The Greek that is usually translated as “scribe” in English “were more than mere writers of the law. They were the trained interpreters of the law and expounders of tradition.”
Tboli: “one who taught the law God before caused Moses to write” (or “one who taught the law of Moses”) (source for this and 5 above: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
Noongar: Mammarapa-Warrinyang or “law man” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
Mairasi: “one who writes and explains Great Above One’s (=God’s) prohibitions” (source: Enggavoter 2004)
Chichewa: “teacher of Laws” (source: Ernst Wendland)
Lalana Chinantec: “one who is a teacher of the law which God gave to Moses back then”
Tepeuxila Cuicatec: “one who know well the law” (Source for this and four above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
Huixtán Tzotzil: “one who mistakenly thought he was teaching God’s commandments”(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.)
Germandas Buch translation by Roland Werner (publ. 2009-2022): “theologian”
English translation by Scot McKnight (in The Second Testament, publ. 2023): Covenant Code scholar
In British Sign Language it is translated with a sign that combines the signs for “expert” and “law.” (Source: Anna Smith)
“Scribe” in British Sign Language (source: Christian BSL, used with permission)
Following are a number of back-translations of John 1:1:
Huehuetla Tepehua: “The Word was living when there was still nothing at all. And that Word lived in the same place God did. And that Word was God himself.”
Yatzachi Zapotec: “When the world began, the person who is the Word was already present. He was with God and the person who is the Word was God.”
Chol: “In the beginning of the world there already was the Word. This Word already was with God. This Word was (and still is) God.” (Source for this and above: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “Long ago before anything was created, the one who is titled the Word of God already was. This Word of God, he already was with God and he is God.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Before the world and heavens/sky was laid-down/spread-out (i.e. existed), there was already Jesus who is called Word/Speech of God. This one referred to as Word, he was already there in the presence of God. Not just in the presence of God but on the contrary, this Word who is Jesus, he indeed is the one who is this God.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “The Son of God makes it known how God is. When the world was made, already he was living. He was in fellowship with God. He also is God.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Anindilyakwa: “Right at the beginning, long, long ago, Jesus Christ was there, the one who revealed God who was hidden from us. Before God made the heavens and the earth, right at that time the same one was already there with God. And those two, the same one and God, they were the same/shared the same characteristics.” (Source: Julie Waddy in The Bible Translator 2004, p. 452ff.)
The Greek that is translated as “Son of Man” and is mostly used by Jesus to refer to himself is (back-) translated in the following languages as (click or tap for details):
Tzotzil: “I who am equal with men” or “The Older Brother of Everybody” (“expressing the dignity and authority of the Messiah and the universality of his work”)
Tenango Otomi: “The Man Appointed” (i.e. the man to whom authority has been delegated) (source for this and preceding: Beekman, p. 189-190, see also Ralph Hill in Notes on Translation February 1983, p. 35-50)
Aguaruna: “One who was born becoming a person” (source for this and two above: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “Older Sibling of Mankind” (source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Child of a Person” (source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “One From Heaven Born of Man/human?” (source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “Man who came from heaven” (source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Yatzachi Zapotec: “One who God sent, who was born a human” (a direct translation would have suggested “that the father is unknown due to the indiscretions of the mother” and where “he is the son of people” is used when one wants to disclaim responsibility for or relationship with a child caught in some mischief — source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
Mezquital Otomi: “The son who became a person” (Source: B. Moore / G. Turner in Notes on Translation 1967, p. 1ff.)
Alekano: “The true man who descended from heaven” (source: Ellis Deibler in Notes on Translation June 1986, p. 36ff.)
Central Tarahumara: “One who has been stood up to help” (“This suggests that Christ has been given authority to some appointed task. A very generic word, help, was selected to fill in the lexically obligatory purpose required by the word which means to appoint or commission. Usually this word is used of menial tasks but not exclusively. The choice of this generic term retains the veiled reference to the character of Christ’s work which He intended in using the ‘Son of Man’ title.”)
Chicahuaxtla Triqui: “He who is relative of all people.” (“The Triqui word for relative is a rather generic term and in its extended sense sometimes is diluted to neighbor and friend. But the primary meaning is relative.”)
Tepeuxila Cuicatec: “The Person who Accompanies All People” (“The literal equivalents ‘son of man’ and ‘son of people’ were both rejected because of the false inference of natural birth involving a human father. Furthermore, it was necessary to expand any translation of the Bible by the addition of the pronoun ‘I’ so as to clarify the fact that Jesus is using the third person in referring to Himself. A common expression used by the Cuicatecos when difficulties befall someone, is to say to that one, ‘don’t worry, we are accompanying you.’ By this they mean they share that person’s sorrow. When wedding guests arrive at the home of a son who has just been married, they say to the father, ‘We have come to accompany you.’ By this they mean that they have come to share the father’s joy. These expressions do not refer to ordinary physical accompaniment, which is expressed by a set of different verbs. For example, visits are always announced by some such greeting as, “I have come to visit you,’ ‘I have come to see you,’ or ‘I have come to ask you something.’ The desire to accompany a friend on a journey is expressed by saying, ‘I will go with you.’ Translation helpers used the verb ‘accompany’ in constructing the phrase ‘I, the Person who Accompanies All People.'(…) It reflects the fact that Jesus closely identified Himself with all of us, understands our weaknesses, shares our burdens, rejoices with us in times of gladness, etc.”) (source for this and the three preceding: Beekman in Notes on Translation January 1963, p. 1-10)
Guhu-Samane: “Elder-brother-man” (“Since the term denotes an elder brother in every way such as honor, power, leadership, representation of the younger, etc. it is a meaningful and fitting — though not ostentatious — title.” Source: Ernest Richert in The Bible Translator 1965, p. 198ff. )
Navajo: Diné Silíi’ii — “Man he-became-the-one-who” (“This terra presented a difficulty not only in Navajo but also one peculiar to all the Athapaskan languages. It lies in the fact that all these languages, so far as we know, have a word phonetically similar to the Navajo diné which has three meanings: ‘man, people in general,’ ‘a man,’ ‘The People’ which is the name the Navajos use for themselves. (The name Navajo was first used by the Spanish explorers.) Although it seemed natural to say diné biye’ ‘a-man his-son,’ this could also mean ‘The-People their-son’ or ‘a-Navajo his-son,’ in contrast to the son of a white man or of another Indian tribe. Since the concept of the humanity of Christ is so important, we felt that diné biye’ with its three possible meanings should not be used. The term finally decided on was Diné Silíi’ii ‘Man he-became-the-one-who.’ This could be interpreted to mean ‘the one who became a Navajo,’ but since it still would impart the idea of Christ’s becoming man, it was deemed adequate, and it has proven acceptable to the Navajos.”) (Source: Faye Edgerton in The Bible Translator 1962, p. 25ff. )
Toraja-Sa’dan: “Child descended in the world” (“using a poetic verb, often found in songs that [deal with] the contacts between heaven and earth”) (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
Obolo: Gwun̄ Ebilene: “Child of Human” (source: Enene Enene).
Mairasi: Jaanoug Tat: “Person Child” (source: Enggavoter 2004)
Costa Rican Sign Language: “It was impossible to translate the expression ‘Son of Man.’ The son-man sign simply means ‘male child.’ The Costa Rican Sign Language (LESCO) team opted for an interpretation of the term and translated it ‘Jesus.'” (Source: Elsa Tamez (in The Bible Translator 2008, p. 59ff.)
Lokạạ: wẹẹn wạ ọnẹn or “son of a person.” “This translation is symbolic in that it uses indigenous Lokạạ words. However, since the publication of the New Testament in 2006, this phrase has gained popularity within contemporary Lokạạ society as an expression to describe an important person whose career is going well. In the New Testament, the phrase ‘son of man’ is used to describe Jesus as prototypically human, but the Lokạạ phrase is now being used to describe an exceptional person in Lokạạ society.” (Source: J.A. Naudé, C.L. Miller Naudé, J.O. Obono in Acta Theologica 43/2, 2023, p. 129ff. )
In many West African languages, using a third person reference as a first person indicator is common practice with a large range of semantic effects. Languages that use the exact expression “son of man” as a self-reference or reference to another person include Lukpa, Baatonum, Mossi (“son of Adam”), Yoruba (“son of person”), Guiberoua Béte, or Samo. (Source: Lynell Zogbo in: Omanson 2000, p. 167-188.)
In Swahili the expression Mwana wa Mtu or mwana wa mtu or “son/daughter of human person,” which is used by several Bible translations, also has “the idiomatic meaning of ‘a human being’” (source: Jean-Claude Loba-Mkole in An Intercultural Criticism of New Testament Translations 2013, see here). The same is true for the Lingala expression Mwana na Moto — “son/daughter of human person.” (Ibid.)
In Balinese “we are again bordering on theological questions when we inquire as to which vocabulary shall be used to translate the texts where Jesus speaks of himself as ‘the Son of man.’ One of the fixed rules governing the use of these special vocabularies is that one may never use the deferential terms in speaking of oneself. This would be the extreme of arrogance. Now if one considers the expression ‘Son of man’ primarily as a description of ‘I,’ then one must continually indicate the possessions or actions of the Son of man by Low Balinese words. In doing this the mystery of the expression is largely lost. In any case the vocabulary used in most of the contexts would betray that Jesus means the title for himself.
“However, a distinction can actually be made in Balinese between the person and the exalted position he occupies. For example, the chairman of a judicial body may employ deferential terms when referring to this body and its chairman, without this being taken as an expression of arrogance. Considered from this standpoint, one may translate in such a way that Jesus is understood as using such deferential words and phrases in speaking of himself. The danger is, however, that the unity between his person and the figure of “the Son of man” is blurred by such usage.
“On request, the New Testament committee of the Netherlands Bible Society advised that ‘the sublimity of this mysterious term be considered the most important point and thus High Balinese be used.'”
In Malay, Barclay Newman reports on the translation of “Today’s Malay Version” (Alkitab Berita Baik) of 1987:
“One of the first things that we did in working through the earlier part of the New Testament was to decide on how we would translate some of the more difficult technical terms. It was immediately obvious that something must be done with the translation of ‘the Son of Man,’ since the literal rendering anak manusia (literally ‘child of a man’) held absolutely no meaning for Malay readers. We felt that the title should emphasize the divine origin and authority of the one who used this title, and at the same time, since it was a title, we decided that it should not be too long a phrase. Finally, a phrase meaning ‘the One whom God has ordained’ was chosen (yang dilantik Allah). It is interesting to note that the newly-begun Common Indonesian (Alkitab Kabar Baik, published in 1985) has followed a similar route by translating ‘the One whom God has chosen’ (yang depilih Allah).”
In many English translations the Greek terms “hieron” (the whole “temple” in Jerusalem or specifically the outer courts open to worshippers) and “naos” (the inner “shrine” or “sanctuary”) are translated with only one word: “temple” (see also for instance “Tempel” in German [for exception see below] and “tempel” in Dutch, Danish, or Afrikaans).
Other languages make a distinction: (Click or tap here to see more)
Navajo: “house in which worship is carried out” (for naos)
Balinese: “inner part of the Great Temple” (“the term ‘inner part’ denoting the hindmost and holiest of the two or three courts that temples on Bali usually possess”) vs. “Great Temple”
Telugu: “womb (i.e. interior)-of-the-abode” vs. “abode”
Thai: a term denoting the main audience hall of a Buddhist temple compound vs. “environs-of-the-main-audience-hall”
Kituba: “place of holiness of house-God Lord” vs. “house-God Lord”
Shipibo-Conibo: “deep in God’s house” vs. “God’s house” (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
Germandas Buch translation by Roland Werner (publ. 2009-2022): “inner court of the temple” (Tempelinnenhof) vs. “temple”
Languages that, like English, German, Dutch, Danish, or Afrikaans don’t make that distinction include:
Toraja-Sa’dan: “house that is looked upon as holy, that is sacred, that is taboo and where one may not set foot” (lit. “house where-the-belly-gets-swollen” — because taboo is violated — using a term that is also applied to a Muslim mosque) (source for this and the three above: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
Aguaruna: “the house for talking to God” (source for this and above: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)
Guhu-Samane: “festival longhouse of God” (“The biiri, ‘festival longhouse’, being the religious and social center of the community, is a possible term for ‘temple’. It is not the ‘poro house’ as such. That would be too closely identified with the cult of poro. The physical features of the building, huge and sub-divided, lend it further favor for this consideration. By qualifying it as ‘God’s biiri’ the term has become meaningful and appropriate in the context of the Scriptures.”) (Source: Ernest Richert in The Bible Translator, 1965, p. 81ff. )
Enga: “God’s restricted access house” (source: Adam Boyd on his blog)
Another distinction that tends to be overlooked in translations is that between hieron (“temple” in English) and sunagógé (“synagogue” in English). Euan Fry (in The Bible Translator 1987, p. 213ff. ) reports on this:
“Many older translations have simply used transliterations of ‘temple’ and ‘synagogue’ rather than trying to find equivalent terms or meaningful expressions in their own languages. This approach does keep the two terms separate; but it makes the readers depend on explanations given by pastors or teachers for their understanding of the text.
“Translators who have tried to find meaningful equivalents, for the two terms ‘temple’ and ‘synagogue’ have usually made a distinction between them in one of two ways (which focus on the contrasting components of meaning). One way takes the size and importance of the Temple to make a contrast, so that expressions such as ‘sacred meeting/ worship house of the Jews’ and ‘big sacred meeting/worship house of the Jews’ are used. The other way focuses on the different nature of the religious activity at each of the places, so that expressions such as ‘meeting/worship house of the Jews’ and ‘sacrifice/ceremony place of the Jews’ are used.
“It is not my purpose in this article to discuss how to arrive at the most precise equivalent to cover all the components of meaning of ‘temple’. That is something that each translator really has to work through for himself in the light of the present usage and possibilities in his own language. My chief concern here is that the basic term or terms chosen for ‘temple’ should give the reader of a translation a clear and correct picture of the location referred to in each passage. And I am afraid that in many cases where an equivalent like ‘house of God’ or ‘worship house’ has been chosen, the readers have quite the wrong picture of what going to the Temple or being in the Temple means. (This may be the case for the word ‘temple’ in English too, for many readers.)”
Here are some examples:
Bambara: “house of God” (or: “big house of worship”) vs. “worship house” (or: “small houses of worship”)
Toraja-Sa’dan: “house where-the-belly-gets-swollen” (see above) vs. “meeting house for discussing matters concerning religious customs” (and “church” is “house where one meets on Sunday”)
Navajo: “house in which worship is carried out” vs. “house of gathering” (source for all above: Bratcher / Nida)
Click or tap here to see a short video clip about Herod’s temple (source: Bible Lands 2012)Click or tap here to see a short video clip showing synagogues in New Testament times (source: Bible Lands 2012)
Following are a number of back-translations of John 1:5:
Huehuetla Tepehua: “That one who gives understanding to the minds of men, he was like a light that shines where it is dark. But the one who walks where it is dark (the devil) couldn’t overcome him.”
Ojitlán Chinantec: “For people are in the evil way, as if to say, they are in darkness. But he illuminates people. The evil one did not prevail over that one who illuminates people.”
Xicotepec De Juárez Totonac: “He is like a light which illuminates where it is dark. And the devil, he is of the darkness but he cannot conquer the light.”
Yatzachi Zapotec: “The person who is the word has light for the hearts of mankind. Even though there is very much evil in this world where he arrived, the evil did not shut off his light.” (Source for this and above: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)
Chol: “The light of the world shows itself in the midst of a very dark world. This very dark world was not able to put out the light.” Wilbur Aulie (in The Bible Translator 1957, p. 109ff. ) explains the use of “put out the light” (click here to display)
“The problem of multiple meanings is often involved in the rendering of figures. Some hold that Greek katelaben in John 1:5 means both ‘to grasp with the mind’ (i.e., ‘to comprehend’) and ‘to grasp with the hand’ (i.e., to overcome’). Many translators are obliged to make a choice here. In Chol there is no choice, since the darkness cannot comprehend, even metaphorically speaking. It was therefore rendered: ‘The darkness did not put out the light’.”
Uma: “That light shone/shines in the darkness, and the darkness was/is not able to kill it/him [NOTE: The verb ‘kill’ can be used of putting out a light or fire]” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “This light shines in darkness and the light can really not be put out by the darkness.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “That light has illumined the darkness here upon the earth, and the light was not defeated by this darkness.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “He has-been-steadily-illuminating the darkness, and the darkness, it is not able-to-defeat the light.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “He gives-light/makes-clear like a light/lamp in darkness, but those who are in darkness, they don’t want to be shined-on by this light.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “The light shines in darkness and it is not able to be put out.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Following are a number of back-translations of John 1:8:
Uma: “Yohanes, it was not he who was that light. The reason he came was to spread that light to all people.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “Yahiya was not this light. But his mission/purpose for coming here was to tell about the light.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “As for this John, he is not the one who is that light, but rather he is the one who explains who the light is.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Juan was not the light itself, but rather the one who came to confirm/verify concerning the light.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “It isn’t that he was the one who was the light. He was caused-to-be-a-person because he would be testifying about this light.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “John is not that one who opens the hearts of the people.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Ojitlán Chinantec: “John was not the one who illuminates people. He came to point out that one.”
Yatzachi Zapotec: “It wasn’t John who brought light, but rather he came speaking about the person who brings light for mankind.” (Source for this and above: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)
Following are a number of back-translations of John 1:9:
Yatzachi Zapotec: “The light of God has arrived in this world, to enter into the hearts of mankind; and it shines for all of them.”
Huehuetla Tepehua: “The one who is the true one, who can give understanding, came here to this earth. He gives understanding to the minds of all men.”
Alekano: “The father of light, who enlightens the people all over, appeared and remained on earth.”
Lalana Chinantec: “The rays of the real Light were beginning to shine, causing the path on which all men walk to become lit.” (Source for this and above: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)
Uma: “That Word, He was the true light that shone on the hearts of all people, he arrived in the world.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “This true light, that means the Word, has come here already to the world giving light to the thoughts/minds of all mankind.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “At that time Christ arrived here on the earth, that true light. He is the one who illumines the minds of all mankind.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “The proper/real light, it was the one who came to the earth to go illuminate (the particle ‘go’ is commonly used with verbs of motion such as ‘come’) the minds of all people.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “That one who really is this light, who gives light to all people, he was now arriving here under the heavens/sky.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “That one who came to the earth is truly the one who opens the hearts of the people.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Following are a number of back-translations of John 1:10:
Uma: “He is the one who was-used-as-a-hand by God to create this world. But when he arrived in the world, the people in the world did not know him.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “But even though the Word is already here in the world and the world hep was created by him, the Word was not known/recognized by the people in the world.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “Now Christ arrived on the earth. By means of him the earth was created; but mankind did not recognize who he was.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “But even though he was in this world and God created all that is here through him, people nevertheless didn’t recognize him.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Well he truly came, and he lived here on earth. But well, even though he was the one who created people, yet they didn’t recognize/acknowledge him.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “This one, the Son of God, lived here on the earth. Even though he made the earth, the people didn’t know who he was.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Aguaruna: “He made the world. Having done that, he lived here in this world, but the ones from this world didn’t recognize him as Christ.”
Yatzachi Zapotec: “The person who is the Word was present in the world; and even though he made the world, the people in the world didn’t realize who he was.”
Lalana Chinantec: “He was living in the world but the people of the world never came to know who he was, even though he is the one who made the world.” (Source for this and two above: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)
