Luke 9:49 – TIPs

in the name of, on the account of his (or: my) name

Some of the Hebrew and Greek phrases that are translated in English in association with “name,” including “in the name of,” “in my name,” “in your name,” “on the account of my name,” “on the account of your name” (according to a classification by Robert Bratcher in The Bible Translator 1963, p. 72ff. , phrases that belong to the categories of “Agency or instrumentality” and “Representation”) present a number of challenges in other languages.

Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight

Eugene Nida (1947, p 178ff.) explains this way:

“The biblical attitudes toward human personality are of great theological importance. There is, however, only one word which produces any considerable difficulty in other languages. This is the word ‘name.’ The great difference attached to the significance of the name of a person in the Bible times in contrast with our own culture is very important. Note such phrases as ‘whatsoever ye shall ask in my name,’ John 14:13, ‘believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God,’ John 3:18, and ‘life through his name,’ John 20:31. These expressions are generally difficult for us to understand, for the word ‘name’ does not mean the same to us as it meant to those of Bible times. To them the name was the symbolization of the authority and personality of the individual who possessed the name. To us a name is far less important. It may be changed whenever one can convince a judge that another name might be more economically advantageous. The name is also a legal method of giving one’s written assent to certain business transactions, but to us it is not the symbol of the personality.”

The translation in Eastern Huasteca Nahuatl typically is “in someone’s authority” (for instance “I have come in my Father’s name” in John 5:43 becomes “I have come on my Father’s authority”) (source Nida 1947, p. 179), or in Highland Puebla Nahuatl with the more paraphrastic equivalent “as though on orders from you” or in Tzeltal as “by your authority, so he said” (both examples for Mark 9:38 and 39, see Bratcher / Nida).

In Guhu-Samane, Mark 11:9 (in English: “Blessed is he that comes in the name of the Lord”) is translated as “Blessed is the Lord’s namesake who comes.” “In the name of the Lord” caused “puzzlement [because] “has he just assumed the name of the Lord, valid or otherwise? [But] with ‘blessed is the Lord’s namesake who comes’ the strong bond between the namesake and the important ancestor for whom named entitles the namesake to the deference due the ancestor. Thought very proper in this context.” (Source: Ernest L. Richert in Notes on Translation December 1963: p. 4-7; reprinted in The Bible Translator 1965, p. 198ff. )

Barclay Newman (see The Bible Translator 1974, pp, 432ff. ) reports on different solutions for the translation of the Today’s Malay Version (Alkitab Berita Baik, 1987):

In Malay “the phrase ‘in my name’ is problematic (…) since it sounds like the use of magic. For this reason [the English] Today’s English Version (Good News Bible) was followed at such passages as John 5:43 and 10:25, where ‘in the name of my Father’ is translated as ‘with my Father’s authority’ and ‘by my Father’s authority’ [respectively]. In John 12:13 ‘in the name of the Lord’ has become ‘in his (the Lord’s) behalf,’ following the common language German translation Die Gute Nachricht. In John 14:13, ‘because you are my followers’ is used, in John in 15:16, 16:23 and 24 ‘as my followers,’ in John 17:11 ‘by your own power, the power you gave me,’ and in John 14:26 ‘in my place.'”

Other translations for “in the name of Jesus Christ” include “in the authority of Jesus Christ” (Isthmus Mixe), “calling on Jesus Christ” (Teutila Cuicatec), “calling the name of Jesus Christ over you” (Ayutla Mixtec), “because of Jesus” (Tepeuxila Cuicatec), “by the power of the name of Jesus Christ” (Chichimeca-Jonaz), “the word of Jesus Christ is strong” (Lalana Chinantec) (source for this and above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.), and “mentioning the name of Jesus” (Elhomwe — source: project-specific translation notes in Paratext).

cast out demons in ones name

The Greek that is translated as “cast out demons in your (or: my) name” is translated in Ocotlán Zapotec as “said your name to cast out demons.” (Source: B. Moore / G. Turner in Notes on Translation 1967, p. 1ff.)

John the Evangelist (icon)

Following is a Bulgarian Orthodox icon of John the Evangelist from the 14th century (found in Rila Monastery, Bulgaria).

source

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 )

John (the disciple)

The term that is transliterated as “John (the disciple)” in English is translated in American Sign Language with the sign for the letter J and the sign signifying “beloved,” referring to John 13:23 et al. (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)

“John” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor

In Swiss-German Sign Language it is translated with a sign that depicts John’s head resting on Jesus’ chest, referring to John 13:23.

“John” in Swiss-German Sign Language, source: DSGS-Lexikon biblischer Begriffe , © CGG Schweiz

In Spanish Sign Language it is translated with with the sign for “young.” This refers to the traditional belief that he was the youngest of the apostles and the fact that he was younger than his brother James (see relative age of James and John. (Source: Steve Parkhurst)

“John” in Spanish Sign Language, source: Sociedad Bíblica de España

For more information on translations of proper names with sign language see Sign Language Bible Translations Have Something to Say to Hearing Christians .

inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Mark 9:38 / Luke 9:49)

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 for the first and the second occurrences of “we” (“we saw” and “we tried”) (excluding Jesus) and either the exclusive or the inclusive pronoun for the third occurrence (“not following us” in English translations) (including or excluding Jesus). (Source: SIL International Translation Department (1999))

Both the Jarai and the Tok Pisin translations use the inclusive pronoun.

formal pronoun: disciples addressing Jesus

Like many languages (but unlike Greek or Hebrew or English), Tuvan uses a formal vs. informal 2nd person pronoun (a familiar vs. a respectful “you”). Unlike other languages that have this feature, however, the translators of the Tuvan Bible have attempted to be very consistent in using the different forms of address in every case a 2nd person pronoun has to be used in the translation of the biblical text.

As Voinov shows in Pronominal Theology in Translating the Gospels (in: The Bible Translator 2002, p. 210ff. ), the choice to use either of the pronouns many times involved theological judgment. While the formal pronoun can signal personal distance or a social/power distance between the speaker and addressee, the informal pronoun can indicate familiarity or social/power equality between speaker and addressee.

Here, individual or several disciples address Jesus with the formal pronoun, expressing respect. Compare this to how that address changes after the resurrection.

In most Dutch as well as in Western Frisian and Afrikaans translations, the disciples address Jesus before and after the resurrection with the formal pronoun.

complete verse (Luke 9:49)

Following are a number of back-translations of Luke 9:49:

Noongar: “John said, ‘Lord, we saw a man send away evil spirits in your name, and we told him to stop, because he is not one of us.'” (Source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
Uma: “Yohanes said: ‘Teacher, we (excl.) saw a person cause-to-leave/expel a demon with your (sing.) name, but we (excl.) forbade him because he is not our follower.'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “Then Yahiya spoke he said, ‘Sir, we (excl.) found a man who spoke/uttered your name when he drove out a demon from a person. We (excl.) told him not to, because he is not one of our (incl.) companions.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And then John said, ‘There was a person whom we came upon, and he was curing people who were afflicted with demons, and he was using the power of your name to cure them. We told him to stop it, because he was not one of us.'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Then Juan said to Jesus, ‘Lord, we (excl.) saw a person causing-evil-spirits -to-leave using your (sing.) name, and we (excl.) forbid him because he wasn’t our (incl.) companion.'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “One disciple who was Juan spoke. He said, ‘Master, we saw a person who was driving out evil spirit(s), your name being what he was mentioning. Well, we told him to stop because he wasn’t one of us.'” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)

demon

The Greek that is typically translated/transliterated in English as “demon” is translated by other languages in the following ways:

Central Mazahua: “the evil spirit(s) of the devil” (source: Ellis Deibler in Notes on Translation July, 1967, p. 5ff.)
Kupsabiny: “bad spirit(s)” (source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Bariai: “bad bush-spirit(s)” (source: Bariai Back Translation)
Hausa: “unclean spirit” (see note below) (source: Hausa Common Language Back Translation)
Mandarin Chinese: “dirty spirit” (污灵 / wūlíng) (Protestant); “evil spirit/demon” （邪鬼 / xiéguǐ) (Catholic) (source: Zetzsche)
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.”

Note that often the words for “demon” and “unclean spirit / evil spirit” are being used interchangeably.

Step into the multitudes of languages of the Bible and join the worldwide conversation!

Verse: Luke 9:49