Translation commentary on Mark 15:38

Exegesis:

to katapetasma tou naou ‘the veil of the sanctuary,’ ‘the curtain of the temple’: it is generally assumed that the katapetasma (only here in Mark) was the veil separating the holy place from the holy of holies. This curtain is described by Edersheim as being sixty feet long, thirty feet wide, and the thickness of the palm of a man’s hand.

naos (cf. 14.58) ‘sanctuary.’

eschisthē (cf. 1.10) ‘was rent,’ ‘was torn.’

ap’ anōthen heōs katō ‘from top to bottom.’

Translation:

Curtain is not always easily translated, since in many societies such objects are not known. In Copainalá Zoque the closest equivalent is ‘cloth-closure,’ literally equivalent to ‘cloth door.’ In a number of languages curtain has been rendered by a borrowed form. It is important, however, to avoid a literal translation of veil, since this may apply only to veils worn by women, and accordingly the veil of the temple would be quite meaningless.

Was torn is a passive construction without the mention of a specific agent; nor would it be justifiable to introduce a specific grammatical subject of a transitive expression, e.g. ‘God tore the curtain.’ Accordingly, it is best, in such instances, to shift the verb expression to an intransitive equivalent, e.g. ‘the curtain split into two pieces,’ or ‘divided into two parts.’

From top to bottom is a highly elliptical expression, requiring some fuller statement in some languages, e.g. ‘the curtain began to split first at the top and then continued to split to the bottom.’

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 1:18

Instead of ta diktua ‘the nets’ of the majority of modern editions of the Greek text, Textus Receptus and Kilpatrick have ta diktua autōn ‘their nets’ (cf. Exegesis, below).

Exegesis:

aphentes ēkolouthēsan ‘leaving … they followed’ is equal to ‘they left and followed.’ The verb aphiēmi is used in the sense of ‘abandon,’ ‘leave’ some fifteen times in Mark (cf. 2.5).

akoloutheō ‘follow’: used both in the literal sense, and with the meaning ‘follow as a disciple.’

ta diktua ‘the nets’: in this context ‘their nets’ is meant (cf. Turner), without the addition of the possessive autōn ‘their.’ diktuon (1.19) is the generic word for “net” of any kind (cf. amphiblēstron ‘casting net’ Mt. 4.18, and sagēnē ‘drag net’ Mt. 13.47).

Translation:

In verses 17 and 18 it is essential that an appropriate word for ‘follow’ be found, since a poor choice at this point may be almost disastrous. There are three principal types of meanings which must be distinguished: (1) to follow a long way off (implying either disinterest or avoidance), (2) to follow in the sense of tracking down (obviously not desirable for disciples), and (3) to follow in the sense of accompaniment, e.g. as a child follows an adult, as a dog its master, or as a friend his companion. One must make certain, however, that such a term does not imply ‘failure to work or to participate in an enterprise,’ in the sense that those who follow along may not take part or do their share.

It is essential that the nets spoken of in this verse be the same as are mentioned or implied in verse 16.

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 2:6

Exegesis:

ēsan … kathēmenoi kai dialogizomenoi ‘were … sitting and questioning’: these verbal phrases, consisting of the imperfect of eimi ‘to be’ plus the present participle of the main verbs, denote continuous action.

tines tōn grammateōn (cf. 1.22) ‘some scribes.’

kathēmenoi (2.14; 3.32, 34; 4.1; 5.15; 10.46; 12.36; 13.3; 14.62; 16.5) ‘(were) sitting.’

dialogizomenoi (2.8; 8.16, 17; 9.33; 11.31) ‘considering,’ ‘pondering,’ ‘reasoning.’ Moulton & Milligan note that in the N.T. the word always has the sense of “inward deliberation or questioning.”

en tais kardiais autōn ‘in their hearts’: the meaning is the same as ēn heautois ‘in themselves’ of v. 8.

kardia (2.8; 3.5; 6.52; 7.6, 19, 21; 8.17; 11.23; 12.30, 33) ‘heart’: in Hebraic thought the heart is the center of intellectual activity. Lagrange points out that the same concept was true also of the Latins and even of the Greeks. The narrative throughout makes clear that this questioning carried on by the scribes was wholly internal and not outwardly expressed. Cf. Abbott-Smith: “say to oneself, i.e. think, reflect, without saying anything aloud.”

Translation:

Now is transitional, introducing a new aspect of the situation; it is not temporal.

For scribes see 1.22.

Questioning can be quite well translated as ‘thinking’ or even ‘speaking to themselves in their hearts.’

Though the heart is spoken of in the Bible as the center of intellectual and emotive elements of human experience, in other languages the heart may have no such value. In some languages the corresponding centers are the viscera (Conob), the liver (Laka), the stomach (Uduk), the gall (Toraja-Sa’dan) and the head (Anuak), though in the neighboring Shilluk demons may be in one’s head, but the liver and heart are the center of most other psychological activities. Whether one is to use ‘heart’ or some other part or organ of the body depends entirely upon the manner in which in any language such psychological experiences are described.

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 3:16

Text:

At the beginning of the verse Tischendorf, Nestle, Westcott and Hort, Soden, Vogels, Kilpatrick, Lagrange, and Merk add kai epoiēsen tous dōdeka “and he appointed the twelve”: this clause is omitted by Textus Receptus, Souter, American Standard Version, Revised Standard Version, Taylor (cf. Taylor for arguments for omitting it). Although not decisive, the evidence for retaining the clause with Nestle and others, seems to outweigh the evidence for omitting it.

Exegesis:

kai ‘and’: here with the meaning ‘so’ (Translator’s New Testament, Manson).

tous dōdeka (4.10; 6.7; 9.35; 10.32; 11.11; 14.10, 17, 20, 43) ‘the Twelve’: not simply a number, as in v. 14, but a title: ‘the Twelve’ (Translator’s New Testament); Lagrange les Douze.

kai epethēken onoma tō Simōni Petron ‘and he added to Simon the name Peter.’

epitithēmi (3.17; 5.33; 6.5; 7.32; 8.23, 25; 16.18) ‘lay,’ ‘set,’ ‘place upon’: the phrase epitithenai onoma means ‘give a surname.’

Translation:

Verses 16 through 19 consist of a list of the names of the apostles, but this list is grammatically in apposition with the twelve, spoken of in verse 14. In most languages this type of apposition is so distant that without some clarification or more explicit reference, misunderstanding is likely to arise. For example, in one translation the list of names (all strange ones) was taken to be a list of the demons that were to be cast out, for the list immediately followed reference to the demons. Accordingly, verse 16 must often begin as ‘these men were…’ (Highland Oaxaca Chontal) or ‘the ones he appointed were…’ (Chicahuaxtla Triqui).

Surnamed is ‘to give an additional name to’ or ‘to give a second name to.’ This practice is a good deal more common in many cultures than in our own, and hence is not likely to be misunderstood.

For problems of transliteration of proper names and the adjustments which must be made in the case of certain familiar names see Bible Translating, 243-46. Note, however, that in many instances there are strong pressures for the adoption of arbitrary orthographic conventions in the case of well-known proper names (e.g. taking over spelling of French, Spanish, or Portuguese, despite the fact that the people do not pronounce the names according to such consonant-vowel representations). In most instances one must accede to these pressures and use the orthographically approved form of the prestige language of the area. This principle often applies to such names as Peter, James, John, Philip, and Thomas, but would not be likely to apply to Bartholomew, Alphaeus, or Thaddaeus.

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 3:29 – 3:30

Text:

Instead of hamartēmatos ‘sin’ Textus Receptus has kriseōs ‘judgment,’ ‘condemnation’: this clearly inferior reading is rejected by all modern editions of the Greek text.

Exegesis:

eis to pneuma to hagion ‘into the Holy Spirit’: eis here has a hostile meaning ‘against.’

aphesin (cf. 1.4) ‘forgiveness’ (for the verb aphiēmi ‘forgive’ see 2.5).

eis ton aiōna ‘into the age,’ i.e. the ‘future age.’

eis ‘into’ indicates duration of time.

aiōn (4.19; 10.30; 11.14) ‘age’: the word reflects the Hebrew concept of time as divided into ages, generally the present age (cf. 4.19) and the future age, the age to come (cf. 10.30). In this passage the phrase means ‘eternally,’ ‘forever’ as the parallel in Mt. 12.32 makes explicit: ‘either in this age or in the coming age.’ Cf. Vulgate in aeternum; Lagrange à jamais.

enochos (14.64) ‘guilty of,’ ‘charged with,’ here indicates the crime of which the man is guilty, not the punishment to which he is liable.

aiōniou ‘of the age,’ ‘age-long’: that is ‘eternal,’ ‘endless.’

hoti elegon ‘because they were saying’: these are words of explanation which the evangelist adds. hoti is causative ‘because,’ giving the reason why Jesus said what he did concerning the unforgivable sin.

elegon ‘they were saying’ is better than ‘they had said’ of Revised Standard Version. ‘They’ are the scribes referred to in v. 22.

pneuma akatharton ‘unclean spirit,’ the same as saying ‘he has Beelzebul’ (v. 22) or ‘he has a demon’ (cf. 1.34).

Translation:

Blasphemes against the Holy Spirit may be rendered as ‘to speak against the Holy Spirit’ or ‘to say evil words about the Holy Spirit’ (for “Holy Spirit” see 1.7).

Has forgiveness is a difficult expression to translate literally, for in general one must speak of ‘to be forgiven’ or ‘to receive forgiveness’ (but for numerous idioms for forgiveness see 1.4). In languages in which an active form of the verb is required the subject ‘God’ must be introduced, ‘God will never forgive a man who speaks evil of the Holy Spirit.’

To be guilty of an eternal sin can only rarely be translated literally. Rather, this phrase must be rendered by various types of idiomatic expressions, e.g. ‘his sin stays on his head for the time that never ends’ (Farefare), ‘he carries the weight of his sin that lasts forever’ (Yaka), ‘his sins will be continually taken into account’ (Pamona), ‘he will always have his sin’ (Highland Oaxaca Chontal), and ‘he has a sin that will never be taken away’ (Huichol).

In some way, the abrupt transition before the clause for they had said … must be marked, either by some kind of a dash, or by a complete new sentence, or by some transitional expression, e.g. ‘Jesus said this because they had said…’ (South Bolivian Quechua). The reason for making this break evident is that one must not translate as ‘he is guilty of an eternal sin because of what they had said’ (though indirectly this is true). Nevertheless, the last sentence must be construed with all that precedes, not merely with the last clause.

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 4:39

Exegesis:

diegertheis (only here in Mark) ‘awakening,’ ‘arousing.’

epitimēsen (cf. 1.25) ‘he stopped,’ ‘he checked.’

pephimōso (cf. 1.25) ‘Be silent!,’ ‘Be quiet!’ (used with the unclean spirit in 1.25).

ekopasen (6.51) ‘it abated,’ ‘it ceased,’ ‘it stopped.’

galēnē (only here in Mark) ‘calm,’ ‘stillness.’

Translation:

Rebuked is equivalent in some instances to ‘scold,’ but in many instances must be translated as ‘commanded the wind strongly.’

The sea is ‘the lake’ or ‘the water in the lake.’

Peace is often translated by two different types of expressions: (1) a term indicating cessation of war and (2) one denoting quietness, inactivity, or calm. It is the latter meaning which is important here, e.g. ‘be quiet,’ ‘be calm.’ In Southern Subanen one may say ‘calm; that’s enough.’

In Greek the word translated in the Revised Standard Version as be still refers primarily to quietness, in contrast with noise. However, in some languages the figure of cessation of violent movement (speaking of the waves) would be more meaningful, especially as the second part of the command to the waters of the lake.

The wind ceased is expressed in a number of ways ‘the wind stopped,’ ‘the wind went down,’ ‘the wind stood still,’ ‘the wind passed over’ (Tabasco Chontal), and ‘the wind healed’ (South Bolivian Quechua).

There was a great calm is in Piro ‘the water was doing nothing at all.’ ‘There were no waves’ can also be used.

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 5:43

Exegesis:

diesteilato … polla ‘commanded … much,’ i.e. ‘gave strict orders.’

diastellomai (7.36; 8.15; 9.9) ‘command,’ ‘order.’

polla (cf. 3.12; 5.10, 23) is adverbial ‘much,’ ‘strictly.’

hina ‘that’ denotes content (cf. 5.18), not purpose.

eipen dothēnai autē phagein ‘he said to be given to her to eat,’ i.e. ‘he said that she be fed.’

Translation:

Strictly charged may be rendered as ‘strongly commanded’ or ‘spoke to them in hard words.’

In some languages the rendering seems to imply a complete inconsistency between Jesus’ order to the parents of the child and the fact that others should not know. What was really meant in the command of Jesus was that they should not tell others what had happened. Hence, one may translate as ‘that no one else should come to know about,’ or ‘that no other people should hear about it,’ or ‘that they should not tell others about.’

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 6:41

Exegesis:

labōn (cf. 4.16) ‘taking.’

anablepsas eis ton ouranon ‘looking up to heaven’ in an attitude of prayer.

anablepō (7.34; 16.4) ‘look up’; in 8.24; 10.51, 52 it means ‘to recover sight,’ ‘see again.’

eulogēsen (8.7; 11.9, 10; 14.22) ‘he blessed’: here and in 8.7 and 14.22 (and parallels in the other Gospels) the word may mean (1) ‘invoke God’s blessing upon,’ or (2) ‘give thanks (to God),’ ‘praise (God)’ as the equivalent of eucharisteō ‘give thanks,’ ‘praise.’ Arndt & Gingrich reflect lack of finality in the matter by refusing to classify these passages definitely under one or other heading.

A study of the passages which deal with the two feedings of the multitudes, the Supper, and the related passages, shows that eulogeō and eucharisteō are used interchangeably. In the feeding of the five thousand, eulogeō is found in Mk. 6.41 // Mt. 14.19 // Lk. 9.16, and eucharisteō in Jn. 6.11, 23. In the feeding of the four thousand, eucharisteō is used in Mk. 8.6 // Mt. 15.36, and eulogeō in Mk. 8.7. In the institution of the Supper eucharisteō is used of the loaf Lk. 22.19 // 1 Co. 11.24, and of the cup Mk. 14.23 // Mt. 26.27 // Lk. 22.17; eulogeō is used of the loaf Mk. 14.22 // Mt. 26.26 (and of the cup in 1 Co. 10.16). In the Emmaus incident eulogeō is used of the bread Lk. 24.30. It would be precarious to try to establish a difference between the actions described by the two verbs in all these passages as though eulogeō always meant exclusively ‘to call God’s blessing upon’ and eucharisteō ‘thank God for.’ The conclusion appears inevitable that the two verbs describe the same action of praise or thanksgiving offered in prayer to God.

It should be noticed, however, that in two passages eulogeō takes a direct object: the loaves and fish in Lk. 9.16 and the fish in Mk. 8.7. In these two passages it would be natural to assume that the meaning is ‘ask God to bless,’ ‘invoke God’s blessing upon’ (although Taylor, 360, maintains that in Mk. 8.7 no difference is to be established between eulogeō [of the fish] and eucharisteō in the previous verse [of the loaves]: “The act is one of thanksgiving to God”). In 1 Co. 10.16 ‘the cup of blessing which we bless’ would seem to mean ‘the cup of blessing for which we bless (i.e. praise) God.’

The Vulgate consistently translates eulogeō by benedicere and eucharisteō by gratias agere. The Syriac always translates eulogeō by b-r-k ‘bless’; used of God, ‘bless God,’ it means ‘praise God’ (cf. Koehler). This same verb is also used to translate eucharisteō in Mk. 8.6, Jn. 6.11, 23, and 1 Co. 11.24. Elsewhere eucharisteō is translated by y-d-ʾ ‘confess,’ ‘give thanks,’ ‘praise’ (Hebrew yadah); in Mk. 14.23 both y-d-ʾ and b-r-k are used, and in Mt. 15.36 sh-v-ch ‘praise,’ ‘give thanks.’ The evidence from the Syriac would seem to indicate that the two Greek verbs are practically synonymous in meaning.

English translations, as a rule, translate eucharisteō ‘give thanks,’ and eulogeō ‘bless.’ The Modern Speech New Testament, Moffatt and Goodspeed always have a direct object for ‘bless,’ either the loaves and fish, or the bread and cup of the Supper. Revised Standard Version has followed American Standard Version by using ‘bless’ as an intransitive verb, with no object following, meaning (presumably) ‘said a blessing.’ O Novo Testamento de Nosso Senhor Jesus Cristo. Revisdo Autorizada always translates eulogeō ‘bless’ with a direct object (as do The Modern Speech New Testament and others), and eucharisteō ‘give thanks’; Le Nouveau Testament. Version Synodale translates both words ‘give thanks’ (with the exception of Lk. 9.16 and 1 Co. 10.16 where eulogeō is translated ‘bless’ with a direct object); Zürcher Bibel translates both words ‘say a prayer of thanks for it’ (sprechen das Dankgebet darüber).

From this it is evident that there exists no uniformity in translating the two terms. That the two are practically equivalent, in these passages, seems to be indicated by the Gospel narratives themselves, and there is good precedent for translating them in this manner.

kateklasen (only here in Mark: cf. klao 8.6, 19; 14.22) ‘he broke,’ ‘he broke into fragments.’

paratithōsin (8.6, 7) ‘that they should set before (them)’: though there is no way of determining the question, it would seem probable, in light of the customs of that time, that the Twelve carried the bread and fish and placed them before the various groups of fifty and one hundred, and not before each person individually.

emerisen (cf. 3.24) ‘he divided,’ ‘he distributed.’

Translation:

Taking must in some languages be ‘took in his hands,’ since the instrument or agent of the taking must be specified.

Looked up to heaven is ‘looked up toward heaven’ not ‘looked into heaven,’ as in some translations.

Blessed involves a number of problems for the translator because of (1) the ambiguous nature of the Greek expression, (2) the tendency to interpret any blessing of an object as involving some magical practices, and (3) the confusion between ‘blessing’ and ‘making taboo.’ Where there is an object of the process of blessing, the tendency is to understanding consecration or sanctifying, e.g. ‘place holiness on’ (San Mateo del Mar Huave) or ‘to cause it to be holy.’ In some languages there is a more indirect way of dealing with this problem by saying ‘give it his good word’ (Chol) and ‘prayed about it’ (Central Tarahumara, Southern Subanen). However, in order to avoid a manifestly incorrect interpretation, which presumes that Jesus employed some word ritual to increase the food magically, it may be better to translate ‘spoke to God on behalf of the food’ or ‘gave thanks to God for the food.’

Broke the loaves means breaking them apart in his hands, not, as implied in one translation, smashing them like stones.

Gave them must refer here to the pieces of bread.

To set before, as noted above, probably refers to supplies distributed to the groups which would in turn distribute them among those in the group.

Divided the two fish among them all does not mean that Jesus divided the fish and personally served all the people. In some languages one must say ‘divided the fish for all the people’ or ‘divided the fish so all the people could have some.’

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 .