Translation commentary on Mark 7:12 – 7:13

Exegesis:

aphiete (cf. 2.5) ‘you allow,’ ‘you permit.’

akurountes ton logon tou theou ‘annulling the word of God’: the participle expresses manner: ‘in this way you annul….’

akuroō (only here in Mark) ‘make void,’ ‘annul,’ ‘invalidate.’

ho logos tou theou (only here in Mark) ‘the Word of God’: cf. the absolute use of logos ‘Word’ in ch. 4 (vv. 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 33).

tē paradosei humōn hē paredōkate ‘by means of your tradition which you have handed down.’ In saying ‘you have handed down,’ Jesus refers to the Jews as a whole, not to the particular individuals whom he was addressing then.

paradosis (cf. v. 3) ‘tradition.’

paradidōmi (cf. 1.14) ‘hand over,’ ‘deliver’: when used of tradition as here, ‘hand down.’

paromoia (only here in the N.T.) ‘similar,’ ‘like.’

Translation:

If, as in some languages, the involved nature of verse 11 (see above) makes the condition quite obscure, one may translate these two verses, as in Southern Bobo Madaré, ‘a man may tell his father or his mother…. Then if he does that you do not permit….’ The result is essentially the same, but the construction may be more readily understood.

To do anything for may be translated as ‘to help’ or ‘to provide for.’

Thus making void introduces still another clause to an already complex sentence. It may be broken off from what precedes, and still integrally related to it, by translating ‘in this way you make void.’

Making void may be translated as ‘make without anything’ (Southern Subanen), ‘cause to be lost’ (Sayula Popoluca), ‘refuse to consider important’ (San Blas Kuna), ‘make powerless’ (Javanese), ‘break’ (Batak Toba), ‘annul’ (Toraja-Sa’dan), or ‘take away its power.’

The word of God should not be confused here with the Bible. This is ‘what God has said.’

Your tradition which you hand on implies ‘customs which have been handed on to you and which in turn you hand on to others,’ since these particular persons were part of the Jewish cultural tradition responsible for adherence to these man-made rules. On the other hand, Jesus is, of course, speaking to the larger group of Jewish people and is not assigning the entire responsibility to these particular persons (see above, under Exegesis). This meaning can be indicated by saying ‘which you as Jews have handed on.’

Hand on is rendered in some languages as ‘to speak to others about’ or ‘to say that your children should do.’

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Mark 8:11

Exegesis:

suzētein (cf. 1.27) ‘argue with,’ ‘debate,’ ‘dispute.’

zētountes par’ autou sēmeion apo tou ouranou ‘seeking from him a sign from heaven.’

zēteō (cf. 3.32) ‘ask,’ ‘request,’ ‘want.’

sēmeion (8.12, 14; 13.4, 22; 16.17, 20) ‘sign,’ i.e. ‘an outward (visible) indication of secret power or truth’ (Souter): in this context the ‘sign’ would be a wonder or miracle clearly of divine origin (apo tou ouranou ‘from heaven’).

peirazontes auton ‘testing him,’ ‘putting him to the test’: the participle may be understood as indicating purpose (Manson, Revised Standard Version, The Modern Speech New Testament, Le Nouveau Testament. Version Synodale, Zürcher Bibel), or attempt, ‘trying to test him’ (cf. Taylor).

peirazō (cf. 1.13) ‘test,’ ‘try’: here, as in 1.13, with a bad intent, and so ‘tempt.’

Translation:

Argue may be ‘to exchange words’ or ‘to speak against what he was saying.’

Seeking from him a sign from heaven may be ‘ask him to show them a sign from heaven’ or ‘wanted him to produce a sign from heaven.’

Though sign is used in the sense of ‘miracle’ or ‘mighty work,’ one should, if at all possible, try to reproduce the essential significance of the Greek term sēmeion which points to the meaningful character of an event or object (note the use of the root sēm- in the derivatives semantics and semiology). This then was to be more than a miracle; rather, it was to be a demonstration of power which would have special meaning for the people – in this instance his immediate opponents, the Pharisees. In order to convey this meaning various devices have been used, e.g. ‘a thing which shows’ (Tepeuxila Cuicatec), ‘supernatural power which shows,’ in which ‘shows’ does not mean ‘is visible,’ but ‘that which shows something else’ (Navajo), ‘events which tell people something’ (Uduk), ‘happenings which point out’ (Highland Puebla Nahuatl), ‘miracles which are to prove’ (or ‘to demonstrate’) (Western Highland Purepecha), ‘how one is going to know’ (Shipibo-Conibo).

