blood guilt

The concept of “blood guilt” that is referred to in Matt 27:24-25 and Acts 5:28 is translated in Gbaya and other languages of Central Africa with familiar terms that denote concepts relating to Hebrew thought in a way that English, for instance, does not have.

Philip Noss reports (in The Bible Translator 1996, p. 139ff. ):

“In the Musey language of western Chad it is called tògòrò, in Sara-Madjingai of southeastern Chad it is known as mōsēyō, in Gbaya as spoken in central Cameroon and in the Central African Republic it is called simbò. (…). Strangely, perhaps, standard English does not have an equivalent word, at least not in contemporary speech. The closest functional equivalent may be the English reference to ‘the stain of blood’ or the expression ‘to have blood on one’s hands.’ These various words and expressions all express the result of shedding blood.

“A person who is guilty of shedding blood becomes the victim of his/her deed. The consequence of the act of killing will inevitably fall upon the killer and potentially upon anyone who comes in contact with the killer, unless the killer is purified.

“In Gbaya a simbò thing is anything that causes someone to become a simbò person, including killing certain animals (incl. leopards, elands and bongos) and humans. (…) The spilling of human blood brought the curse of simbò upon the person who was responsible for the death of a fellow human being. From this curse there was no escape for the guilty person and his family and his village without purification by another person who himself had been purified from simbò.

“For the translator of the Bible the question that must be asked is whether the concept associated with the spilling of blood by these central African cultures is similar to the concepts reflected in the Old and New Testaments or whether it is too culture-specific to be applied within the context of Hebrew and Jewish religious thought and expression.

“When Pilate washes his hands before the people and says, ‘I am not responsible for this man’s death.’ and the mob responds. ‘Let the punishment for his death fall on us and on our children’ (Matt 27:24-25, Good News Bible), the Gbaya understand this to refer to simbò. Pilate attempts to cleanse himself from the consequence of his responsibility in the death of Jesus while the people call for that very consequence to fall upon themselves. In the Gbaya understanding of the shedding of blood, no amount of self-cleansing can remove the curse of spilled blood which will surely fall upon Pilate and the people and their descendants.

“In Acts 5:28 the Jews express an implied fear of simbò when the High Priest says to the apostles, “you want to make us responsible for this man’s death” (Good News Bible). The New International Version of the Bible renders this statement, ‘you are determined to make us guilty of this man’s blood.’ The Gbaya would say, ‘you want this man’s simbò to take us.’

“The Greek text of these verses reflects the Hebrew underlying thought, for in each of the three sentences quoted, explicit reference is made to blood. (…)

“Although there does not seem to be a specific word that expresses the concept of simbò in Hebrew, in Greek we do come very close to an explicit expression of the result of the shedding of blood. The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible cites the Greek word miasma which it defines as the ‘slain, pollution” of homicide, “an automatic, objective state” for which purification was required. The early Greek verb miainō meant “to stain, to dye.’ A specialized meaning of this verb resulted from its use with blood where it came to mean ‘to defile, to sully.’ The stain or defilement was known as miasma, the person who was defiled was miaros. For the Gbaya this was simbò. for the Sar speaker it was möseyö which is literally, ‘the blood of death,’ that is, ‘the stain/defilement of the spilling of human blood.’ (…)

“In conclusion, the components that are central to the Old Testament concept of dam/damim and the New Testament miasma are widely recognized in the cultures of central Africa. The implications of this fact need to be considered by translator and theologian alike.”

Pilate

The name that is transliterated as “Pilate” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language (as well as in French Sign Language) with the sign signifying the washing of hands (referring to Matthew 27:24). (Source: John Elwode in The Bible Translator 2008, p. 78ff.)


“Pilate” in Spanish Sign Language, source: Sociedad Bíblica de España

In American Sign Language it is translated with the sign for “government/governor” plus the sign for “P” with a circular movement. The reference to government indicates Pilate’s position of authority in the Roman Empire. (Source: RuthAnna Spooner, Ron Lawer)


“Pilate” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor

complete verse (Matthew 27:24)

Following are a number of back-translations of Matthew 27:24:

  • Uma: “Finally Pilatus saw that there was no longer any use in speaking to them, for they were becoming noisier-and-noisier. That’s why he took some water and washed-his-hands [with it] in front of the crowds and said: ‘I wash-my-hands! So that you see that I have no part [lit., I am not mixing] in the murder of this person! You yourselves are responsible.'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “Pilatus knew that there was no use in saying anything more, because the crowds were soon going to riot. So-then he took/got water and washed his hands in front of the people as a sign that he did not have anything to do with their doings. And he said, ‘If this man dies I have no sin. You are the ones at fault/sinning.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And then Pilate knew that there was no use in his talking, because the people were beginning to riot. So he got some water, and he washed his hands here in front of the people. He said, ‘This is your sin. The blood of this man is on your hands. My hands are clean.'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “Upon Pilato’s seeing that he had no alternative because it-was-close to there-being a riot, he took water and washed-his-hands in front of the people saying, ‘I have done this to show that I am not joining-in-the-action of killing this person. You are the ones who will be responsible!'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “When Pilato observed that he wasn’t able to do anything, but that on the contrary the people were getting much more troubled/worked-up, he caused water to be fetched and then washed his hands there in front of that crowd. He spoke saying, ‘My hands are now clean. Now I have no involvement in the death of this fellow. You are responsible!'” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “Pilate knew then that he could in no way release Jesus. Because the people were very loudly shouting with anger. He ordered that water be brought so that in the face, the eyes of the people, he could wash his hands. He said to the people: ‘This man here is innocent. He has no sin for which he should be killed. See to it yourselves what you do.'” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)

Translation commentary on Matthew 27:24

This final in the series of five scenes (verses 24-26) is unique to Matthew’s Gospel. Through it the author accomplishes at least two goals: (1) the acknowledgment on the part of the Roman governor that Jesus is innocent, and (2) the Jewish acceptance of the responsibility for the death of Jesus.

So when Pilate saw that he was gaining nothing is expressed very well in Phillips: “When Pilate realized that nothing more could be done.” Gaining can also be “accomplishing” or “achieving.”

Riot represents the word rendered “tumult” in 26.5, where the chief priests and the elders are making their plans to capture Jesus at a time when the people would not riot. Matthew perhaps intends to show that a riot was now in the making, but one which was actually initiated by the chief priests and the elders, who have finally won the people over to their side.

That Pilate washed his hands in sight of the crowd is a claim that he is assuming no responsibility for what the Jews want to do to Jesus. Commentators note that the ritual of hand washing to show one’s innocence of a crime is of Jewish origin, going back to Deuteronomy 21.6-7. But one commentator notes that the action was “almost proverbial,” thereby intimating that it was not confined to the Jewish people.

In the Old Testament blood is used to refer to a violent death (for example, murder or execution), and then to refer to the responsibility for that death. Therefore I am innocent of this man’s blood means “I am not responsible for this man’s death.” In verse 25 “His blood be upon us and on our children” assumes the second of these two meanings: “Let the responsibility for his death fall on us and on our children!” (Good News Translation). In many languages, of course, the blood can be retained with complete understanding.

As the footnotes in Revised Standard Version and New Jerusalem Bible point out, some Greek manuscripts have “I am innocent of this man’s righteous blood.” However, the adjective “righteous” is not likely to have been omitted by a later scribe, had it been an original part of the Greek text. On the other hand, it is precisely the sort of information which pious scribes would have added to the text for the sake of underscoring Pilate’s acknowledgment of Jesus’ innocence.

“This is your doing” of Good News Translation is more literally see to it yourselves. The meaning is “This is something for which you will have to answer” (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch), as the response of the crowd (verse 25) clearly established. Other translators have “this is your responsibility.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on the Gospel of Matthew. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1988. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .