baptism, baptize

Click here to view graphically

About the translation of the Greek (and Ge’ez) term that is usually transliterated with the terms “baptism” or “baptize” in English (for other English translations see below), Bratcher / Nida (1961) say this (click or tap for details):

“[It] has given rise not only to an immense amount of discussion in terms of its meaning within the Judaeo-Christia historical context, but also continues to introduce serious problems for translators today. In many instances the recommendation has been to transliterate, i.e. employing some indigenous equivalent of the sounds of the word in some more prestigious language spoken in the region, e.g. English, French, Spanish, or Portuguese. Though this solution tends to remove some theological controversies, it does not completely satisfy everyone, for not only does it avoid the problem of the mode of baptism, but it leaves the Scriptures with a zero word. Unfortunately, many of the controversies over the indigenous equivalent of baptism arise because of a false evaluation of a word’s so-called etymology. For example, in Yucateco the word for baptism means literally ‘to enter the water’, but this term is used freely by both Presbyterians and Roman Catholics, even though it might appear to be strictly ‘Baptist nomenclature.’ Similarly, in Kekchí, an even ‘stronger’ term ‘to put under the water’ is employed by Nazarenes and Roman Catholics. Obviously the meanings of these Yucateco and Kekchí words are not derivable from their literal significance but from the fact that they now designate a particular kind of Christian rite. To insist on changing such a well-established usage (and one to which immersionists could certainly not object) would seem quite unwarranted. The situation may, on the other hand, be reversed. There are instances in which immersionists are quite happy to use a term which though it means literally ‘to put water on the head’ [see below for the translations in Northern Emberá and Ewe] has actually lost this etymological value and refers simply to the rite itself, regardless of the way in which it is performed. A translator should not, however, employ an already existing expression or construct a new phrase which will in its evident meaning rule out any major Christian constituency.

“There are, of course, a number of instances in which traditional terms for ‘baptism’ need modification. In some situations the word may mean only ‘to give a new name to’ (one aspect of christening) or ‘to be one who lights’ (referring to a custom in some traditions of lighting a candle at the time of baptism). However, in order to reproduce the core of significant meaning of the original Biblical term, it is important to explore the entire range of indigenous usage in order that whatever term is chosen may have at least some measure of cultural relevance. In Navajo (Dinė), for example, there were four principal possibilities of choice: (1) borrowing some transliterated form of the English word, (2) constructing a phrase meaning ‘to touch with water’ (an expression which would have been acceptable with some groups in the field, but not with others), (3) using a phrase meaning ‘ceremonial washing’ (but this expression seemed to be too closely related to indigenous practices in healing ceremonies), and (4) devising an expression meaning ‘to dedicate (or consecrate) by water’, without specifying the amount of water employed. This last alternative was chosen as the most meaningful and the best basis for metaphorical extension and teaching.

“On the other hand, it would be wrong to think that the meaning of ‘washing’ must be rejected in all languages. For example, it is quite appropriate in Kpelle culture, since it ties in with male puberty rites, and in the San Blas Kuna society, since washing is a very important aspect of female puberty ceremonies, in some translations ‘water’ is introduced into the expression for baptism, but the quantity and means of administrating it are left quite ambiguous, e.g. ‘to get (take, receive) water’ (Tzeltal). Toraja-Sa’dan, Pamona and Batak Toba render the verb ‘to pour water over, give a bath’.” (Source: Bratcher / Nida)

Other examples of translation include:

  • Javanese, Indonesian and many others: transliterated forms of the Greek “baptizo”
  • Pamona, Wejewa: “to bathe, wash with water”
  • Sundanese: “to apply water to”
  • Padoe: “to make one wet with water”
  • Batak Simalungun: “to wash with a little bit of water” (“used in speaking of a ceremony in which very small children are ceremonially cleansed”)
  • Kambera: “to dip into”
  • Balinese: ngelukat (a Balinese initiation ceremony in which persons were sprinkled with consecrated water) (source for this and above: Biblical Terms in The Bible Translator 1952, p. 225ff. )
  • Maan: “put in water” (source: Don Slager)
  • Mairasi: fat jaenggom; “water washing” (“baptize with the Holy Spirit”: “wash with the Holy Spirit”) (source: Enggavoter 2004)
  • Kwara’ae: “holy wash” (traditional church term for baptism) (source: Carl Gross)
  • Shipibo-Conibo: “to wash” (Catholic: “to name;” Seventh Day Adventists: “to bathe”) (source: James Lauriault in The Bible Translator 1951, p. 56ff. )
  • Northern Emberá: “head-poured” (source: Loewen 1980, p. 107)
  • Ewe: “put God’s water on one’s head”
  • Dangme (1999 edition) / Ga (2006 edition): “pray for one” (in Matthew 28:19)
  • Akan: “throw water at one” (source for this and two above: Jonathan E.T. Kuwornu-Adjaottor in HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 2025 )
  • Muna: kadiu sarani “Christian bathing” (source: René von den Berg)
  • Gonja: “bath of God”
  • Konkomba: “put them deep in the water” (source for this and one above: Jonathan E.T. Kuwornu-Adjaottor in HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 2025 )
  • Agarabi: “get water” (“being baptized”); “give water” (“baptizing”)
  • Safeyoka: “immerse in water”
  • Yagaria: “gospel water” (bono’ nina) for “baptism” and “wash (or: rub) with gospel water” (bono’ ni’ folo-) for “baptize” (source for this and two above: Renck 1990, p. 84; 115)
  • Apali: “pulled down and lifted up in water” (source: Martha Wade in The Bible Translator 2013, p. 324ff. )
  • Halh Mongolian: argon ochial (“holy washing”) (“The people in Mongolia are strictly religious and understand the meaning very well. They are familiar with the idea of water being used as a symbol of a new life and having received ‘holy washing’ means to have entered into a new sphere of life.”) (Source: A. Marthinson in The Bible Translator 1954, p. 74ff. ) (Note: In more recent Mongolian translations a transliteration of baptizo is used instead)
  • Yatzachi Zapotec: (Spanish loan word and transliteration of the Greek term) bautizar (click or tap for details):

    “The Yatzachi Zapotec know the practice of baptism and have a word to express it. There would thus seem to be no problem involved. Unfortunately, however, the word for ‘baptize’ is a compound, one part being a word nowhere else used and the other part being the word for ‘water.’ Perhaps ‘water-baptize’ is the closest equivalent in English. For most contexts this presents no problem, but if the word is used in Mark 1:8, it would say, ‘He will water-baptize you with the Holy Ghost.’ In Zapotec the idea is unintelligible. To meet the problem, the Spanish word ‘bautizar’ was introduced at this point though the Zapotec word is ordinarily used. The disadvantages of this substitution are obvious, but no better solution was found.” (Source: Otis M. Leal in The Bible Translator 1951, p. 164ff.

  • Uab Meto: antam oe (“to enter into the water”) (click or tap for details):

    “Formerly in Uab Meto the word used for ’baptism’ was ‘nasrami’ which actually came by way of Arabic from ‘Nazarene.’ Its meaning was ‘to make a Christian’ and the idea was that the one who baptized actually made Christians. Such an expression was obviously inadequate. We have used for ‘baptize’ the phrase in ‘antam oe’ which means ‘to enter into the water.’ This phrase can be used for sprinkling, for water is used as a symbol of the new life, and being baptized means for the Uab Meto to enter into a new sphere of life. Baptism is so frequently spoken of in connection with the giving of the Holy Spirit that the proper associations have arisen in the thinking of the people.” (Source: P. Middelkoop in The Bible Translator 1952 p. 165ff. )

  • Mandarin Chinese: Catholic: 洗 xǐ (“washing”); non-Baptist Protestant 聖洗 shèngxǐ (“holy washing”); Baptist: 浸洗 jìnxǐ (“immerse and wash”) (In the history of Chinese Bible translation the translation of the Greek baptizo was a point of great contention, so much so that in the 19th Century Baptists had a completely different set of Bible translations and even today are using different editions with the different term of the same versions that other Protestants use.) (Source: Zetzsche 2008)
  • Many Germanic languages use a term that originally means “dip” or “make deep”: German: Taufe, Danish: dåb Swedish: dop, Norwegian: dåp, Dutch: doop, Faroese: dópur; and so do Creole languages with a strong Dutch influence, such as Saramaccan, Sranan Tongo, or Eastern Maroon Creole: dopu
  • The German das Buch translation by Roland Werner (publ. 2009-2022) uses a variety of translations, including “immersed (in water)” (eintauchen or untertauchen) but also the traditional German term for “baptism (Taufe)” or in the combination “immersed in baptism”

The disagreement about whether the translation of the Greek baptizo needed to include “immersion” not only caused conflict in China, it also led to splits — and different translations — in English-speaking countries: “The influential British and Foreign Bible Society had been a major supporter of the [Baptist] Serampore mission, but it finally severed its support in 1836 because of the Baptist interpretation of the Bible translations produced there. This led to the formation of the separate Baptist Bible Translation Society in Great Britain in 1840. Almost concurrently, in 1837, the American and Foreign Bible Society was founded in the United States as an offspring of the American Bible Society, over a controversy about a Baptist Bengali Bible translation. The American and Foreign Bible Society itself experienced another split in 1850, when a sub-group rejected the transliteration of baptizo in the English Bible and formed the American Bible Union, which published its own English New Testament in 1862/63 that used the term immerse instead of “baptize” (see here ). (Source: Zetzsche 2008)

See also baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with.

Click or tap here to see a short video clip showing how baptisms were done in biblical times (source: Bible Lands 2012)

Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Baptism in Early Christianity .

Translation commentary on Luke 3:7

Exegesis:

elegen oun ‘and so he said.’ oun indicates the resuming of the narrative after the interruption of vv. 4-6. The imperfect tense is best understood as introducing what may be regarded as the content of the summary of a speech, cf. 6.20.

tois ekporeuomenois ochlois baptisthēnai hup’ autou ‘to the crowds who came out to get baptized by him.’ The infinitive baptisthēnai is dependent upon the participle ekporeuomenois indicating the purpose of the crowds in coming out.

ekporeuomai ‘to come out,’ without indication from where and whither. The latter is implied in v. 3 but the former remains open.

ochlos ‘crowd,’ without unfavourable connotation. Here the plural suggests a very big crowd.

baptizō, ‘to dip,’ ‘to immerse,’ exc. 11.38 and 12.50, in Luke always used with reference to the baptism preached and administered by John the baptist. The aorist tense implies that the rite of baptism is administered only once. As to the meaning of the passive two explanations are possible: (1) ‘to be baptized,’ or (2) ‘to get baptized,’ cf. sich taufen zu lassen (Zürcher Bibel, Nieuwe Vertaling), and “to have oneself baptized”. The latter fits the context better because of the final force of the infinitive baptisthēnai; the emphasis is on the intention of the crowds.

gennēmata echidnōn ‘brood of vipers.’ The exact meaning of the phrase (clearly meant as reproach) has to be determined in the light of the context. Since the crowds want to be baptized as a safeguard against the impending judgment of God, the phrase gennēmata echidnōn exposes them as cunning, cf. Mt. 10.16, and the Jewish parallels quoted by Strack-Billerbeck I, 574f on that verse.

gennēma ‘offspring,’ ‘brood.’

echidna ‘viper,’ ‘poisonous snake.’

tis hupedeixen humin ‘who has suggested to you.’ The usual meaning of hupodeiknumi with the following infinitive is ‘to warn,’ but this is not fitting here. The coming judgment was part of John’s message (cf. v. 9) and we may assume that he called his hearers to repent before the day of judgment would dawn. The point of the passage is that people think that they can escape from judgment by being baptized without sincere repentance, and John asks the crowds who suggested that impossible idea to them.

hupodeiknumi ‘to show,’ ‘to warn.’

phugein apo tēs melloussēs orgēs ‘to fly from the coming wrath.’ The participle of mellō usually refers to events or situations of eschatological order.

orgē (also 21.23) ‘wrath,’ in Luke of the future judgment of God.

mellō with present infinitive following ‘to be about to,’ ‘to be on the point of’ often of that which is divinely bound to happen: with less emphasis ‘to have in mind.’ The participle mellōn (of which here the feminine form melloussēs) means ‘future,’ ‘coming’ or ‘to come’; here with the connotation that the ‘coming wrath’ is bound to come.

Translation:

He said. The pronominal reference will have to be elucidated in many languages, cf. above on 1.8.

The multitudes that came out to be baptized by him refers to a fact that is prior to John’s speaking, and essential to the understanding of what follows; hence it may be better rendered as an introductory sentence, e.g. ‘people came to John in-order to be-baptized by him. He said to them…’ (Kituba, cf. also Good News Translation). — The multitudes. The noun (also in 1.10; 2.13; 3.10; 5.15; 6.17; 7.9; 8.45; 12.1, 13, 54; 14.25; 18.36; 19.37, 39; 22.6; 23.4, 27, 48) can often be rendered by ‘mass,’ ‘gathering of people,’ ‘many people.’ The plural has augmentative force here, i.e. emphasizes that the reference is to a multitude of large size. For the force of the definite article see below on “the crowd” in 5.19. — To be baptized can often be rendered by a causative reflexive form (Manobo, see on v. 3) or phrase (Sranan Tongo), or by ‘to take baptism’ (Marathi), ‘to receive baptism’ (Hindi), ‘to receive water’ (Medumba), ‘to ask him/John to baptize them.’ In Tae’ one can use a verbal form with a specific prefix indicating that the subject asks for, evokes, or instigates the act of ‘washing/baptism’ expressed by the root-word. Cf. also the Pohnpeian rendering mentioned below.

You here helps to identify what follows as an exclamation; one may have to add or substitute an exclamatory particle.

Brood of vipers. In languages were honorific forms of speech are normally used towards strangers, this strong term of abuse is an important clue, because it may be taken as an indication that the speaker is not in a mood to be polite. In some languages ‘vipers’ or ‘snakes’ is not commonly used as an invective, e.g. in Balinese or Kituba, where the natural equivalent would be ‘leeches’ or ‘insects,’ respectively. Even in such languages, however, translators often have kept to the literal rendering, probably because they felt that the bad connotation was sufficiently suggested by the situation. It may be advisable then to shift from metaphor to simile, adding e.g. ‘like,’ ‘as it were’ etc. — The normal equivalent of brood, e.g. ‘young ones,’ may rather impair the pejorative force of the expression; hence it had to be omitted in some versions. — Vipers, or a local equivalent, or, ‘poisonous snakes,’ or simply ‘snakes.’

Who…? If the intention of this rhetorical question must be brought out, one may add an answer such as ‘It is not I!.’ The people’s intention in asking for baptism (as explained in Exegesis) is brought out economically in Pohnpeian by the use of a suffix which, added to ‘be-baptized,’ suggests that the physical experience was all they came for.

Warned you, or, following the interpretation advocated in Exegesis, ‘gave you a hint’ (Nieuwe Vertaling, Hindi; also Sranan Tongo, lit. ‘pinched you to’); ‘counselled you’ (Telugu), ‘pointed-out to you the way’ (Bahasa Indonesia), ‘showed you the means’ (Tamil), ‘taught you,’ cf. also “told you that you could” (Good News Translation, similarly Nyakyusa).

Flee, or ‘run off/away (from danger)’; here metaphorically, ‘to shun,’ ‘to try to escape from.’

Wrath, or specified, ‘God’s wrath,’ ‘divine anger’ (Chinese, Balinese, Dravidian languages). Here the term does not primarily refer to the emotion felt but to the action resulting from that emotion; hence such rendering as, ‘judgment,’ “retribution” (New English Bible), ‘punishment’ (Manobo).

To come, or ‘impending’ (Willibrord); cf. also ‘wrath which God will have’ (Kekchi).

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.

SIL Translator’s Notes on Luke 3:7

Paragraph 3:7–9

These verses are similar to the text in Matthew 3:7–10.

3:7a

Then John said to the crowds coming out to be baptized by him: In some languages, it may be helpful to change the order of information in this part of the verse. For example:

Crowds of people were coming out to be baptized by John. So John said to them….

Then At the end of 3:6, Luke ended his quote from the book of Isaiah. In 3:7, Luke began to tell how John fulfilled this prophecy by his preaching. In Greek, there is a conjunction at the beginning of 3:7 that indicates this connection. The Berean Standard Bible and some other versions (CSB, New King James Version) translate this conjunction as “then,” introducing the next event that happened. Other versions (New American Standard Bible, NET Bible) translate this conjunction as “so,” indicating that what John did fulfilled Isaiah’s prophecy. Some other ways to express this connection are:

John ⌊did as the words from Isaiah’s book said⌋
-or-
In keeping with ⌊the words of Isaiah’s book⌋

Connect these verses in a natural way in your language. In some languages a connector may not be needed.

crowds: The word crowds is a plural form. In this context it has the same meaning as the singular form “crowd.” It refers to many people. It does not focus on different groups that may have been included in the crowd.

coming out: The crowds were coming out of the towns and villages to where John was, in the desert.

to be baptized by him: The phrase to be baptized by him is passive. It also indicates the purpose for which the people came to John in the desert. They came out to John in order to be baptized by him.

In some languages it may be more natural to use an active phrase here. For example:

in order for John to baptize them

be baptized: The Greek word that the Berean Standard Bible translates here as be baptized means to be ceremonially washed/purified with a special ritual that uses water. In this context people were purified from their sins. They were not washed to remove dirt from their bodies. A person was baptized as an initiation into a new spiritual condition.

The verb be baptized is another form of the word that was translated as “baptism” in 3:3c. You should translate the verb baptize in a similar way as you translate the noun “baptism.” See the note on “baptism” in 3:3c. Here are some ways to translate baptize in this context:

• Use a descriptive term. For example:

⌊ritually⌋ wash
-or-
initiate ⌊people⌋ in/with water
-or-
enter water

• Use a term for a similar ritual that is already part of your culture. You may need to indicate that in this context it has a special connection with God. For example:

purify people with God’s ceremonial bath
-or-
wash people in initiation water for God

• Use a term that is already accepted by the local churches. In some areas this term may have been borrowed from the national language or transliterated from Greek or English.

See baptize, Meaning 1, in the Glossary.

3:7b

You brood of vipers: Many English versions punctuate the phrase You brood of vipers as a separate sentence, as an exclamation. They begin a new sentence, a question, in 3:7c. Other versions, including the Berean Standard Bible, punctuate it as part of the same sentence as 3:7c. Connect 3:7b and 3:7c in the most natural way in your language.

brood of vipers: The word vipers refers to poisonous snakes. Another name for this type of snakes is “adders.” The phrase brood of vipers means “children/offspring of poisonous snakes.”

John used a metaphor here to criticize the people in the crowds. He called them a group of poisonous snakes. This phrase was an insult to the people. It meant that they were treacherous and evil, like deadly snakes.

In some cultures people may not understand the meaning of this metaphor. In some languages it may not be considered an insult. If that is true in your language, some other ways to translate it are:

• Use a simile and make the point of comparison explicit. For example:

You are ⌊as treacherous/dangerous as⌋ a group of vipers!
-or-
You are ⌊dangerous, like⌋ a bunch of poisonous snakes!

• Use an idiom that has the same meaning in your culture. If you do this, you may want to include a footnote that gives the biblical metaphor. For example:

The Greek text literally says, “you brood of vipers.”

• Translate the meaning without the metaphor. For example:

You treacherous deceivers!
-or-
You deceitful people!
-or-
You evil frauds!

brood: The Greek word that the Berean Standard Bible translates here as brood means offspring. However, John was not saying that the people were young or childlike. Some English translations do not translate the word brood. For example:

You snakes! (Good News Translation)
-or-
You poisonous snakes! (God’s Word)

3:7c

who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?: This is a rhetorical question. John asked the question to rebuke the people. He implied that the people were coming to be baptized so that God would not punish them in the future. John also implied that the people did not really intend to repent of their sins.

Some ways to translate this rhetorical question include:

• As a rhetorical question. For example:

Who warned you to run away from God’s coming punishment? (New Century Version)

• As a statement. For example:

⌊So,⌋ someone has told you to try to escape God’s wrath!

If you translate this rebuke as a question, it may be necessary to have a transition to the next verse. For example:

Who warned you to run away from God’s coming punishment? Now that you have been warned….

See the note on the connection in 3:8a. Translate this rhetorical question in a natural way in your language.

flee: The Greek word that the Berean Standard Bible translates as flee means “to run away from (something)” or “avoid/escape danger.”

the coming wrath: The word wrath means “anger” or “the punishment that comes as a consequence of someone’s anger.” In this context the phrase the coming wrath refers to the fact that God will judge and punish people because of their rebellious attitudes and their sins. Some other ways to translate the coming wrath are:

the punishment God is about to send (Good News Translation)
-or-
the coming judgment (Contemporary English Version)

© 2009, 2010, 2013 by SIL International®
Made available under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License (CC BY-SA) creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0.
All Scripture quotations in this publication, unless otherwise indicated, are from The Holy Bible, Berean Standard Bible.
BSB is produced in cooperation with Bible Hub, Discovery Bible, OpenBible.com, and the Berean Bible Translation Committee.