35But Jesus rebuked him, saying, “Be quiet and come out of him!” Then the demon, throwing the man down before them, came out of him without doing him any harm.
Following are a number of back-translations of Luke 4:35:
Noongar: “Jesus told the evil spirit, ‘No talking! Go out of the man.’ The evil spirit threw down the man in front of them and went away and did not harm him.” (Source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
Uma: “Yesus said to that demon: ‘Be quiet! Come out from that person!’ The demon that possessed that person made-him-fall-down in the midst of the people, and he came out, but he did not do anything to him.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “But Isa scolded the demon. He said, ‘Do not speak. Come out of that person.’ Then the demon hit the person on the ground in the middle of the people and after that he came out of the person and didn’t do anything to the person.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And then Jesus scolded that demon and He said, ‘You be quiet, and you come out of him.’ And then that demon used his power, so that that person he was afflicting would be dashed down to the ground in the presence of all the people. And he left, and he did not harm that person whom he had afflicted.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Then Jesus commanded the evil-spirit saying, ‘You (sing.) be quiet! Leave him.’ Whereupon the evil-spirit violently-shoved-down that man in front of the many-people and after that he left him without hurting him.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “When Jesus heard, he rebuked him. He said, ‘Stop making all that noise! Leave him now!’ Well, there in front of everyone, the evil spirit caused the man to throw himself down on the ground, and then he left him without any bodily harm.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Sissala: kaŋtɔŋ, which traditionally referred to “either a spirit of natural phenomena such as trees, rivers, stones, etc., or the spirit of a deceased person that has not been taken into the realm of the dead. Kaŋtɔŋ can be good or evil. Evil kaŋtɔŋ can bring much harm to people and are feared accordingly. A kaŋtɔŋ can also dwell in a person living on this earth. A person possessed by kaŋtɔŋ does not behave normally.” (Source: Regina Blass in Holzhausen 1991, p. 48f.)
Umiray Dumaget Agta: hayup or “creature, animal, general term for any non-human creature, whether natural or supernatural.” Thomas Headland (in: Notes on Translation, September 1971, p. 17ff.) explains some more: “There are several types of supernatural creatures, or spirit beings which are designated by the generic term hayup. Just as we have several terms in English for various spirit beings (elves, fairies, goblins, demons, imps, pixies) so have the Dumagats. And just as you will find vast disagreement and vagueness among English informants as to the differences between pixies and imps, etc., so you will find that no two Dumagats will agree as to the form and function of their different spirit beings.” This term can also be used in a verb form: hayupen: “creatured” or “to be killed, made sick, or crazy by a spirit.”
Yala: yapri̍ija ɔdwɔ̄bi̍ or “bad Yaprija.” Yaprijas are traditional spirits that have a range presumed activities including giving or withholding gifts, giving and protecting children, causing death and disease and rewarding good behavior. (Source: Eugene Bunkowske in Notes on Translation 78/1980, p. 36ff.)
Lamnso’: aànyùyi jívirì: “lesser gods who disturb, bother, pester, or confuse a person.” (Source: Fanwong 2013, p. 93)
Paasaal: gyɩŋbɔmɔ, “beings that are in the wild and can only be seen when they choose to reveal themselves to certain people. They can ‘capture’ humans and keep them in hiding while they train the person in herbalism and divination. After the training period, which can range from a week to many years, the ‘captured’ individual is released to go back into society as a healer and a diviner. The gyɩŋbɔmɔ can also be evil, striking humans with mental diseases and causing individuals to get lost in the wild. The Pasaale worldview about demons is like that of others of the language groups in the area, including the Northern Dagara [who use kɔ̃tɔmɛ with a similar meaning].” (Source: Fabian N. Dapila in The Bible Translator 2024, p. 415ff.)
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.”
The Greek Iēsous is “only” a proper name but one with great importance. The following quote by John Ellington (in The Bible Translator1993, p. 401ff. ) illustrates this:
“In Matthew’s account of the birth of Jesus Christ, Joseph is told that when Mary gives birth to a son ‘you will name him Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins’ (1:21). This name is a Greek transliteration of the Hebrew name [Yeshua (יֵשׁוּעַ) which is a short form of a name meaning] ‘the Lord [Yahweh] saves.’ The name is very significant and is in itself especially dear to Christians around the world. (…) Unquestionably great importance is attached to the name of Jesus by Christians of all persuasions and backgrounds.”
While Iēsous (pronounced: /i.ɛː.suːs/) is transliterated as “Jesus” (pronounced /ˈdʒiːzəs/) in English (but was translated as “Hælend” [the “healing one”] in Old English — see Swain 2019) it is transliterated and pronounced in a large variety of other ways as well, following the different rules of different languages’ orthographies, writing systems and rules of pronunciation. The following is a (partial) list of forms of Jesus in Latin characters: aYeso, Azezi, Cecoc, Chesús, Chi̍i̍sū, Ciisahs, Ciise, Ciisusu, Djesu, Ɛisa, Ƹisa, Eyesu, Gesù, Gesû, Gesü, Ġesù, Ghjesù, Giêsu, ꞌGiê‑ꞌsu, Giê-xu, Gyisɛse, Hesu, Hesús, Hisus, Hisuw, Ià-sŭ, Iesen, Ié:sos, Iesu, Iesui, Iesusɨn, Iesusiva, Ié:sos, Ihu, Iisus, Iisussa, Ijeesu, iJisọsị, Iji̍sɔ̄ɔsi, Iosa, Íosa, Ìosa, İsa, I’sa, Isiso, Isõs, Ísu, Isus, Isusa, Iisussa, Isuthi, Itota, Îtu, Isuva, Izesu, Izesuq, Jasus, Jeeju, Jeesus, Jeesuse, Jeezas, Jehu, Jeisu, Jeju, Jejus, Jeso, Jesoe, Jesosa, Jesoshi, Jesosy, Jesu, Jesû, Jesua, Jesuh, Jesuhs, Jesuo, Jesús, Jésus, Jesúsu, Jethu, Jezed, Jezi, Jézi, Ježiš, Jezu, Jezus, Jézus, Jėzus, Jēzus, Jezusi, Jėzus, Jezuz, Jiijajju, Jíísas, Jiizas, Jíìzọ̀s, Jisas, Jisase, Jisasi, Jisasɨ, Jisaso, Jisesi, Jisɛ̀, Jisos, Jisọs, Jisɔs, Jisu, Jiszs, Jizọs, Jizɔs, Jizọsi, Jizọsu, Jòso, Jusu, Jweesus, Ketsutsi, Njises, Sesi, Sisa, Sísa, Sisas, Sīsū, Sizi, Txesusu, uJesu, Ujísɔ̄si, ŵaYesu, Xesosi, ´Xesús, Xesús, Yasu, Ya:su, Ɣaysa, Yecu, Yeeb Sub, Yeeh Suh, Yeesey, Yeeso, Yeesso, Yēēsu, Yēēsu, Yehsu, Yëësu, Yeisu, Yeisuw, Yeshu, Yeso, Yesò, Yëso, Yɛso, ye-su, Yésu, Yêsu, Yẹ́sụ̃, Yésʉs, Yeswa, Yet Sut, Yetut, Yexus, Yezo, Yezu, Yiesu, Yiisa, Yiisu, Yiitju, Yis, Yisɔs, Yisufa, Yitati, Yusu, ‑Yusu, :Yusu’, Zeezi, Zezi, Zezì, Zezwii, Ziizɛ, Zisas, Zîsɛ, Zjezus, Zozi, Zozii, and this (much more incomplete) list with other writings systems: ᔩᓱᓯ, ᒋᓴᔅ, Հիսուս, ᏥᏌ, ኢየሱስ, ያሱስ, ܝܫܘܥ, Ісус, Їисъ, 耶稣, იესო, ईसा, イエス, イイスス, イエスス, 예수, येशू, येशो, ਈਸਾ, ພຣະເຢຊູ, ජේසුස්, যীশু, ଯୀଶୁ, ཡེ་ཤུ་, ‘ঈছা, இயேசு, ಯೇಸು, ພຣະເຢຊູ, ယေရှု, ઇસુ, जेजू, येसु, เยซู, យេស៊ូ, ᱡᱤᱥᱩ, ယေသှု, యేసు, ᤕᤧᤛᤢ᤺ᤴ, އީސާގެފާނު, ਯਿਸੂ, ꕉꖷ ꔤꕢ ꕞ, ⵏ⵿ⵗⵢⵙⴰ, ଜୀସୁ, يَسُوعَ,ㄧㄝㄙㄨ, YE-SU, ꓬꓰ꓿ꓢꓴ, 𖽃𖽡𖾐𖼺𖽹𖾏𖼽𖽔𖾏, ꑳꌠ, ᠶᠡᠰᠦᠰ (note that some of these might not display correctly if your device does not have the correct fonts installed).
Click or tap here to read more.
In some languages the different confessions have selected different transliterations, such as in Belarusian with Isus (Ісус) by the Orthodox and Protestant churches and Yezus (Езус) by the Catholic church, Bulgarian with Iisus (Иисус) by the Orthodox and Isus (Исус) by the Protestant church, Japanese with Iesu (イエス) (Protestant and Catholic) and Iisusu (イイスス) (Orthodox), or Lingala with Yesu (Protestant) or Yezu (Catholic). These differences have come to the forefront especially during the work on interconfessional translations such as one in Lingala where “many hours were spent on a single letter difference” (source: Ellington, p. 401).
In Literary and Mandarin Chinese where transliterations of proper names between the Catholic and Protestant versions typically differ vastly, the Chinese name of Jesus (Yēsū 耶稣) remarkably was never brought into question between and by those two confessions, likely due to its ingenious choice. (Click or tap here to see more).
The proper name of God in the Old Testament, Yahweh (YHWH), is rendered in most Chinese Bible translations as Yēhéhuá 耶和華 — Jehovah. According to Chinese naming conventions, Yēhéhuá could be interpreted as Yē Héhuá, in which Yē would be the family name and Héhuá — “harmonic and radiant” — the given name. In the same manner, Yē 耶 would be the family name of Jesus and Sū 稣 would be his given name. Because in China the children inherit the family name from the father, the sonship of Jesus to God the Father, Jehovah, would be illustrated through this. Though this line of argumentation sounds theologically unsound, it is indeed used effectively in the Chinese church (see Wright 1953, p. 298).
Moreover, the “given name” of Sū 稣 carries the meaning ‘to revive, to rise again’ and seems to point to the resurrected Jesus. (Source: J. Zetzsche in Malek 2002, p. 141ff., see also tetragrammaton (YHWH))
There are different ways that Bible translators have chosen historically and today in how to translate the name of Jesus in predominantly Muslim areas: with a form of the Arabic Isa (عيسى) (which is used for “Jesus” in the Qur’an), the Greek Iēsous, or, like major 20th century Bible translations into Standard Arabic, the Aramaic Yēšūaʿ: Yasua (يَسُوعَ). (Click or tap here to see more.)
Following are languages and language groups that use a form of Isa include the following (note that this list is not complete):
In Indonesian, while most Bible translations had already used Yesus Kristus rather than Isa al Masih, three public holidays used to be described using the term Isa Al Masih. From 2024 on the government is using Yesus Kristus in those holiday names instead (see this article in Christianity Today ).
Some languages have additional “TAZI” editions (TAZI stands for “Tawrat, Anbiya, Zabur, and Injil” the “Torah, Prophets, Psalms and Gospel”) of the New Testament that are geared towards Muslim readers where there is also a translation in the same language for non-Muslims. In those editions, Isa is typically used as well (for example, the Khmer TAZI edition uses Isa (អ៊ីសា) rather than the commonly used Yesaou (យេស៊ូ), the Thai edition uses Isa (อีซา) rather than Yesu (เยซู), the Chinese edition uses Ěrsā (尔撒) vs. Yēsū (耶稣), and the English edition also has Isa rather than Jesus.)
In German the name Jesus (pronounced: /ˈjeːzʊs/) is distinguished by its grammatical forms. Into the 20th century the grammatical rules prescribed a unique Greek-Latin declination: Jesus (nominative), Jesu (genitive, dative, vocative), Jesum (accusative), from which today only the genitive case “Jesu” is still in active use. Likewise, in Seediq (Taroko), the morphological treatment of “Jesus” also occupies a special category by not falling under the normal rule of experiencing a vowel reduction when the object-specific suffix an is added “since it was felt that the readers might resent that the name has been changed that drastically.” (Compare Msian for “Moses” (Mosi) as an object, but Yisuan for “Jesus” (Yisu).) (Source: Covell 1998. p. 249)
In Lamba the name ŵaYesu consists of a transliteration Yesu and the prefix ŵa, a plural form for “proper names when addressing and referring to persons in any position of seniority or honor.” While this was avoided in early translations to avoid possible misunderstandings of more than one Jesus, once the church was established it was felt that it was both “safe” and respectful to use the honorific (pl.) prefix. (Source C. M. Doke in The Bible Translator 1958, p. 57ff. )
In virtually all sign languages, “Jesus” is signed with the middle finger of each hand pointing to the palm (or wrist) of the other in succession (signing the nails of the cross). In the context of Bible translation this has been pointed out as theologically problematic since the “semantic connections of the original name Jesus do point towards ‘salvation,’ they do not naturally lead to crucifixion.” (Source: Phil King in Journal of Translation 1 (2020), p. 33ff.)
Following is the oldest remaining Ethiopian Orthodox icon of Jesus from the 14th or possibly 13th century (found in the Church of the Saviour of the World in Gurji, Ethiopia). As in many Orthodox icons, Jesus’ right hand forms the Greek letters I-C-X-C for IHCOYCXPICTOC or “Jesus Christ.” Another interpretation of the right hand is that it shows three fingers pointing to the Trinity, while the two other fingers point to Jesus’ two natures.
Orthodox icons are not drawings or creations of imagination. They are in fact writings of things not of this world. Icons can represent our Lord Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary, and the Saints. They can also represent the Holy Trinity, Angels, the Heavenly hosts, and even events. Orthodox icons, unlike Western pictures, change the perspective and form of the image so that it is not naturalistic. This is done so that we can look beyond appearances of the world, and instead look to the spiritual truth of the holy person or event. (Source )
The style of the following drawing of Jesus by Annie Vallotton is described by the artist as this: “By using few lines the readers fill in the outlines with their imagination and freedom. That is when the drawings begin to communicate.” (see here )
Illustration by Annie Vallotton, copyright by Donald and Patricia Griggs of Griggs Educational Service.
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 usage of an honorific construction where the morpheme are (され) is affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, iw-are-ru (言われる) or “say” is used.
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®).
epetimēsen autō ho Iēsous ‘Jesus checked him.’ The meaning of epetimēsen is defined by the subsequent phimōthēti ‘be silent,’ which suggests a command.
epitimaō ‘to rebuke,’ ‘to reprove,’ here “to speak seriously in order to prevent an action or to bring one to an end”, hence ‘to check.’ This meaning also in vv. 39 and 41; 8.24; 9.42; 19.39, and probably also 9.21.
phimōthēti ‘be silent.’
exelthe ap’ autou ‘come out of him,’ not ‘get away from him’ as the preposition might seem to suggest. But Luke always has apo after exerchomai (cf. 5.8; 8.2, 29, 33, 35, 38; 9.5; 11.24).
kai ripsan auton to daimonion eis to meson exēlthen ap’ autou mēden blapsan auton ‘and having thrown him down in the midst the demon came out of him having done him no harm.’ The sentence consists of (1) a main clause to daimonion … exēlthen ap’ autou ‘the demon came out of him,’ and (2) a participial clause ripsan … meson ‘having thrown him in the midst,’ describing an event preceding that of the main clause, and (3) a participial clause mēden blapsan auton ‘having done him no harm,’ which qualifies the event of (2) with regard to its consequences for the possessed.
ripsan auton … eis to meson ‘having thrown him down in the middle.’ For eis to meson. The most natural explanation is that the man falls down where he stood in the middle of the people in such a way that it appears as if somebody throws him down. riptō also 17.2.
mēden blapsan auton ‘having done him no harm whatever,’ stronger than mē blapsan auton ‘having done him no harm.’
Translation:
Rebuked him, or, ‘the demon.’ In the gospel of Luke the Gr. verb epitimaō (with the exception of 9.21 always rendered by ‘to rebuke’ in Revised Standard Version) occurs with a non-personal object (for which see on 4.39; 8.24), or with a personal object, i.e. demons (4.35, 41; 9.42), human beings (9.55; 17.3; 18.15, 39; 19.39; 23.40). In the latter case the verb is variously expressed, cf. e.g. ‘to scold’ (Bahasa Indonesia; similarly Batak Toba in 9.55, lit. ‘to be hit with words by someone’), ‘to reprimand’ (Javanese, lit. ‘to-be-angry-towards’), ‘to threaten’ (Bible de Jérusalem; similarly Sranan Tongo, lit. ‘to peel one’s eyes,’ i.e. to open one’s eyes wide). Where, as in this case, the reference probably is to strict command rather than to censure it is preferable to use, ‘to check,’ ‘to bring to a stop,’ or making explicit the implied direct discourse, ‘to say, “Stop doing so (immediately)” ,’ which would result here in something like, ‘he said to him, “Immediately stop speaking and get out of him” .’
Come out of him. The term to be used here for the cessation of demon possession should be the normal counterpart of the idiom that expresses the being in or beginning of that state, for which see on v. 33 and references.
The subsequent clauses may better be co-ordinated, e.g. ‘then (or, on these words, or, when he heard this) the demon threw … and came….’
To throw down, or, ‘cause-to-fall’ (several Indonesian languages), ‘cause to collapse.’
In the midst may have to be specified, ‘in between the people’ (Willibrord, Pohnpeian), ‘in front of all’ (Bible de Jérusalem), ‘in the sight of all present.’
Having done him no harm, or, ‘injury.’ This fact was probably contrary to expectation; this will influence the choice of connective when the clause has to be co-ordinated, e.g. ‘but (he) did not hurt him at all.’
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.
But Jesus rebuked the demon: The Greek verb that the Berean Standard Bible translates as rebuked may also be translated as:
commanded (New Century Version) -or-
ordered (Contemporary English Version)
Be silent!: This is the first of two commands that Jesus gave to the evil spirit. Some other ways to translate this are:
Be quiet! (New International Version) -or-
Silence! (NET Bible)
Translate this in the way that is natural in your language to order another person to stop speaking.
He said: The Berean Standard Bible has placed the words He said after “Be silent!” In Greek, these words occur before the quotation of what Jesus said. Put these words where they are natural in your language.
Come out: The Greek verb that the Berean Standard Bible translates as Come out means that the demon should come out from inside the man and leave him. In some languages, it may sound more natural to say “Go out.”
Your translation of this verb should be consistent with the way you translated “possessed by a demon” in 4:33a.
General Comment on 4:35a
In some languages, it may be more natural to translate Jesus’ command to the demon using indirect speech. For example:
Jesus ordered the evil spirit to be quiet and come out. (Contemporary English Version) -or-
Jesus commanded the demon to be silent and to leave the man.
4:35b
At this: This verse begins with a Greek conjunction that is often translated as “and.” Some English versions, such as the English Standard Version and the New American Standard Bible, translate it that way. Many English versions do not translate this conjunction. However, since the events in 4:36b occurred immediately after the events in 4:35a, some versions connect these events with a word that describes a time sequence. The New International Version, for example, says “Then,” and the Berean Standard Bible says At this. Connect 4:35b to 4:35a in a way that is natural in your language.
the demon threw the man down: The phrase the demon threw the man down means “the demon caused the man to fall to the ground.” For example:
The evil spirit threw the man down to the ground (New Century Version)
This event happened in the synagogue. So it may be more natural to say that the demon caused the man to fall to the floor. For example:
the demon threw the man to the floor (New Living Translation (2004))
demon: The Greek word that the Berean Standard Bible translates as demon is the same word as in 4:33a. You may translate it the same way in both places.
before them all: The Greek phrase that the Berean Standard Bible translates as before them all is literally “in the middle/midst” (as in the Revised Standard Version). This means “in the middle of all the people.” The demon caused the man to fall where all the people in the synagogue could see what was happening. Some other ways to translate this are:
before all the people (New Century Version) -or-
in front of everyone (Contemporary English Version)
4:35c
came out: The Greek verb that the Berean Standard Bible translates as came out is the same verb as in 4:35a. It means that the demon left the man. In some languages, this may need to be explicit. For example:
left the man (New Century Version) -or-
came out of him (New American Standard Bible)
without harming him: The phrase without harming him means that the demon did not hurt the man. The demon probably tried to hurt the man when he threw him to the ground. But because Jesus had ordered the demon to leave, he left the man without harming him.
Avoid translating this in a way that might suggest that the demon was being kind to the man. It may be necessary to translate this as:
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.