inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (1Tim. 6:8)

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 inclusive form (including the addressee).

Source: Velma Pickett and Florence Cowan in Notes on Translation January 1962, p. 1ff.

complete verse (1 Timothy 6:8)

Following are a number of back-translations of 1 Timothy 6:8:

  • Uma: “So, if we have food and clothes, it’s enough.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “Therefore as-long-as we (dual) have food and clothing we (dual) ought to give-thanks/be-content.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “If we have food and we have clothing, our breath is good already.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “Therefore just-so-long-as there is what suffices for our food and clothing, we will be satisfied.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “Therefore as long as there is something to eat and to wear, that’s good enough.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “Therefore, if a person has what he needs to eat or to wear, that is enough, let him rejoice.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)

Translation commentary on 1 Timothy 6:8

If in fact it is true that we bring nothing into the world and we take nothing out of this world, then we should be content with having the bare necessities of life, like food and clothing. These two items, sometimes together with lodging, are sometimes put together to refer to physical needs in general (so Phillips “as far as physical things are concerned”). The idea expressed in this verse has parallels in Stoic thought as well, and many interpreters take the position that this stems directly from Stoic philosophy. It is, however, interesting to note that the same teaching is found in the teachings of Jesus (see, for example, Matt 6.25-34; Luke 12.22-32). If one takes the Old Testament as the background for verse 7 and the teachings of Jesus as the background for verse 8, then the structure will be parallel to that of 5.18, where there is an appeal to both the Old Testament and the teachings of Jesus, and where both bodies of teaching are identified as scripture.

It should be further noted that the connective used here can be literally rendered as but or “and.” If, however, this verse functions as an inference arising out of the assertion in verse 7, then a connective expressing inference or result would be preferable (as, for example, Good News Translation “So then,” Phillips “Surely, then”). In certain languages it is possible to restructure this verse as follows: “So then, we should be satisfied if we have (or, just to have) enough food and clothes.”

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Paul’s First Letter to Timothy. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1995. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .