The Greek that is translated as a form of “teach” is translated with some figurative phrases such as “to engrave the mind” (Ngäbere) or “to cause others to imitate” (Huichol). (Source: Bratcher / Nida)
In Noongar it is translated as karni-waangki or “truth saying” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).
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 Matthew 7:29:
Uma: “Because he did not teach like the teachers of religion. His teaching [was] as a person who really has authority/power.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “because Isa’s teaching was very different from the teaching of the teachers of the religious law. For Isa had power when he spoke.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And Jesus finished teaching there, and the many people who were gathered there were amazed because his teaching was not like the teaching of the teachers of the law. Because the teaching of Jesus, by contrast, had power.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “because in his teaching, they could-see that he had authority/rulership, not like the way of the teachers of the law.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Because it was clear from his speech that he had authority to teach. Not like the explainers of law, who always quoted what had been said by the ancestors of the past.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “Because the teachers of the law do not speak forcefully when they speak, yet Jesus was like an official when he spoke, he spoke so that what he said was the final word.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
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 ta (他) is written; where he is referred to as divine, especially after the ascension, the reverential ta (祂) is used.”
In that system one kind of pronoun is used for humans (male and female alike) and one 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 in the following way: “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 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, but most translations, especially those published in the 21st century, do not. Two other languages where this is also done (in most Bible translations) are the closely related Indonesian and Malay. In both 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. ).
See also this chapter in the World Atlas of Language Structures on different approaches to personal pronouns.
Revised Standard Version follows the order of the Greek text, but Good News Translation inverts the order of the two clauses, thereby introducing the negative clause first and concluding with a positive statement: “instead, he taught with authority.”
Taught … authority contrasts the teaching of Jesus with that of the scribes. Elsewhere in the Gospel the noun authority is used in 8.9; 9.6, 8; 10.1; 21.23, 24, 27; according to 28.18 the exalted Lord has been given “all authority.”
The idea of teaching with authority has often been misunderstood. Many have translated it as “he taught with power,” for example. However, this verse is contrasting the way Jesus taught with the way the teachers of the Law taught. Their manner was to take a Scripture verse and cite what a variety of other rabbis or teachers had said about it. But Jesus taught directly without referring to other teachers. As Barclay phrases it, “he taught as one who needed no authority beyond his own.” Another way to express this may be “he taught as one who had authority himself to teach the truth.”
Scribes (Good News Translation “the teachers of the Law”) is first used in 2.4 (see comments there), though it is also found earlier in the Sermon itself (5.20). They were teachers and interpreters of the Jewish Law, and one of their primary concerns was the perpetuation of traditional decisions based on it. Jesus, on the other hand, was more concerned with the plain meaning of Scripture than with the intricate legal system that had been developed from it.
Worthy of comment is Matthew’s use of their in the phrase their scribes. Matthew probably intends to differentiate between the Jewish teachers of Scripture and a similar class of teachers who were interpreters of the Christian tradition. Therefore he uses “their teachers” as opposed to “the teachers” of Mark 1.22. Compare also 12.9, where Matthew refers to “their synagogue”; Mark 3.1 and Luke 6.6, in the parallel passage, have “the synagogue.”
For their scribes, translators sometimes have to put “the teachers of the Law of those people” or “… of the Jews.” This makes it clear who their refers to.
As in Good News Translation, it may be necessary to reverse the last part of the verse: “He didn’t teach like their teachers of the Law. He needed no authority other than his own.”
It is to be noticed that in the Gospel of Mark (1.22) this verse is set in a totally different context, thus giving it an entirely different meaning and function.
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 .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.