From heaven is not always easily related to the preceding expression. If this clause has reference to a portent which shows from heaven (or the sky), that is one thing (and not very difficult to translate), but if the meaning is primarily a demonstration of divine power, then one may be required to say ‘wanted him to do a great work with power from heaven’ or ‘ask him to show that his power was from heaven.’

Test must not be translated in the sense of ‘tempt,’ with the connotation of ‘try to make sin.’ The meaning is more ‘so they could really test him’ or ‘so they could put him to the test.’

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Mark 9:5

Exegesis:

apokritheis … legei (cf. 3.33) ‘answering … says,’ ‘he answered.’

rabbi (11.21; 14.45) ‘Rabbi,’ ‘Teacher’: cf. rabbouni ‘Rabbi’ 10.51 (cf. didaskale ‘Teacher’ 4.38).

kalon estin (cf. 4.8) ‘it is good,’ ‘fitting,’ ‘advantageous.’

hōde (cf. 8.4) ‘here.’

poiēsōmen treis skēnas ‘let us make three booths’: we are to understand by ‘us’ the three disciples, not Peter and Jesus.

skēnē (only here in Mark) ‘tent,’ ‘booth’: a temporary construction like those built during the celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles (or, Booths).

Translation:

The Greek term apokritheis, often translated ‘answered,’ may also designate the action of a person who breaks into a conversation or who introduces something new into the discourse – this is its use here, for Peter had not been asked any questions.

Master is probably better taken in the sense of ‘teacher’ or ‘my teacher’ (in languages which may demand a possessive in such a construction). However, if there is a title of respect which also designates one’s ‘boss,’ ‘leader,’ and/or ‘respected guide,’ this can certainly be used, for the term rabbi implied more than merely ‘teacher.’

For languages employing contrasts between inclusive and exclusive first person plurals, this verse presents certain complications. When Peter says to Jesus ‘It is well that we are here’ does he mean that it is good (1) that all six persons are present (or that at least the disciples and Jesus are there) or (2) that the three disciples are on hand to make some shelters for the three important personages: Jesus, Elijah, and Moses. In other words, is Peter describing the blessedness of the experience for all those present or only saying that it is fortunate that the three disciples are present to help provide shelter. The first alternative has been preferred by many, and accordingly the inclusive first person plural should be used. However, in the next clause let us make three booths can scarcely be taken as ‘inclusive,’ for it would seem out of place for Peter to be asking Jesus to assist in the preparation of the three shelters. In this instance the exclusive first person plural is no doubt better.

The booths are ‘leaf shades’ (Shipibo-Conibo), ‘lean-tos’ or ‘thatch shelters.’ What is implied is a very temporary type of construction designed primarily to protect one from the sun or rain. Some translators have resorted to borrowings at this point, e.g. pabellón, borrowed from Spanish, but more often than not such borrowings have had wrong denotations. For example, in the case of several Indian languages in Latin America the Spanish word pabellón meant only a ‘mosquito net.’

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Mark 9:37

Text:

Instead of hen tōn toioutōn paidiōn ‘one of such children’ of most modern editions of the Greek text, Tischendorf and Soden have hen tōn paidiōn toutōn ‘one of these children.’

Exegesis:

dexētai (cf. 6.11) ‘he should receive,’ ‘welcome,’ ‘accept.’

epi tō onomati mou (cf. v. 39; 13.6; cf. en onomati 11.9; en tō onomati v. 38; 16.17) ‘on my name,’ ‘on account of my name.’ Vincent (on Mt. 18.5) ‘on the ground of,’ ‘on account of,’ ‘for the sake of.’ Lagrange translates ‘because of my name’; Arndt & Gingrich explain, ‘when someone’s name is mentioned or called upon,’ ‘receive (a child) when my name is confessed, when I am called upon.’ Most English translations have simply ‘in my name’; Goodspeed has ‘on my account’ and The Modern Speech New Testament ‘for my sake.’

ton aposteilanta me ‘him who sent me,’ i.e. God. This saying reflects the familiar Jewish idea that a man’s messenger is the same as the man himself, in that particular charge or mission.

Translation:

Receives involves a problem of translation in many languages because of the variety of terms used, depending upon the type of object which is received. In the case of a ‘child,’ as the object of ‘receiving,’ the problem is made even more difficult, and in some languages requires special usage, e.g. ‘to take under one’s care’ (Tzeltal), ‘to say, Come into my house’ (Cashibo-Cacataibo), ‘to say Welcome to’ (Navajo), ‘to help’ (Yaka), and ‘to treat well’ (Dan). However, if the idiom is too highly specialized, there are of course problems in adjusting the form of the second clause (in which case some of the force of the expression may be lost). However, one can say, for example, ‘whoever helps a child like this helps me,’ ‘whoever says welcome to a child says welcome to me,’ or ‘whoever asks this child into his home, asks me into his home.’ When, however, one must use an idiom such as ‘to take under one’s care,’ then obviously some adjustment in form must be made.

In my name involves a very complex problem (see Bible Translating 178-79), since in so many languages ‘name’ cannot be used as a substitute for the person. In such instances one must use a direct reference to the person, rather than employing the indirect reference of ‘name,’ e.g. ‘for my sake,’ ‘because of me’ (Central Tarahumara), or ‘out of regard for me.’ But note that this usage of in my name is somewhat different in many translations from what it is in the next verse.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Mark 10:20

Exegesis:

There is no evidence, either in the man’s statement, or in Jesus’ reply, that these words are an exaggeration or a falsehood (cf. Lagrange).

ephulaxamēn (only here in Mark) ‘I kept,’ ‘I guarded’: with reference to a commandment, as here, the verb means ‘observe,’ ‘follow.’

ek neotētos ‘from youth (up to now),’ ‘ever since I was young.’

Translation:

Said may need to be translated as ‘replied.’

For teacher see 2.13.

All these I have observed must be translated carefully, for obviously this must not be translated literally in the sense of ‘looked at,’ or ‘regarded.’ The meaning here is ‘I have obeyed these commandments.’ In some translations the rendering has been ‘have done all these things,’ with exactly the wrong meaning, for though the last commandment is a positive one, the previous ones are in negative form, and to say ‘I have done these’ might be entirely in error. Accordingly, one may translate in some cases as ‘I have done just what I should’ or ‘I have obeyed these words.’

Youth would imply approximately thirteen years of age, at which time Jewish boys were regarded as having reached the age of accountability and hence moral responsibility for their actions.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Mark 11:1

Exegesis:

Bethany was about two miles from Jerusalem, while Bethphage was closer, probably less than one mile from the city; Dalman (op. cit., 252) calls it “a suburb, but not a separate unit” of the city of Jerusalem.

eggizousin (cf. 1.15) ‘they approach.’

to oros tōn elaiōn (13.3; 14.26) ‘the Mount of Olives.’

apostellei (cf. 1.2) ‘he sends.’

Translation:

To Jerusalem, to Bethphage and Bethany has been translated in some instances in such a way as to suggest that the crowd approached three different cities all at the same time. Actually, to Bethphage and Bethany is a kind of appositional explanation of the previous prepositional phrase, meaning ‘that is to say, to the outlying towns of Bethphage and Bethany,’ which were considered as essentially a part of the larger city unit. To make this clear one can sometimes use ‘that is’ as an introductory phrase. As a classifier for the small towns of Bethphage and Bethany, one may be able to employ some term which indicates small dependent towns on the outskirts of a larger city.

As in all instances of transliteration, one must check for possible meanings in strange words. For example, in one language in Mexico the normal transliteration of Bethphage turned out to mean ‘a debt tomorrow.’ By a slight modification in the transliterated form all possibility of misinterpretation was eliminated.

At as a preposition used with the Mount of Olives is so indefinite that it is often not readily translatable, especially in languages which require somewhat more precise indications of locations. In this instance one can say ‘on the slope of the Mount of Olives’ or ‘on the side of the Mount of Olives,’ or as in some languages ‘on the skirt of the Mount of Olives.’

Olives refers to the ‘olive trees,’ not to the fruit. In most instances the practice is to transliterate Olives, and use it strictly as a proper name, though in some instances a classifier such as ‘trees’ is employed, e.g. ‘high hill on which there were olive trees’ or ‘Mount of Olive trees.’ In some translations, however, the local equivalent of the olive tree is employed, though olive trees do not have a very wide geographical distribution. Mount should not be translated in such a way as to give the impression of a high mountain, for in comparison with the surrounding terrain it is only a high hill, even though it does rise somewhat higher than the surrounding hills.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Mark 11:33

Exegesis:

apokrithentes … legousin (cf. 3.33) ‘they answered.’

en poia exousia (cf. v. 28) ‘by what authority.’

Translation:

So is equivalent to ‘therefore,’ ‘because of this,’ or ‘accordingly.’

In Tzeltal there is an interesting idiomatic way of disclaiming knowledge, namely, ‘What shall we say!’ – an expression which fits this context perfectly, for it was not ignorance but unwillingness to answer which dictated the reply of the authorities.

Neither will I … is equivalent in some languages to ‘in that case I will not tell you…’ or ‘then I will not tell you….’

For other problems in this verse see 11.28.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Mark 12:33

Text:

After suneseōs ‘understanding,’ Textus Receptus includes kai ex holēs tēs psuchēs ‘and with all the soul,’ which is omitted by all modern editions of the Greek text.

Exegesis:

to agapan literally ‘the to love’: the infinitival phrase is used as a noun, and is the subject of the sentence. The infinitive is timeless, indicating simply the action involved in the verb without any reference to the time aspect.

It is to be noticed that the three clauses ‘heart,’ ‘understanding,’ and ‘strength’ do not follow literally either v. 30 or Septuagint Deut. 6.5.

ex holēs tēs kardias ‘with all the heart,’ following v. 30 and the Septuagint of Deut. 6.5.

ex holēs tēs suneseōs ‘with all the understanding,’ which follows neither v. 30 nor the LXX of Deut. 6.5. It is the equivalent of ex holēs tēs dianoias sou ‘with all your mind’ of v. 30, which, as noticed, is added to the three clauses of Deut. 6.5.

sunesis (only here in Mark; cf. suniēmi 4.12) ‘comprehension,’ ‘understanding.’

ex holēs tēs ischuos ‘with all the strength,’ following v. 30 (but not the Septuagint of Deut. 6.5, which has dunamis).

perissoteron (cf. 7.36) ‘much more (than),’ ‘more abundant (than)’: in the neuter, agreeing with the subject to agapan ‘the to love,’ which is also neuter.

holokautōmatōn (only here in Mark) ‘whole burnt offerings’: these were the offerings in which the animal was entirely consumed by fire.

thusiōn (only here in Mark) ‘sacrifices,’ ‘offerings’: refers to all offerings and sacrifices of the Jewish religion, whether animal or vegetable. (Carefully to be avoided is any rendering which might convey the idea of ‘sacrifice’ as the personal element of cost and hardship with which one may accomplish certain tasks or perform certain duties.)

Translation:

For problems involved in translating love with … the heart see 12.30.

Understanding may be translated in the same way as ‘mind’ in 12.30.

The basic problem of translation in this verse is the use of the infinitive constructions which in many languages cannot be used, especially not when the infinitive constructions are so involved and include two different expressions for ‘love.’ In this passage there are often two alternative ways of treating the construction: (1) by means of a conditional clause, e.g. ‘if you love him … and if you love your neighbor…, that is much more than…’ or (2) through the use of paratactic constructions, in which the first is a statement of obligation, e.g. ‘you should love him … and you should love your neighbors…; that is much more than….’

General obligations or a truth of universal import may be stated in terms of second person ‘you’ or of first person ‘we,’ usually in the inclusive form, if the inclusive-exclusive contrast exists. The use of these persons is seemingly more widespread than an indefinite third person singular, as in the Greek and English.

Much more than all is a difficult comparative expression since two complex processes, ‘loving God’ and ‘loving one’s neighbors,’ are compared with two other processes ‘providing burnt offerings’ and ‘making sacrifices.’ This is treated in Tzeltal as ‘great the goodness this becomes past the goodness of burned gifts for God and killed gifts.’

Where there is no special designation, burnt offerings are often treated as ‘gifts that are burned,’ sometimes with ‘to God’ added in order to imply their religious significance. Sacrifices are frequently rendered as ‘killed gifts’ or ‘gifts that one kills.’

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .