Translation commentary on Romans 11:29

The word rendered “irrevocable” by some translations (Revised Standard Version and New English Bible) basically means “without change of mind or heart.” It is used in this sense in 2 Corinthians 7.10, its only other occurrence in the New Testament. In order to express in English the meaning of “without a change of mind,” it is necessary to change the noun into a verb phrase. Both the Good News Translation and An American Translation* render it by God does not change his mind; the Jerusalem Bible, assuming that the meaning of the word is “irrevocable,” also changes to a verb: “God never takes back his gifts or revokes his choice.”

In light of the context, what is the meaning of the phrase “the gifts and the choice of God”? It is possible, of course, to take “gifts” as a general reference to any blessing that God gives, but in the context “gifts” seems to have a more specific meaning. In light of its connection with the word “called,” it may best be taken as a reference to those blessings which are bestowed on the persons whom God calls. Since the “calling” comes first and the “blessings” follow, the Good News Translation translates the phrase to mean whom he chooses and blesses.

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Romans 1:19

God punishes them is supplied from God’s wrath in verse 18, to make clear the action implied by because. Men are punished because they sin even while knowing the truth about God. Is plain to them translates an aorist tense in Greek; Paul probably has in mind God’s actions in creating the universe, which he looks upon as being one event. Is plain to them may be rendered as “can be clearly seen,” “can be fully understood,” or even “there is no uncertainty about what men can know about God.”

What men can know about God is literally “what can be known about God,” and the context of this knowledge is indicated in the following verse: his eternal power and his divine nature.

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Romans 2:24

The scripture to which Paul refers comes from Isaiah 52.5. The form in which Paul quotes it comes from the Septuagint; in the Hebrew the words because of you do not appear.

In a number of languages one cannot say the scripture says; only “people can say.” An equivalent expression may be: “as it is written in the scripture,” “the scripture has these words,” or “these are the words of the writings.”

The Good News Translation makes the Greek expression “because of you” explicit as a reference to the Jews: because of you Jews, the Gentiles speak evil of God’s name translates a Greek passive construction (literally, “the name of God is being spoken evil of among the nations”). Speak evil (New English Bible “dishonored”) is generally rendered “blaspheme” in other translations wherever it appears in the New Testament. “Blaspheme” has a disadvantage of being a term which most readers do not understand unless they are familiar with biblical terminology; it is merely a transliteration of the Greek word blasphēmeō, a term which means, in contexts such as this, “to speak evil of God.” In some languages it is confusing to say speak evil of God’s name. The more natural equivalent is “speak evil of God.” Since name is simply a symbolic substitute for God, it is frequently better to employ a more direct expression: “speak bad against God.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Romans 4:1

Since Abraham was the father of the Jewish nation and was looked upon by them as being completely acceptable in God’s sight, it will strengthen Paul’s argument to point out that Abraham was put right with God through faith, rather than through obedience to the Law.

The translation of this verse is complicated by the presence of a textual problem. Some manuscripts omit altogether the words what was his experience? (see Revised Standard Version, New English Bible, Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, An American Translation*). If these words are omitted, then the passage may be translated: “What, then, are we to say about Abraham, our racial ancestor?” Other manuscripts place these words (literally “what did he find?”) in such a position in the sentence that they are connected with the phrase that the Good News Translation renders racial (literally “according to the flesh”). In this case the words “according to the flesh” must be taken to mean something like “on his own,” and the entire verse then rendered: “What did Abraham our ancestor accomplish on his own (that is, without God’s grace)?” but apparently no modern translations follow this choice of text (La Sainte Bible: Nouvelle version Segond révisée gives it as an alternative possibility, though accepting the same reading as the Good News Translation in his text).

Most modern English translations prefer the shorter text, apparently assuming that the longer texts are the result of including a marginal note in the text. On the other hand, the Zürich Bibel, Luther, and La Sainte Bible: Nouvelle version Segond révisée, along with the Good News Translation, are in accord with the UBS Committee as to the Greek text. In favor of the UBS text is the diversity of manuscript evidence, which gives strong support to their choice of text, while the shorter reading has very little manuscript support.

Verse 1 presents a number of translational problems. In the first place, the rhetorical questions may need to be expressed as statements, “we should now speak of Abraham, our ancestor. The following was his experience” or “… this was what happened to him.” However, a more difficult problem is involved in whether the inclusive or exclusive first person plural should be used in the phrase our racial ancestor. In his letter to the Romans Paul is obviously addressing an audience which is largely Gentile, as is clearly indicated in 1.6. Therefore it is necessary, in languages which do make a distinction in first person plurals, to use an exclusive form of “our” or to say “Abraham, the ancestor of the Jews.” Similarly, the editorial we in the rhetorical question should be changed to “I” in a number of languages.

In a number of languages it is both confusing, as well as superfluous, to translate “according to the flesh,” since a term for ancestor indicates specifically this kind of human relationship. Therefore, a term such as racial is often better omitted since it may constitute a misleading redundancy.

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Romans 5:13 – 5:14

These verses are difficult to fit into Paul’s argument, though as far as the exegetical matters relating to translation are concerned, verse 13 is not difficult. Most translators assume that the Law referred to in this verse is the Jewish Law, and so indicate this by using a capital “L”, however, the New English Bible takes law in a more general sense (“before there was law”).

The first clause of verse 13 may be quite easily rendered by making “people” the subject of sin—for example, “before the Law was given, people in the world sinned.” In order to make specific an interpretation of the Law as being the Law of Moses, one may say “before the Law was given to Moses” or “before God gave the Law by means of Moses.”

The verb rendered account is kept was a term used in business and referred to the entering of accounts into a ledger. If, in the receptor language, this passive verb has to be rendered by an active one, then God in the one who did not keep account of sins.

Paul’s reasoning is here difficult to follow. If no account is kept of sins, why then did death rule over all men from the time of Adam to the time of Moses Somehow Paul seems to imply that no record could be kept of sin, unless it was sin against a specific command of God, such as the specific command given to Adam or the specific commands contained in the Mosaic Law. But even though all men did not sin as Adam did by disobeying God’s command (that is, by disobeying a specific command of God; see New English Bible “by disobeying a direct command”), all men did sin. And since all men did sin, death ruled over all men. Fortunately, the translator does not have to answer all of these difficult questions; but in order to deal adequately with the meaning of the passage, he should at least know the basic problems involved.

Most translations take Paul’s literal words (Revised Standard Version “whose sins were not like the transgression of Adam”) in a way similar to what the Good News Translation does. The rendering of the New English Bible has already been given; An American Translation* has “who had not sinned as Adam had, in the face of an express command”; while the Jerusalem Bible has “even though their sin, unlike that of Adam, was not a matter of breaking a law.”

The expression from the time of Adam to the time of Moses may cause certain difficulties in some languages because of the necessity of recasting the relations and relating these to death—for example, “all the people who lived from the time Adam lived until the time Moses lived, all had to die”; or, in relation to the following clause, “all people who followed after Adam, and all those who lived until Moses lived, had to die, even those persons who did not sin just as Adam sinned when he disobeyed the very command which God had given him”; or “… when he disobeyed the very words that God had spoken to him.”

Paul begins by saying Adam was a figure of the one who was to come. The word rendered figure is difficult to translate; the Revised Standard Version has merely transliterated (“a type”). Several modern translations render this noun either by the verb “prefigure” (Jerusalem Bible “Adam prefigured the One to come”; Moffatt “Adam prefigured Him who was to come”) or by the verb “foreshadow” (New English Bible “Adam foreshadows the Man who was to come”; An American Translation* “Adam foreshadowed the one who was to come”). Phillips has “Adam, the first man, corresponds in some degree to the man who was to come.” This word figure is used in a variety of ways in the New Testament and in other early Christian literature outside the New Testament. Paul himself uses it in 1 Corinthians 10.6 with the meaning of “example,” and in 1 Corinthians 10.11 the adverbial form made from this root is used with the meaning of “by way of example.” The best explanation of the precise meaning of this word in the present passage is to be found in the series of analogies and contrasts listed in the verses following (15-17).

For languages which lack a term for “figure,” “type,” or “foreshadow,” one may employ terms denoting similarly—for example, “Adam was in some regards similar to the one who was to come.” In some languages one must indicate both the similarity and the contrast—for example, “Adam was in some ways like and in some ways different from the person who was destined to come.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Romans 7:5

It is important to notice the parallels between verses 5 and 6, and at the same time their relation to what follows. Verse 5 describes the pre-Christian experience, and has its parallel in 7.7-25; verse 6 describes the present life of faith under the leadership of God’s Spirit, and has its parallel in 8.1-11.

For when we lived according to our human nature is literally “for when we were in the flesh.” A number of translations render this clause literally, though others try to make some meaning of it: “when we were unspiritual” (Moffatt); “while we lived on the level of our lower nature” (New English Bible); “for when we were living mere physical lives” (An American Translation*). In the present passage “life in the flesh” is life lived apart from the control of God’s Spirit (see v. 6); it describes life lived according to one’s own human nature, and which is under the law, sin, and death. In 8.9 (see also Galatians 5.24) Paul uses this phrase with the same meaning; while in a passage such as Galatians 2.20 the phrase has no sinful overtones, but merely describes human existence in general.

In many languages there is simply no general expression such as human nature. Accordingly, the first clause in verse 5 must be rather drastically modified as far as its form is concerned, but not in terms of its content—for example, “when we live just as we ourselves want to,” “when we live just as people generally like to live,” or “when we live just as most people desire to live.” In this manner one can describe the attitudes of most people and thus signify what human nature is.

The sinful desires translates a genitive expression in Greek (literally “the desires of sin”) and may mean either “desires which lead to sin” or sinful desires; most translations seem to take this in the same sense that the Good News Translation does. The most common equivalent is, of course, “desire to sin,” and in the larger context “the Law causes us to desire to sin.”

Were at work in our bodies may be expressed as “the desires which are in our bodies” or “the desires which our bodies have” or “what we desire in our bodies.”

We were useful in the service of death may be translated simply as “all we did ended in death.” However, the underlying Greek expression may be understood also in the sense of “caused us to die”; that is to say, “the desires … at work in our bodies killed us” or “because we had these desires … in our bodies, we died.” This death must be clearly distinguished from “dying to the law” (v. 4). For this reason in some translations the future tense is preferred—for example, “all we do will end in death” or “these desires … will cause us to die.”

Stirred up by the Law is the meaning of the phrase that Paul uses here; to change this into a negative expression (Jerusalem Bible “quite unsubdued by the Law”) is to miss the impact of what Paul is saying. He is not trying to indicate that the Law failed to control one’s sinful desires, but rather that the Law encouraged one’s sinful desires (see 7.8). An equivalent of stirred up by the Law may be in some languages “because there was the Law, our desires to sin came to life” or “… became strong.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Romans 8:14

In the same way that verses 12 and 13 are closely related (in the New English Bible and Jerusalem Bible they form a separate paragraph), so verses 14 to 17 are a unit within themselves. Verses 12-13 indicate that obedience is demanded of the believer, while verses 14-17 take up the theme of obedience and indicate its joyful results.

Most translations render the verb in this verse as led by, though others use “guided by” (Moffatt and An American Translation*) or “moved by” (New English Bible and Jerusalem Bible). Other languages may use “directed by” or “commanded by,” but in some instances an active expression may be preferable—for example, “obey God’s Spirit” or “follow God’s Spirit.” The verb chosen should imply voluntary submission to the leadership of God’s Spirit.

In this verse Paul describes the believers as God’s sons, while in verse 16 they are described as God’s children. Both terms describe the natural relationship which exists between parent and child. One might argue that sons in contrast with children could imply status and certain privileges, but the shift from sons to children in these verses is essentially stylistic, and no significant differences of meaning should be attributed to the variation in terms.

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Romans 9:10

Paul’s intention in verse 9-13 is to show the absolute freedom of God’s choice.

And this is not all may be equivalent in some languages to a mere conjunctive adverb or phrase, such as “moreover,” “therefore,” or “in addition to this.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .