Translation commentary on James 3:13

Who is wise and understanding among you?: James continues with his favorite style by asking another rhetorical question. He addresses those among his readers who consider themselves to be wise and understanding. This pair of terms is found often in the Old Testament (Deut 1.13; 4.6), describing a person who lives in accordance with the insight given by God. The wise person is not someone who possesses intellectual capacity or abstract knowledge, but someone who has moral insight on practical matters in daily life. The Greek word translated understanding appears only here in the New Testament. It is rendered as “endued with knowledge” by King James Version, “clever” by New English Bible, and “learned” by Revised English Bible, and is used to describe someone who possesses expert knowledge with deep perception and understanding. There is, however, no need to press for a precise and distinct difference of meaning between the two. Rather, comparable to their usage in the Old Testament as a pair, the two words are perhaps best taken as having the same sense, so Contemporary English Version “wise and sensible.” In languages not accustomed to using similar words like this, the pair may be rendered as “truly wise,” “having great spiritual insight,” “a person who considers everything very carefully,” or idiomatically, for example, “a person with a very big mind.” The clause Who is … among you? may also be expressed as “Are there any of you…?” (Good News Translation), “Are any of you…?” (Contemporary English Version) or, “Do any of you…?”

James goes on to answer his own question by mentioning two things that are evidence of true wisdom, namely that true wisdom should show itself in deeds, and that it should manifest itself in meekness. First, the person who is truly wise and understanding should prove it by the quality of his or her own conduct. It is proven By his good life. The word life is not the usual word for life; it refers not so much to private and inner life, but to life in relation to others as shown in conduct. It is a favorite word in 1 Peter, referring to the whole manner and style of Christian living intended to be a witness to nonbelievers. The King James Version rendering “conversation” is misleading, since in modern usage it is used almost exclusively to mean “oral expression,” namely “talk.” In the present context it means more or less the Christian way of life, conduct, or behavior. To show here means to “prove” or to “demonstrate.” The force of the imperative let him show may therefore be brought out more clearly as “You are to prove it” (Good News Translation), “he must demonstrate” (Barclay), or “he must give evidence of.” Other ways to express this clause are “show it by living right” (Contemporary English Version) or “Show you are truly wise by walking a straight life.”

By his good life let him show his works: what exactly is the relationship between good life and his works, as the two expressions appear to be needless repetition of the same idea? What is to be shown is his works: and his good life is the means to be used. Since his works is the content of what is to be shown, it may be clearer in English to add the function word “that” to introduce a subordinate clause, thus “Show by his good life that his works….” In this case we can either make his works a verbal statement like “what he does is done…” (Goodspeed) or supply a verb like “his works are done…” (so Barclay, New Revised Standard Version). Another possibility is to take his works as in apposition to good life, thus “by your good life, by your good deeds…,” as Good News Translation has done (similarly Contemporary English Version). This alternative is the more likely one. We may also express this as “by walking his life well and doing good deeds.”

Secondly, true wisdom should show itself in the meekness of wisdom. The genitive construction “A of B” is ambiguous, as it may be understood in so many different ways.
(1) It is most often taken as “B modifying A” or “B as descriptive of A,” reflected in all literal translations, resulting in the meaning “wise meekness [humility]” (so Chinese Union Version [CUV], Chinese New Translation).
(2) It is also understood as a coordinate construction, “A and B,” as seen in the rendering of Good News Translation “with humility and wisdom” (so also Luther 1984, Bible en français courant; similarly Contemporary English Version).
(3) It can be interpreted as “A characterizing B,” apparently the sense favored by Barclay when he renders the phrase as “that gentleness which is the hallmark of wisdom.”
(4) It is also taken as “A agreeing with B,” for example, “meekness that is in accord with wisdom” (so Japanese colloquial version, Japanese Franciscan Translation).
(5) Finally, it is interpreted as “A originating from B,” resulting in the rendering “the humility that comes from wisdom” (New American Bible; similarly Phillips, Translator’s New Testament, Revised English Bible). This is the option favored by many modern scholars and translators.

To sum up, (2) and (5) appear to fit the context best and therefore are recommended by this Handbook.

Meekness is the opposite of arrogance. It is often understood as self-effacement or submissiveness and is therefore considered by many as a weakness rather than a virtue. In Jesus’ teaching, however, it is a desirable quality. In one of the beatitudes he pronounces “Blessed are the meek” (Matt 5.5). The “meek” there means people with genuine humility and awareness that they are unworthy before God and are totally dependent on him. In the present context the word has been rendered in various ways; for example, “modesty” (Revised English Bible), “gentleness” (Barclay), and “humility” (Good News Translation, Translator’s New Testament, New International Version). Indeed this sort of “humility” can come only from true wisdom—the wisdom from God! For more discussion on the meaning of “meekness,” see the discussion in 1.21.

The following are possible alternative translation models for this verse:
• Are any of you truly wise? If you are, then you must show this by living [or, walking] a good life, and also by doing good deeds with the humility [or, gentleness] that comes from your wisdom.
• Is there any person among you who is wise or sensible? You must show it by living a right [or, correct] life and by being humble and wise in everything you do.

Quoted with permission from Loh, I-Jin and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on The Letter from James. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Luke 1:17

Exegesis:

The syntactic structure of this verse is rather loose. The main clause proeleusetai enōpion autou ‘he will go before him,’ etc. is followed by two infinitive clauses, one (1) with the loosely attached final epistrepsai ‘to turn,’ the other (2) with the unconnected final hetoimasai ‘to prepare.’ Clause (2) is either subordinate to (1), or dependent upon the main clause and then co-ordinate with (1). The former interpretation (represented by The Four Gospels – a New Translation, Willibrord, La Sainte Bible: Nouvelle version Segond révisée) seems to be slightly more probable, since clause (2) is the more general and comprehensive of the two, but the syntactic pattern is too vague to admit of clear distinctions. The semantic function of the clause beginning with hetoimasai however is clear: it serves to indicate with what intention John will ‘turn the hearts of the fathers to the children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just’: it is to prepare a people for the Lord.

