The Greek and Latin that is translated as “resurrection” in English is translated in Chicahuaxtla Triqui and Pohnpeian as “live-up” (i.e. return to life) (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel) and in Iloko as panagungar: a term that stems “from the word ‘agungar,’ an agricultural term used to describe the coming back to life of a plant which was wilting but which has been watered by the farmer, or of a bulb which was apparently dead but grows again.” (Source: G. Henry Waterman in The Bible Translator 1960, p. 24ff. )
Likewise, in Matumbiyu’ya carries the meaning of “raise from the dead, resuscitate, come back from near death” and is used for dry plants that come back to life when you water them or sick children who revive after being healed. (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific notes in Paratext)
In Estado de México Otomi, it is translated as “people will be raised from the dead,” in Teutila Cuicatec as “the dead having to come to life again,” in San Mateo del Mar Huave as “arose from the grave” (source: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.), and in Kriol as gidap laibala brom dedbala or “get up alive from the dead” (source: Sam Freney in this article .)
Following are a number of back-translations of Philippians 3:10:
Uma: “My real desire [is], I want to know Kristus, I want to feel the power that made him cause him to live again from death. I want to receive suffering like he received, to the point that perhaps I die the same as he,” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “That is only what I want, that I really know Almasi. That means I want to know the power which caused him to be alive again from his death and I want to endure like he endured the difficulties which came to him. I want/wish that I am just able to follow/obey God’s will like Almasi followed even until/including he died.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “The only thing that makes me happy now is the knowledge I have about the customs of Christ and His giving me power, which is that power that was used to raise Him from the dead. I want also to share in the sufferings which He endured by abandoning my own desires just like He laid down his life.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “I have no other purpose but that I come-to-know Cristo properly and experience the power that was Cristo’s when he had come-to-life again. But not only that but rather that I also experience his suffering/hardship and join him in dying.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “What I am really after now is that I will know Cristo even better, and that I will experience in my life the strength of the supernatural-power which comes from him because he was made alive again. I really want to be able to share in the hardships which were experienced by Cristo, and as-it-were to be able to share also in his death for I am making myself like him in his obeying the will of God.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “What I want now is that I know well Christ. I want to encounter the power of God, that which was manifested when Christ was resurrected. Therefore like Christ did, in that he was killed, also I give up my life now, even though it means that I die.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
The Greek Christos (Χρηστός) is typically transliterated when it appears together with Iésous (Ἰησοῦς) (Jesus). In English the transliteration is the Anglicized “Christ,” whereas in many other languages it is based on the Greek or Latin as “Kristus,” “Cristo,” or similar.
When used as a descriptive term in the New Testament — as it’s typically done in the gospels (with the possible exceptions of for instance John 1:17 and 17:3) — Christos is seen as the Greek translation of the Hebrew mashiaḥ (המשיח) (“anointed”). Accordingly, a transliteration of mashiaḥ is used, either as “Messiah” or based on the Greek or Latin as a form of “Messias.”
This transliteration is also used in the two instances where the Greek term Μεσσίας (Messias) is used in John 1:41 and 4:25.
In some languages and some translations, the term “Messiah” is supplemented with an explanation. Such as in the GermanGute Nachricht with “the Messiah, the promised savior” (Wir haben den Messias gefunden, den versprochenen Retter) or in Muna with “Messiah, the Saving King” (Mesias, Omputo Fosalamatino) (source: René van den Berg).
In predominantly Muslim areas or for Bible translations for a Muslim target group, Christos is usually transliterated from the Arabic al-Masih (ٱلْمَسِيحِ) — “Messiah.” In most cases, this practice corresponds with languages that also use a form of the Arabic Isa (عيسى) for Jesus (see Jesus). There are some exceptions, though, including modern translations in Arabic which use Yasua (يَسُوعَ) (coming from the Aramaic Yēšūa’) alongside a transliteration of al-Masih, Hausa which uses Yesu but Almahisu, and some Fula languages (Adamawa Fulfulde, Nigerian Fulfulde, and Central-Eastern Niger Fulfulde) which also use a form of Iésous (Yeesu) but Almasiihu (or Almasiifu) for Christos.
In Indonesian, while most Bible translations had already used Yesus Kristus rather than Isa al Masih, three public holidays used to be described using the term Isa Al Masih. From 2024 on, the government is using Yesus Kristus in those holiday names instead (see this article in Christianity Today ).
Other solutions that are used by a number of languages include these:
Dobel: “The important one that God had appointed to come” (source: Jock Hughes)
Noongar: Keny Mammarap or “The One Man” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
Mairasi: “King of not dying for life all mashed out infinitely” (for “mashed out,” see salvation; source: Lloyd Peckham)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “One chosen by God to rule mankind” (source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Bacama: Ma Pwa a Ngɨltən: “The one God has chosen” (source: David Frank in this blog post )
Binumarien: Anutuna: originally a term that was used for a man that was blessed by elders for a task by the laying on of hands (source: Desmond Oatridges, Holzhausen 1991, p. 49f.)
Noongar: Keny Boolanga-Yira Waangki-Koorliny: “One God is Sending” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
Uab Meto: Neno Anan: “Son of heaven” P. Middelkoop explains: “The idea of heavenly power bestowed on a Timorese king is rendered in the title Neno Anan. It is based on the historical fact that chiefs in general came from overseas and they who come thence are believed to have come down from heaven, from the land beyond the sea, that means the sphere of God and the ghosts of the dead. The symbolical act of anointing has been made subservient to the revelation of an eternal truth and when the term Neno Anan is used as a translation thereof, it also is made subservient to a new revelation of God in Jesus Christ. The very fact that Jesus came from heaven makes this translation hit the mark.” (Source: P. Middelkoop in The Bible Translator 1953, p. 183ff. )
In Finnish Sign Language both “Christ” and “Messiah” are translated with a sign signifying “king.” (Source: Tarja Sandholm)
“Christ / Messiah” in Finnish Sign Language (source )
Law (2013, p. 97) writes about how the Ancient GreekSeptuagint‘s translation of the Hebrew mashiah was used by the New Testament writers as a bridge between the Old and New Testaments (click or tap here to read more):
“Another important word in the New Testament that comes from the Septuagint is christos, ‘Christ.’ Christ is not part of the name of the man from Nazareth, as if ‘the Christs’ were written above the door of his family home. Rather, ‘Christ’ is an explicitly messianic title used by the writers of the New Testament who have learned this word from the Septuagint’s translation of the Hebrew mashiach, ‘anointed,’ which itself is often rendered in English as ‘Messiah.’ To be sure, one detects a messianic intent on the part of the Septuagint translator in some places. Amos 4:13 may have been one of these. In the Hebrew Bible, God ‘reveals his thoughts to mortals,’ but the Septuagint has ‘announcing his anointed to humans.’ A fine distinction must be made, however, between theology that was intended by the Septuagint translators and that developed by later Christian writers. In Amos 4:13 it is merely possible we have a messianic reading, but it is unquestionably the case that the New Testament writers exploit the Septuagint’s use of christos, in Amos and elsewhere, to messianic ends.”
God transcends gender, but most languages are limited to grammatical gender expressed in pronouns. In the case of English, this is traditionally confined to “he” (or in the forms “his,” “him,” and “himself”), “she” (and “her,” “hers,” and “herself”), and “it” (and “its” and “itself”).
Modern Mandarin Chinese, however, offers another possibility. Here, the third-person singular pronoun is always pronounced the same (tā), but it is written differently according to its gender (他 is “he,” 她 is “she,” and 它/牠 is “it” and their respective derivative forms). In each of these characters, the first (or upper) part defines the gender (man, woman, or thing/animal), while the second element gives the clue to its pronunciation.
In 1930, after a full century with dozens of Chinese translations, Bible translator Wang Yuande (王元德) coined a new “godly” pronoun: 祂. Chinese readers immediately knew how to pronounce it: tā. But they also recognized that the first part of that character, signifying something spiritual, clarified that each person of the Trinity has no gender aside from being God.
While the most important Protestant and Catholic Chinese versions respectively have opted not to use 祂, some Bible translations do and it is widely used in hymnals and other Christian materials. Among the translations that use 祂 to refer to “God” were early versions of Lü Zhenzhong’s (呂振中) version (New Testament: 1946, complete Bible: 1970). R.P. Kramers (in The Bible Translator 1956, p. 152ff. ) explains why later versions of Lü’s translation did not continue with this practice: “This new way of writing ‘He,’ however, has created a minor problem of its own: must this polite form be used whenever Jesus is referred to? Lü follows the rule that, wherever Jesus is referred to as a human being, the normal tā (他) is written; where he is referred to as divine, especially after the ascension, the reverential tā (祂) is used.”
In that system, one kind of pronoun is used for humans (male and female alike) and others for natural elements, non-liquid masses, and some spiritual entities (one other is used for large animals and another one for miscellaneous items). While in these languages the pronoun for spiritual entities used to be employed when referring to God, this has changed into the use of the human pronoun.
Lynell Zogbo (in The Bible Translator 1989, p. 401ff. ) explains: “From informal discussions with young Christians especially, it would appear that, at least for some people, the experience and/or concepts of Christianity are affecting the choice of pronoun for God. Some people explain that God is no longer ‘far away,’ but is somehow tangible and personal. For these speakers God has shifted over into the human category.”
In Kouya, God (the Father) and Jesus are referred to with the human pronoun ɔ, whereas the Holy Spirit is referred to with a non-human pronoun. (Northern Grebo and Western Krahn make a similar distinction.)
Eddie Arthur, a former Kouya Bible translation consultant, says the following: “We tried to insist that this shouldn’t happen, but the Kouya team members were insistent that the human pronoun for the Spirit would not work.”
In Burmese, the pronoun ko taw (ကိုယ်တော်) is used either as 2nd person (you) or 3rd person (he, him, his) reference. “This term clearly has its root in the religious language in Burmese. No ordinary persons are addressed or known by this pronoun because it is reserved for Buddhist monks, famous religious teachers, and in the case of Christianity, the Trinity.” (Source: Gam Seng Shae in The Bible Translator 2002, p. 202ff. )
In Thai, the pronoun phra`ong (พระองค์) is used, a gender-neutral pronoun which must refer to a previously introduced royal or divine being. Similarly, in Northern Khmer, which is spoken in Thailand, “an honorific divine pronoun” is used for the pronoun referring to the persons of the Trinity (source: David Thomas in The Bible Translator 1993, p. 445 ). In Urak Lawoi’, another language spoken in Thailand, the translation often uses tuhat (ตูฮัด) — “God” — ”as a divine pronoun where Thai has phra’ong even though it’s actually a noun.” (Source for Thai and Urak Lawoi’: Stephen Pattemore)
The English “Contemporary Torah” addresses the question of God and gendered pronouns by mostly avoiding pronouns in the first five books of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament (unless God is referred to as “lord,” “father,” “king,” or “warrior”). It does that by either using passive constructs (“He gave us” vs. “we were given”), by using the adjective “divine” or by using “God” rather than a pronoun.
Some Protestant and Orthodox English Bibles use a referential capitalized spelling when referring to the persons of the Trinity with “He,” “His,” “Him,” or “Himself.” This includes for instance the New American Standard Bible or The Orthodox New Testament, but most translations do not. Two other languages where this is also done (in most Bible translations) are Twents as well as the closely related Indonesian and Malay. In the latter two languages this follows the language usage according to the Qur’an, which in turn predicts that usage (see Soesilo in The Bible Translator 1991, p. 442ff. and The Bible Translator 1997, p. 433ff. ).
In verse 10 and 11 there is another instance of the rhetorical device called “chiasmus”:
Quoted with permission from Luo, I-Jin. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1977. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
This verse begins with the phrase “I want to know Christ.” Paul followed this with three phrases that show three ways that he could know Christ: by the power of Christ’s resurrection, by the fellowship of sharing Christ’s sufferings, and by becoming like Christ in his death.
3:10a
I want to know Christ: This does not mean to know about Christ. It means to know and experience Christ personally. Paul already knew Christ, but he wanted to know him better.
3:10b
and the power of His resurrection: The power of Christ’s resurrection was already influencing Paul’s life, but he wanted to experience it more. This is one of the ways that a person can know Christ better.
There are several ways to understand the phrase the power of His resurrection :
(1) It refers to the power Christ received after God raised him from the dead. This could be translated:
I want to have the power ⌊that⌋ Christ ⌊had⌋ when he rose again.
(2) It refers to the God’s power that raised Christ from the dead. This could be translated:
I want to experience the same power ⌊that God used when he caused⌋ Christ to live again ⌊after he had died⌋. (New Century Version, Contemporary English Version, New Living Translation (2004))
Most English versions do not specify how they understand his phrase, but both interpretations have strong support from commentators. It is recommended that you follow the first interpretation (1). Paul probably meant that knowing Christ included Paul experiencing the power that is now Christ’s.
Paul wanted this power so that he could behave in the way that pleased God and so that he could effectively teach others God’s message.
resurrection: In some languages the word resurrection can mean to come back to life as a different person or as a different living thing. This is not the meaning of resurrection in the Bible. If this is a problem in your language, you need to translate in a way that makes it clear that resurrection means a person becoming alive again as the same person.
General Comment on 3:10a–b
One way to connect 3:10a–b is:
I want to know Christ ⌊better in this way: I want to know⌋ the power of his resurrection.
3:10c
and the fellowship of His sufferings: This is the second way in which a person can know Christ better.
There are two main ways to interpret this phrase:
(1) Paul was already suffering for Christ and he wanted more of the fellowship with Christ that comes from following him. He did not want to suffer, but he wanted to know Christ more and more even though that meant suffering.
(2) Paul wanted to share by faith (mentally) the sufferings that Christ had.
The first interpretation has stronger support. It is recommended that you follow it (1). Paul did not want to suffer. But he knew that everyone who follows Christ faithfully should expect to suffer because those who refuse to follow Christ oppose them (2 Timothy 3:12). And he wanted the fellowship with Christ that would accompany this suffering.
fellowship: In this context this means “sharing in something with someone.” See note on “partnership” in 1:5a, and “fellowship”, sense A2 in Key Biblical Terms. This sense is brought out by the Berean Standard Bible when it supplies the words “sharing in.”
3:10d
being conformed to Him in His death: This is a difficult phrase to understand and most English versions translate it more or less literally. There are two ways to interpret this phrase:
(1) It is meant literally. Paul wanted to become like Christ by suffering as Christ did even to the point of death.
(2) It is meant figuratively. Paul wanted to die to sin.
Both interpretations have strong support, but it is more likely that Paul was referring here to physical death, just as he had been referring to physical sufferings in 3:10c. So it is recommended that you follow interpretation (1). Paul said that he wanted to become like Christ in every aspect of his life. He even wanted to die like Christ died. This means that he was willing to have people persecute him and kill him for his faith just like people killed Christ.
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®).
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.