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.
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 Translator2002, 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, Gronings, and Afrikaans translations, the disciples address Jesus before and after the resurrection with the formal pronoun.
German translation by Fridolin Stier (1989): “false (or: perverted) spirit) (Abergeist).
Adioukrou: abŋ ŋuŋ, originally “evil spirit (‘the spiritual/invisible part of a person that leaves the body at death, not an independent spirit being’).” “Exactly what abŋ ŋuŋ evokes for Adioukrou is the question. One thing Adioukrou know is that when a person’s abŋ leaves his or her body after death, it can enter someone else and speak through them to reveal the cause of death, a practice forbidden by the church. It is clear to all that abŋ eŋuŋ in Scripture is not speaking of this, however, because contexts that involve evil spirits in Scripture do not involve the Adioukrou post-mortem interrogation of a corpse. (…) Although the expression abŋ ŋuŋ is made up of Adioukrou words, it does not refer to a category in the Adioukrou worldview.” (Source: Hill 2006)
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.”
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®).
There are three different ways in which the last part of this verse is read by modern editions of the Greek Text: (1) the Revised Standard Version reading kai ekōluomen auton hoti ouk akolouthei hēmin ‘and we were forbidding him because he does not follow us’ is the text preferred also by Westcott and Hort, Vogels, and Souter; (2) hos ouk akolouthei hēmin, kai ekōluomen auton, hoti ouk ēkolouthei hēmin ‘who does not follow us, and we were forbidding him, because he was not following us’ is the text preferred by Textus Receptus (with slight differences noted in Appendix), Tischendorf, Nestle, Kilpatrick, Merk, and Taylor; (3) hos ouk akolouthei hēmin, kai ekōluomen auton ‘who does not follow us, and we were forbidding him’ is preferred by Soden and Lagrange. The choice seems to lie between (1) and (2), the majority of editors preferring (2).
Exegesis:
Iōannēs ‘John’: presumably the apostle, son of Zebedee and brother of James (cf. 1.19; 3.17).
en tō onomati sou (cf. v. 37; 16.17) ‘in your name,’ ‘using your name’: cf. Arndt & Gingrich ‘with mention of the name, while naming or calling on the name.’
ēkoluomen (9.39; 10.14) ‘we were hindering,’ ‘preventing,’ ‘forbidding’: the imperfect tense in this case expresses attempt ‘we tried to stop him’ (cf. The Modern Speech New Testament, Montgomery, Manson).
The other words in this verse have already been dealt with: didaskale ‘teacher’ cf. 4.38; ekballein daimonia ‘cast out demons’ cf. 1.12, 34; akoloutheō ‘follow (as a disciple)’ cf. 1.18.
Translation:
For teacher see 2.13.
For casting out demons see 1.34.
In your name has a somewhat different meaning here from that in verse 9.37, for here the usage is more technical – more related to the concepts of “word magic,” in the sense that the man was evidently invoking the name of Jesus, whose reputation as an exorcist had attracted considerable attention, and had acquired evident “power.” One may translate this passage merely as ‘by using your name’ or ‘by calling out your name.’ However, even this use of ‘name’ may be utterly meaningless in a receptor language and in such instances one can use a more paraphrastic equivalent ‘as though on orders from you’ (Highland Puebla Nahuatl). It is not possible to say merely ‘on your orders,’ for obviously the man had not been commissioned by Jesus, and the use of Jesus’ name was evidently a prerogative assumed by the man without warrant. In Tzeltal the equivalent is ‘by your authority, so he said.’
Forbade him may be translated as ‘said, Don’t do that’ (Navajo).
Not following us involves unsuspected difficulties, for if translated literally, it would mean that the man was not coming along behind the other disciples, obviously not what was meant. The equivalent in many languages does not involve the use of a verb ‘to follow,’ but an identification of the adherence of the man to the group, e.g. ‘he was not one of us’ (Southern Subanen) or ‘he was not with us.’
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 .
In this section, the disciple John told Jesus that he and the other disciples had tried to stop a man from expelling demons in Jesus’ name. They did this because the man was not one of the twelve disciples. Jesus then taught them that many people other than the twelve disciples were following him. He said that all of these people will be rewarded for what they do in his name.
It is good to translate this section before you decide on a heading for it.
