Chichewachipongwe Mulungu. Chipwonge is used to refer to acts or derogatory remarks that dishonor another person. (Mulungu is the Choichewa word for “God.”) (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
The Greek that is typically translated as “eternity,” “forever,” or “forever and ever” in English are translated in Mairasi as “mashed out infinitely.” Lloyd Peckham explains: “Bark cloth required pounding. It got longer and wider as it got pounded. Similarly, life gets pounded or mashed to lengthen it into infinity. Tubers also get mashed into the standard way of serving the staple food, like the fufu of Uganda, or like poi of Hawaii. It spreads out into infinity.” (Source: Lloyd Peckham)
In Lisu the phrase “forever and ever” is translated as ꓕꓲꓽ ꓞꓲꓼ ꓕꓲ ꓑ — thi tsi thi pa, verbatim translated as “one – lifetime – one – world.” This construction follows a traditional four-couplet construct in oral Lisu poetry that is usually in the form ABAC or ABCB. (Source: Arrington 2020, p. 57f.)
In Makonde it is often translated as navyaka or “years and years.” (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific notes in Paratext)
Peter’s house. This is where Jesus wanted to come with the disciples to eat. As they approached the house they saw a crowd of people. They did not get to eat in the house. Jesus’ mother, brothers and sisters also came there. They said that Jesus had gone crazy, so they decided to take Jesus home. Also the teachers of the Law from Jerusalem came to that place. They began to say to the people:
— Behold you marvel that Jesus casts demons out of people. But in fact the most important demon sits in him, and he gives orders to small demons, and they obey him.
Jesus heard this and turned to the teachers of the Law:
— I will tell you a parable. You say that one demon orders another demon to come out of a man. But is such a thing possible? The first example. There is a kingdom, and in it people fight with each other. Do you think such a kingdom can stand? No, this kingdom will collapse. The second example. If a husband and wife hate each other in a family, will such a family be strong? No, that family will fall apart. Third example. If demons cast each other out, then Satan’s kingdom would have been destroyed long ago. Do you think demons can cast each other out? No, they can’t!
If a very strong man lives in a certain house, and a burglar comes to the house. Would the robber be able to take things from that house? Of course not, because the strong master will drive the robber away. If only the robber succeeds in tying up the master, only then can he rob the house.
People are sinful, they do evil deeds, but God forgives their bad deeds. The spirit of God is in me, it works miracles, heals, casts out demons, but you slander that it is a demon — God will never forgive such lies.
Original Russian back-translation (click or tap here):
Дом Петра. Сюда Иисус хотел прийти с учениками, чтобы поесть там. Когда они подходили к дому, они увидели толпу народа. Им не удалось поесть в доме. Также туда пришли мать, братья и сестры Иисуса. Они говорили, что Иисус сошел с ума, и они решили забрать Иисуса домой. Также в то место пришли учителя Закона из Иерусалима. Они начала говорить народу:
— Вот вы восхищаетесь, что Иисус изгоняет бесов из людей. А на самом деле в нем самый главный бес сидит, и он отдает приказы мелким бесам, и те его слушаются.
Иисус услышал это и обратился к учителям Закона:
— Я расскажу вам притчу. Вот вы говорите, что один бес приказывает другому выйти из человека. Но разве такое возможно? Первый пример. Царство, а в нем люди враждуют друг с другом. Как вы думаете, устоит такое царство? Нет, это царство разрушится. Второй пример. Если в семье муж и жена ненавидят друг друга, такая семья будет крепкой? Нет, эта семья распадется. Третий пример. Если бесы изгоняют друг друга, тогда бы царство Сатаны давно бы разрушилось. Как вы думаете, могут ли бесы друг друга изгонять? Нет, такого не бывает!
Если в некотором доме живет очень сильный человек, и пришел в этот дом грабитель. Разве грабитель сможет спокойно забирать себе вещи из этого дома? Конечно, нет, потому что сильный хозяин, прогонит грабителя. Если только грабителю удастся связать хозяина, только тогда он сможет ограбить дом.
Люди грешны, делают злые дела, но Бог прощает им плохие дела. Во мне дух Божий, он творит чудеса, дает исцеление, изгоняет бесов, а вы клевещете, что это бес — вот такой лжи Бог никогда не простит.
Retrotraducciones en español (haga clic o pulse aquí)
Jesús y los discípulos fueron juntos a una casa, y una multitud personas también fue a la casa y la entró y la casa estaba llena de personas y Jesús y sus discípulos no comían nada.
Personas chismearon y contaron la familia de Jesús: “Las multitudes van a él y Jesús no come nada.”
La familia (dijo): “Ay Jesús está loco, ahorita lo traigamos, vamonos”. Y fueron (por él).
En la misma casa había algunos maestros de la ley de Jerusalén que lo vieron y dijeron: “Jesús tiene adentro de él el rey de los demonios, que se llama Beelzebú. Jesús y él tienen una conspiración y el demonio ayuda a Jesús, así que puede expulsar demonios.”
Jesús dijo: “¿El demonio me ayuda? Es absurdo. Les doy un ejemplo: Si yo soy un demonio y quiero expulsar a un demonio, ¿lo puedo? No puedo, es imposible, yo también soy demonio.
Por ejemplo, primero: Si diferentes gobiernos se pelean ellos fracasarán.
Segundo: Si en una familia ellos se pelean, se separarán.
Tercero: Si dos demonios se pelean no ganan nada, los dos se eliminarán.
Otro ejemplo: Una persona entra en una casa y toma cosas, y un hombre fuerte y poderoso lo ve. Le tiene miedo (al hombre fuerte) porque lo vio.
Primero debe agarrarlo (al hombre fuerte) y atarlo hasta que esté impotente en el piso y esto hecho puede libremente recoger las cosas.
Este ejemplo del (hombre) fuerte y poderoso es como el rey de los demonios, ¿entienden?
Les advierto y digo la verdad; si una persona hace pecados diferentes y es irrespetuoso contra Dios y después pide perdón, Dios lo perdonará y borrará sus pecados.
Pero hay una excepción: Si uds insultan contra el espíritu santo y lo apodan demonio, huy, no serán perdonados jamás, habrá un castigo fuerte para siempre.”
Allá vino la familia de Jesús y tocaban alguién: “Por favor, que Jesús venga” y el hombre dijo a Jesús: “Tu mamá y tus hermanos te llaman, por allá.”
Jesús miró a sus familiares y a la multitud, a todas las personas que estaban sentadas alrededor, y Jesús dijo: “Les pregunto: ¿Quiénes son mi mamá y mis hermanos?
Uds mismos son mi familia, porque uds obedecen sólo a Dios, por eso uds son mi mamá y mis hermanos.”
Jesus and the disciples went together to a house and a multitude of people also went to the house and entered it and the house was full of people, and Jesus and his disciples did not eat anything.
Some people gossiped and told Jesus’ family: “The multitudes go to him and Jesus does not eat anything.”
The family (said): “Ah, Jesus has gone mad, we will bring him back now, let’s go.” And they went (for him).
In the same house there were some teachers of the law from Jerusalem, and they watched him and said: “Jesus has inside him the king of demons, which is called Beelzebub. Jesus and he are conspiring together and the demon is helping Jesus so that he can throw out demons.”
Jesus said: “So the demon is helping me? That’s absurd. Let me give you an example: If I am a demon and I want to throw out a demon, can I? No I cannot, it’s impossible, I am a demon myself.
“For example, firstly: If different governments fight with each other they will all go down.
“Secondly: If the people in a family fight together they will be separated.
“Thirdly: If two demons fight together, they do not gain anything, both will be eliminated.
“Another example: A person enters a house and takes things away and a strong, powerful man sees him, he gets frightened because he’s been seen.
“First he has to take hold (of the strong man) tie him up so that he lies wriggling on the floor and when that is done he can freely collect the things.
“This example of the strong and powerful (man) is like the king of demons, do you understand?
“I warn you, and I say the truth; if a person does different sins and is disrespectful towards God and afterwards asks forgiveness, God will forgive him and delete his sins.
“But there is one exception: If you insult the Holy Spirit and nickname him a demon, wow, you will never be forgiven, there will be a strong punishment forever.”
Over there the family of Jesus came and they touched someone: “Please, let Jesus come” and the man went and told Jesus: “Your mother and brothers call you, over there.”
Jesus looked at his family and at the multitude, at all the people seated around him, and Jesus said: “I ask you, who are my mother and my brothers?
“You yourselves are my family, because you obey only God, that’s why you are my mother and my brothers.”
Chicahuaxtla Triqui: “cover over” (a figure of speech which is also employed in Hebrew, but which in many languages is not acceptable, because it implies “hiding” or “concealment”)
Warao: “not being concerned with him clean your obonja.” Obonja is a term that “includes the concepts of consciousness, will, attitude, attention and a few other miscellaneous notions” (source: Henry Osborn in The Bible Translator 1969, p. 74ff. See other occurrences of Obojona in the Warao New Testament.)
Martu Wangka: “throw out badness” (source: Carl Gross)
Koonzime: “remove the bad deed-counters” (“The Koonzime lay out the deeds symbolically — usually strips of banana leaf — and rehearse their grievances with the person addressed.”) (Source: Keith and Mary Beavon in Notes on Translation 3/1996, p. 16)
Ngbaka: ele: “forgive and forget” (Margaret Hill [in Holzhausen & Ridere 2010, p. 8f.] recalls that originally there were two different words used in Ngbaka, one for God (ɛlɛ) and one for people (mbɔkɔ — excuse something) since it was felt that people might well forgive but, unlike God, can’t forget. See also this lectionary in The Christian Century.
Amahuaca: “erase” / “smooth over” (“It was an expression the people used for smoothing over dirt when marks or drawings had been made in it. It meant wiping off dust in which marks had been made, or wiping off writing on the blackboard. To wipe off the slate, to erase, to take completely away — it has a very wide meaning and applies very well to God’s wiping away sins, removing them from the record, taking them away.”) (Source: Robert Russel, quoted in Walls / Bennett 1959, p. 193)
Gonja / Dangme: “lend / loan” (in the words of one Dangme scholar: “When you sin and you are forgiven, you forget that you have been forgiven, and continue to sin. But when you see the forgiveness as a debt/loan which you will pay for, you do not continue to sin, else you have more debts to pay” — quoted in Jonathan E.T. Kuwornu-Adjaottor in Ibadan Journal of Religious Studies 17/2 2010, p. 67ff. )
Kwere: kulekelela, meaning literally “to allow for.” Derived from the root leka which means “to leave.” In other words, forgiveness is leaving behind the offense in relationship to the person. It is also used in contexts of setting someone free. (Source: Megan Barton)
Merina Malagasy: mamela or “leave / let go (of sin / mistakes)” (source: Brigitte Rabarijaona)
Following are a number of back-translations of Mark 3:29:
Uma: “But whoever rejects the Holy Spirit, there is no forgiveness for them forever. They are guilty of their rejecting [him] forever.'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “But if he speaks evil-of/insults the Holy Spirit, he will really not be forgiven for that sin of his will remain with him forever.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “he who speaks in rejection against the Holy Spirit, that sin can never be removed from him, and it can never be forgiven forever.'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “But as-for the one-who-speaks-evil-of the Holy Spirit, his sin can absolutely not be forgiven, because that is his sin forever.'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “But whoever will insult/belittle the Espiritu Santo, it really will not be forgiven. As for this sin of his, it can never be removed.'” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
In English, the Greek term Pneûma tò Hagion is translated as “Holy Ghost” or “Holy Spirit.” The English terms referring to Pneûma are synonyms: “ghost” is derived from Old Englishgast (“breath” or “good or bad spirit”) and “spirit” from Latinspiritus (“breath” or “supernatural immaterial creature”). Until the late 19th century, English translators of all traditions used “Holy Ghost” (or “holy Ghost”) but generally switched to “Holy Spirit” (or “holy Spirit”) thereafter, likely because the meaning of “ghost” had transitioned to predominantly refer to the spirit of a dead person.
Other languages with a long tradition in Bible translation translate Pneûma (for “holy” see holy) as follows (click or tap here to see more):
While a few Germanic languages still use terms derived from gast (see above) including German and Dutch (Geist and Geest respectively), the majority use forms of Proto*-Germanic anadô (“breath,” “spirit,” “zeal” — used in Latin as anima), including Danish (Ånden), Swedish (Ande/ande — for more on the gender of the Swedish translation, see below), Icelandic (andi), and Norwegian (Ånd/ånd). (*”Proto” refers to the most recent common, often hypothetical language ancestor).
The majority of Romance languages use a form of the LatinSpiritus (French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, and Catalan among others). (Note that in the French 1985 translation by Chouraqui, souffle sacré or “sacred breath” is used [source: Watson 2023, p. 52])
Slavic languages derive their translation from the Proto-Slavic dȗxъ (“breath,” “wind,” “spirit”), including Russian, Belarusian, Ukrainian, and Bulgarian (all: Дух)
Most Semitic languages (Hebrew, Arabic, Assyrian, Chaldean — with the exception of Maltese which uses the Latin-based l-Ispirtu s-Santu), Iranian languages (Urdu, Tajik, Dari, Persian, Pashto), Turkic languages (Uzbek, Turkish), Malayic languages (Indonesian, Balinese, Sangir, and Malay — for further information on Malay, see below) use a derivative of the Proto-Semitic rūḥ- (“to blow,” “breathe”). Compare the Hebrew term ruach (רוּחַ: “breath,” “wind,” “spirit”) in the Old Testament. (For the use of Roho in Swahili, see below)
Bratcher / Nida say this about the translation into languages that do not have an existing Bible translation (click or tap here to see more):
“Undoubtedly no word has given quite so much trouble to the Bible translator as spirit, for (1) it includes such a wide range of meaning, from ‘evil spirit’ to ‘poor in spirit’ to ‘Holy Spirit’ and (2) it touches so vitally the crucial comparison and contrast between Christianity and so-called ‘animism.’
“There are four principal dangers in the choice of a word for Holy Spirit: (1) the term may identify an essential malevolent spirit, and no mere addition of the word ‘holy’ or ‘good’ is likely to change the basic connotation of the word, (2) the word may mean primarily the spirit of a deceased person (hence God must have died — a not infrequent error in Bible translations), (3) the expression used to mean ‘spirit’ may denote only an impersonal life force, a sort of soul-stuff which may be conceived as indwelling all plant, animal, and human substances (therefore, to say that ‘God is spirit’ is to deny His essential personality), and (4) a borrowed term may signify next to nothing to the people, and can only be explained by another term or terms, which, if they are adequate to explain the borrowing, should have been used in the first place. It is true that in some instances a borrowed word has seemed to be the only alternative, but it should be chosen only as a last resort.
“There is no easy formula to be employed in finding an adequate equivalent for Holy Spirit, for what seems to work quite well in one area may not serve in another. One thing, however, is certain: one should not select a term before making a comprehensive study of all kinds of words for spirits and for parts or aspects of personality and thus having as complete a view as possible of all indigenous beliefs about supernatural beings.”
Following are ways that languages without a long tradition Bible translation have translated Pneûma (click or tap here to see more):
Western Highland Chatino: “God’s perfect heart” J. Hefley (1968, p. 210) tells this story (click or tap here to read more):
“Ninu [a Chatino translation assistant] told his translator that the word ‘holy’ could be used to modify an idol, a household god, the witch doctor, an altar, a lion, the sea which had caused a flood and disaster, a sacred mushroom, and several other things. The translator and his consultant deduced that holy had two main components of meanings for Chatinos. It referred to persons purported to hold supernatural powers, and to objects which, if not properly respected, would bring evil upon one. With this and other information, they agreed that they could not use the Chatino word for ‘holy’ and ‘spirit’ in defining the third person of the Trinity. Their approved translation for Holy Spirit became ‘God’s perfect heart’ (referring primarily to the life principles of one who is living).”
Malay (Today’s Malay Version, publ. 1987): Roh Allah: “Spirit of God.” Barclay Newman (in The Bible Translator 1974, p. 432ff. ) explains this as follows (click or tap here to see more):
“A third difficult phrase that had to be dealt with was ‘Holy Spirit,’ since in popular Islamic theology there are many ‘holy spirits.’ In order to overcome this problem it was decided that ‘the Holy Spirit’ would always be rendered ‘God’s Spirit,’ and that wherever ‘Spirit’ or ‘the Spirit’ was used as a reference to God’s Spirit this would be clearly marked.
