The Hebrew, Latin and Greek that is translated as “blind” in English is translated as “(having) eyes dark/night” in Ekari or “having no eyes” in Zarma. (Source: Nida 1964, p. 200)
See also blind (Luke 4:18) and his eyes are darker than wine.
ἄλλοι ἔλεγον, Ταῦτα τὰ ῥήματα οὐκ ἔστιν δαιμονιζομένου· μὴ δαιμόνιον δύναται τυφλῶν ὀφθαλμοὺς ἀνοῖξαι;
21Others were saying, “These are not the words of one who has a demon. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?”
The Hebrew, Latin and Greek that is translated as “blind” in English is translated as “(having) eyes dark/night” in Ekari or “having no eyes” in Zarma. (Source: Nida 1964, p. 200)
See also blind (Luke 4:18) and his eyes are darker than wine.
Following are a number of back-translations of John 10:21:
The Greek that is typically translated/transliterated in English as “demon” is translated by other languages in the following ways:
In the still widely-used 1908 Tswana (also: Setswana) translation (by Robert Moffat, revised by Alfred Wookey), the term badino or “ancestor spirit” is used for “demon,” even though in the traditional understanding there is nothing inherently negative associated with that term. Musa Dube (in: Journal of Society of New Testament 73, 1999, p. 33ff. ) describes this as an example of “engaging in the colonization of the minds of natives and for advancing European imperial spaces. The death and burial of Setswana culture here was primarily championed through the colonization of their language such that it no longer served the interests of the original speakers. Instead the written form of language had equated their cultural beliefs with evil spirits, demons and wizardry. This colonization of Setswana was in itself the planting of a colonial cultural bomb, meant to clear the ground for the implantation of a worldwide Christian commonwealth and European consciousness. It was a minefield that marked Setswana cultural spaces as dangerous death zones, to be avoided by every intelligent Motswana reader or hearer of the translated text.”
In Kachin, the term Nat (or nat) us used for “demon” (as well as “devil” and “unclean/evil spirit“). Like in Tswana, the meaning of Nat is not inherently negative but can be positive in the traditional Nat worship as well. Naw Din Dumdaw (in The Bible Translator 2024, p. 94ff.) argues that “the demonization of Nat created a social conflict between Kachin Christians and Kachin non-Christians. Kachin converts began to perceive their fellow Kachins who were still worshipping Nats as demonic and they wanted to distance themselves from them. Likewise, the Nat-worshiping Kachin community perceived the Kachin converts as betrayers and enemies of their own cultural heritage. (…) The demonization of the word Nat was not only the demonization of the pre-Christian religion but also the demonization of the cultural heritage of the Kachin people. When the word Nat is perceived as demonic, it creates an existential dilemma for Kachin Christians. It distances them from their cultural traditions.”
Note that often the words for “demon” and “unclean spirit / evil spirit” are being used interchangeably.
See also devil and formal pronoun: demons or Satan addressing Jesus.
Could not talk like this must refer to content, not to manner of speech, for example, “could not say things like this” or “could not communicate a message such as he has communicated.”
How could a demon give sight to blind people? is more literally “Can a demon open the eyes of blind men?” In Greek the expected answer is “No.” This exclamatory question may be changed into a statement: “A demon could certainly not give sight to blind people” or “… cause blind people to see.”
Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
No comments yet.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.