The Hebrew and Greek What is translated into English as “the wrath of God” (Good News Translation: “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)
In Kikuyu the whole phrase that is translated in English as “storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath” or similar is translated as “you are increasing for yourself God’s wrath.” (Source: Jan Sterk)
In Quetzaltepec Mixe it is translated with a term “that not only expresses anger, but also punishment” (source: Robert Bascom), in Western Bukidnon Manobo as “the coming punishment of God on mankind” (source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation), in Kankanaey as “God’s fearful/terrible future punishing of people” (source: Kankanaey Back Translation), in Tagbanwa as “the coming anger/hatred of God” (source: Tagbanwa Back Translation), and in Tenango Otomi as “the punishment which will come” (source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation).
The Greek that is translated in English as “(brood of) vipers” is translated in North Tanna as “sea-snakes” (“This is the black and white sea snake which is thought of as very evil here.”) (Source Ross McKerras)
The name that is transliterated as “John (the Baptist)” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language and Mexican Sign Language as “baptize” (source: John Elwode in The Bible Translator 2008, p. 78ff.)
“John the Baptist” in Mexican Sign Language (source: BSLM )
In German Sign Language (Catholic) it is translated with the sign for the letter J and the sign signifying a Catholic baptism by sprinkling on the head.
In American Sign Language it is translated with the sign for the letter J and the sign signifying “shout,” referring to John 1:23. (Source: RuthAnna Spooner, Ron Lawer)
“John” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor
A question of cultural assumptions arose in Tuvan. The instinctive way to translate this name denotatively would be “John the Dipper,” but this would carry the highly misleading connotation that he drowned people. It was therefore decided that his label should focus on the other major aspect of his work, that is, proclaiming that the Messiah would soon succeed him. (Compare his title in Russian Orthodox translation “Иоанн Предтеча” — “John the Forerunner.”) So he became “John the Announcer,” which fortunately did not seem to give rise to any confusion with radio newsreaders! (Source: David Clark in The Bible Translator 2015, p. 117ff.)
In Noongar it is translated as John-Kakaloorniny or “John Washing” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).
The Greek that is typically translated in English as “You brood of vipers!” is translated by the ItalianLa Sua Parola è Vita translation as Razza di vipere! Venite a farvi battezzare, ma non siete disposti a cambiar vita! Chi vi ha fatto credere di poter sfuggire così all’imminente castigod di Dio? or “You brood of vipers! You come to be baptized but are not willing to change your life! Who made you believe you could escape God’s impending punishment in this way?” Cotrozzi (2019) explains: “There is a gap in the logic of the argument that is filled only in v. 8, but even so it is not readily apparent to many readers why John reacts in this way. John criticized the superficial attitude of the people who were content with outward baptism but would not change their lifestyle, thinking that this would be enough to secure them salvation. (…) The words that are added to the text are marked as an explanatory addition.”
Following is a Syriac Orthodox icon of John the Baptist from the 18/19th century (found in the Cathedral of Saints Constantine and Helen, Yabrud, Syria).
The wings are often depicted in icons of John the Baptist because of his status as a messenger. The scroll that John the Baptist holds quotes John 1:29 and reads (translated into English): “I saw and witnessed concerning him, ‘Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.’”
Orthodox Icons are not drawings or creations of imagination. They are in fact writings of things not of this world. Icons can represent our Lord Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary, and the Saints. They can also represent the Holy Trinity, Angels, the Heavenly hosts, and even events. Orthodox icons, unlike Western pictures, change the perspective and form of the image so that it is not naturalistic. This is done so that we can look beyond appearances of the world, and instead look to the spiritual truth of the holy person or event. (Source )
Following are a number of back-translations of Luke 3:7:
Noongar: “Many people came out to John. He baptised them in water. ‘You snakes!’ John said to them. ‘Who said that you would escape! Soon God will send your punishment!” (Source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
Uma: “Many people came requesting-to-be-baptized to Yohanes. Yohanes said saying to them: ‘You whose actions are twisted! Why do you come? Perhaps you think that you can get away from the anger of the Lord God that is almost striking you?” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “Very many people went to Yahiya asking him to be bathed. Therefore he said to them, ‘You there, your custom is like the custom of a deceiving snake. Why do you come here? Do you perhaps mistakenly-think that if you are bathed you won’t be hit by the wrath of God which is soon coming?” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And there were many people who went there to John to be baptized. And he said to them, ‘Just like a custom of a snake is your custom because you are liars. Why are you coming here? You thought, mistakenly perhaps, that you could escape from the punishment of God.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Many people went to Juan to get-baptized koma, but whereupon he said, ‘Oh you who are like crafty snakes are just-too-much (expression of rebuke)! Who perhaps told you that you will escape God’s judging of you if you are baptized?” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Many people went to Juan and were baptized. Juan was telling-them -frankly, saying, ‘Why are you (pl.) here who are deceivers like the nature of a snake? Who said that you could run away from the punishment which is coming?” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
About the translation of the Greek term that is usually transliterated with the terms “baptism” or “baptize” in English (for other English translations see below), Bratcher / Nida (1961) say this (click or tap for details):
“[It] has given rise not only to an immense amount of discussion in terms of its meaning within the Judaeo-Christian 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 translation in Northern Emberá] 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, 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)
Balinese: ngelukat (a Balinese initiation ceremony in which persons were sprinkled with consecrated water) (source for this and above: Biblical Terms in The Bible Translator 1952, p. 225ff.
Mairasi: fat jaenggom; “water washing” (“baptize with the Holy Spirit”: “wash with the Holy Spirit”) (source: Enggavoter 2004)
Kwara’ae: “holy wash” (traditional church term for baptism) (source: Carl Gross)
Northern Emberá: “head-poured” (source: Loewen 1980, p. 107)
Muna: kadiu sarani “Christian bathing” (source: René von den Berg)
Halh Mongolian: argon ochial (“holy washing”) (“The people in Mongolia are strictly religious and understand the meaning very well. They are familiar with the idea of water being used as a symbol of a new life and having received ‘holy washing’ means to have entered into a new sphere of life.”) (Source: A. Marthinson in The Bible Translator 1954, p. 74ff. ) (Note: In more recent Mongolian translations a transliteration of baptizo is used instead)
“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.”
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.”
Chinese: Catholic: 洗 xǐ (“washing”); non-Baptist Protestant 聖洗 shèngxǐ (“holy washing”); Baptist: 浸洗 jìnxǐ (“immerse and wash”) (In the history of Chinese Bible translation the translation of the Greek baptizo was a point of great contention, so much so that in the 19th Century Baptists had a completely different set of Bible translations and even today are using different editions with the different term of the same versions that other Protestants use.) (Source: Zetzsche 2008)
The Germandas Buch translation by Roland Werner (publ. 2009-2022) uses a variety of translations, including “immersed (in water)” (eintauchen or untertauchen) but also the traditional German term for “baptism (Taufe)” or in the combination “immersed in baptism”
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)
Click or tap here to see a short video clip showing how baptisms were done in biblical times (source: Bible Lands 2012)
elegen oun ‘and so he said.’ oun indicates the resuming of the narrative after the interruption of vv. 4-6. The imperfect tense is best understood as introducing what may be regarded as the content of the summary of a speech, cf. 6.20.
tois ekporeuomenois ochlois baptisthēnai hup’ autou ‘to the crowds who came out to get baptized by him.’ The infinitive baptisthēnai is dependent upon the participle ekporeuomenois indicating the purpose of the crowds in coming out.
ekporeuomai ‘to come out,’ without indication from where and whither. The latter is implied in v. 3 but the former remains open.
ochlos ‘crowd,’ without unfavourable connotation. Here the plural suggests a very big crowd.
baptizō, ‘to dip,’ ‘to immerse,’ exc. 11.38 and 12.50, in Luke always used with reference to the baptism preached and administered by John the baptist. The aorist tense implies that the rite of baptism is administered only once. As to the meaning of the passive two explanations are possible: (1) ‘to be baptized,’ or (2) ‘to get baptized,’ cf. sich taufen zu lassen (Zürcher Bibel, Nieuwe Vertaling), and “to have oneself baptized”. The latter fits the context better because of the final force of the infinitive baptisthēnai; the emphasis is on the intention of the crowds.
gennēmata echidnōn ‘brood of vipers.’ The exact meaning of the phrase (clearly meant as reproach) has to be determined in the light of the context. Since the crowds want to be baptized as a safeguard against the impending judgment of God, the phrase gennēmata echidnōn exposes them as cunning, cf. Mt. 10.16, and the Jewish parallels quoted by Strack-Billerbeck I, 574f on that verse.
gennēma ‘offspring,’ ‘brood.’
echidna ‘viper,’ ‘poisonous snake.’
tis hupedeixen humin ‘who has suggested to you.’ The usual meaning of hupodeiknumi with the following infinitive is ‘to warn,’ but this is not fitting here. The coming judgment was part of John’s message (cf. v. 9) and we may assume that he called his hearers to repent before the day of judgment would dawn. The point of the passage is that people think that they can escape from judgment by being baptized without sincere repentance, and John asks the crowds who suggested that impossible idea to them.
hupodeiknumi ‘to show,’ ‘to warn.’
phugein apo tēs melloussēs orgēs ‘to fly from the coming wrath.’ The participle of mellō usually refers to events or situations of eschatological order.
orgē (also 21.23) ‘wrath,’ in Luke of the future judgment of God.
mellō with present infinitive following ‘to be about to,’ ‘to be on the point of’ often of that which is divinely bound to happen: with less emphasis ‘to have in mind.’ The participle mellōn (of which here the feminine form melloussēs) means ‘future,’ ‘coming’ or ‘to come’; here with the connotation that the ‘coming wrath’ is bound to come.
Translation:
He said. The pronominal reference will have to be elucidated in many languages, cf. above on 1.8.
The multitudes that came out to be baptized by him refers to a fact that is prior to John’s speaking, and essential to the understanding of what follows; hence it may be better rendered as an introductory sentence, e.g. ‘people came to John in-order to be-baptized by him. He said to them…’ (Kituba, cf. also Good News Translation). — The multitudes. The noun (also in 1.10; 2.13; 3.10; 5.15; 6.17; 7.9; 8.45; 12.1, 13, 54; 14.25; 18.36; 19.37, 39; 22.6; 23.4, 27, 48) can often be rendered by ‘mass,’ ‘gathering of people,’ ‘many people.’ The plural has augmentative force here, i.e. emphasizes that the reference is to a multitude of large size. For the force of the definite article see below on “the crowd” in 5.19. — To be baptized can often be rendered by a causative reflexive form (Manobo, see on v. 3) or phrase (Sranan Tongo), or by ‘to take baptism’ (Marathi), ‘to receive baptism’ (Hindi), ‘to receive water’ (Medumba), ‘to ask him/John to baptize them.’ In Tae’ one can use a verbal form with a specific prefix indicating that the subject asks for, evokes, or instigates the act of ‘washing/baptism’ expressed by the root-word. Cf. also the Pohnpeian rendering mentioned below.
You here helps to identify what follows as an exclamation; one may have to add or substitute an exclamatory particle.
Brood of vipers. In languages were honorific forms of speech are normally used towards strangers, this strong term of abuse is an important clue, because it may be taken as an indication that the speaker is not in a mood to be polite. In some languages ‘vipers’ or ‘snakes’ is not commonly used as an invective, e.g. in Balinese or Kituba, where the natural equivalent would be ‘leeches’ or ‘insects,’ respectively. Even in such languages, however, translators often have kept to the literal rendering, probably because they felt that the bad connotation was sufficiently suggested by the situation. It may be advisable then to shift from metaphor to simile, adding e.g. ‘like,’ ‘as it were’ etc. — The normal equivalent of brood, e.g. ‘young ones,’ may rather impair the pejorative force of the expression; hence it had to be omitted in some versions. — Vipers, or a local equivalent, or, ‘poisonous snakes,’ or simply ‘snakes.’
Who…? If the intention of this rhetorical question must be brought out, one may add an answer such as ‘It is not I!.’ The people’s intention in asking for baptism (as explained in Exegesis) is brought out economically in Pohnpeian by the use of a suffix which, added to ‘be-baptized,’ suggests that the physical experience was all they came for.
Warned you, or, following the interpretation advocated in Exegesis, ‘gave you a hint’ (Nieuwe Vertaling, Hindi; also Sranan Tongo, lit. ‘pinched you to’); ‘counselled you’ (Telugu), ‘pointed-out to you the way’ (Bahasa Indonesia), ‘showed you the means’ (Tamil), ‘taught you,’ cf. also “told you that you could” (Good News Translation, similarly Nyakyusa).
Flee, or ‘run off/away (from danger)’; here metaphorically, ‘to shun,’ ‘to try to escape from.’
Wrath, or specified, ‘God’s wrath,’ ‘divine anger’ (Chinese, Balinese, Dravidian languages). Here the term does not primarily refer to the emotion felt but to the action resulting from that emotion; hence such rendering as, ‘judgment,’ “retribution” (New English Bible), ‘punishment’ (Manobo).
To come, or ‘impending’ (Willibrord); cf. also ‘wrath which God will have’ (Kekchi).
Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.
.jpg){kind=link}
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.