Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between. One way to do this is through the usage (or a lack) of an honorific prefix as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. When the referent is God or a person or persons to be greatly honored, the honorific prefix go- (御 or ご) can be used, as in go-shihai (ご支配), a combination of “dominion / rule” (shihai) and the honorific prefix go-. (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
In the GermanGute Nachricht (Good News) translation of 1982, this occurrence of the Greek term which is translated in most English versions of “kingdom (of God or heaven)” is translated with a form of “God establishes his rule” (Gott richtet seine Herrschaft auf) or “God’s rule” (Herrschaft). For an explanation of the differentiated translation in German as well as translation choices in a number of languages, see Kingdom (of God / heaven).
Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)
The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).
For this verse, translators typically select the inclusive form (including the addressee).
Source: Velma Pickett and Florence Cowan in Notes on Translation January 1962, p. 1ff.
Following are a number of back-translations of Colossians 1:13:
Uma: “He freed us from the power of darkness, and he made us his people in the Kingdom of his Son whom he loves.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “We (incl.) are freed by God from inside darkness, that means from the hold/rule of the leader of demons and we (incl.) are transferred by him to the hold/rule of his Child/Son whom he loves, Isa Almasi.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “Our Father God has helped us (incl.) and because of this we (incl.) are no longer controlled by darkness- which is to say, by Satan. And now the One who controls us is the Son of God, Jesus, who is very precious in the breath of God.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Because he has saved us from the power of Satanas who rules where darkness is, and he has joined us/added us to the ruling/ruling-place of his Child whom he loves” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “For he has now saved us from the jurisdiction of darkness, and he has now transferred us to the jurisdiction of his very-held-dear Son (lit.Child).” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “It is he who took us out of the power of the devil who was ruling us. He caused that we now obey the word which is commanded by the Son of God. God very much loves his Son.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
God transcends gender, but most languages are limited to grammatical gender expressed in pronouns. In the case of English, this is traditionally confined to “he” (or in the forms “his,” “him,” and “himself”), “she” (and “her,” “hers,” and “herself”), and “it” (and “its” and “itself”).
Modern Mandarin Chinese, however, offers another possibility. Here, the third-person singular pronoun is always pronounced the same (tā), but it is written differently according to its gender (他 is “he,” 她 is “she,” and 它/牠 is “it” and their respective derivative forms). In each of these characters, the first (or upper) part defines the gender (man, woman, or thing/animal), while the second element gives the clue to its pronunciation.
In 1930, after a full century with dozens of Chinese translations, Bible translator Wang Yuande (王元德) coined a new “godly” pronoun: 祂. Chinese readers immediately knew how to pronounce it: tā. But they also recognized that the first part of that character, signifying something spiritual, clarified that each person of the Trinity has no gender aside from being God.
While the most important Protestant and Catholic Chinese versions respectively have opted not to use 祂, some Bible translations do and it is widely used in hymnals and other Christian materials. Among the translations that use 祂 to refer to “God” were early versions of Lü Zhenzhong’s (呂振中) version (New Testament: 1946, complete Bible: 1970). R.P. Kramers (in The Bible Translator 1956, p. 152ff. ) explains why later versions of Lü’s translation did not continue with this practice: “This new way of writing ‘He,’ however, has created a minor problem of its own: must this polite form be used whenever Jesus is referred to? Lü follows the rule that, wherever Jesus is referred to as a human being, the normal ta (他) is written; where he is referred to as divine, especially after the ascension, the reverential ta (祂) is used.”
In that system one kind of pronoun is used for humans (male and female alike) and one for natural elements, non-liquid masses, and some spiritual entities (one other is used for large animals and another one for miscellaneous items). While in these languages the pronoun for spiritual entities used to be employed when referring to God, this has changed into the use of the human pronoun.
Lynell Zogbo (in The Bible Translator 1989, p. 401ff. ) explains in the following way: “From informal discussions with young Christians especially, it would appear that, at least for some people, the experience and/or concepts of Christianity are affecting the choice of pronoun for God. Some people explain that God is no longer ‘far away,’ but is somehow tangible and personal. For these speakers God has shifted over into the human category.”
In Kouya, God (the Father) and Jesus are referred to with the human pronoun ɔ, whereas the Holy Spirit is referred to with a non-human pronoun. (Northern Grebo and Western Krahn make a similar distinction.)
Eddie Arthur, a former Kouya Bible translation consultant, says the following: “We tried to insist that this shouldn’t happen, but the Kouya team members were insistent that the human pronoun for the Spirit would not work.”
In Burmese, the pronoun ko taw (ကိုယ်တော်) is used either as 2nd person (you) or 3rd person (he, him, his) reference. “This term clearly has its root in the religious language in Burmese. No ordinary persons are addressed or known by this pronoun because it is reserved for Buddhist monks, famous religious teachers, and in the case of Christianity, the Trinity.” (Source: Gam Seng Shae in The Bible Translator 2002, p. 202ff. )
In Thai, the pronoun phra`ong (พระองค์) is used, a gender-neutral pronoun which must refer to a previously introduced royal or divine being. Similarly, in Northern Khmer, which is spoken in Thailand, “an honorific divine pronoun” is used for the pronoun referring to the persons of the Trinity (source: David Thomas in The Bible Translator 1993, p. 445 ). In Urak Lawoi’, another language spoken in Thailand, the translation often uses tuhat (ตูฮัด) — “God” — ”as a divine pronoun where Thai has phra’ong even though it’s actually a noun.” (Source for Thai and Urak Lawoi’: Stephen Pattemore)
The English “Contemporary Torah” addresses the question of God and gendered pronouns by mostly avoiding pronouns in the first five books of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament (unless God is referred to as “lord,” “father,” “king,” or “warrior”). It does that by either using passive constructs (“He gave us” vs. “we were given”), by using the adjective “divine” or by using “God” rather than a pronoun.
Some Protestant and Orthodox English Bibles use a referential capitalized spelling when referring to the persons of the Trinity with “He,” “His,” “Him,” or “Himself.” This includes for instance the New American Standard Bible or The Orthodox New Testament, but most translations do not. Two other languages where this is also done (in most Bible translations) are the closely related Indonesian and Malay. In both languages this follows the language usage according to the Qur’an, which in turn predicts that usage (see Soesilo in The Bible Translator 1991, p. 442ff. and The Bible Translator 1997, p. 433ff. ).
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between. One way Japanese show different degree of politeness is through the choice of a benefactive construction as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017.
Here, utsushite (移して) or “transfer” is used in combination with kudasaru (くださる), a respectful form of the benefactive kureru (くれる). A benefactive reflects the good will of the giver or the gratitude of a recipient of the favor. To convey this connotation, English translation needs to employ a phrase such as “for me (my sake)” or “for you (your sake).” (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
Verses 13-14 serve as a transition to the next section, by describing God’s redemptive activity through Jesus Christ.
He rescued us: the verb ruomai is significantly appropriate here, in terms of the rescue of captives from an evil power, the power of darkness, a descriptive figure of the spiritual power by which mankind is held prisoner. It forcefully portrays the gracious initiative and independent activity of God, the impotence and helplessness of man, and the contrast between the two modes of existence. Us is here inclusive, of course, designating all who have been set free.
In place of the past tense forms rescued and brought, it may be important to use a perfective tense, for example, “he has rescued us” and “he has brought us.” In this way, one may emphasize not only a past event but the continuing reality of such an experience.
“To be rescued from the power of darkness” may seem to be a very strange and almost impossible expression. A literal translation might suggest only rescuing somebody who was lost in the darkness of night. Sometimes the relationship between the realm of darkness and the kingdom of light may be emphasized by saying “he rescued us from the dark realm which had power over us,” or “… the dark realm which controlled us,” or “… where we were tied down, as it were.”
Brought us safe is literally “transferred, removed” (see the verb methistēmi elsewhere in Luke 16.4, Acts 13.22, 19.26, 1 Cor 13.2).
The kingdom of his dear Son should not be understood as a geographical place, but rather as a “rule” or “realm of authority.” One may, therefore, translate “brought us safe under the rule of his dear Son” (so Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch) or “brought us safe to the point where his dear Son rules over us.” In verses 12, 13, and 14, there is not only a good deal of specific figurative language, but the entire passage has a figurative theme. In a sense, it is the theme which provides clues to the use of the figurative language, and therefore, in a sense, the very abundance of figurative expressions tends to reinforce one another and, therefore, suggests to the reader that the entire passage must be taken in a non-literal sense.
His dear Son may be rendered as “his Son whom he loves.”
By whom or, as in Revised Standard Version, “in whom,” meaning “in union with whom”; the idea of instrumentality, however, seems preferable here.
We are set free … our sins are forgiven are both verbal expressions of what in Greek are nouns; “redemption and forgiveness.” The Greek word apolutrōsis has here no idea in it, as has been sometimes suggested, of a ransom paid to someone for the freeing of the captive; it stresses the result of the action of liberation. The second noun “forgiveness (of sins)” is in apposition to the first one, that is, it explains what is meant by this liberation (so Jerusalem BibleNew International VersionMoffattNew American Bible). Some, however, make the two parallel (New English BiblePhillipsDie Bibel im heutigen Deutsch) and Translator’s New Testament reverses the two. Others see a dependent relation here: Barclay “the liberation which comes when our sins are forgiven”; compare Biblia Dios Habla HoyGoodspeed.
By whom we are set free may be changed from passive to active by translating “he is the one who set us free,” expressed literally in some languages as “caused us to no longer be prisoners” or “caused us no longer to be slaves.” One may also employ an active form with both primary and secondary agents: “through him God set us free” or “God set us free; he did it through his Son.”
It should be observed that the phrase “through his blood” after the word “redemption” is found in some late manuscripts (compare King James VersionBiblia Dios Habla Hoy), having been introduced here by copyists from the parallel passage in Eph 1.7.
The explanatory phrase that is may be rendered as “that means,” or “that is the same as,” or “that says.”
In place of the passive expression our sins are forgiven, one may employ an active phrase with God as the subject, for example, “God has forgiven our sins” or “because of him God has forgiven our sins.” Expressions for forgiveness are frequently figurative, for example, “has wiped away,” “has thrown away,” “has caused to disappear,” or “has turned his back on,” or “has lost from his mind.”
Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Colossians. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1977. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
In this section, Paul stated these things: Jesus is equal to God in every way. He has always been with God and he (with God) created the world. God has freed Christians from the power of Satan and has placed them under the rule of his Son, Christ Jesus. God has accepted those who believe in Jesus as his own people. This was possible because Jesus died on the cross instead of them.
Paragraph 1:13–14
Theme: God has delivered Christians from the power of Satan and placed them under the protection of his Son.
1:13–14 are transitional verses. It is difficult to decide whether these verses should be the end of the previous section (1:9–12), or the beginning of the next section (1:15–20). In most English versions 1:13–14 are part of the same section as 1:9–12 (Berean Standard Bible, New International Version, Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, New Century Version, New Jerusalem Bible, New Living Translation (2004)). However, the SSA gives good reasons why a new section should begin at 1:13.
1:9–12 was Paul’s prayer for the Colossians. In 1:13–14 Paul was no longer praying, rather he was writing about how God had redeemed those who believed in Jesus. So it seems best to begin a new section at 1:13, not at 1:15. If the national language translation in your country has the section break at 1:15 and you feel you must follow that, you should at least start a new paragraph at 1:13.
1:13a
Some English versions add the word “For” to clarify the connection between verses 12 and 13. In 1:12, Paul said that God had made the Colossians worthy to share all that he had prepared for his people. In 1:13, Paul began to explain how God did this.
He has rescued us: A literal translation of the Greek is “who rescued us.” The “who” refers back to God the Father in 1:12.
the dominion of darkness: This contrasts with the phrase “in the light” in 1:12. Here darkness is a figure of speech for the evil power of Satan who rules over people who do not believe in Jesus. If darkness is not used as a figure of speech for evil in your language, here is another way to translate this verse part:
he delivered us from the ⌊evil⌋ power of ⌊Satan who is the ruler of⌋ evil/darkness
1:13b
brought us into the kingdom of His beloved Son: The Greek word that the Berean Standard Bible translates brought means “change, remove, move from one place to another.” When a person becomes a Christian, God removes him from the kingdom where Satan rules, to a different kingdom, the kingdom of His beloved Son.
kingdom of His beloved Son: This means the kingdom where Jesus rules. See meaning 1 of “kingdom” in the glossary.
His beloved Son: The phrase His beloved Son refers to Jesus. It is the short form of the title, “the Son of God.” This title was often used to refer to a savior who would be a descendant of King David. God would send this savior to rescue his people. This person was often referred to as the “Messiah” or “Christ.”
The title “the Son of God” also indicates that Jesus has the same nature and character as God. The relationship between God the Father and Jesus, his Son, is similar in some way to the relationship between human fathers and sons. God the Father does not have a physical body. He did not have a sexual relationship with Mary that resulted in her becoming pregnant and giving birth to Jesus. The Son of God existed eternally as the Son with his Father.
In areas where people do not understand the title “the Son of God” in this way, you may want to include a footnote that explains the correct meaning. Here is a suggested footnote:
The title “the Son” or “the Son of God” refers to Jesus. It indicates that Jesus has the same nature and character as God. It does not mean that God the Father had a sexual relationship with Mary that resulted in her becoming pregnant and giving birth to Jesus. Mary became pregnant with Jesus in a miraculous way by the Holy Spirit of God.
In some languages, it is natural to speak of a son as a “child,” without specifying male or female. If that is true in your language, you may use a more general term, such as:
the Child -or-
the Child of God
Other verses will usually make clear that Jesus was a male child. If you use a phrase such as “the male child,” be sure that it does not imply that God had another child who was female.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.