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 exclusive form (excluding Pharisees). The Tok Pisin specifies this even more by using the dual (only including two, the parents of the blind man).
Source: Velma Pickett and Florence Cowan in Notes on Translation January 1962, p. 1ff.
Following are a number of back-translations of John 9:21:
Uma: “But what happened with the result that he can see, we (excl.) do not know. And who healed him, we (excl.) also do not know. He is big now, ask him yourself. He can answer for himself.'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “But we (excl.) do not know as to how he can see now or as to who healed his eyes. Ask him. He is no longer a child. Let him answer you.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “However, how he is able to see and who medicined his eyes, we do not know. Perhaps you should ask him because he is already adult. He can be the one to answer.'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “But concerning his being-able-to-see now, we (excl.) don’t know who removed his blindness and how it was that it happened. He is the one you can inquire-from, because he is a grown-man and he knows how to answer.'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “But we don’t know why he can see today, and we also don’t know who made him well. It would be good if he is the one you question, after all he’s no longer a child. He could tell properly concerning his body.'” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “But now we do not know how his eyes were opened. Neither do we know who healed his eyes. Ask him yourselves. Now he is a big man, he will tell you how come.'” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Following is a 1973 painting of the JESUS MAFA project, a response to New Testament readings from the Lectionary by a Christian community in Cameroon, Africa. Each of the readings was selected and adapted to dramatic interpretation by the community members. Photographs of their interpretations were made, and these were then transcribed to paintings:
In this simply beautiful painting of one of Jesus’ healings, we see a caring Jesus bend over a blind man holding his walking stick. From the story in John’s gospel, we know that the religious leaders struggle with accepting Jesus’ activity and Jesus responds saying, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.” The Pharisees do not look at the blind man as a person, but as a symbol and Jesus points out their error. We are reminded that we should see the humanity in all people, refusing to use them for our own ends. We must look past our own issues and see the individuals.
From Art in the Christian Tradition, a project of the Vanderbilt Divinity Library, Nashville, TN. Image retrieved March 23, 2026. Original source: librairie-emmanuel.fr.
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.
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 shows 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, kīte (聞いて) or “listen” 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).”
Living Water is produced for the Bible translation movement in association with Lutheran Bible Translators. Lyrics derived from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®).
Most translations maintain the literal Semitic expression “to open one’s eyes” when referring to the healing of blindness. Phillips translates “made him able to see.” The statement of the parents may be translated succinctly “We do not know how he is now able to see, and we do not know who caused him to be able to see.”
The expression he is old enough (so also Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible; Moffatt, New English Bible “he is of age”) is perhaps a reference to the age of legal responsibility. Phillips translates “He is a grown-up man.” In many languages it is sufficient to say “he is a man,” though it would be more typical to say in some languages “he is no longer a child.”
He can answer for himself (Moffatt “he can speak for himself”) is actually in the future tense “he will speak for himself” (Revised Standard Version, New English Bible). The meaning is that the man is old enough to speak for himself as a legally responsible person. The New American Bible rendering, “he is old enough to speak for himself,” leaves implicit the meaning “he can speak.”
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 .
But: The word that the Berean Standard Bible translates as But indicates a contrast. The contrast is between what the parents knew and what they did not know. They said that they did not know what happened to cause their son to be able to see.
how he can now see: The man’s parents refused to say how the man had received his sight. Verse 9:22 implies that they had heard what happened but were afraid to say. They were apparently not telling the truth here.
or who opened his eyes, we do not know: The word or here introduces something else that the parents said that they did not know. In some languages it may be natural to leave the word or untranslated. For example:
But we don’t know how he can now see. We don’t know who opened his eyes. (New Century Version)
Again, the phrase opened his eyes does not mean that the man’s eyes were shut and Jesus caused him to open them. Rather it means that the man was blind and Jesus healed him.
9:21b
Ask him: The parents wanted to avoid saying that Jesus had given sight to their son. They were afraid that the leaders might punish them for saying something good about Jesus. So they told the religious leaders to ask the man himself. Here is a translation that implies that the parents wanted to avoid saying what they knew about Jesus:
You’ll have to ask him. (God’s Word)
In some languages it may be necessary to say what the leaders were to ask the son. For example:
Ask him ⌊about it⌋ .
-or-
Ask him ⌊how he is able to see⌋ .
He is old enough: This clause means that the man Jesus had healed was an adult. He was legally able to testify (tell what he knew) about what happened in a law court. In Jesus’ culture that meant that he was at least thirteen (13) years old.
Here are other ways to translate this clause:
he is a mature adult (NET Bible Bible)
-or-
he is not a child anymore
to speak for himself: This sentence indicates that the son could himself tell the religious leaders what happened to him. Here are other ways to translate this clause:
he can answer for himself (Good News Translation)
-or-
let him speak for himself (Revised English Bible)
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.