kai autos proeleusetai enōpion autou ‘and he will go before him.’

kai autos ‘and he,’ unemphatic: there appears to be no reason for referring explicitly to the subject because it is the same as that of the preceding verb epistrepsei ‘he will turn’ (different in 1.22; 2.28, which see).

proerchomai ‘to go before,’ as a forerunner (here) or as a leader (22.47).

enōpion autou ‘before him,’ cf. on v. 15. Here it has both a local meaning, ‘some distance in front of him,’ and a temporal one ‘going and coming sometime before him.’ From the general usage of enōpion it follows that the local meaning is predominant.

en pneumati kai dunamei Eliou ‘in the spirit and power of Elijah,’ i.e. “possessed by the spirit and power of Elijah” (New English Bible). en means here as in 2.27 ‘under the influence of,’ or ‘guided by.’ The genitive Eliou is not possessive but qualifying: John will be possessed by the same spirit as Elijah. pneuma does not refer to the human spirit but to the divine spirit, as usually when accompanied by a semantically related noun.

dunamis ‘power,’ often connected with pneuma (4.14; Acts 1.8; Rom 15.13, 19; 2 Tim. 1.7) and here practically synonymous with it as in 1.35. Hence both words may be rendered as one concept, ‘powerful spirit.’

epistrepsai kardias paterōn epi tekna ‘to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children,’ a free quotation of Mal. 4.6 (3.24 in the Hebrew text); the emphasis is on the restoration of mutual relationship between fathers and children. Translations like “to reconcile father and child” (New English Bible, cf. Phillips, An American Translation) are based on the idea of the Hebrew of Mal. 3.23 rather than on the exact wording of Lk. 1.17! The clause may refer to a restoration of parental affection (Plummer, Creed, Klostermann, Weiss) or to the winning of the older generation for the religious ideals of the younger generation (Zahn, Grundmann).

kai apeitheis en phronēsei dikaiōn ‘and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous.’ The phrase is still dependent upon epistrepsai, which implies that en phronēsei is equivalent to eis phronēsin, indicating to which John will turn the disobedient. For dikaios cf. on v. 6.

apeithēs ‘disobedient,’ here in the religious sense of ‘disobedient towards God.’

phronēsis ‘way of thinking,’ or, ‘insight,’ ‘understanding.’ The translation “wisdom” (Revised Standard Version and many others) goes back to the latter, “ways” (New English Bible) to the former, which seems to suit the context better.

hetoimasai kuriō laon kateskeuasmenon ‘to make ready for the Lord a people prepared,’ indicating the final purpose of the preceding clause.

hetoimazō ‘to make ready,’ ‘to prepare,’ virtually synonymous with kataskeuazō, but used with a different function: hetoimasai, qualified by kuriō, refers to the act done by John for the Lord, kateskeuasmenon, past participle, refers to the outcome of the act (as brought out by Translator’s New Testament, “thoroughly prepared”). Some translations take kuriō to go with kateskeuasmenon and render hetoimasai and kateskeuasmenon by one expression, cf. “to make a people perfectly ready for the Lord” (An American Translation), but the position of kuriō immediately after hetoimasai and separated from kateskeuasmenon does not point to this interpretation.

kataskeuazō (also 7.27) ‘to make ready,’ ‘to prepare.’

Translation:

Him, or, ‘the Lord,’ because the mere pronoun sounds disrespectful (Malay), cf. on 3.22.

In the spirit and power. As shown in Exegesis the function of “in” often has to be described, e.g. by ‘bearing,’ ‘endowed with’ (Kannada), ‘having received’ (Shipibo-Conibo); with necessary further shifts and expansions this may lead to such renderings of the phrase as, ‘being dressed-in the spirit and having-as-attribute the power’ (Javanese), ‘having-as-spirit the spirit and having-as-power the power,’ ‘having received the powerful/strong spirit,’ or to corresponding verbal clauses. For spirit, preferably to be rendered as in ‘Holy Spirit,’ see references on v. 15; for power on v. 35.

Of Elijah, i.e. that (the prophet) E. had, cf. ‘bespirited and bepowered as E. (was)’ (Batak Toba 1885), ‘his strength of spirit (will be) like the strength of spirit of E.’ (Tae’ 1933), ‘and the spirit and power that have influenced (or, driven/strengthened) E. also will influence (etc.) him.’

To turn the hearts of the fathers to the children repeats the verb of v. 16 but in different context; hence, the rendering may have to differ more or less radically, as in, ‘make the fathers love their children’ (Pohnpeian), ‘direct the hearts of the fathers towards their children’ (Toraja-Sa’dan), ‘cause men to think well again of their children’ (Apache, where ‘father’ cannot be used without definite possessor; hence, ‘men’). The plural in ‘hearts’ is distributive, that in ‘fathers’ and ‘children’ collective, expressing a category; in both cases some languages use a singular. The word (also occurring in 1.51, 66; 2.19, 35, 51; 3.15; 5.22; 6.45; 8.12, 15; 9.47; 10.27; 12.34; 16.15; 18.1; 21.34; 24.25, 32, 38) stands for the centre of the personality, the seat of emotions and/or intellect, etc. Here, as in some other cases, its use helps to signal the metaphorical meaning the verb has. In other languages, however, a direct reference to the person concerned is preferable, see some of the renderings quoted above. In Kituba a literal rendering would imply that a physical transaction was taking place, a quite dangerous idea in the local cultural context, which is avoided by saying, ‘to return fathers to love their children.’ — Fathers. The plural is distributive. For the noun, here used in the sense of a person’s biological father (also in 1.59, 62, 67; 8.51; 9.42, 59; 11.11; 12.53; 14.26; 15.12, 17f, 20ff, 27ff; 16.27; 18.20; and in 2.33, 48. For father(s), i.e. ‘ancestor(s)’ cf. below on 1.32 and 55; for Father in the sense of Jesus’ or the believers’ heavenly Father on 2.49.

And the disobedient to the wisdom (preferably, way of thinking) of the just. To clarify the clause structure the verb rendering “to turn” often has to be repeated here, or a synonymous verb that fits this phrase better, cf. ‘cause the hard-headed to accept the same thoughts as the people who do right’ (Sranan Tongo), ‘cause those who do not hear/obey to hear/obey the wisdom of the men who are good’ (Apache), ‘change the rebellious ones to think as the righteous think’ (Western Highland Purepecha). For disobedient, i.e. ‘those who do not obey God’ (Tboli), cf. the above quotations, and Shipibo-Conibo’s ‘the not to be talked to,’ i.e. people who, though you tell them, do not want to do. For the verb ‘obey’ see on 2.51. For just cf. references on “righteous” in v. 6.

To make ready … prepared, or as a co-ordinated clause, ‘and so (he will) make ready prepared.’ In translating this phrase the main problem is to prevent its sounding repetitive, or becoming a tautology. This will influence the way the verb and the participle must be rendered. Make ready for the Lord, or, ‘form … for the Lord’ (Willibrord, Bible en français courant), ‘makes the hearts soft for the Lord’ (Huanuco Quechua); or again, because the phrase emphasizes the beneficiary, ‘to put at the Lord’s disposal,’ ‘to provide the Lord with.’ A people prepared, or, ‘a people fit to be used’ (Chinese Union Version). If the aim of preparation has to be made explicit, one may say, .’.. prepared for (or, to serve) him.’ — People may have a generic meaning, ‘several persons,’ or it may refer, as it does here, to a particular political and/or racial entity, such as Israel, and then has been rendered, ‘nation’ (see on 7.5), ‘race,’ ‘tribe,’ ‘the hundred (sur)names’ (Chinese Union Version, traditional for the totality of the Chinese people), or a term for the collective citizens (Lü Zhenzhong). When that entity is seen in its relationship to a ruler or overlord, one may have to say, ‘the subjects.’ When that ruler is God, the same rendering often can be used (as is done here in Balinese), or a specific term designating a people as a religious community, e.g. the followers of a prophet or the worshippers of a god (Bahasa Indonesia). In some cases the term is used to indicate the common people in contrast to their leaders, see on 7.29.

Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.

Translation commentary on Luke 2:27 – 2:28

Exegesis:

kai ēlthen ‘and he came.’ With this clause the description of the event, already announced by kai idou ‘and behold’ in v. 25 (cf. note there), begins; kai therefore resumes the opening words of v. 25. Hence Knox translates “he now came”.

en tō pneumati ‘in the Spirit,’ i.e. “guided by the Spirit” (New English Bible), not on his own account or initiative.

eis to hieron ‘into the temple,’ i.e. the temple in Jerusalem.

hieron ‘temple’; as compared with naos ‘temple’ (1.9, 21, 22) hieron includes the whole temple with its buildings, courts, etc. and is often used when the scene of action is not the temple building itself.

kai en tō eisagagein tous goneis to paidion Iēsoun ‘and after the parents had brought in the child Jesus,’ scil. eis to hieron ‘into the temple,’ omitted in order to avoid repetition. en with following articular accusative and infinitive in the aorist tense indicates events preceding the event expressed in the main clause (cf. 9.36; 11.37; 14.1; 19.15).

eisagō ‘to bring in,’ or, ‘into.’

tou poiēsai autous kata to eithismenon tou nomou peri autou ‘in order to do concerning him according to the custom of the law.’ tou with following articular infinitive has final force and the clause expresses the purpose of their entering the temple. autous is the subject of the infinitive poiēsai, not expressed in English. peri autou ‘concerning him’ goes with poiēsai; the phrase does not mean that the child Jesus himself is to be submitted to a rite but only that what his parents do, concerns him.

to eithismenon, past participle of ethizō ‘to accustom,’ lit. ‘that which is accustomed’ i.e. ‘that which has become a custom,’ synonymous with to ethos (cf. on 1.8) ‘custom,’ ‘tradition’; to eithismenon tou nomou ‘the custom of the law’ is the custom which the law prescribes.

(V. 28) kai autos ‘and he.’ autos refers to a subject already mentioned, i.e. that of ēlthen ‘he came.’ kai is used here in a redundant way to introduce the apodosis after a subordinate clause (cf. 2.21).

edexato auto eis tas agkalas ‘he received it in his arms.’

dechomai ‘to take,’ ‘to receive.’ The use of this verb here suggests that the initiative is not with Simeon but that the child is handed over to him.

agkalē ‘bent arm,’ usually in order to receive something.

kai eulogēsen ton theon kai eipen ‘and he praised God and said.’ For eulogeō cf. on 1.64. The two verbs of this clause may be taken to refer to two different acts, or to one single act, preferably the latter, cf. The Four Gospels – a New Translation, “blessed God in these words”.

Translation:

Inspired by the Spirit he came into the temple. The activity of the Spirit has also been described as, “impelled by” (The Four Gospels – a New Translation), ‘moved by’ (Ekari), ‘on instruction of’ (Toraja-Sa’dan), ‘on instigation/command of’ (Tamil); or, changing the syntactic pattern, ‘the Holy Spirit led him into, or, caused Simeon to enter’ (Sranan Tongo, Tboli). Spirit may have to be specified, cf. ‘Holy Spirit,’ ‘Spirit of God.’ — The temple (Gr. to hieron, occurring in 2.37, 46; 4.9; 18.10; 19.45, 47; 20.1; 21.5, 37f; 22.52f; 24.53) is preferably to be distinguished in translation from the more specific ho naos (for which see on 1.9). Commonly used descriptive renderings are, ‘Holy/Sacred House,’ ‘Divine Abode,’ ‘House of God.’ In order to indicate the uniqueness of Jerusalem’s temple Balinese has to use ‘Great Temple.’ The Chinese Union Version did not choose the term for the temple of popular religion (in which also the participation of the state was centred), but a word (lit. ‘palace’) indicating the main worship hall of the Buddhists. A similar term is used in Thai to translate ho naos, and an expression built on that term is employed as rendering of to hieron, i.e. ‘environs-of the main-audience-hall’ (preferred to the existing term for a temple compound because of the strong Buddhist connotations of the latter). Some other renderings used (most of them both for hieron and naos) are, ‘God’s compound’ (Zarma), ‘big church of the Jews’ (Otomi), ‘big house on top (i.e. most important)’ (Zapotec of Villa Alta), ‘festival longhouse of God’ (Guhu-Samane), ‘sacrosanct house,’ lit. ‘house where-the-belly-gets-swollen’ (i.e. because taboo is violated) (Toraja-Sa’dan, using a term that is also applied to a Muslim mosque).