“Other illustrations could be given of the clearing up of ambiguous and difficult phrases, but only one more will be selected, and it will serve as a transition to the next major section of this article. In John 6:63 the phrase ‘Spirit and life’ (in the expression ‘the words I have spoken to you are Spirit and life’) is taken to refer to one thing not two. That is, even though the words are connected by the conjunction ‘and’ they are not in the relationship to one another that ‘and’ normally suggests. Moreover, ‘spirit’ in John’s Gospel, unless otherwise indicated, always refers to God’s Spirit. So then, the Common Malay has translated with the meaning, ‘the words which I speak come from God’s Spirit and bring life.’ This exegesis also has the advantage of tying in the meaning closely to the previous verse.
“As previously indicated, except in the passages where the context clearly indicates otherwise (John 11:33; John 13:21; John 19:30), it was assumed that ‘spirit’ or ‘the spirit’ refer to God’s Spirit, and so the translator always made this information explicit. For example, John the Baptist’s words in John 1:32 become ‘I saw God’s Spirit come down like a dove from heaven.’ The one exception to this rule is in 3:8a, where there is a play on words. In Greek, as in Hebrew, the same word may mean either ‘wind’ or ‘spirit.’ In this context most translations take ‘wind’ to be the basic comparison, and so have translated in this way; and some have even provided a footnote, indicating the play on words. Since the basic comparison here is seen to be ‘wind,’ the Malay New Testament translated the text in this way.”
“The Shipibo consider all spirits evil, with the exception of certain entities making up a human personality. It would be a manifest contradiction to say ‘Good Evil-Spirit’ for ‘Holy Spirit,’ and it would be completely misinterpreted if one should say that Jesus perceived in his evil-spirit that some of the scribes thus questioned within their hearts (Mark 2:8).
“For these reasons we have translated this word (…) when it unmistakably refers to a disembodied evil personality yoshin ‘demon.’ (‘Unclean spirit’ we have translated ‘harmful demon.’)
“When it refers to the ‘Holy Spirit,’ we have finally translated it ‘Spotless Spirit,’ using for ‘Spirit’ a word designating one of the larger entities of human personality, the one which includes most of the others and which is always used of a live person.”
Sranan Tongo: Santa Yeye (from previously Santa Winti). Marlon Winedt explains (click or tap here to see more):
“One of the translators in Sranan Tongo followed the historically and scientifically correct analysis that the word for Holy Spirit should be ‘Santa Winti.’ However, the churches had traditionally used ‘Santa Yeye.’ Although in the spiritual world-mapping of the afro-descendants of the country Santa Yeye refers to a more limited spirit, it was the most acceptable choice because ‘winti’ besides meaning ‘spirit, wind’ also refers to the afro-Caribbean religion /spiritual practice ‘winti’ which can be compared to voodoo or other forms in the Caribbean. The Catholic lectionary used this translation (Santa Winti) though there was a heated debate about the use. The then-bishop of Paramaribo advised the faithful to choose whether they wanted to say Santa Winti or Santa Yeye when reading the text. In the interior of Suriname, Catholic catechists actually burned the lectionary because they found the term Santa Winti to be blasphemous.
“When the Sranan Tongo New Testament translation project was underway an attempt to merge two teams did not succeed partially based on this issue. Ultimately the remaining SIL/Bible Society of Suriname team did not chose to use Santa Winti but the accepted Santa Yeye. [This version was published in 2002.]”
“In Anuak there is no term for ‘spirit’ in the sense of the Holy Spirit.
“There is a word (ywey) which may be used to translate human soul or spirit, but which is essentially the ‘life principle.’ One cannot speak of the ywey of God, for the Anuaks insist that God does not have a ywey and that He is not a ywey. It is God who has given ywey to all people, animals and plants, but He Himself is of a different order of existence.
“To speak of the ywey of God would be to equate him with earthly creation. There seems to be no easy solution to this problem, but for the time being ‘Spirit’ is to be translated as ‘that which comes from God’, in the sense of that which emanates from or has its origin in God.”
Kaingang: Topẽ kuprĩg (God’s Spirit — kuprĩg is often to the spirit of a dead person). Ursula Wiesemann (in Notes on Translation 1978, p. 32ff.) explains how the translation team reached that conclusion (click or tap here to see more):
“All human beings have a kãnhvég which has as an outward manifestation the shadow or the reflection of that person. It is closely linked to the body and cannot leave it. It is an indication of life in the body. According to one language helper, it lives in our chest (that is, heart), but this may be a carry-over from his Christian teaching.
“The kãnhvég at death becomes vẽnh kuprĩg. Vẽnh is a pronoun meaning ‘someone’s’. The vẽnh kuprĩg seem to live in groups and can be heard at night making a peculiar humming noise. They may do mischievous things like throwing dirt on the house which scares the inhabitants. A vẽnh kuprĩg may also appear to an individual, be recognized by him for whose spirit he is, speak kindly to him, and even touch him. The purpose is to take the living person along to the place where the dead live. It is reported that in this way the vẽnh kuprĩg cause death, or that they might even choke babies to death during the night. In describing an encounter with a vẽnh kuprĩg, the Indians say: ‘I saw a vẽnh kuprĩg. It was so-and-so.’ Whereas kãnhvég collocates with all pronouns and names (that is, can be directly identified as belonging to a specific person), kuprĩg collocates most naturally with vẽnh when it refers to the spirit of a dead person.
“Such conflicting reports on the meaning of the terms is difficult to choose the right terms for the Spirit of God. In Rio das Cobras and in Guarita, God is said to have a kuprĩg and a kãnhvég, but it is His kuprĩg who has a life of his own without being tied to God’s body. In both localities (and some others, where, however, the question was not looked into in detail as in the three areas identified), the definite and unquestioned choice of all people asked was to identify the ‘Holy Spirit’ as Topẽ kuprĩg ‘Spirit of God’. In Nonoai (same dialect area as Guarita but different dialect area from Rio das Cobras), however, the definite and unquestioned choice is Topẽ kãnhvég ‘because kuprĩg refers to the spirit of one who died.’ So it will be necessary to use both terms in a paraphrase to satisfy everyone. The objection to kãnhvég is its close tie to a body, and only in Nonoai this connection seems to be broken.
“Postscript: Since writing the above, several years have passed, and the New Testament has been completed, and the revision committee, composed of three Indians from as many dialect areas, unanimously chose Topẽ kuprĩg for ‘Spirit of God,’ rejecting the word kãnhvég as being ‘too weak and not meaningful’ — that is, the kãnhvég is not a spirit at all but just a sign of life, so it has been dropped in the last revision, as well as the reference to the ‘kãnhvég not dying’ as eternal life.”
Papiamento: Spiritu. Since the term on its own means “bad spirit,” in any case that no modifier is used (such as “Holy” or “of truth”), the translators used Spiritu di Dios (“Spirit of God”) to differentiate it from the negative connotation (source: Marlon Winedt).
Ditammari: “Air of God.” Loewen (in The Bible Translator 1983, p. 213ff. ) explains that a search for the term “spirit” was conducted (especially as in “Holy Spirit”). Since faith healers often avoided using the name of unclean spirits by saying “impure air” a suggestion was made to call Holy Spirit “clean/pure air”. This was accepted but changed to “air of God” to avoid ambiguity with air that we breath.
Warlpiri: Pirlirrpa Kaatu-kurlangu: “God’s Eternal Spirit,” since “holy’ carries the meaning of taboo and cannot be used (source: Stephen Swartz in The Bible Translator 1985, p. 415ff. )
Eastern Highland Otomi: “God’s Good Spirit” (source: John Beekman in Notes on Translation November 1964, p. 1-22.)
Kahua: the term for “Spirit” is a generic term for a spirit which never had a body (i.e., not the spirit of a dead ancestor). (Source: David Clark)
Keapara: Vea’a Palaguna (“Holy Spirit” but can also be “Holy God” or “angels” — “there is not a strong contrast between the meaning of God and Holy Spirit” since “God” is translated with “Palagu”) (source: Norm Mundhenk in The Bible Translator 2004, p. 222f. )
Naro: Tc’ẽe: a word that refers to the “thinking/willing part” of one’s personality. (Source: van Steenbergen)
Tibetan: thugs nyid (ཐུགས་ཉིད།།), an honorific form for sems nyid (སེམས་ཉིད།) or “spirit” (source: gSungrab website )
Many Bantu languages translate Pneûma with a word that originally means “soul,” including Luganda and Haya (both: mwoyo), Ndebele (uMoya), Sotho (Moya). Fang uses Nsísim: “shadow” or “separate soul” (anima separata) (source: Bühlmann 1950, p. 176)
The grammatical gender of the Greek Pneûma is neuter (and the Hebrew ruach has a feminine gender). While many languages either do not have a grammatical gender or have a word for Pneûma that grammatically is masculine, other languages found various ways of dealing with this. (Click or tap here to read more):
The earliest example is Classical Syriac which, like Hebrew, used a term — Ruhä — that was of feminine gender. According to Ashbrook (1993), in early documents the feminine gender was not only used in a grammatical sense but the Spirit was often described with feminine imagery as well. “Around the year 400 [though], a change emerges in our texts. Starting in the fifth century, and almost universally by the sixth, the Spirit is masculine in Syriac writers. Ruhä when referring to wind or spirit continues to follow rules of grammar and to be construed in the feminine; but when referring to the Holy Spirit, it is now construed as masculine, although this does violence to the fabric of the language.” (Source: Ashbrook 1993)
A similar process of ungrammatical usage was attempted in Asháninka. The “Good Spirit of God” required a feminine, inanimate pronoun which was artificially changed to masculine. After a while this was changed back to its true grammatical form with no perceptible difference in the understanding of the Trinity. Will Kindberg (in The Bible Translator 1964, 197f. ) tells that story (click or tap here to read more):
“For the past several years Mr Sylvester Dirks of the Mennonite Brethren Mission and I have been engaged in missionary work with the Asháninka sub-group of the Campa tribe in Peru, and have collaborated on Christian vocabulary items and translation as well as other phases of our missionary activities. For the ‘Holy Spirit’ we are using ‘the Good Spirit of God’. The normal pronominal reference for spirit, whether it be a human spirit or the spirit of a god, is third person feminine inanimate. Long ago, Sylvester and I agreed that we would force the use of the third person masculine animate pronoun to refer to the Holy Spirit, although we recognized it was contrary to the grammatical system of Asháninka. We did this because of a theological bias: the Holy Spirit is referred to in English as masculine, and we think of the Spirit as a masculine member of the Godhead. We ignored the fact that it has a neuter reference in Greek.
“In the Gospel of Mark and also in the book of Acts, my translation consistently uses the third person masculine pronoun to refer to the feminine inanimate spirit. There has been a reaction against this by the people as they hear or read these portions of Scripture, though some of the believers have accepted it when it was explained to them why it had been done.
“This past year while I was continuing working on other portions of Scripture, I was again troubled by the non-grammatical use of the pronominal referent.
“I checked again with some of my colleagues here in Peru and they agreed with me that it might be wise to switch back to the correct grammatical usage. So I checked with Mr Dirks and he did not object to the change.
“Because of the importance of the issue, I also wrote to Dr Eugene Nida and Dr John Beekman for their opinions. They both suggested the use of the grammatically correct forms. The following is a quote from Dr Beekman’s letter:
“‘There is a distinction between animate and inanimate reference in one of the Zapoteco dialects of Mexico. All spirits fall into the inanimate class. The weight of theological considerations led the translators to use the animate form contrary to usage. In consultation, however, it was agreed that it would be preferable not to violate the grammatical pattern especially since the informants felt that the use of the inanimate form did not necessarily mean that the Holy Spirit was not a person. The translators are now using the inanimate form to the satisfaction of all of the believers.’
“I have switched the pronominal reference throughout John and it has just been printed. The reaction of the few people with whom I have checked this has been good. The question has been asked: ‘How does having two masculine members and a feminine-inanimate member affect the Asháninka’s idea of a triune God?’
“One day I was talking to my informant (still a relatively untrained believer) about the different gods in which his fellow tribesmen believe. And I said, ‘What does the Bible teach about God? How many are there?’ (Note that I used the unmarked form that might be either singular or plural.) He answered, ‘There is one God’. Then after thinking a minute, he said, ‘There are two—there’s Jesus. Then afterwards he said, ‘There are three— there’s God’s Spirit’. It seems to me he has understood the doctrine of the Trinity about as well as most Christians. For the last few months we have been using a feminine inanimate referent for the Holy Spirit and this has not seemed to hinder his understanding of the Trinity. Time will tell the reaction of the rest of the people.”
In Swahili, the translation of Pneûma tò Hagion is Roho Mtakatifu. Roho, derived from the Semitic / Arabic Rūḥ, should be in the noun class for loan words but to prevent the misunderstanding of Roho as an inanimate object, it is (grammatically incorrectly) used in the first class of nouns which is specifically reserved for people (source: Bühlmann 1950, p. 176). While some Bantu languages use similar strategies, Lamba left Umupasi Uswetelele in the third noun class that is also used for trees and plants, making a grammatically a non-person. But, as C. M. Doke (in The Bible Translator 1958, p. 57ff. ) remarks, “it is [left] to numerous references in the Scriptures to establish that the Holy Spirit is a person, the third person of the Trinity.”
While Swedish used to have three genders (masculine, feminine, neuter), modern Swedish only uses two genders (common [utrum] and neuter). Until the Bibel 2000, “Holy Spirit” was translated as helige Ande which used a masculine adjective and paired it with ande (“Spirit”), which historically could be read as masculine. With the merging of the masculine gender into the common gender it is now translated as the common-gendered heliga ande, matching a more widely-used gender-equal language practice in Swedish. (Source: Mikael Winninge and Sara Rösare)
Instead of hamartēmatos ‘sin’ Textus Receptus has kriseōs ‘judgment,’ ‘condemnation’: this clearly inferior reading is rejected by all modern editions of the Greek text.
Exegesis:
eis to pneuma to hagion ‘into the Holy Spirit’: eis here has a hostile meaning ‘against.’
aphesin (cf. 1.4) ‘forgiveness’ (for the verb aphiēmi ‘forgive’ see 2.5).
eis ton aiōna ‘into the age,’ i.e. the ‘future age.’
eis ‘into’ indicates duration of time.
aiōn (4.19; 10.30; 11.14) ‘age’: the word reflects the Hebrew concept of time as divided into ages, generally the present age (cf. 4.19) and the future age, the age to come (cf. 10.30). In this passage the phrase means ‘eternally,’ ‘forever’ as the parallel in Mt. 12.32 makes explicit: ‘either in this age or in the coming age.’ Cf. Vulgatein aeternum; Lagrange à jamais.
enochos (14.64) ‘guilty of,’ ‘charged with,’ here indicates the crime of which the man is guilty, not the punishment to which he is liable.
aiōniou ‘of the age,’ ‘age-long’: that is ‘eternal,’ ‘endless.’
hoti elegon ‘because they were saying’: these are words of explanation which the evangelist adds. hoti is causative ‘because,’ giving the reason why Jesus said what he did concerning the unforgivable sin.
elegon ‘they were saying’ is better than ‘they had said’ of Revised Standard Version. ‘They’ are the scribes referred to in v. 22.
pneuma akatharton ‘unclean spirit,’ the same as saying ‘he has Beelzebul’ (v. 22) or ‘he has a demon’ (cf. 1.34).
Translation:
Blasphemes against the Holy Spirit may be rendered as ‘to speak against the Holy Spirit’ or ‘to say evil words about the Holy Spirit’ (for “Holy Spirit” see 1.7).
Has forgiveness is a difficult expression to translate literally, for in general one must speak of ‘to be forgiven’ or ‘to receive forgiveness’ (but for numerous idioms for forgiveness see 1.4). In languages in which an active form of the verb is required the subject ‘God’ must be introduced, ‘God will never forgive a man who speaks evil of the Holy Spirit.’
To be guilty of an eternal sin can only rarely be translated literally. Rather, this phrase must be rendered by various types of idiomatic expressions, e.g. ‘his sin stays on his head for the time that never ends’ (Farefare), ‘he carries the weight of his sin that lasts forever’ (Yaka), ‘his sins will be continually taken into account’ (Pamona), ‘he will always have his sin’ (Highland Oaxaca Chontal), and ‘he has a sin that will never be taken away’ (Huichol).
In some way, the abrupt transition before the clause for they had said … must be marked, either by some kind of a dash, or by a complete new sentence, or by some transitional expression, e.g. ‘Jesus said this because they had said…’ (South Bolivian Quechua). The reason for making this break evident is that one must not translate as ‘he is guilty of an eternal sin because of what they had said’ (though indirectly this is true). Nevertheless, the last sentence must be construed with all that precedes, not merely with the last clause.
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 .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.