Matt 12:27 – TIPs

judge (noun)

The Greek that is translated as “judge” in English is translated in Noongar as birdiyar djonanykarinyang or “boss of testing/judgement” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).

The Greek that is typically transliterated as “Beelzebul” in English used to be transliterated in English and most other languages with a long tradition in Bible translation as Beelzebub, going back to the Latin Vulgate translation that had used Beelzebub. St. Jerome likely had done that to correspond with the pronunciation of Baal Zebub (בַּעַל זְבוּב) of 2 Kings 1:2 where a Philistine god by that name is mentioned. The Hebrew name carries the derogative meaning “Baal (or: god) of flies” and is likely an ironic and humiliating misspelling of Baal Zebul with the meaning of “Baal (or: god) the Prince” (see Translation commentary on 2 Kings 1:2).

In popular German literature of the 14th through 17th century, the term “Beelzebock” was also used, a word with a similar sound, but with last and changed syllable carrying the meaning of “(billy) goat / ram,” the partial form of the devil in popular imagination. (Source: Jost Zetzsche — see also the sheep from the goats)

In languages that use Chinese characters, including Mandarin Chinese, Min Nan Chinese, Yue Chinese (Cantonese), or Hakka Chinese, the characters 別西卜 are used in Protestant translations (pronunciation in Mandarin: biéxību, in Cantonese: bit⁶ sai¹ buk¹, in Hakka phe̍t-sî-puk). That transliteration name has been used since at least 1850 in the Literary Chinese Delegates’ Version, likely because of the suitably negative meaning of the last character 卜 or “divination.” (The Catholic transliteration is 貝耳則步 / bèiěrzébù in Mandarin, without any particular meaning.)

In Western Bukidnon Manobo it is translated with Endedaman, the Manobo name for the ruler of the evil spirits (source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation) and in the German New Testament translation by Berger / Nord (publ. 1999) with Oberteufel or “chief devil.”

In Libras (Brazilian Sign Language) it is translated with a sign that combines the signs for “Baal” and “fly,” because of its meaning of “Baal (god) of flies.” (Source: Missão Kophós )

“Beelzebul” in Libras (source )

complete verse (Matthew 12:27)

Following are a number of back-translations of Matthew 12:27:

Uma: “You say that I cause-to-leave demons with the power/authority from Beelzebul. But there are also your own companions who cause-to-leave demons. With what power/authority do your companions cause-to-leave demons? Certainly with the power/authority of God. So, from the doing of your own companions, the wrongness of your false-accusations is clear.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “You say that I drive out demons because I am given power by Belsebul, the leader of demons. If that is true, na, your disciples, by whose power do they drive out demons? They will be the ones to say that your thinking is at fault.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “If the means by which I drive away demons is the power which comes from Satan, then where does the power come from that your companions use to drive away demons? By means of what your disciples are doing, it can be seen that you are mistaken.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “You say that Beelzebul is the one who gave my power to cause-evil-spirits -to-leave. If that is true, then how have your disciples been-causing-evil-spirits -to-leave? Even they, they will-confirm that what you are saying is mistaken.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Well, since you say I drive out evil spirits by the ability of Beelzebub, where then does the ability come from by which your followers can drive out evil spirits? They can testify that you really have made a mistake.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “You say that the devil helps me to heal the people who walk with evil spirits. If that were the case then how about your fellow-Jews who follow the word you teach, does the devil help them when they heal people who walk with evil spirits too? Now it can be seen that you speak blindly, not knowing what you say.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)

formal pronoun: Jesus addressing religious leaders

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, Jesus is addressing religious leaders with the formal pronoun, showing respect. Compare that with the typical address with the informal pronoun of the religious leaders.

The only two exceptions to this are Luke 7:40/43 and 10:26 where Jesus uses the informal pronoun as a response to the sycophantic use of the formal pronoun by the religious leaders (see formal pronoun: religious leaders addressing Jesus).

In most Dutch translations, the same distinctions are made, with the exception of Luke 10:26 where Jesus is using the formal pronoun. In Afrikaans and Western Frisian the informal pronoun is used throughout.

demon

The Hebrew and Greek that is typically translated/transliterated in English as “demon” is translated in Central Mazahua as “the evil spirit(s) of the devil” (source: Ellis Deibler in Notes on Translation July, 1967, p. 5ff.).

In Sissala it is translated with 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.)

In Umiray Dumaget Agta it is translated as 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.”

In Yala it is translated as 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.)

In Lamnso’ it is translated as aànyùyi jívirì: “lesser gods who disturb, bother, pester, or confuse a person.” (Source: Fanwong 2013, p. 93)

In Paasaal it is translated as 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.”

first person pronoun referring to God

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 show different degree of politeness is through the choice of a first person singular and plural pronoun (“I” and “we” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. The most commonly used watashi/watakushi (私) is typically used when the speaker is humble and asking for help. In these verses, where God / Jesus is referring to himself, watashi is also used but instead of the kanji writing system (私) the syllabary hiragana (わたし) is used to distinguish God from others. (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )

Translation commentary on Matthew 12:27

Verses 27-28, in which Jesus turns the Pharisees’ argument against themselves, do not have a parallel in Mark, though one is present in Luke 11.19-20. The Pharisees claim that Jesus’ work of casting out demons is done in the power of Satan. But the Pharisees’ own followers also cast out demons, and so Jesus asks where their power to do this comes from. This is a question which they cannot answer without condemning themselves, and it simultaneously proves that they are wrong in their conclusions about the source of Jesus’ power.

And if introduces a clause in Greek which assumes that the untrue statement, I cast out demons by Beelzebul, is a true statement. But the clause also includes in its scope the accusation made by the Pharisees in verse 24. One can then appropriately translate “If it is true, as you say, that I cast out demons by Beelzebul.” Or, placed in statement form, “You say that I drive out demons because Beelzebul gives me the power to do so” (Good News Translation).

By Beelzebul (Good News Translation “because Beelzebul gives me the power to do so”) is phrased in a dynamic way in a number of translations: “by Beelzebub’s aid” (An American Translation), “with Beelzebul’s help” (New American Bible), and “by the help of Beelzebul” (Barclay). Phillips (“I am an ally of Beelzebub”) and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch (“because I am in league with Satan”) are also good examples of what may be done.

By whom is preceded by a transitional in Good News Translation: (“Well, then”) and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch (“Then”), though many other translations into major modern languages do not employ such a device. This is a stylistic matter which will have to be evaluated in each language situation. Good News Translation restructures the question by whom do your sons cast them out? to “who gives your followers the power to drive them out?” This will be easier to follow in most languages.

Your sons (so also Moffatt, An American Translation) is a Semitism (New Jerusalem Bible footnote) which one commentator defines as here having the meaning of “membership in a group.” Traduction œcuménique de la Bible has “your disciples,” Barclay “your own disciples,” and Good News Translation “your followers.” Certainly to translate sons literally would give the wrong meaning to Jesus’ words.

Therefore (literally “Because of this”) they shall be your judges is represented in Good News Translation as “What your own followers do proves that you are wrong!” and in Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch as “Your own followers prove that you are in the wrong.” The time reference is the present and immediate future, not the final judgment. Accordingly, they shall be your judges is translated “Let them be the ones to judge you” (New American Bible), “If this is your argument, they themselves will refute you” (New English Bible), and “Ask them what they think of this argument of yours” (Barclay). The text does not necessarily imply verbal refutation; the implication is rather that the miraculous deeds performed by the followers of the Pharisees are sufficient evidence in themselves to prove that the Pharisees’ argument is erroneous. In most languages a simple sentence such as the one in Good News Translation will be best here; for example, “Their actions demonstrate how wrong your argument is” or “What they are doing proves that your accusations cannot be right.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on the Gospel of Matthew. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1988. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

formal second person plural pronoun

In these verses, anata-gata (あなたがた) is used, combining the second person pronoun anata and the plural suffix -gata to create a formal plural pronoun (“you” [plural] in English). (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )

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

Verse: Matt 12:27