Ἰδὼν δὲ πολλοὺς τῶν Φαρισαίων καὶ Σαδδουκαίων ἐρχομένους ἐπὶ τὸ βάπτισμα αὐτοῦ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Γεννήματα ἐχιδνῶν, τίς ὑπέδειξεν ὑμῖν φυγεῖν ἀπὸ τῆς μελλούσης ὀργῆς;
7But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming for his baptism, he said to them, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?
The Greek in Matthew 3:7 that is translated in English as “brood of vipers” or similar is translated in Ge’ez as tiwilide ārawīte midiri (ትውልደ አራዊተ ምድር) or “descendants of the beasts of earth” in the occurrence in Matthew. (Source: G.A. Mikre-Sellasie in The Bible Translator 2000, p. 302ff. )
See also You brood of vipers! (Luke 3:7).
The Greek that is translated as “Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?” or similar in English is translated in Huixtán Tzotzil as “You mistakenly think that if you receive baptism God will not punish you, you mistakenly think.” Huixtán Tzotzil frequently uses the verb -cuy to express “to mistakenly think something” from the point of view of the speaker. (Source: Marion M. Cowan in Notes on Translation 20/1966, pp. 6ff.)
In the German New Testament translation by Berger / Nord (publ. 1999) it is translated as Niemand kann euch einen Schleichweg sagen, auf dem ihr Gottes Zorn entkommen könnt or “No one can point you to a secret path to escape God’s wrath.”
The Hebrew and Greek that is translated into English as “the wrath of God” or “God’s anger” has to be referred to in Bengali as judgment, punishment or whatever fits the context. In Bengali culture, anger is by definition bad and can never be predicated of God. (Source: David Clark)
Translations in other languages:
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 to do this is through the usage (or a lack) of an honorific prefix as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. When the referent is God, the “divine” honorific prefix mi- (御) is used as in mi-ikari (御怒り) or “wrath (of God)” in the referenced verses. (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
See also anger and the coming wrath.
Following is a 1973 painting of the JESUS MAFA project, a response to New Testament readings from the Lectionary by a Christian community in Cameroon, Africa. Each of the readings was selected and adapted to dramatic interpretation by the community members. Photographs of their interpretations were made, and these were then transcribed to paintings:
John the Baptist dramatically preaches by the water’s edge to his audience that consists of common people as well as religious leaders. He appears to be in the middle of his harsh pronouncement on the Pharisees and Sadducees, calling them a “brood of vipers.” They stand at the right-hand side of the painting, arms folded, seemingly indignant at John’s words. The rest of the crowd watches and listens intently to John, curious and enthralled by the scene before them. In the distance there are some figures approaching the group. Could it be Jesus on the way to his baptism?
From Art in the Christian Tradition , a project of the Vanderbilt Divinity Library, Nashville, TN. Image retrieved March 23, 2026. Original source: librairie-emmanuel.fr.
Following are a number of back-translations of Matthew 3:7:
The Greek that is a transliteration of the Hebrew Pərūšīm and is typically transliterated into English as “Pharisee” is transliterated in Mandarin Chinese as Fǎlìsài (法利賽 / 法利赛) (Protestant) or Fǎlìsāi (法利塞) (Catholic). In Chinese, transliterations can typically be done with a great number of different and identical-sounding characters. Often the meaning of the characters are not relevant, unless they are chosen carefully as in these cases. The Protestant Fǎlìsài can mean something like “Competition for the profit of the law” and the Catholic Fǎlìsāi “Stuffed by/with the profit of the law.” (Source: Zetzsche 1996, p. 51)
In Finnish Sign Language it is translated with the sign signifying “prayer shawl”. (Source: Tarja Sandholm)
“Pharisee” in Finnish Sign Language (source )
In British Sign Language it is translated with a sign that depicts “pointing out the law.” (Source: Anna Smith)
“Pharisee” in British Sign Language (source: Christian BSL, used with permission)
In French Sign Language it is translated with a sign that depicts the box of the phylacteries attached to the forehead:
“Pharisees” in French Sign Language (source: La Bible en langue des signes française )
Scot McKnight (in The Second Testament, publ. 2023) translates it into English as Observant. He explains (p. 302): “Pharisee has become a public, universal pejorative term for a hypocrite. Pharisees were observant of the interpretation of the Covenant Code called the ‘tradition of the elders.’ They conformed their behaviors to the interpretation. Among the various groups of Jews at the time of Jesus, they were perhaps closest to Jesus in their overall concern to make a radical commitment to the will of God (as they understood it).”
See also Nicodemus.
Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Pharisees .
The Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “adder,” “asp,” “viper,” or “serpent” in English is translated in Lambya as chipili or “puff adder “, a highly poisonous local snake species. (Source: project-specific notes in Paratext)
There are a large number of snake species belonging to the viper family in Israel. From the contexts it is possible in one or two places to identify the particular species, and it is possible that the various Hebrew words actually refer to particular species. However, associating the various words with the corresponding species is largely conjecture, even though based on careful deduction.
The most common vipers in Israel are the Palestinian Viper Viper palaestina, the Carpet Viper Echis coloratus, the Sand Viper Cerastes vipera, and the Horned Viper Cerastes cerastes cerastes. The Palestinian viper is the largest of these vipers and is found in a variety of habitats, from the woods of the north to the desert’s edge. Since this is the most inhabited area, people are bitten by this snake more than any other. The other four vipers mentioned are found in desert areas, but in slightly different habitats. The sand viper and the horned viper live in the sand, while the carpet viper lives in gravelly areas and among rocks. It often camouflages itself among dried leaves.
The desert vipers, when moving in sand, cannot move in the normal way, so they adopt a movement known as “sidewinding”. They do this by moving a coil sideways to a position in front of the head, then the snake moves its head and the front part of its body in the air, arching over the sand as far as it can reach before falling back onto the sand. Then it repeats the movement again. This is done at some speed, and the snake moves diagonally across the sand surprisingly quickly, although not as quickly as another snake moving normally. The parallel elongated S-shaped marks it leaves in the sand look as though it has moved in a series of jumps, since they seem not to be connected. It is generally accepted that this motion caused the biblical writers to refer to these snakes as “flying” (see flying fiery serpent).
Vipers are different from other snakes mainly in that they give birth to live offspring. The females retain their eggs in a special sac in their bodies, and when the eggs hatch the small snakes emerge from the mother. The larger vipers produce as many as sixty young snakes at a time, while the smaller sand vipers have smaller broods of about twelve to fifteen. This is what John the Baptist refers to by his well-known phrase “brood of vipers”.
The vipers have long hinged fangs located in the front of their mouths. These fangs fold back as they close their mouths. When striking, vipers have to open their mouths very wide in order to get these fangs into the required position.
The carpet viper (also known as the saw-scaled viper) was very numerous in biblical Israel, and in most other areas of its range (it is found in a broad continuous band from West Africa to South and Central Asia). It is likely that this was the saraf, a name derived from a finite verb meaning “to burn something,” a reference to the burning effect of its poisonous bite.
Vipers have the same basic significance in the Bible as other snakes, with one additional feature. Since the young are carried alive inside the female viper, which then gives birth to large numbers of well-developed young, all at the same time, the viper was associated with fertility. This was also their significance in the Egyptian and Canaanite religious systems.
Although vipers are found widely all over the world, not all languages distinguish them from other types of snake. As mentioned above, the carpet viper is found across Central Africa, from the west to east coasts, and into Central and South Asia. In these areas the name for this snake can be used in all the verses that refer to vipers. In southern Africa the Puff Adder Bitis arietans is probably the best equivalent.
In order to retain the relationship of the word saraf with the verb “to burn something,” translators often try to use expressions such as “vipers that burn [people]” or “fiery serpents”. This is only possible where the word used for “burn” means “to cause a wound with something hot.” One should not convey the idea of “a viper that sets people on fire” or “a viper that is burning.” Often it is better to use a phrase meaning simply “poisonous vipers”.
See also vipers, You brood of vipers!, and cobra.
“[It] has given rise not only to an immense amount of discussion in terms of its meaning within the Judaeo-Christia historical context, but also continues to introduce serious problems for translators today. In many instances the recommendation has been to transliterate, i.e. employing some indigenous equivalent of the sounds of the word in some more prestigious language spoken in the region, e.g. English, French, Spanish, or Portuguese. Though this solution tends to remove some theological controversies, it does not completely satisfy everyone, for not only does it avoid the problem of the mode of baptism, but it leaves the Scriptures with a zero word. Unfortunately, many of the controversies over the indigenous equivalent of baptism arise because of a false evaluation of a word’s so-called etymology. For example, in Yucateco the word for baptism means literally ‘to enter the water’, but this term is used freely by both Presbyterians and Roman Catholics, even though it might appear to be strictly ‘Baptist nomenclature.’ Similarly, in Kekchí, an even ‘stronger’ term ‘to put under the water’ is employed by Nazarenes and Roman Catholics. Obviously the meanings of these Yucateco and Kekchí words are not derivable from their literal significance but from the fact that they now designate a particular kind of Christian rite. To insist on changing such a well-established usage (and one to which immersionists could certainly not object) would seem quite unwarranted. The situation may, on the other hand, be reversed. There are instances in which immersionists are quite happy to use a term which though it means literally ‘to put water on the head’ [see below for the translations in Northern Emberá and Ewe] has actually lost this etymological value and refers simply to the rite itself, regardless of the way in which it is performed. A translator should not, however, employ an already existing expression or construct a new phrase which will in its evident meaning rule out any major Christian constituency.
“There are, of course, a number of instances in which traditional terms for ‘baptism’ need modification. In some situations the word may mean only ‘to give a new name to’ (one aspect of christening) or ‘to be one who lights’ (referring to a custom in some traditions of lighting a candle at the time of baptism). However, in order to reproduce the core of significant meaning of the original Biblical term, it is important to explore the entire range of indigenous usage in order that whatever term is chosen may have at least some measure of cultural relevance. In Navajo (Dinė), for example, there were four principal possibilities of choice: (1) borrowing some transliterated form of the English word, (2) constructing a phrase meaning ‘to touch with water’ (an expression which would have been acceptable with some groups in the field, but not with others), (3) using a phrase meaning ‘ceremonial washing’ (but this expression seemed to be too closely related to indigenous practices in healing ceremonies), and (4) devising an expression meaning ‘to dedicate (or consecrate) by water’, without specifying the amount of water employed. This last alternative was chosen as the most meaningful and the best basis for metaphorical extension and teaching.
“On the other hand, it would be wrong to think that the meaning of ‘washing’ must be rejected in all languages. For example, it is quite appropriate in Kpelle culture, since it ties in with male puberty rites, and in the San Blas Kuna society, since washing is a very important aspect of female puberty ceremonies, in some translations ‘water’ is introduced into the expression for baptism, but the quantity and means of administrating it are left quite ambiguous, e.g. ‘to get (take, receive) water’ (Tzeltal). Toraja-Sa’dan, Pamona and Batak Toba render the verb ‘to pour water over, give a bath’.” (Source: Bratcher / Nida)
Other examples of translation include:
“The Yatzachi Zapotec know the practice of baptism and have a word to express it. There would thus seem to be no problem involved. Unfortunately, however, the word for ‘baptize’ is a compound, one part being a word nowhere else used and the other part being the word for ‘water.’ Perhaps ‘water-baptize’ is the closest equivalent in English. For most contexts this presents no problem, but if the word is used in Mark 1:8, it would say, ‘He will water-baptize you with the Holy Ghost.’ In Zapotec the idea is unintelligible. To meet the problem, the Spanish word ‘bautizar’ was introduced at this point though the Zapotec word is ordinarily used. The disadvantages of this substitution are obvious, but no better solution was found.” (Source: Otis M. Leal in The Bible Translator 1951, p. 164ff.
“Formerly in Uab Meto the word used for ’baptism’ was ‘nasrami’ which actually came by way of Arabic from ‘Nazarene.’ Its meaning was ‘to make a Christian’ and the idea was that the one who baptized actually made Christians. Such an expression was obviously inadequate. We have used for ‘baptize’ the phrase in ‘antam oe’ which means ‘to enter into the water.’ This phrase can be used for sprinkling, for water is used as a symbol of the new life, and being baptized means for the Uab Meto to enter into a new sphere of life. Baptism is so frequently spoken of in connection with the giving of the Holy Spirit that the proper associations have arisen in the thinking of the people.” (Source: P. Middelkoop in The Bible Translator 1952 p. 165ff. )
The disagreement about whether the translation of the Greek baptizo needed to include “immersion” not only caused conflict in China, it also led to splits — and different translations — in English-speaking countries: “The influential British and Foreign Bible Society had been a major supporter of the [Baptist] Serampore mission, but it finally severed its support in 1836 because of the Baptist interpretation of the Bible translations produced there. This led to the formation of the separate Baptist Bible Translation Society in Great Britain in 1840. Almost concurrently, in 1837, the American and Foreign Bible Society was founded in the United States as an offspring of the American Bible Society, over a controversy about a Baptist Bengali Bible translation. The American and Foreign Bible Society itself experienced another split in 1850, when a sub-group rejected the transliteration of baptizo in the English Bible and formed the American Bible Union, which published its own English New Testament in 1862/63 that used the term immerse instead of “baptize” (see here ). (Source: Zetzsche 2008)
See also baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with.
Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Baptism in Early Christianity .
No comments yet.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.