Following are a number of back-translations of Acts 15:39:
Uma: “From there, Paulus and Barnabas argued, with the result that they separated. Barnabas took Markus to be with him, and they boarded a ship to the land of Siprus.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “The two really argued, therefore they separated. Barnabas took Markus along and they sailed to the island of Kiprus.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “This caused a dispute between them. Therefore they separated, and as for Barnabas, he took Mark and he got on a boat and went to Cyprus.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Then their argument was excessive, and they separated. Barnabas took-along Marcos, and they rode in a ship to go to Cyprus.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Over that they really didn’t agree. Without anything further, they didn’t go together when they set out. Bernabe caused Marcos to accompany him when he sailed going to Chipre.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Isthmus Mixe: “They discussed but their minds did not meet each other. For that reason they separated. Then Barnabas took Mark with him. They entered a boat at the sea. Then they went to the land of Cyprus.” (Source: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
Following are a number of back-translations of Mark 14:24:
Uma: “He said to them: ‘This is my blood that will be spilled when I die to redeem / take-the-place-of many people. This blood of mine strengthens the promise that connects God with mankind.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “Isa said to them, ‘This is my blood which will soon be poured out because of/on behalf of many people. This is a sign that God is fulfilling/will fulfill his covenant.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And Jesus said, ‘This is my blood which will be shed when I am killed in order to annoint many people. This is the sign of the way of setting free which God has established.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Jesus said, ‘This is my blood that ratifies (lit. ties-in-a-knot) God’s new agreement. It will flow-out when I die for the many people.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “‘That,’ said Jesus, ‘that is my blood which is the strength/pledge of the initiated-agreement of God with people. For I will shed (lit. cause to drip) my blood so that many can be forgiven.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Choapan Zapotec: “… This is my blood which I will shed in order that you will know God has entered into an agreement with mankind. Also in order that he might forgive the sins of mankind.”
Southern Puebla Mixtec: “… This is my blood. It is going to run out for many people. By my blood God makes a new agreement with people.”
Isthmus Mixe: “… his is my blood which will run out in behalf of many people, this is a sign that God has made a new agreement with you.”
Peñoles Mixtec: “… This is my blood which is for a contract God spoke for all people. My blood will be spilled and for this reason people will find salvation.”
Tewa: “… This is my blood. I will spill my blood for many people, and because I do this, what God has promised will come to pass.” (Source for this and four above: B. Moore / G. Turner in Notes on Translation 1967, p. 1ff.)
The Greek that is translated as “Son of Man” is mostly used by Jesus to refer to himself as well as in the prophecies of Daniel and Enoch (see Enoch 17:34 et al). It is translated in the following languages as (click or tap for details):
Tzotzil: “I who am equal with men” or “The Older Brother of Everybody” (“expressing the dignity and authority of the Messiah and the universality of his work”)
Tenango Otomi: “The Man Appointed” (i.e. the man to whom authority has been delegated) (source for this and preceding: Beekman, p. 189-190, see also Ralph Hill in Notes on Translation February 1983, p. 35-50)
Aguaruna: “One who was born becoming a person” (source for this and two above: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “Older Sibling of Mankind” (source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Child of a Person” (source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “One From Heaven Born of Man/human?” (source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “Man who came from heaven” (source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Yatzachi Zapotec: “One who God sent, who was born a human” (a direct translation would have suggested “that the father is unknown due to the indiscretions of the mother” and where “he is the son of people” is used when one wants to disclaim responsibility for or relationship with a child caught in some mischief — source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
Kâte: Ŋic Fâri Wâtuŋne or “the man who is a true support” (source: Renck, p. 106)
Mezquital Otomi: “The son who became a person” (Source: B. Moore / G. Turner in Notes on Translation 1967, p. 1ff.)
Alekano: “The true man who descended from heaven” (source: Ellis Deibler in Notes on Translation June 1986, p. 36ff.)
Central Tarahumara: “One who has been stood up to help” (“This suggests that Christ has been given authority to some appointed task. A very generic word, help, was selected to fill in the lexically obligatory purpose required by the word which means to appoint or commission. Usually this word is used of menial tasks but not exclusively. The choice of this generic term retains the veiled reference to the character of Christ’s work which He intended in using the ‘Son of Man’ title.”)
Chicahuaxtla Triqui: “He who is relative of all people.” (“The Triqui word for relative is a rather generic term and in its extended sense sometimes is diluted to neighbor and friend. But the primary meaning is relative.”)
Tepeuxila Cuicatec: “The Person who Accompanies All People” (“The literal equivalents ‘son of man’ and ‘son of people’ were both rejected because of the false inference of natural birth involving a human father. Furthermore, it was necessary to expand any translation of the Bible by the addition of the pronoun ‘I’ so as to clarify the fact that Jesus is using the third person in referring to Himself. A common expression used by the Cuicatecos when difficulties befall someone, is to say to that one, ‘don’t worry, we are accompanying you.’ By this they mean they share that person’s sorrow. When wedding guests arrive at the home of a son who has just been married, they say to the father, ‘We have come to accompany you.’ By this they mean that they have come to share the father’s joy. These expressions do not refer to ordinary physical accompaniment, which is expressed by a set of different verbs. For example, visits are always announced by some such greeting as, “I have come to visit you,’ ‘I have come to see you,’ or ‘I have come to ask you something.’ The desire to accompany a friend on a journey is expressed by saying, ‘I will go with you.’ Translation helpers used the verb ‘accompany’ in constructing the phrase ‘I, the Person who Accompanies All People.'(…) It reflects the fact that Jesus closely identified Himself with all of us, understands our weaknesses, shares our burdens, rejoices with us in times of gladness, etc.”) (source for this and the three preceding: Beekman in Notes on Translation January 1963, p. 1-10)
Guhu-Samane: “Elder-brother-man” (“Since the term denotes an elder brother in every way such as honor, power, leadership, representation of the younger, etc. it is a meaningful and fitting — though not ostentatious — title.” Source: Ernest Richert in The Bible Translator 1965, p. 198ff. )
Navajo (Dinė): Diné Silíi’ii — “Man he-became-the-one-who” (“This terra presented a difficulty not only in Navajo but also one peculiar to all the Athapaskan languages. It lies in the fact that all these languages, so far as we know, have a word phonetically similar to the Navajo diné which has three meanings: ‘man, people in general,’ ‘a man,’ ‘The People’ which is the name the Navajos use for themselves. (The name Navajo was first used by the Spanish explorers.) Although it seemed natural to say diné biye’ ‘a-man his-son,’ this could also mean ‘The-People their-son’ or ‘a-Navajo his-son,’ in contrast to the son of a white man or of another Indian tribe. Since the concept of the humanity of Christ is so important, we felt that diné biye’ with its three possible meanings should not be used. The term finally decided on was Diné Silíi’ii ‘Man he-became-the-one-who.’ This could be interpreted to mean ‘the one who became a Navajo,’ but since it still would impart the idea of Christ’s becoming man, it was deemed adequate, and it has proven acceptable to the Navajos.”) (Source: Faye Edgerton in The Bible Translator 1962, p. 25ff. )
Toraja-Sa’dan: “Child descended in the world” (“using a poetic verb, often found in songs that [deal with] the contacts between heaven and earth”) (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
Obolo: Gwun̄ Ebilene: “Child of Human” (source: Enene Enene).
Mairasi: Jaanoug Tat: “Person Child” (source: Enggavoter 2004)
Costa Rican Sign Language: “It was impossible to translate the expression ‘Son of Man.’ The son-man sign simply means ‘male child.’ The Costa Rican Sign Language (LESCO) team opted for an interpretation of the term and translated it ‘Jesus.'” (Source: Elsa Tamez (in The Bible Translator 2008, p. 59ff. )
Lokạạ: wẹẹn wạ ọnẹn or “son of a person.” “This translation is symbolic in that it uses indigenous Lokạạ words. However, since the publication of the New Testament in 2006, this phrase has gained popularity within contemporary Lokạạ society as an expression to describe an important person whose career is going well. In the New Testament, the phrase ‘son of man’ is used to describe Jesus as prototypically human, but the Lokạạ phrase is now being used to describe an exceptional person in Lokạạ society.” (Source: J.A. Naudé, C.L. Miller Naudé, J.O. Obono in Acta Theologica 43/2, 2023, p. 129ff. )
In many West African languages, using a third person reference as a first person indicator is common practice with a large range of semantic effects. Languages that use the exact expression “son of man” as a self-reference or reference to another person include Lukpa, Baatonum, Mossi (“son of Adam”), Yoruba (“son of person”), Guiberoua Béte, or Samo. (Source: Lynell Zogbo in: Omanson 2000, p. 167-188.)
In Swahili the expression Mwana wa Mtu or mwana wa mtu or “son/daughter of human person,” which is used by several Bible translations, also has “the idiomatic meaning of ‘a human being’” (source: Jean-Claude Loba-Mkole in An Intercultural Criticism of New Testament Translations 2013, see here). The same is true for the Lingala expression Mwana na Moto — “son/daughter of human person.” (Ibid.)
In Balinese “we are again bordering on theological questions when we inquire as to which vocabulary shall be used to translate the texts where Jesus speaks of himself as ‘the Son of man.’ One of the fixed rules governing the use of these special vocabularies is that one may never use the deferential terms in speaking of oneself. This would be the extreme of arrogance. Now if one considers the expression ‘Son of man’ primarily as a description of ‘I,’ then one must continually indicate the possessions or actions of the Son of man by Low Balinese words. In doing this the mystery of the expression is largely lost. In any case the vocabulary used in most of the contexts would betray that Jesus means the title for himself.
“However, a distinction can actually be made in Balinese between the person and the exalted position he occupies. For example, the chairman of a judicial body may employ deferential terms when referring to this body and its chairman, without this being taken as an expression of arrogance. Considered from this standpoint, one may translate in such a way that Jesus is understood as using such deferential words and phrases in speaking of himself. The danger is, however, that the unity between his person and the figure of “the Son of man” is blurred by such usage.
“On request, the New Testament committee of the Netherlands Bible Society advised that ‘the sublimity of this mysterious term be considered the most important point and thus High Balinese be used.'”
“One of the first things that we did in working through the earlier part of the New Testament was to decide on how we would translate some of the more difficult technical terms. It was immediately obvious that something must be done with the translation of ‘the Son of Man,’ since the literal rendering anak manusia (literally ‘child of a man’) held absolutely no meaning for Malay readers. We felt that the title should emphasize the divine origin and authority of the one who used this title, and at the same time, since it was a title, we decided that it should not be too long a phrase. Finally, a phrase meaning ‘the One whom God has ordained’ was chosen (yang dilantik Allah). It is interesting to note that the newly-begun Common Indonesian (Alkitab Kabar Baik, published in 1985) has followed a similar route by translating ‘the One whom God has chosen’ (yang depilih Allah).”
Following are a number of back-translations of Acts 4:12:
Uma: “There is no other way to receive salvation from God, only Yesus. Because in all the world there is no other person, only Yesus whom God provided for man, only he has power to lift us from the punishment of our sin.'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “And really he is the only one who can save us (incl.). Because here in this whole world, there is no other/nothing else given by God that can save us (incl.) except only Isa.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “It is only Jesus who can set us free from punishment,’ said Peter, ‘because here in all the world there is no other person who is able to do it which God has given.'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “It is only Jesus who can save us. Because there is no other in the entire world that God has sent to save us except him.'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “It’s true, there really is no-one at all from whom salvation can be gotten from the punishment for sin, except this Jesu-Cristo only. For there is no-one else here under the heavens who has been given by God who can save us, but on the contrary this one only.'” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Chuj: “‘There is no other person who can save us; because there is no other person whom God has shown to people on this earth who can save us. Only Jesus,’ said Peter.”
Lalana Chinantec: “‘Only Jesus is able to save people. Only Jesus did God give. All over the world there is no one else who is able to save people.’ That’s what Peter said.”
Isthmus Mixe: “Another person cannot save us. But Jesus Christ can. For no other person in this world has been appointed to save us.”
Totontepec Mixe: “No one else is able that he forgive the sins of the earth people. Jesus alone is able to forgive our sins. God has sent no one else to forgive sins.”
Teutila Cuicatec: “There is not a single person who can save us apart from him, the one who has the authority to save the people on this earth.” (source for this and four above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
Following are a number of back-translations of Acts 17:26:
Uma: “From one person, he brought forth [lit., caused to be descended] all of mankind, and he commanded us to inhabit the whole world. He established from the start the border of the land of the dwelling of every nation, and the time of their rule.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “The first man created by God,’ Paul said, ‘he was the beginning of all the tribes and God made them to dwell here in the whole world. And beforehand already he set a limit as to how long and as to which land/place they should live in.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And out of only one origin he made all kinds of people, and he spread them here all over the earth. And he established beforehand the boundaries of where we human beings live and also the time of our living here.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Only-one person is whom he created at first in order that that would be the origin of the mutually-different people on the surface of the earth. He also designated long ago the time that each nation would rule and the boundaries of their countries.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “And it’s true, although the origin of us people is one only, he has made the nations many now, so that this world which he created would be spread all over with people. And he indeed is the one who has determined the times and land of each of these nations, as to when he would set them up or cause them to be wiped out, and where would be the limits of the places where they would live.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Teutila Cuicatec: “God made of one single race the people of all nations and commanded them to live on all the earth. He established the period that they should live and where they should live.”
Isthmus Mixe: “He made us, he gave us one blood, as many of us as live in all groups of towns, so that we might live in all the land of the earth. He has appointed what time and place we should live in.” (Source for this and above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
Following are a number of back-translations of John 1:21:
Yatzachi Zapotec: “They said to him, ‘Who are you then? Are you Elijah, the person who spoke God’s word long ago?’ And he said to them, ‘I am not he.’ Then they said to him again, ‘Are you the person who is to come to speak the Word of God to us?’ And he answered and said to them, ‘Not I.’ “
Ojitlán Chinantec: ” What then? Are you Elijah: Who are you? Are you the prophet of God called Elijah? I am not: I am not Elijah.”
Aguaruna: No, I am not Elijah. Are you the prophet: But what are you? Are you the teller of God’s word who will come, that one?”
Isthmus Mixe: “Are you God’s messenger, the one Moses talked about?” (Source for this and above: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)
Uma: “They asked further: ‘If thus, who are you (sing.)? Are you (sing.) the prophet Elia?’ Yohanes said: ‘No also.’ They asked further: ‘Are you (sing.) perhaps the big prophet who was promised long ago, who they said would come to the world?’ Yohanes said: ‘No also.'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “‘Na, who are you?’ they said. ‘Are you Eliyas?’ Yahiya said, ‘No.’ The priests said, ‘Are you the prophet that our (incl.) tribe Isra’il is waiting for/expecting?’ Yahiya answered, he said, ‘No.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And they said, ‘Are you the long ago inspired one, Elijah?’ (inspired one-prophet) And John said, ‘I am not also.’ And they said, ‘Perhaps you are that prophesied prophet of God?’ And John said, ‘I am not also.'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “‘Who are you (sing.) then? Are you (sing.) Elias? they said. ‘No,’ he said. ‘Are you (sing.) perhaps the prophet who is coming?’ they inquired again. ‘No,’ he said.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “‘Well if it’s like that,’ they said, ‘then who are you? Are you not the Prophet Elias?’ ‘Expletive, no,’ said Juan. ‘Well what, are you not the one who is meant by that Prophet?’ ‘Expletive, no. I won’t make-false-claims for myself.'” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “Again they asked him, ‘But who are you then? Are you the prophet Elijah?’ John said, ‘I am not.'” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Following are a number of back-translations of Acts 4:19:
Uma: “Petrus and Yohanes answered said: ‘Consider for yourselves, which one does God like: to follow your [emphatic] commands, or follow the commands of God.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “But Petros and Yahiya answered them, they said, ‘Give your opinion, which is right/straight in God’s sight, we (excl.) obey/follow you or God?” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And Peter and John answered saying, ‘Consider which one of these two ways would be what God would want, if we obey your command and we do not teach the name of Jesus or if we obey that which God told us to do.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “But Pedro and Juan said, ‘Please think if it is right in the sight of God that we (excl.) obey what you are saying, not what he is saying.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “But when Pedro-and-companion heard, they replied, saying, ‘You judge which is possible/acceptable with God. Is it that his will is what we (excl.) obey or this of yours which is contrary to what he told us (excl.) to do?” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Desano: “Peter and John answered saying, ‘Think this over with the help of God. What do you think? Should one do first your commands, or the commands of God?'”
Eastern Highland Otomi: “Peter and John answered: ‘You say now what is better that we do before the face of God. Do we do what you say or do we do what God says?'”
Coatlán Mixe: “All of you consider if it is the straight of it with God that we obey you when it is proper that we should obey God.”
Teutila Cuicatec: “…Figure it out for yourselves. Before God, is it proper that we should not obey what he commands in order to obey you?”
Isthmus Mixe: “…You decide if God approves if we obey your words and not God’s.”
Chichimeca-Jonaz: “…Do you think God will say it’s good if we believe you and obey your saying and leave the saying of God? Do you feel it is right?”
Ayutla Mixtec: “Then Peter and John answered, they said to them, ‘May you consider, would God see it as better that we obey you? Would God see it as better that we obey him himself?’ they said answering.” (Source for this and six above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
Following are a number of back-translations of Acts 19:19:
Uma: “Many who had magic carried their magic books, they gathered them and burned them in the eyes of the masses. The cost of those magic books if it were gathered, was around 50,000 silver moneys.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “Many of them who had ‘practiced medicine’ (tawal), they brought and gathered the booklets (kitab-kitab) where they had written their words-for-medicining and they burned them in the sight of the people. They counted the cost of those booklets, it was five thousand pesos.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And those who did sorcery, they brought their books on magic, and they burned them there in front of everybody. And they counted the value of these books, and it was about fifty thousand pieces of silver that they were worth.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “while some, they gathered-together their books and burned them with the many-people spectating. When they counted the value of what was burned, it was about fifty thousand in their money.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “There were many of them who, although they had already believed in the Lord, still had something else they trusted in, like charms, incantations, and other skills/acquired-knowledge (usually supernatural). Well, without anything further, as for the rolled up writings on which were written those skills of theirs, they assembled them all, and then burned them before the eyes of everyone. Someone estimated the cost of all those writings and it came to the sum of over fifty thousand.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Isthmus Mixe: “Many of the ones who practised magic brought the books of magic. Then they burned them before everyone. Then they figured out how much the books were worth. They were found to be worth 50,000 pieces of silver money.” (Source: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
