In at least five significant respects the first part of this verse differs from the parallel in Mark (8.31–9.1): (1) Mark uses the simple conjunction “and” to join this episode with the previous one, whereas Matthew uses the adverbial phrase From that time. Thus in translation this adverbial marker should be made prominent. (2) In place of the verb “teach” Matthew uses a stronger verb (show), which Good News Translation renders “say plainly to”; both New English Bible and New Jerusalem Bible have “make it clear to,” while Phillips translates “explain to.” The helping verb is correctly rendered began by most all English translations, except that New American Bible has “started to indicate.” The problem with “started to” for English speakers is that it could imply that this is something that Jesus intended to do but did not accomplish. (3) Mark uses the pronoun “them” as an indirect object, which Matthew replaces with the more explicit his disciples, thus laying greater stress upon their role in this learning process. (4) By the construction Jesus … he, Matthew unambiguously identifies Jesus as the one who must experience these sufferings, whereas Mark returns to the phrase “the Son of Man.” It is interesting that this is a reversal of what the two writers did earlier (Matt 16.13; Mark 8.27). (5) Matthew makes specific mention of Jerusalem as the place where Jesus must suffer; neither Mark (8.31) nor Luke (9.22) mention the city by name.
As we indicate above, From that time Jesus began requires a clear adverbial marker like “From then on Jesus began” or “That was the time when Jesus began.”
Quite frequently, as here, must is used in the Gospels of a necessity imposed upon a person in the fulfillment of the divine will (see 17.10; 24.6; 26.54). Some translators have even used a phrase like “that God required that” or “that it was God’s will that” to convey the full force of must.
The elders and chief priests and scribes constituted the highest Jewish council in Jerusalem, known as the Sanhedrin. They had supreme authority in matters of the Jewish faith, and the Roman government even allowed them to exercise some power in the regulation of Jewish life. Elders can often be translated literally and be understood, especially in societies where the men (generally not the women) of a certain age and status are leaders of the community. But otherwise “leaders” can be used. Chief priests and scribes were first mentioned in 2.4 (see comments there).
That he must go … and be killed, and on the third day be raised is shifted into direct discourse in Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Bible en français courant, and Good News Translation: “I must go … I will be put to death, but three days later I will be raised to life.” In addition to the shift to direct discourse, one may also employ an active construction for the passives be killed and be raised: “They will put me to death … God will raise me back to life.”
This sentence often gets a little long and awkward, and some translators break it up into two or more sentences; for example, “Jesus began to explain to his disciples that it was God’s will he go to Jerusalem. There the elders, the chief priests, and the teachers of the Law would cause him to suffer greatly and then would have him killed.” Those who use direct discourse may have “Jesus began to explain to his disciples, ‘I must go to Jerusalem. There the elders, chief priests, and the teachers of the Law will make me suffer many things, and they will have me put to death.’ ”
It is probably better to say “have put to death,” as above, than to render the verse as if the elders and others will actually be the ones killing Jesus.
The verb be raised (Good News Translation “be raised to life”) may also be used with the meaning “rise” (meaning “I will come back to life”; see 14.2 where the same verb is used), but it is better understood as God’s action in raising Jesus back to life. Therefore “But God will raise me back to life” or “But I will be raised back to life” are possible translations.
On the third day (so also New English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible) may be translated “three days later,” as in Good News Translation. Of course, each translator will use whatever expression is natural. For the Jews, the day of the event spoken of was the first day, the day after that was the second day, and the day after that was the third day. Languages which count the day after the event as the first day may have “two days later.” (Note that English is such a language, and therefore Good News Bible is actually translated incorrectly.) But because “third day” or “in three days” are phrases that are frequently used in the Bible with some symbolic value, many translators prefer an expression like that in Revised Standard Version.
Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on the Gospel of Matthew. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1988. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .