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.
Following are a number of back-translations of 1 John 3:22:
Uma: “And whatever we request he will give us, for we follow his commands and we do what makes his heart happy.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “Whatever we (dual) ask God for we (dual) will receive because we (dual) follow/obey his commands and we (dual) do what pleases him.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “He will give us what we ask for since we obey His commands and we do what He wants.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “And whatever we request from him, he will give it because we are obeying his commands and we are doing what pleases/satisfies him.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Well therein, whatever we will request from him, it’s certain we can receive it, because we are obeying his commands and we are doing what pleases him.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “Whenever we ask something from God, God will give what we want because we obey the word he commands and we do what he approves of.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Yatzachi Zapotec: “And whatever we ask him, he will give it, because we do what he commands and what he likes.”
Eastern Highland Otomi: “And we receive all that we ask for, because we do his will and also we do what he favors (looks well on).”
Tzotzil: “Because we obey his commands, because we do what his heart wants, therefore he gives us all that we ask him.” (Source for this and two above: John Beekman in Notes on Translation 12, November 1964, p. 1ff.)
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 tā (他) is written; where he is referred to as divine, especially after the ascension, the reverential tā (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 and Orthodox 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 or The Orthodox New Testament, but most translations 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. ).
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between. One way to do this is through the usage of lexical honorific forms, i.e., completely different words, as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017.
In these verses, itadaku (いただく), a respectful form of morau (もらう) or “receive” is used. (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
This verse is still dependent on the “if” clause in verse 21. The two clauses show that love between God and the Christians is reciprocal; God shows his love by giving them what they ask for, and they show their love by doing what pleases him.
In we receive from him, the present tense again shows that the reference is to a present reality. The clause may have to be rendered ‘to us is given by him/God,’ ‘God gives us.’
For whatever we ask or, shifting to a temporal clause, ‘whenever we ask (him) for something,’ see comments on “whoever keeps” in 2.5. For comparable statements on asking a favor from God, see John 16.23-24, 26-27; and compare Matt 18.19; Mark 11.24; Luke 11.9-13; James 1.5.
Ask: for this request, which is addressed to a superior power, several versions use ‘to beseech/entreat,’ ‘to call upon,’ or an idiomatic phrase of the same meaning such as ‘to say poor,’ that is, to call attention to one’s situation, ‘to ask with one’s heart coming out (that is, very sincerely).’
Other versions prefer their term for “to pray.” Some idiomatic or descriptive renderings of that concept are ‘to talk to God,’ ‘to cause God to know,’ ‘to lift up one’s words to God.’ Terms referring to the reciting of long, often meaningless prayers, or having the connotation of irreverent insistence, should be avoided.
Because: the following clause indicates a certain parallelism between God’s acts of love for his children and the Christians’ acts of love for their Father. Therefore the conjunction because has the sense of ‘since,’ ‘in view of the fact that.’
For we keep his commandments, see comments on 2.3. The present tense of this and the following verb has durative force.
What pleases him in the Greek is literally “things pleasing before him.” Some other renderings used are ‘what he rejoices in,’ ‘things that make him happy.’ Sometimes idiomatic phrases serve to render the concept; for example, ‘what his heart considers good,’ ‘what fits his eye,’ ‘what his bowels are sweet with,’ ‘what arrives at his gall.’ For some further details compare A Translator’s Handbook on the Gospel of Mark on 1.11.
Quoted with permission from Haas, C., de Jonge, M. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on The First Letter of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
and we will receive:(Logical Relationship) This is a second, and more important, consequence of the fact that God does not condemn us as sinners when we pray to him.
Made available under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License (CC BY-SA) creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0
All Scripture quotations in this publication, unless otherwise indicated, are from The Holy Bible, Berean Standard Bible. BSB is produced in cooperation with Bible Hub, Discovery Bible, OpenBible.com, and the Berean Bible Translation Committee.
Living Water is produced for the Bible translation movement in association with Lutheran Bible Translators. Lyrics derived from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®).
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.