The parents brought in the child Jesus. Where ‘parents’ should preferably be possessed one may shift to, ‘the child J. was brought in by his parents’ (Indonesian languages), ‘father and mother of that child J. brought-in him’ (Kituba), or, ‘Jesus’ parents brought in the little one.’ Parents is often rendered by a combination of the words for father and mother, cf. on v. 33. — Brought in, or, ‘brought/carried enter (the temple),’ ‘came in there, carrying’; cf. also on “brought him up” in v. 22. — The child Jesus. This combination of noun and proper name is awkward in some languages; then one may have to say, ‘the young/little one called Jesus,’ or simply, ‘the little one,’ or, ‘Jesus’ (Tboli); or again, shifting to a term for descendant (cf. on 1.7), ‘their child (called Jesus).’

To do for him, or, ‘concerning him,’ ‘with him’; or, ‘to act/perform with regard to him.’ In some languages the very generic character of the clause cannot be maintained. Since it refers backwards to v. 22b, it is defensible in such a case to say ‘to present him (to the Lord).’

According to the custom of the law, ‘as was the custom prescribed by the law,’ ‘as the law had made them accustomed to do’ (Sranan Tongo); or, making the phrase the object of ‘to do,’ “what was customary under the Law” (New English Bible), ‘custom required by the law’ (Tagalog), ‘custom that started from their own commandment/law’ (Tboli). Where ‘custom’ and ‘law’ are incompatible in an expression like this, one may have to shift to, “what the Law required” (Good News Translation), ‘the prescriptions of the Law’; then the rendering may become more similar to, or coincide with, that of “according to the law” in v. 22.

(V. 28) He took him up in his arms. One or both of the pronouns may have to be specified, ‘Simeon’ and ‘the child’ respectively. To take in one’s arms (in some languages expressed by one verb), or, with a slight semantic shift ‘to take/hold-to-one’s-breast’ (Bahasa Indonesia, Javanese). Elsewhere one has to add a verb, cf. ‘he took and held-in-his-arms’ (Toraja-Sa’dan), ‘Simeon took him, held-him-to-his-breast’ (Malay).

Blessed God and said, preferably, ‘praised God, saying (or, in/with these words),’ see on 1.42 sub (2).

Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.

Translation commentary on Luke 3:1 – 3:2

Exegesis:

Vv. 1f consist of (a) a series of indications of time, serving to fix the events to be described in vv. 2ff in the setting of world and regional history, the latter both political and religious, and (b) the main clause egeneto rēma theou epi Iōannēn ‘the word of God came to John,’ etc.

en etei de pentekaidekatō tēs hēgemonias Tiberiou Kaisaros ‘in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar.’ de is transitional and serves to introduce a new narrative.

hēgemonia ‘rule,’ here referring to the reign of the Roman emperor but in itself as general a term as the verb hēgemoneuō (used in the next phrase), cf. on 2.2.

Tiberiou Kaisaros ‘of Tiberius Caesar,’ cf. on 2.1.

tēs Ioudaias ‘of Judea,’ cf. on 1.5. Here it is used in an administrative sense, including Samaria but not Galilee, as the next phrase shows.

kai tetraarchountos … Hērōdou ‘and when Herod was tetrarch.’

tetrarcheō ‘to be tetrarch,’ i.e. originally the governor of one of the four provinces of Thessaly, later denoting the ruler of any small country or region who was not a king.

tēs Itouraias kai Trachōnitidos chōras ‘of Ituraea and Trachonitis,’ both going with chōras which admits of many translations, cf. e.g., “district” (Translator’s New Testament), “territory” (Phillips), “country” (Moffatt). Their tetrarch Philippus was Herod’s older brother, of a different mother.

epi archiereōs Hanna kai Kaïapha ‘in the time of the high priest Annas and Caiaphas.’ archiereōs, though in the singular, refers to both names mentioned, and Luke may have thought of Annas and Caiaphas as being a kind of joint high priests.

archiereus ‘high priest.’

egeneto rēma theou epi Iōannēn ‘the word of God happened, or, came to John.’ This phrase occurs frequently in the Septuagint, denoting the divine inspiration of a prophet by God and the entrusting of a divine message or commission (cf. e.g. Gen. 15.1; 1 Sam. 15.10; Jer. 1.2). It implies that the person to whom the word of God comes, comes under the power of that word, not just that the word is communicated to him.

en tē erēmō ‘in the desert’ refers to the same area as hai erēmoi in 1.80.

Translation:

The elaborate way in which Luke states the date of the events to be told has the stylistic function of marking that he now comes to the main part of his narrative. In several languages this can be imitated approximately, but it may be advisable then to divide the one long sentence in small units, introducing the main event (‘the word … came …’) by a recapitulating expression, e.g. “It was the fifteenth year of the rule of Emperor T.; Pontius P. was governor of Judea, Herod was ruler of G…. It was at that time that the word of God came…” (Good News Translation). Other languages may require an introductory word or phrase, such as, ‘To-begin-with’ (Malay; cf. also above on 1.5), ‘What will be told now is this.’ If according to receptor language usage the main event has to be mentioned early in the utterance, the sentence may have to be recast in such a way that first the emperor, next John and what happened to him, and last the secular and religious rulers are referred to (Manobo), whereas in a language as Sateré what happened to John will have to come at the very beginning.

The noun reign may have to be expressed in a clause, e.g. ‘when T. C. had been reigning/ruling, or, had been emperor’; and cf. on 1.33.

Governor, see on 2.2.

Tetrarch. The rendering to be chosen should denote an indigenous ruler that is subject to higher authority, cf. the following renderings of ‘tetrarch’ and ‘emperor’ respectively, ‘prince’—‘king-of-princes’ (cf. Balinese), ‘chief’—‘chief of greatness’ (Kituba), ‘king who has been apportioned a fief,’ i.e. feudal Lord—‘(one who is) on the throne,’ using a well known idiom that expresses sovereiGood News Bibley (Chinese Union Version); in Kekchí the distinction is indicated by a reference to areas of different size, e.g. ‘who had power in Galilee’ (etc.)—‘who had power in all the land.’ A cultural equivalent has been used in, ‘at the time of these four chiefs: Herod in the region G., Phillip in the region I….’ (Batak Toba, adapting an expression employed in several parts of Sumatra for groups of high dignitaries, which are called ‘the four chiefs/grandees,’ even if their number is not complete). Attempts at a literal rendering, often a neologism in the receptor language, usually result in a long and cumbersome phrase, in some cases even a misleading one, suggesting some such meaning as ‘chief over four parts,’ or ‘fourth ruler.’ The renderings of “tetrarch” and “governor” are the same in some languages (e.g. Kituba, Ekari, Sranan Tongo); this is acceptable, because the distinction is of no relevance here (cf. the fact that in Pilate’s case the Greek does not mention his precise rank).

Brother, see below on 6.14.

(V. 2) In the high-priesthood of A. and C., or, ‘when A. and C. were high-priests.’

The word of God came to John. Though the wording of this Hebraistic phrase should preferably be preserved, yet receptor language idiom may compel the translator to the use of more or less radical adjustments. He may have to mark the expression as a simile, e.g. ‘the word of God came, as it were, to/over John’; or to rephrase it so that the connexion between ‘word of God’ and the verb becomes less direct, e.g. by speaking of ‘the power/guidance of God’s word,’ or so that ‘the word of God’ is no longer the agent, e.g. by shifting to a rendering like, ‘John was-commissioned with God’s word’ (Javanese), or, ‘John received the word of God’; or again, he may have to treat the ultimate agent, i.e. God, as subject of the sentence, e.g. ‘God made J. the one to speak his (i.e. God’s) words,’ ‘God made-known his message to him’ (Kituba). ‘God commanded/commissioned/told John to preach.’ — For word of God cf. on 5.1. In some Bantu languages the choice is between two terms for ‘word,’ the one used in contexts of social communication in the meaning voice, ‘word (that is heard and awaits response),’ the other in that of ‘word (as power, or as expression of intention),’ ‘command,’ ‘message’; as the exegesis shows the latter term will usually best fit the present context. — Came to, has been rendered by ‘came over’ (Willibrord), ‘took possession of’ (Schonfield), ‘found’ (Nyakyusa), ‘arrived in the heart of,’ indicating that John is merely an instrument of God in receiving the word (Tzeltal), ‘arrived at/reached’ (Shona 1963, employing a verb that, when given a suffix indicating purpose or aim, is used in ritual contexts of a god, or spirit, that takes possession of a medium).

In such phrases as John the son of Zechariah the appositional phrase functions approximately as does the surname in modern western languages; in some languages it forms a closely knit linguistic unit, signalled as such by a specific term or construction.

When name and apposition do not form such a unit one should make clear that in the wilderness does not go with Zechariah, but with John, cf. ‘then God’s voice found J., the son of Z., it found him in the woods’ (Nyakyusa), .’.. to John there in the wilderness. This J. was the child of Z.’ (Manobo); cf. also, ‘at that time Z.’s son J. was in the desert (and) the word of God came down to him’ (Chinese Union Version, locative clauses in Chinese normally preceding that part they qualify) for wilderness.

Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.

Translation commentary on Luke 3:4

Exegesis:

hōs gegraptai ‘as it is written,’ the usual formula for the introduction of a quotation from the Old Testament. The subsequent quotation, here related to what precedes by the connective hōs ‘as,’ serves to qualify John’s ministry in a general way as the announcing of the promised salvation and has no direct bearing upon the baptism he proclaims.

en biblō logōn Ēsaiou tou prophētou ‘in the book of sayings of Isaiah the prophet.’

biblos (also 20.24) ‘book,’ in both places followed by a genitive which indicates the content of the book. As the synonymous biblion it is to be thought of as a scroll (cf. Plummer on 4.20).

phōnē boōntos ‘(the) voice of one shouting,’ the genitive boōntos makes phōnē, which is without article, definite. The phrase serves to draw the attention strongly to what follows, cf. Phillips‘ “Hark! Someone is shouting”.

boaō ‘to shout,’ ‘to cry out,’ here of solemn proclamation.

en tē erēmō ‘in the desert,’ goes with boōntos, not with what follows, as in the Hebrew text of Is. 40.3.

hetoimasate tēn hodon kuriou ‘prepare the road of the Lord.’ The underlying picture is that of preparations for an approaching visit of a king (cf. Moulton-Milligan 258): the road over which the Lord shall come must be made ready. The plural shows that the order is directed to a group but this group is not subsequently identified. The picture is that of an existing road which must be made ready.

eutheias poieite tas tribous autou ‘make his paths straight.’ The reference is to the elimination of curves, rather than to making the road smooth, as shown by the use of euthus ‘straight’ elsewhere and by the fact that in v. 5 the same word eutheias is used in contrast with skolios ‘bent,’ ‘curved,’ and distinguished from leios ‘smooth.’

eutheia (†, from masc, euthus) ‘straight.’ In v. 5 it is used as a substantive with hodon ‘way’ understood, and meaning ‘straight way.’

tribos ‘a beaten track,’ ‘path.’

Translation:

This verse, in the Greek subordinated to v. 3, may better become a new sentence, e.g. ‘This happened just as it was written in…’ (Marathi), ‘This is according to what…’ (cf. Manobo). A more radical shift of order is required in Telugu, which first quotes the prophecy, and concludes this quotation with the statement that these occurrences were predicted by Isaiah.

As it is written in … For this formula to introduce quotations from the Old Testament see above on 2.23. The pronoun it refers to the details of John’s ministry as described in v. 3, cf. “all in accordance with” (The Four Gospels – a New Translation); if necessary, one may shift to a personal reference, e.g. ‘About him it has been written in…,’ or, ‘He was like the man mentioned in….’

The book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, i.e. the book containing the words of the prophet Isaiah, or, the book recording what the prophet Isaiah has said. Idiom may necessitate some adjustments, e.g. ‘the words recorded in the book (of prophecies) of the prophet Is.’ (Chinese Union Version) or the ‘words of the prophet Is., (as) recorded/contained in his book.’ If idiom, style, or decodability require a simpler wording, the rendering may be modelled on the synonymous phrase “the book of the prophet Is.” (4.17) as done in Marathi, Balinese, or it may become, ‘in the (book of the) prophecies of (Prophet) Is.’ (cf. Malay and Bahasa Indonesia RC). Still further simplification will be necessary where passive constructions and subordination have to be avoided; then the whole clause “it is written … Isaiah” may be rendered, “as the prophet Is. had written in his book” (Good News Translation). For book see also on 4.17.

The voice of one crying in the wilderness. One (or, a person) crying has been rendered by the more specific ‘a proclaimer’ (Marathi, which also changes the phrase in a full sentence by adding a verb, ‘happened’). In Manobo culture ‘crying/shouting’ implies anger and accordingly has to be avoided. In such a case one may shift to ‘the voice of a person was widely heard.’

For prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. — Prepare the way of. One of the renderings possible in Sranan Tongo is ‘clear the overgrown tracks for (lit. wake up the lines for).’ Way and paths, or ‘road(s)’ and ‘little roads,’ ‘path(s)’ and ‘by-paths/side-alleys’; or, not to overtranslate the difference, ‘passage (or, place to walk)’ and ‘ways/paths,’ or a noun and a pronominal reference, e.g. ‘prepare the way…, and make it straight.’

Lord, see above on 1.6, sub (c).

Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.

Translation commentary on Luke 3:15 – 3:16

Exegesis:

Main clause to the two absolute genitives of v. 15 (prosdokōntos tou laou ‘as people were in expectation,’ and dialogizomenōn pantōn ‘as all were wondering’) is the first clause of v. 16, apekrinato … Iōannēs, ‘John answered.’ The relationship of the two absolute genitives to one another depends on the interpretation of the first one, see next note.

(V. 15) prosdokōntos de tou laou ‘as people were in expectation.’ de, which has not been translated, marks the beginning of a new development. The participle prosdokōntos which has no object, is best understood in an absolute sense as e.g. in Revised Standard Version. People were “in a great state of expectation” (Phillips), because of John’s message. The clause describes the result of John’s preaching, cf. An American Translation, “as all this aroused people’s expectations”. Then laos does not refer to the people of Israel in general but to the people that came out to listen to John. For prosdokaō cf. on 1.21.

dialogizomenōn pantōn ‘as all were wondering,’ describes a further and more specific result of John’s preaching; pantes refers to the same people as laos in the preceding clause. For dialogizomai cf. on 1.29.

en tais kardiais autōn ‘in their hearts,’ or, “in their minds” (Translator’s New Testament), or, “inwardly” (Phillips).

mēpote autos eiē ho Christos ‘whether perhaps he was the Messiah.’ autos is unemphatic ‘he,’ referring back to John’s name in the preceding clause. The optative eiē has no special function. Instead of ‘the Messiah’ Revised Standard Version and several other translations have “the Christ”, a transliteration of the Greek rendering of the Hebrew word. This must be regarded as a second best rendering.

(V. 16) apekrinato legōn pasin ho Iōannēs ‘John answered saying to all,’ cf. on 1.60.

egō men hudati baptizō humas ‘As to me, I am baptising you with water.’ egō is emphatic and men suggests that a contrast is to follow. hudati ‘with water,’ instrumental dative. The present tense baptizō is habitual, ‘I practise water-baptism.’

erchetai de ho ischuroteros mou ‘but the one who is mightier than I is coming.’ de corresponds to men in the preceding clause but the clause which corresponds materially with it (‘he will baptise you with the Holy Spirit and with fire’) does not come until its subject, i.e. the mightier one, is properly identified in his relationship to John. The clause introduces the mightier one as someone who is known, though no previous reference has occurred.

ischuros ‘strong,’ ‘mighty.’

hou … autou ‘whose … of him.’ The relative pronoun at the beginning of the clause and the personal pronoun at the end both go with ton himanta tōn hupodēmatōn ‘the thong of the sandals’ and are therefore to be rendered only once. This is probably a semitism but also not unknown in Greek.

hikanos of things ‘adequate,’ ‘considerable,’ of persons ‘fit,’ ‘competent,’ here with the connotation ‘worthy for something,’ and followed by a complementing infinitive.

lusai ton himanta tōn hupodēmatōn ‘to untie the thong of the sandals.’ This was considered to be the task of a slave.

luō ‘to loose,’ ‘to untie,’ ‘to set free.’

himas ‘thong,’ or ‘strap’ on sandals.

hupodēma ‘sandal,’ “a leather sole that is fastened to the foot by means of straps”.

autos humas baptisei en pneumati hagiō ‘he will baptise you with Holy Spirit.’ autos ‘he’ is emphatic and contrasts with egō at the beginning of the verse. humas ‘you’ does, of course, not imply that this baptism will be limited to those who have previously received John’s baptism with water, just as humas in the first clause of this verse does not mean that John only baptised those to whom he talked at the moment.

en pneumati hagiō ‘with,’ rather than ‘in the Holy Spirit.’ The phrase ‘to baptise with the Holy Spirit,’ occurs only in connection with, and contrast to, John’s baptism with water (Mt. 3.11; Mk. 1.8; Lk. 3.16; Jn. 1.33; Acts 1.5; 11.16) and not as an independent expression. It is therefore best understood as an analogy to the baptism with water and to be interpreted along the same lines as that phrase.

kai puri ‘and with fire.’ This addition also in Matthew but not in Mark. There are two interpretations: (1) the fire is the fire of judgment (Klostermann, Zahn) because of the mentioning of the fire in vv. 9 and 17 both in a picture that refers to the coming judgment; (2) the fire is the fire of purification (Plummer, Lagrange). Interpretation (1) is preferable. This implies a disjunctive relationship between pneuma hagion and pur.

Translation:

It is often better not to render v. 15 as a subordinate clause, but as one separate sentence, formed by two co-ordinated clauses with or without connective, or as two such sentences.

The people, here virtually the same as ‘the crowd.’

Were in expectation, or, if the expression requires an object, ‘were expecting something,’ ‘were believing that things of importance would come to pass’ (Kituba).

All men, or, “they … all” (An American Translation), ‘everyone (amongst them),’ referring to the subject of the first clause, cf. also, ‘the multitudes,’ partly repeating ‘the multitude of people (i.e. the crowds)’ (Lü Zhenzhong).

Questioned in their hearts, or, ‘inquired in their minds’ (Dravidian languages), ‘were asking-themselves in heart of them’ (Kituba), the qualifying word or phrase being required to show that no discussion with others is meant; or again, ‘wondered (lit. guessed and doubted)’ (Chinese Union Version), ‘were-thinking’ (Marathi, Manobo), without such a qualification.

Concerning John, whether perhaps he were the Christ may have to be restructured, e.g. .’.. whether perhaps J. were the Messiah,’ or, if the verb is to be followed by direct discourse, “Is John (or, this man, or, he) perhaps the Messiah?”, “What? Might he be Christ?” (Marathi).

(V. 16) Answered. Revised Standard Version‘s rendering of Gr. apokrinomai by a form of ‘to answer’ here (and in 5.22, 31; 7.40a; 8.50; 9.49; 11.45; 13.15) is rather unidiomatic because it does not introduce a person’s reaction upon a request or statement that has been addressed to him. As a rule it is preferable in these cases to shift to another verb, e.g. ‘to speak up,’ ‘to start speaking,’ ‘to address’; or ‘to interpose’; or a combination of ‘to say/ speak to’ with such expressions as ‘on his part,’ ‘to this,’ ‘again,’ ‘then,’ ‘thereupon,’ ‘but,’ ‘however,’ as required by the context; hence here e.g. ‘But John said to them.’ Such renderings have been used by Revised Standard Version itself for similar occurrences of apokrinomai (e.g. 1.60, cf. also 13.14; 17.17, 37; 22.51), but some other translations have used ‘to answer/reply’ for nearly all occurrences even though decidedly unidiomatic in the language concerned. Their example is not to be followed.

I, or more emphatically, ‘as for me (lit. to me), I’ (Kituba, similarly Kannada), ‘I indeed’ (Marathi).

He who is mightier, etc. is to be applied to the Messiah, although his name is not explicitly mentioned; hence in the references to his person and acts in vv. 16f the use of honorifics may be required in languages like Balinese and Javanese. — Comparative forms of adjectives may not be available in the receptor language. Then it is usually possible to circumscribe the comparison by ‘he surpasses me (or, he is ahead) in might/power,’ or to use a positive-negative contrast, ‘he is (really) mighty, I am not mighty.’ For mighty, or, ‘powerful,’ cf. on “power” in 1.35.

The function of the clause the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie is to give the measure of the difference in might between John and Jesus; hence, “I am not good enough even to untie his sandals” (Good News Translation), ‘mightier than I so that (or, so much mightier than I that) I am unworthy to untie-for-him….’ — Thong, or, ‘tie,’ ‘straps’; in some cases not rendered by a separate term but implied in the verb for ‘untie.’ Chuukese has to use a descriptive phrase, ‘covering-of his-foot.’ — I am not worthy to, i.e. I have not sufficient worth/value/excellence to. In Trukese, Pohnpeian, and some Indonesian languages one says, ‘it is not fitting that I ….’

With the Holy Spirit and with fire. The rendering of this phrase should be modelled on that of ‘with water,’ where necessary marking a shift from metaphor to simile by adding a clue like, ‘as it were.’ The disjunctive relationship between the two nouns may be suggested by using ‘or’ instead of ‘and’ (Kituba), or expressed more explicitly by saying, ‘some of you with the Holy Spirit, others with fire,’ cf. ‘some of you he will baptise with the H. Sp. and the rest he will baptise with fire’ (Manobo).

Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.

Translation commentary on Luke 3:18

Exegesis:

men oun indicates that the clause it introduces serves to summarize and bring to a close what has been described in the preceding verses, in order to form a transition to what follows, since it is a combination of the particle oun, which is retrospective, with men, which is prospective, i.e. preparing the way for a new subject to be introduced by subsequent de .

polla … kai hetera ‘many other things,’ accusative of content with parakalōn. kai is redundant in English.

heteros ‘other,’ or ‘different,’ here best understood in the former sense.

parakalōn ‘exhorting.’ The semantic problem involved here is the relationship between parakalōn and euēggelizeto ‘he preached the good news.’ The exhortations are either (1) part of John’s preaching, or (2) identical with it, or (3) different from it, preferably (1).

parakaleō ‘to exhort,’ ‘to entreat,’ ‘to comfort.’

euēggelizeto ton laon ‘he preached the good news to the people,’ cf. on 1.19. The content of the preaching is to be supplied from the context, cf. preceding note.

Translation:

Many other exhortations, or in a verbal clause, ‘he was exhorting in many other ways’ (cf. Kituba), ‘John taught the people many more things’ (Manobo), ‘J. still used many other words to exhort the people’ (Chinese Union Version). As shown in these examples the verb often requires an explicit reference to those who were exhorted, i.e. ‘the people,’ which may entail the shift to a pronominal reference with the next verb. — Other is referring here to non-specified examples of the same category; it may have to be rendered by ‘more such,’ ‘similar,’ ‘of the same kind.’ Exhortations. The verb ‘to exhort’ has been rendered ‘to point-out’ (Tae’), ‘to teach’ (Javanese, Manobo), ‘to remind-of’ (Batak Toba), ‘to stir’ (Nyakyusa), ‘to work upon the heart’ (Sranan Tongo).

He. The pronominal reference will often have to be specified, unless this has already been done in what precedes.

To preach the good news. This verbal phrase renders a Greek verb that is derived from the noun eu-aggelion ‘good news,’ ‘gospel’ (which noun, however, does not occur Luke’s Gospel); it refers to the news or message about man’s salvation by God through Jesus the Messiah and about the kingdom he is establishing, the messenger being John the Baptist (here), the Messiah (4.18), Jesus (4.43; 7.22; 8.1; 20.1), the twelve disciples (9.6), Jesus and/or the disciples (implied agents of the passive form in 16.16). In a less specific sense the verb is used in 1.19 and 2.10, where an angel is the messenger. To preach, or, ‘to tell/make-known/announce,’ ‘to cause-to-be-heard’ (Hindi). Good news.

The people, here referring to Israel, the people of God, as in 2.10; therefore, the rendering may have to differ from that in v. 15.

Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.

Translation commentary on Luke 3:19 – 3:20

Exegesis:

ho de Hērōdēs ho tetraarchēs ‘but Herod the tetrarch,’ cf. on v. 1. For de and the connection with the preceding verse, cf. on men oun in v. 18. The verb of which ho Hērōdēs is the subject is prosethēken ‘added,’ see below.

elegchomenos hup’ autou ‘being reproved by him,’ going with ho Hērōdēs. The present tense of the participle suggests that this reproving happened more than once.

elegchō ‘to reprove,’ ‘to show somebody his fault.’

peri Hērōdiados … kai peri pantōn ‘concerning Herodias … and concerning everything.’ The idea of the clause appears to be that John used to reprove Herod because of every wicked thing he did but that his reproval of Herod because of Herodias (cf. Mt. 14.4) was what made Herod have John arrested.

tou adelphou autou. According to Josephus Herodias’ first husband, referred to in this verse was Herod, son of Herod the Great and Mariamne (the second wife of that name). Herod the tetrarch was the son of Herod the Great and Malthake, whom he married after Mariamne, cf. IDB II, 586ff. Hence adelphou refers to an older brother of a different mother.

peri pantōn hōn epoiēsen ponērōn ‘concerning all the wicked things he did.’ ponērōn goes with pantōn and hōn is attraction of the relative pronoun into the case of its antecedent.

ponēros ‘wicked,’ ‘evil,’ ‘bad,’ always with a moral connotation.

prosethēken kai touto epi pasin ‘added also this to all (the wicked things he did).’ pasin refers back to the preceding clause peri pantōn … ponērōn. kai touto refers to the next clause. The clause represents John’s arrest by Herod as the crowning of all his other wicked deeds, cf. New English Bible, An American Translation.

prostithēmi ‘to add,’ ‘to grant.’

katekleisen ton Iōannēn en phulakē ‘he shut up John in prison,’ asyndetic clause, taking up and explaining touto.

katakleiō ‘to lock up,’ ‘to shut up.’ For phulakē, here meaning ‘prison,’ cf. on 2.8.

Translation:

The syntactic structure will have to be changed more or less radically in some languages, e.g. ‘John also reproved Herod … for Herodias, his brother’s wife, and for all … done. After that/Then he/Herod added to all his crimes this (one): he shut up John in prison.’

To reprove, or, ‘to rebuke’ (for which cf. on 4.35), ‘to scold’ (Kituba, similarly Tae,’ using a verbal derivation of ‘angry’), ‘to hit-with words’ (Batak Toba); or analytically, ‘to say that he had done evil.’

For Herodias. Luke says less than he probably knew, and than we can know from Mk. 6.17f. Style, or decodability may require some clarification, e.g. “over the affair of … H.” (New English Bible, similarly Lü Zhenzhong.), ‘for his doings with H.,’ ‘because of what Herod did about the woman Herodias’ (Manobo, which has to add ‘woman,’ because the proper name and the rendering of “brother’s wife”, i.e. ‘sibling’s spouse,’ do not specify the sex), but Luke’s allusive way of speaking should be preserved as far as possible; if one wishes to state the case overtly, one should do so in a footnote.

His. If Herod has been clearly in focus in the preceding clauses the pronoun will usually be sufficient as reference to him here; if not, one will have to use the proper name, or to change the sentence structure so as to keep one’s references straight.

His brother’s wife, or, ‘whom his brother had married,’ ‘who was married (or, had been given in marriage) to his brother.’

The evil things Herod had done, or, ‘the crimes/misdeeds Herod (or, he) had done,’ ‘Herod’s (or, his) crimes/misdeeds/wicked doings.’ Some versions (e.g. New English Bible, Kituba, Hindi) add ‘other,’ to bring out that ‘his doings with Herodias’ were a crime also.

(V. 20) Added this to them all, or, ‘to all his evil doings/crimes,’ ‘to (lit. on top of) all other bad things he had done’ (Kituba); or, ‘extra added one item’ (Chinese Union Version), ‘did something even worse’ (Western Highland Purepecha, similarly Good News Translation), ‘put crime on top of crime’ (Sranan Tongo).

He shut up John in prison, or, ‘he imprisoned/locked-up J.,’ or, ‘he gave J. rope in the rope house,’ as the idiom is in Alekano. That Herod is not the direct agent, may lead to, ‘he caused-to-be-put J. in prison’ (Kituba, similarly Western Highland Purepecha).

The connexion between “added this to them all” and “shut up J. in prison” is indicated by the forward pointing deictic element “this” in the first sentence, to which the next sentence is epexegetic. To express this relationship more overtly one may add a connective, e.g. ‘namely,’ ‘that is’ (Chinese); elsewhere subordination is preferable, either of the second sentence, e.g. “by throwing J. in prison” (The Four Gospels – a New Translation, similarly some other English versions, Bahasa Indonesia), or of the first sentence, e.g. ‘locked-up J., in-addition-to all those crimes’ (Balinese), ‘imprisoned J., (as) the worst of all the evil things he did.’

Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.