Translation commentary on John 1:6

Good News Translation transforms the Greek passive structure (New English Bible “there appeared a man named John, sent from God”) into an active one, God sent his messenger, a man named John. The verb rendered “appeared” (New English Bible, Revised Standard Version “there was”; Jerusalem Bible “came”) is aorist, and the participle translated sent is perfect, and so both are in contrast with the imperfect tense (was) of verses 1,2,4 and present tense of verse 5 (shines). The significance in this change of tense is that the imperfect and the present point to something which exists outside the limits of time, while the aorist and the perfect suggest an event which took place in history. The Greek participle (“sent”) is rendered as a finite verb plus an object (sent his messenger).

A literal rendering of verse 6, such as “There was a man sent from God, whose name was John,” presents so many complications in translation that it is better to employ a rendering which clearly indicates God as the agent of the sending.

An appositional phrase, a man named John, can be placed after the expression his messenger. If one follows the Greek text literally, a reader in any one of several languages may seriously misunderstand the relation between the clause “whose name was John” and the immediately preceding referent, namely, “God.” In fact, in some languages this is precisely what people understand—that God’s name was John.

Though the Greek text does not have a noun meaning messenger, the verb translated sent really means “to send as a messenger” or “to send with a message.” Good News Translation simply restructures this expression, placing the meaning of “messenger” in a noun form, rather than inadequately translating it as a verb, such as “sent.”

A man named John may be rendered in some languages “a man whom people called John” or “a man who had the name John.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on John 1:7

In Greek, verse 7 is a sentence complete in itself (literally, “This one came for witnessing, in order that he might give witness concerning the light, in order that all might believe through him”). Many modern translations (Revised Standard Version, Jerusalem Bible, Moffatt, New English Bible) render “this one” by the third person pronoun “he.” Good News Translation renders “this one” by who, and connects the first part of this verse as a relative clause continuing the sentence begun in verse 6.

The theme of “witness” or “witnessing” is basic to John’s Gospel, and carries the meaning “speak for the benefit of/in a person’s favor,” as well as “reveal who a person is.” John the Baptist is a witness, 1.7; the Samaritan woman is a witness, 4.39; Jesus’ works are a witness, 5.36; 10.25; the Old Testament is a witness, 5.39; the crowds are a witness, 12.17; God himself is a witness, 5.37; and the Holy Spirit, as well as those whom our Lord chooses, are witnesses to him, 15.26,27.

Though the Greek usually rendered “witness” or “testify” may frequently be rendered simply “speak” or “tell,” there are two important components in the Greek term which may be made explicit in some languages. In the first place, there is an element of personal relation to the events mentioned, that is, one normally testifies or witnesses to something which one has personally experienced or seen. The second component involves an element of importance or significance in the content of what is said. Since the Greek term was frequently used in connection with witnessing in court, the associations of “important truths” are often significant in particular contexts. In this context it seems that the writer is emphasizing the importance of John’s message concerning Jesus, and therefore chooses a term which carries more significance than merely some expression for “talking” or “speaking about.”

It may be necessary to qualify the light as being “this light which comes to mankind,” to make certain that the reference is to the same light mentioned in the second part of verse 4.

So that all should hear the message and believe is a clause of purpose, and is literally “so that all should believe through him.” The phrase “through him” is recognized by all commentators as a reference to John the Baptist; and since the English sentence structure can carry this force implicitly, without the actual rendering of the phrase, Good News Translation translates it in this way, and thus avoids the possibility of an ambiguous rendering.

It is important in most languages to indicate clearly the goal of “believing,” that is, one must specify what is believed. A literal rendering, such as “that all might believe through him,” can therefore be misleading. The rendering in English “so that all should hear the message and believe” implies clearly that they should “believe the message,” but in some languages it may be necessary to say “so that all should hear what he had to say and believe his message.” On the other hand, the object of the verb may be “the light” (= Jesus), and some few translations have made this meaning explicit (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Phillips, Goodspeed). But whatever exegesis is followed, the translation should be made explicit and clear.

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on John 1:8

This verse expresses in a negative form the thought of the previous verse; the negative statement following the positive statement is a form of emphasis. This same technique was followed in verse 3.

He himself (so also New English Bible, New American Bible; “he” of Revised Standard Version, Moffatt, Goodspeed, Jerusalem Bible; “that man” of Phillips) is literally “that one.” The second clause of this verse contains no verb, but most translations supply the verb came (Phillips “was sent”). The Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch restructures completely: “his task was only to point to the Light”

In some languages it may not make sense to say He himself was not the light, since this could be interpreted as saying “John was not a torch”—an obvious truth. Therefore, it may be necessary to render this clause “He himself was not the one who brought light to mankind.”

Because of the contrast between the negative and positive statements, it may be important to emphasize this distinction by translating the second clause of verse 8 “he came just to tell about that light.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on John 1:9

Scholars are divided in their opinions of the relation between this verse and the previous and following verses. Some make it the conclusion of the paragraph begun in verse 6 (Good News Translation, New English Bible, New American Bible, Moffatt), while others place it at the beginning of the following paragraph (Phillips, Goodspeed, Jerusalem Bible, Revised Standard Version, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch). On the other hand, the UBS Greek New Testament makes verses 6-13 into one paragraph. Two arguments favor placing verse 9 as a continuation of the paragraph begun in verse 6, rather than as the beginning of a new paragraph. First, verses 1-5 reflect a kind of poetic structure, which is picked up again in verse 10. From the viewpoint of the sentence structure, therefore, verse 9 fits more naturally with the prose of verses 6-8. Secondly, as the commentators point out, the pronominal reference in verse 10 (Greek “he”; Good News Translation the Word) is the Word (see New English Bible alternative rendering), and not “the light.” It would seem, therefore, that it is better to place verse 9 with verses 6-8.

Another problem of translation in this verse grows out of the observation that the Greek text may be punctuated in two different ways. These alternatives are represented (1) in the Good News Translation text (the light that comes into the world and shines on all mankind) and (2) in the alternative rendering given in certain editions of Good News Translation (the light that shines on all men who come into the world). Most modern commentators and translators accept as their first choice the rendering represented in the Good News Translation text. Although both renderings are grammatically possible, at least two reasons favor this interpretation: (1) In the context the focus is on light, and not on mankind. (2) John elsewhere speaks of Jesus as “coming into the world” (6.14; 9.39; 11.27; 16.28), and in 12.46 Jesus says “I have come into the world as light”; but nowhere in John’s Gospel are men spoken of as “coming into the world.”

The adjective translated real (Moffatt, Goodspeed, New English Bible, New American Bible) refers to that which is real or genuine, as opposed to that which does not exist or is an imitation of that which is authentic. Elsewhere in John’s Gospel this adjective appears in 4.23,37; 6.32; 7.28; 8.16; 15.1; 17.3; and 19.35.

The precise connotation of the verb rendered shines on is difficult to determine. A number of translations understand it in the sense of “to enlighten” (Moffatt, Revised Standard Version, Jerusalem Bible, New English Bible). It can have this meaning (see Eph 1.18; Heb 6.4; 10.32), but generally those who interpret the present passage in this fashion presuppose a Hellenistic background for the prologue of the Gospel. Two considerations oppose this interpretation. (1) Nowhere else in John’s Gospel is it implied that all men are given a divine illumination; in fact, it is often explicitly stated that men do not recognize the truth when it comes to them, and it requires a special act of God’s grace for them to become his children. (2) Elsewhere in this Gospel the function of light is “to show men up for what they are,” that is, to bring men under God’s judgment (see especially 3.19-21; see also Paul’s use of this word in 1 Cor 4.5). Most translators prefer either to remain ambiguous (Good News Translation, Phillips; and so it seems Goodspeed “sheds light upon”), or to render with the force of “to enlighten” (New American Bible “gives light to”; Anchor Bible also appears to go in this direction).

A number of translational problems are associated with verse 9. In the first place, there is a shift of tense between “this was the real light” and the explanation concerning the light, that it “comes into the world” and “shines on all mankind.” The first clause must often be rendered “this light is the real light,” in which the subject becomes a specific identification of the “light” just mentioned in verse 8. The rendering of “real” as a qualification of “light” is difficult, since a literal translation would suggest to many readers that it was a physical light: that is, a torch or lamp. In reality, John is using “light” in a spiritual sense, and therefore it may be necessary to translate “This light was surely true.” On the other hand, some languages express genuineness by a negation, for example, “There is nothing at all false in this light.”

Certain complications appear when one speaks about “the light coming into the world.” It might be interpreted almost exclusively in the sense of “the dawning of the morning.” In the present context, the “coming” is not so much the arrival of the light in the physical world as its coming to mankind. It may be appropriate, therefore, to translate the final qualifications of light as “the light that comes to the people in the world and shines on all of them.”

It is essential to understand the expression all mankind in the sense of “all people.” A translation of “men” which might be interpreted as not including women should certainly be avoided.

In some languages it is not sufficient to say shines on all mankind, which would imply merely the light of a lamp or a torch shining on people. The emphasis here is that people are caused to see the light, and so in some languages one may render the final expression in verse 9 as “causes all men to see the light.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on John 1:10

World is used in John’s Gospel in three senses. (1) It may indicate the created order (see 11.9; 17.5,24; 21.25). (2) More generally it is often used in the sense of “the world of mankind,” and as such has a neutral meaning. (3) However, especially in the second half of the Gospel, the world is equated with those people who are aligned with the power of evil in opposition to God. While it is true that the major focus of attention in verse 10 is the world of men, it is necessary in some languages to distinguish between the two different emphases in this verse. The first clause refers to the Word being in the world, that is to say, in a particular place. It is further identified as the world which was made through the Word. This meaning includes the people who are in the world, but in the last clause the world obviously refers to the people in the world who did not recognize and acknowledge Christ as the Word of God. Accordingly, in some languages the first two instances of world may refer to the physical world, but the third instance of world must be translated “people in the world.”

The word translated recognize, literally “know,” especially in light of its Jewish background, implies more than mere recognition. In the Old Testament, “to know God” is not only to recognize who he is, but more important, to respond to him in obedience and faith. In John’s Gospel both ideas are important, but “to respond in faith” is primary. “To recognize” may thus be rendered “to recognize him for who he was” or “to acknowledge him.” The specific manner in which people did not recognize him is explained in verses 11 and 12, but it is important in verse 10 to anticipate this explanation by an adequate rendering of “recognize.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on John 1:11

His own country represents the Greek “his own,” a neuter phrase in Greek. Although translators differ as to the specific way in which they render this phrase, most commentators indicate that the reference is specifically to his own country, perhaps to the region of Judea in particular, which, together with Jerusalem and the Temple, is placed in focus in John’s Gospel.

His own people is literally “his own,” a masculine expression in Greek. It is best taken as a reference to the Jewish people. It is possible, of course, to take the first expression as a reference to the world in general, and the second as a reference to the peoples of the world in general, but the more restricted choice is preferable. However, Goodspeed (“he came to his home, and his own family did not welcome him”), though possible, seems too narrowly restricted. Perhaps Goodspeed bases this interpretation on the fact that the neuter phrase “his own” is used in 19.27 as a reference to the disciple’s “own home.”

Should He came to his own country be interpreted as “the country which he possessed” or “the country to which he belonged”? If it is a reference to the land of the Jewish people and to his rejection by his own Jewish people, then “country” should be understood in the sense of the country to which he belonged. However, it is important to avoid any implication that it was a country to which he belonged prior to his coming to it.

Depending upon viewpoint, it may be necessary in some languages to say “he went to his country.” In saying “he came,” one might have to assume that the writer of this Gospel was actually in Palestine when he wrote the book.

His own people did not receive him may be rendered “the people of which he was a part did not welcome him.” It is often necessary to render his own people “the people of which he was a part” or “the people to which he belonged”; otherwise readers may think that these people were his own possession, either “his own slaves” or “those over whom he ruled.”

In some languages “to receive a person” may be expressed idiomatically as “to greet him in one’s home,” “to say welcome to him,” “to accept him with happiness,” or even “to greet him as a kinsman.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on John 1:12

The verb translated receive in this verse is the simple form of the verb (Greek lambanō), while the verb translated receive in the previous verse has a prepositional prefix (Greek paralambanō). However, it is agreed that the words are synonyms in this passage.

The verb translated believed is a participle in Greek, and it is in apposition with the indirect object of the verb gave. However, the restructuring of Good News Translation carries through the meaning of the Greek and is more natural for the English reader.

It is important in rendering the verb “believe” to indicate more than merely accepting the truth about some statement. John’s use of the expression believed in him refers certainly to confidence and trust placed in Christ as the Word. Therefore, it is not merely “believed what he said,” but “trusted in him” or “put their confidence in him” or, as expressed idiomatically in some languages, “hung onto him with the heart” or “leaned their weight upon him.”

The word translated right appears elsewhere in John’s Gospel (5.27; 17.2; 19.10,11). It carries the idea of “authority” or “right,” not the meaning of “power.” It is difficult in some languages to find an appropriate equivalent for right as the term is used here. The closest equivalent may be an expression of possibility; for example, “he made it possible for them to become God’s children.” It may be expressed as direct discourse in some languages, for example, “now he said, ‘You can become God’s children.’ ” In other languages, it may be best simply to use a causative expression, for example, “so he caused them to become God’s children.” In still other instances it may be important to express some delegation of right or permission. It may be expressed in some languages as a kind of “position” or “status,” for example, “he gave them the place of being God’s children.”

In him represents “in his name,” but in biblical thought “the name” of a person is often equivalent to the person himself and to what he is (for example, in John, Jesus is the Messiah, Son of God, Savior of the world). See 14.13 for a more detailed discussion.

Although in many languages it is impossible to make the distinction, it is interesting to note that in John’s Gospel believers are referred to as God’s children and never as “God’s sons.” According to the Gospel of John, Jesus is the only Son of God.

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on John 1:13

Good News Translation, together with many modern translations, radically restructures this verse, which reads: “who were not born of bloods, neither of the will of the flesh, neither of the will of a man, but of God.” “Of bloods” is taken by most modern translators to mean “of human origin” (New English Bible “of any human stock,” Jerusalem Bible “of human stock”; Phillips “the course of nature”), in light of the ancient belief that the embryo was created from the blood of the father and the mother. In Good News Translation this phrase appears as by natural means.

The meaning of the next two phrases is debated. The word “flesh” is taken by some to have an evil connotation (so New American Bible “by carnal desire”; New English Bible “fleshly desire”; Jerusalem Bible “urge of the flesh”). However, in John’s Gospel “flesh” is not regarded as evil in itself (see in particular verse 14), but rather as standing for man over against God, as in the Old Testament. It seems best, therefore, to interpret “flesh” in a neutral sense in this passage. Moreover, the word “man” is the word used of an adult male, and most frequently of a husband. In the ancient world, the man was looked upon as the primary agent in procreation; the woman was merely the vessel in which procreation took place. So it is best to take the phrase “through the will of a man” in a general sense without any evil connotation attached to it.

Good News Translation understands the entire verse to be a contrast between birth by natural means and birth by God’s Spirit. Moreover, it takes the last two phrases (“through the will of the flesh” and “through the will of a man”) as equivalent, the one qualifying the other. This interpretation is the basis for the rendering by being born as the children of a human father. Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch translates the entire verse “They did not become this (that is, God’s children of verse 12) by natural birth, but because God himself gave them new life.”

Though it is possible to render verse 13 literally, such a rendering would almost always involve severe distortion in the meaning of the original text, carrying the implication that natural birth is in some way related to evil sexual desires. Furthermore, “who were born not of blood” has been understood in some languages to mean that the children of God had no blood in them when they were born. In still other languages, this clause would be interpreted as meaning that there was no afterbirth when the children of God were born.

The expression “of the will of the flesh” may be either misunderstood or meaningless, especially in a language in which the flesh itself (simply as the softer body tissues in contrast with the bones) cannot be spoken of as having any desires or will.

However, to translate They did not become God’s children by natural means may also produce difficulties. “By natural means” is a generic expression, though it is explained by the following clause, by being born as the children of a human father. It is possible in some languages to express this passage as “They did not become God’s children just by being born as human beings, that is, by being born as the children of a human father.” In other languages, however, this meaning may be expressed more fully as “They did not become God’s children in the same way that people become the children of their parents, that is, by being born as children of a human father.”

God himself was their Father accomplishes at least two things translationally. First, in the Greek clause structure “God” is in focus, which accounts for the rendering God himself. Secondly, such an expression as “were begotten” is difficult in English; the nearest equivalent is was their Father.

Rather than saying God himself was their Father, it may be more satisfactory to translate “God himself caused them to be his children.” God himself was their Father might suggest that the children of God were to be virgin born or that God himself would in some way influence their conception. The use of “caused them to be his children” will remove the possibility of misunderstanding in most cases.

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .