Mark 13:20 – Page 2

Lord

The Hebrew adonai in the Old Testament typically refers to God. The shorter adon (and in two cases in the book of Daniel the Aramaic mare [מָרֵא]) is also used to refer to God but more often for concepts like “master,” “owner,” etc. In English Bible translations all of those are translated with “Lord” if they refer to God.

In English Old Testament translations, as in Old Testament translations in many other languages, the use of Lord (or an equivalent term in other languages) is not to be confused with Lord (or the equivalent term with a different typographical display for other languages). While the former translates adonai, adon and mare, the latter is a translation for the tetragrammaton (YHWH) or the Name of God. See tetragrammaton (YHWH) and the article by Andy Warren-Rothlin in Noss / Houser, p. 618ff. for more information.

In the New Testament, the Greek term kurios has at least four different kinds of use:

referring to “God,” especially in Old Testament quotations,
meaning “master” or “owner,” especially in parables, etc.,
as a form of address (see for instance John 4:11: “Sir, you have no bucket”),
or, most often, referring to Jesus

In the first and fourth case, it is also translated as “Lord” in English.

Most languages naturally don’t have one word that covers all these meanings. According to Bratcher / Nida, “the alternatives are usually (1) a term which is an honorific title of respect for a high-ranking person and (2) a word meaning ‘boss’, ‘master’, or ‘chief.’ (…) and on the whole it has generally seemed better to employ a word of the second category, in order to emphasize the immediate personal relationship, and then by context to build into the word the prestigeful character, since its very association with Jesus Christ will tend to accomplish this purpose.”

When looking at the following list of back-translations of the terms that translators in the different languages have used for both kurios and adonai to refer to God and Jesus respectively, it might be helpful for English readers to recall the etymology of the English “Lord.” While this term might have gained an exalted meaning in the understanding of many, it actually comes from hlaford or “loaf-ward,” referring to the lord of the castle who was the keeper of the bread (source: Rosin 1956, p. 121).

Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight

Following are some of the solutions that don’t rely on a different typographical display (see above):

Navajo (Dinė): “the one who has charge”
Mossi: “the one who has the head” (the leader)
Uduk: “chief”
Guerrero Amuzgo: “the one who commands”
Kpelle: “person-owner” (a term which may be applied to a chief)
Central Pame: “the one who owns us” (or “commands us”)
Piro: “the big one” (used commonly of one in authority)
San Blas Kuna: “the great one over all” (source for this and above: Bratcher / Nida)
Guhu-Samane: Soopara (“our Supervisor”) (source: Ellis Deibler in Notes on Translation July, 1967, p. 5ff.)
Balinese: “Venerated-one” (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
Yanesha’: “the one who carries us” (source: Nida 1952, p. 159)
Northern Emberá: Dadjirã Boro (“our Head”)
Rarotongan: Atu (“master or owner of a property”)
Gilbertese: Uea (“a person of high status invested with authority to rule the people”)
Rotuman: Gagaja (“village chief”)
Samoan: Ali’i (“an important word in the native culture, it derives from the Samoan understanding of lordship based on the local traditions”)
Tahitian: Fatu (“owner,” “master”)
Tuvalu: Te Aliki (“chief”)
Fijian: Liuliu (“leader”) (source for this and six above: Joseph Hong in The Bible Translator 1994, p. 329ff. )
Bacama: Həmə miye: “owner of people” (source: David Frank in this blog post )
Hopi: “Controller” (source: Walls 2000, p. 139)
Iyansi: Mwol. Mwol is traditionally used for the “chief of a group of communities and villages” with legal, temporal, and spiritual authority (versus the “mfum [the term used in other Bantu languages] which is used for the chief of one community of people in one village”). Mwol is also used for twins who are “treated as special children, highly honored, and taken care of like kings and queens.” (Source: Kividi Kikama in Greed / Kruger, p. 396ff.)
Ghomala’: Cyəpɔ (“he who is above everyone,” consisting of the verb cyə — to surpass or go beyond — and pɔ — referring to people. No human can claim this attribute, no matter what his or her social status or prestige.” (Source: Michel Kenmogne in Theologizing in Context: An Example from the Study of a Ghomala’ Christian Hymn )
Binumarien: Karaambaia: “fight-leader” (Source: Oates 1995, p. 255)
Warlpiri: Warlaljamarri (owner or possessor of something — for more information tap or click here)

We have come to rely on another term which emphasizes God’s essential nature as YHWH, namely jukurrarnu (see tetragrammaton (YHWH)). This word is built on the same root jukurr– as is jukurrpa, ‘dreaming.’ Its basic meaning is ‘timelessness’ and it is used to describe physical features of the land which are viewed as always being there. Some speakers view jukurrarnu in terms of ‘history.’ In all Genesis references to YHWH we have used Kaatu Jukurrarnu. In all Mark passages where kurios refers to God and not specifically to Christ we have also used Kaatu Jukurrarnu.

New Testament references to Christ as kurios are handled differently. At one stage we experimented with the term Watirirririrri which refers to a ceremonial boss of highest rank who has the authority to instigate ceremonies. While adequately conveying the sense of Christ’s authority, there remained potential negative connotations relating to Warlpiri ceremonial life of which we might be unaware.

Here it is that the Holy Spirit led us to make a chance discovery. Transcribing the personal testimony of the local Warlpiri pastor, I noticed that he described how ‘my Warlaljamarri called and embraced me (to the faith)’. Warlaljamarri is based on the root warlalja which means variously ‘family, possessions, belongingness’. A warlaljamarri is the ‘owner’ or ‘possessor’ of something. While previously being aware of the ‘ownership’ aspect of warlaljamarri, this was the first time I had heard it applied spontaneously and naturally in a fashion which did justice to the entire concept of ‘Lordship’. Thus references to Christ as kurios are now being handled by Warlaljamarri.” (Source: Stephen Swartz, The Bible Translator 1985, p. 415ff. )
Mairasi: Onggoao Nem (“Throated One” — “Leader,” “Elder”) or Enggavot Nan (“Above-One”) (source: Enggavoter 2004)
Obolo: Okaan̄-ene (“Owner of person(s)”) (source: Enene Enene)
Angami Naga: Niepu (“master,” “owner”)
Lotha Naga: Opvui (“owner of house / field / cattle”) — since both “Lord” and YHWH are translated as Opvui there is an understanding that “Opvui Jesus is the same as the Opvui of the Old Testament”
Ao Naga: Kibuba (“human master,” “teacher,” “owner of property,” etc.) (source for this and two above: Nitoy Achumi in The Bible Translator 1992 p. 438ff. )
Seediq: Tholang, loan word from Min Nan Chinese (the majority language in Taiwan) thâu-lâng (頭儂): “Master” (source: Covell 1998, p. 248)
Thai: p^hra’ p^hu pen cao (พระผู้เป็นเจ้า) (divine person who is lord) or ong(kh) cao nay (องค์เจ้านาย) (<divine classifier>-lord-boss) (source: Stephen Pattemore)
Arabic often uses different terms for adonai or kurios referring to God (al-rabb الرب) and kurios referring to Jesus (al-sayyid الـسـيـد). Al-rabb is also the term traditionally used in Arabic Christian-idiom translations for YHWH, and al-sayyid is an honorary term, similar to English “lord” or “sir” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin).
Tamil also uses different terms for adonai/kurios when referring to God and kurios when referring to Jesus. The former is Karttar கர்த்தர், a Sanskrit-derived term with the original meaning of “creator,” and the latter in Āṇṭavar ஆண்டவர், a Tamil term originally meaning “govern” or “reign” (source: Natarajan Subramani).
Burunge: Looimoo: “owner who owns everything” (in the Burunge Bible translation, this term is only used as a reference to Jesus and was originally used to refer to the traditional highest deity — source: Michael Endl in Holzhausen / Riderer 2010, p. 48)
Yagaria: Souve, originally “war lord” (source: Renck, p. 94)
Aguacateco: Ajcaw ske’j: “the one to whom we belong and who is above us” (source: Rita Peterson in Holzhausen / Riderer 2010, p. 49)
Konkomba: Tidindaan: “He who is the owner of the land and reigns over the people” (source: Lidorio 2007, p. 66)
Chichewa: Ambuye Ambuye comes from the singular form Mbuye which is used to refer to: (1) someone who is a guardian or protector of someone or group of people — a grandparent who has founded a community or village; (2) someone who is a boss or master over a group of people or servants and has absolute control over them; (3) owner of something, be it a property, animals and people who are bound under his/her rule — for people this was mostly commonly used in the context of slaves and their owner. In short, Mbuye is someone who has some authorities over those who call him/her their “Mbuye.” Now, when the form Ambuye is used it will either be for honorific when used for singular or plural when referring to more than one person. When this term is used in reference to God, it is for respect to God as he is acknowledged as a guardian, protector, and ruler of everything. (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation).
Hdi uses rveri (“lion”) as a title of respect and as such it regularly translates adon in the Old Testament. As an address, it’s most often with a possessive pronoun as in rvera ɗa (“my lion” = “my lord” or “sir”). So, for example, Genesis 15:2 (“O Lord God”) is Rvera ɗa Yawe (“My lion Yahweh”) or Ruth to Boaz in Ruth 2:13: “May I find your grace [lit. good-stomach] my lion.” This ties in nicely with the imagery of the Lord roaring like a lion (Hosea 11:10; Amos 3:8; Joel 3:16). Better still, this makes passages like Revelation 5:5 even richer when we read about rveri ma taba məndəra la Yuda, “the Lion of the tribe of Judah”. In Revelation 19:16, Jesus is rveri ta ghəŋa rveriha “the lion above lions” (“lord of lords”). (Source: Drew Maust)

Law (2013, p. 97) writes about how the Ancient Greek Septuagint‘s translation of the Hebrew adonai was used by the New Testament writers as a bridge between the Old and New Testaments: “Another case is the use of kurios referring to Jesus. For Yahweh (in English Bibles: ‘the Lord‘), the Septuagint uses kurios. Although the term kurios usually has to do with one’s authority over others, when the New Testament authors use this word from the Septuagint to refer to Jesus, they are making an extraordinary claim: Jesus of Nazareth is to be identified with Yahweh.”

Translation commentary on Mark 13:20

Exegesis:

ei mē ekolobōsen kurios tas hēmeras ‘if the Lord had not shortened the days,’ ‘unless the Lord had cut short those days.’

koloboō (only here in Mark) ‘amputate,’ ‘curtail,’ ‘shorten’: the phrase ‘shorten the days,’ means, of course, to reduce the number of days (of the ‘tribulation’ referred to in the previous verse). It is to be noticed that the whole verse speaks of the matter as though it were past, in conformance with Hebrew prophetic style.

kurios (cf. 1.3) ‘the Lord’: here, of course, God.

tas hēmeras ‘those days’ better fits the context than ‘the days.’

ouk an esōthē pasa sarx literally ‘all flesh would not have been saved’: the Hebrew idiom loʾ … kol (Greek ouk … pas) ‘not all’ means ‘none,’ ‘not one,’ so that the clause means, ‘no flesh would have been saved.’

sōzō (cf. 3.4) ‘save’: here with the meaning ‘escape,’ ‘survive,’ ‘live (through it)’ (of the translations, The Modern Speech New Testament, Goodspeed, and Montgomery have ‘escape’; Moffatt ‘be saved alive’; Berkeley ‘survive’). Lagrange and Taylor, however, understand the word in its eschatological sense, ‘to be saved,’ as in v. 13. This depends, of course, upon the interpretation given the events described in the context. Other considerations aside, the plain meaning of the events in vv. 14-23 connected with the ‘tribulation’ (thlipsis, v. 19) is that they are of a temporal and temporary nature which none would survive unless the Lord had ‘shortened the days’: it seems difficult, therefore, to understand the verb sōzō in the theological sense of “salvation unto eternal life.”

pasa sarx ‘all flesh’: here with the meaning ‘every human being,’ ‘every man’ (for this meaning of the Hebrew basar ‘flesh’).

tous eklektous hous exelexato ‘the chosen ones whom he chose,’ ‘the elect whom he elected.’

eklektos (13.22, 27) ‘chosen one,’ ‘elected one’: in the context the word refers to the Christians, the followers of Jesus.

eklegomai (only here in Mark) ‘choose,’ ‘select,’ ‘prefer’: the verb, in accordance with Jewish theology, indicates the predestinating activity of God.

Translation:

Shortened the days, if translated literally, may imply quite a wrong meaning, namely, reduce the length of each day. One may therefore have to speak of ‘reducing the time’ or ‘cutting off the days’ (Tzeltal) or ‘cutting the time’ (Cashibo-Cacataibo).

In some languages the problem of tense in this verse is extremely difficult, to the point of making the passage meaningless. For example, the reduction of time is spoken of as past, while the salvation is obviously future. This problem may be resolved in some instances by translating ‘if the Lord had not decided to cut off the days.’ That is to say, the decision is past (as determined in the counsel of God), but the actual event is still future.

No human being (‘no one,’ or ‘no person’) is a necessary translation of the Greek phrase which means literally ‘no flesh.’ Translated word-for-word in some languages, this phrase has meant nothing more than ‘no meat.’ On the basis of such a translation as ‘no flesh,’ the people in question concluded that this was in some way related to the tendency for carcasses to spoil after a period of time, and that for this reason the time was reduced.

Be saved is generally interpreted on the basis of (1) continued existence or life, e.g. ‘remain living’ (Tabasco Chontal), or (2) escape from destruction, e.g. ‘nobody would escape’ (Tzotzil).

The elect, whom he chose is a redundant expression which is frequently translated with only a single reference to the process of choosing, e.g. ‘those whom he chose’ or ‘the people whom he chose.’ The obvious reason for this is the fact that elect is translatable in many languages only as ‘those whom he chose,’ and to repeat ‘those whom he chose’ would be completely tautological.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

SIL Translator's Notes on Mark 13:20

13:20a–b

If the Lord had not cut short those days, nobody would be saved: In 13:20a–b, Jesus spoke as though the Lord had already cut short the days. It was common in Old Testament prophecy to refer to future events as if they had already happened. That implied that the events were sure to happen, because God had already decided that they would happen. See the New Century Version example below.

In the Greek text the sentence begins with the word If and the expression is negative: had not cut short. Many English versions translate it with a negative expression. It is also possible to express this sentence in a positive way, as in the New Century Version:

God has decided to make that terrible time short. Otherwise, no one would go on living.

The New Century Version has supplied the verb “has decided,” which is implied in the Greek statement.

13:20a

If the Lord: The expression the Lord refers here to “God,” as in the New Century Version. See the two terms you used to translate “the Lord” in 12:36b. One term referred to Jesus and the other term referred to God. Use the same term for the Lord (God) here in 13:20a that you used in 12:36b. See Lord, Context 2, in the Glossary.

had not cut short those days: The expression cut short those days is an idiom. It refers to reducing the time of suffering. Jesus was not talking about shortening the length of each day.