Here are some other possible headings for this section heading:
Jesus told who is on his side and who is on the side against him -or-
Whoever Is Not Against Us Is For Us (New International Version) -or-
On using the name of Jesus (New Jerusalem Bible)
The parallel passage for this section is in Luke 9:49–50.
Paragraph 9:38–41
9:38a
This is the beginning of a new story. It may be necessary in your language to introduce a new story in some way. For example, the New Century Version has:
Then John said…
John said to Him: Some Greek manuscripts say “John answered” (as in the King James Version). This indicates that John responded to Jesus’ words and deeds in 9:33–37. Other Greek manuscripts say said. Many English versions use the verb said here, and it is recommended that you do the same.
John: Here the name John refers to one of Jesus’ twelve disciples. It does not refer to John the Baptist. If people in your area will think that this name refers to John the Baptist, you may want to include some implied information. For example:
the disciple John
See how you translated the name John in 9:2a.
Teacher: The disciples and others often called Jesus Teacher. This was a polite title for a Jewish religious leader. It was a title of respect for a Jewish man who had authority to teach the things about God. It does not mean “school teacher.” See how you translated this term of address in 4:38c and 9:17b.
9:38b
driving out demons: The Greek word that the Berean Standard Bible translates as driving out is literally “casting/throwing out.” This is the same word as in 9:18e. The term driving out demons means to cause demons to stop controlling a person.
Jewish people often spoke of demons as being in someone. Different cultures have different ways of speaking about people being controlled by demons and being released from the control of demons. Use a natural expression for this in your language.
Here are some other ways to translate this:
forcing demons out (God’s Word) -or-
causing demons to leave people -or-
sending demons away -or-
exorcizing demons -or-
freeing people who were controlled by demons
See how you translated the similar phrase “drove out demons” in 1:34b.
demons: The Greek word that the Berean Standard Bible translates as demons refers to spirits that are evil and can control people’s actions. The word demons refers to the same type of spirits as the Greek terms that are often translated as “evil spirits” and “unclean spirits.”
Here are some other ways to translate demons:
• Use a general term in your language that refers to spirits that are evil and can control people.
• Use a specific term in your language that refers to a certain type of spirit. These spirits should be able to do evil things. Do not use a term that refers to the spirits of dead people.
• Use a descriptive phrase. For example:
evil/bad spirits -or-
unclean spirits
Be sure that an expression like “unclean spirits” does not imply that the spirits are literally dirty.
See how you translated the word demons in 1:34b or 7:26c. See evil spirit in the Glossary for more information.
in Your name: The phrase in Your name indicates using the power or authority of Jesus to do something.
Here are some other ways to translate this phrase:
by using the power and authority of your name (God’s Word) -or-
through your power -or-
as your representative
9:38c–d
and we tried to stop him, because he does not accompany us: Some Greek manuscripts have a different wording and a different order of the clauses in 9:38c–d. But the meaning is the same in each.
9:38c
and we tried to stop him: The Greek word that the Berean Standard Bible translates as tried to stop is literally “were preventing” or “were forbidding.” The tense indicates that the disciples tried to make the man stop. They did this with words. They did not try to physically restrain him. Probably more than one of the disciples told him to stop. But the man probably continued to cast out demons.
Here are some other ways to translate this:
we tried to stop him (New Jerusalem Bible) -or-
we tried to hinder him (New American Standard Bible) -or-
we were forbidding him to do that -or-
We told him to stop (New Century Version)
to stop him: It is implied that they tried to make him stop using Jesus’ name to cast out demons. If your language needs to say what was stopped, you could say:
to stop doing that -or-
to stop driving/casting out demons using your name
9:38d
he does not accompany us: The Greek clause that the Berean Standard Bible translates as he does not accompany us is literally “he was not following us.” The word us probably refers to Jesus and the twelve disciples.
Here are some other ways to translate this clause:
he doesn’t belong to our group (Good News Bible) -or-
he is not associated with us
General Comment on 9:38c–d
It might be more natural in your language to put the reason (9:38d) before the result (9:38c). For example:
38dHe was not one of us, 38cso we tried to stop him. -or- 38dHe was not one of us; 38cthat is why we tried to stop him.
Made available under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License (CC BY-SA) creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0
All Scripture quotations in this publication, unless otherwise indicated, are from The Holy Bible, Berean Standard Bible.
BSB is produced in cooperation with Bible Hub, Discovery Bible, OpenBible.com, and the Berean Bible Translation Committee.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.