The Greek in John 21:24 that is translated as “and we know” or similar in English is translated in the German New Testament translation by Berger / Nord (publ. 1999) as und wir als die Gemeinde or “we as the church (or “congregation”).”
disciple
The Greek that is often translated as “disciple” in English typically follows three types of translation: (1) those which employ a verb ‘to learn’ or ‘to be taught’, (2) those which involve an additional factor of following, or accompaniment, often in the sense of apprenticeship, and (3) those which imply imitation of the teacher.
Following are some examples (click or tap for details):
- Ngäbere: “word searcher”
- Yaka: “one who learned from Jesus”
- Navajo (Dinė), Western Highland Purepecha, Tepeuxila Cuicatec, Lacandon: “one who learned”
- San Miguel El Grande Mixtec: “one who studied with Jesus”
- Northern Grebo: “one Jesus taught”
- Toraja-Sa’dan: “child (i.e., follower) of the master”
- Indonesian: “pupil” (also used in many Slavic languages, including Russian [ученик], Bulgarian [учени́к], Ukrainian [учень], or Polish [uczeń] — source: Paul Amara)
- Central Mazahua: “companion whom Jesus taught”
- Kipsigis, Loma, Copainalá Zoque: “apprentice” (implying continued association and learning)
- Cashibo-Cacataibo: “one who followed Jesus”
- Huautla Mazatec: “his people” (essentially his followers and is the political adherents of a leader)
- Highland Puebla Nahuatl: based on the root of “to imitate” (source for this and all above: Bratcher / Nida)
- Chol: “learner” (source: Larson 1998, p. 107)
- Waorani: “one who lives following Jesus” (source: Wallis 1973, p. 39)
- Ojitlán Chinantec: “learner” (Source: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)
- Javanese: “pupil” or “companion” (“a borrowing from Arabic that is a technical term for Mohammed’s close associates”)
- German: Jünger or “younger one” (source for this and one above: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
- German New Testament translation by Berger / Nord (publ. 1999): Jüngerinnen und Jünger or “female and male disciples.” Note that Berger/Nord only use that translation in many cases in the gospel of Luke, “because especially according to Luke (see 8:1–3), women were part of the extended circle of disciples” (see p. 452 and looked up at his disciples).
- Noongar: ngooldjara-kambarna or “friend-follow” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
-
French 1985 translation by Chouraqui: adept or “adept” (as in a person who is skilled or proficient at something). Watson (2023, p. 48ff.) explains (click or tap here to see more):
[Chouraqui] uses the noun “adept,” which is as uncommon in French as it is in English. It’s an evocative choice on several levels. First, linguistically, it derives — via the term adeptus — from the Latin verb adipiscor, “to arrive at; to reach; to attain something by effort or striving.” It suggests those who have successfully reached the goal of their searching, and implies a certain struggle or process of learning that has been gradually overcome. But it’s also a term with a very particular history: in the Middle Ages, “adept” was used in the world of alchemy, to describe those who, after years of labor and intensive study, claimed to have discovered the Great Secret (how to turn base metals like lead into gold); it thus had the somewhat softened meaning of “someone who is completely skilled in all the secrets of their field.”
Historians of religion often use the term adept with reference to the ancient mystery religions that were so prevalent in the Mediterranean in the centuries around the time of Jesus. An adept was someone who, through a series of initiatory stages, had penetrated into the inner, hidden mysteries of the religion, who understood its rituals, symbols, and their meaning. To be an adept implied a lengthy and intensive master-disciple relationship, gradually being led further and further into the secrets of the god or goddess (Isis-Osiris, Mithras, Serapis, Hermes, etc.) — secrets that were never to be revealed to an outsider.
Is “adept” a suitable category in which to consider discipleship as we see it described in the Gospels? On some levels, the link is an attractive one, drawing both upon the social-religious framework of the ancient Mediterranean, and upon certain aspects of intimacy and obscurity/secrecy that we see in the relationship of Jesus and those who followed him. The idea that disciples are “learners” — people who are “on the way” — and that Jesus is portrayed as (and addressed as) their Master/Teacher is accurate. But the comparison is unsatisfactory on several other levels.
First, the Gospels portray Jesus’s ministry as a largely public matter — there is relatively little of the secrecy and exclusiveness that is normally associated with both the mystery cults and medieval alchemy. Jesus’s primary message is not destined for a small, elite circle of “initiates” — although the Twelve are privy to explanations, experiences and teachings that are not provided to “the crowds.” For example, in Matthew 13:10-13:
Then the disciples came and asked him, “Why do you speak to [the crowds] in parables?” He answered, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. For to those who have, more will be given, and they will have an abundance; but from those who have nothing, even what they have will be taken away. The reason I speak to them in parables is that ‘seeing they do not perceive, and hearing they do not listen, nor do they understand.’”
Etymologically, adeptus suggests someone who “has arrived,” who has attained a superior level of understanding reserved for very few. However, what we see in the Gospels, repeatedly, is a general lack of comprehension of many of Jesus’s key teachings by many of those who hear him. Many of his more cryptic sayings would have been virtually incomprehensible in their original context, and would only make sense in retrospect, in the wake of the events of Jesus’s passion, death, and resurrection. The intense master-student relationship is also lacking: the Gospels largely portray “the disciples” as a loose (and probably fluctuating) body of individuals, with minimal structure or cohesion. Finally, there seems to be little scholarly consensus about the degree to which the mystery cults had made inroads in Roman-ruled Palestine during the decades of Jesus’s life. According to Everett Ferguson in his Backgrounds of Early Christianity.
Although Christianity had points of contact with Stoicism, the mysteries, the Qumran community, and so on, the total worldview was often quite different….So far as we can tell, Christianity represented a new combination for its time…. At the beginning of the Christian era a number of local mysteries, some of great antiquity, flourished in Greece and Asia Minor. In the first century A.D. the vonly mysteries whose extension may be called universal were the mysteries of Dionysus and those of the eastern gods, especially Isis.
And Norman Perrin and Dennis C. Duling note, in their book The New Testament:
Examples of such mystery religions could be found in Greece… Asia Minor… Syria-Palestine… Persia… and Egypt. Though the mysteries had sacred shrines in these regions, many of them spread to other parts of the empire, including Rome. There is no clearly direct influence of the mysteries on early Christianity, but they shared a common environment and many non-Christians would have perceived Christians as members of an oriental Jewish mystery cult.56
Given the sparse archaeological and literary evidence from this period regarding mystery cults in Roman Palestine, and the apparent resistance of many Palestinian Jews to religious syncretism, Chouraqui’s use of the noun adept implies a comparison between the historical Jesus and mystery cults that is doubtful, on both the levels of chronology and religious culture. Personally, I believe this choice suggests a vision of Jesus that distances him from the religious world of ancient Judaism, thus creating a distorted view of what spiritually inspired him. But the idea of the disciples as “learners” on a journey (as the Greek term suggests) is a striking one to consider; certainly, the Gospels show us the Twelve as people who are growing, learning, and developing…but who have not yet “arrived” at the fullness of their vocation.
Scot McKnight (in The Second Testament, publ. 2023) translates it into English as apprentice.
In Luang several terms with different shades of meaning are being used.
- For Mark 2:23 and 3:7: maka nwatutu-nwaye’a re — “those that are taught” (“This is the term used for ‘disciples’ before the resurrection, while Jesus was still on earth teaching them.”)
- For Acts 9:1 and 9:10: makpesiay — “those who believe.” (“This is the term used for believers and occasionally for the church, but also for referring to the disciples when tracking participants with a view to keeping them clear for the Luang readers. Although Greek has different terms for ‘believers’, ‘brothers’, and ‘church’, only one Luang word can be used in a given episode to avoid confusion. Using three different terms would imply three different sets of participants.”)
- For Acts 6:1: mak lernohora Yesus wniatutunu-wniaye’eni — “those who follow Jesus’ teaching.” (“This is the term used for ‘disciples’ after Jesus returned to heaven.”)
Source: Kathy Taber in Notes on Translation 1/1999, p. 9-16.
In American Sign Language it is translated with a combination of the signs for “following” plus the sign for “group.” (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)
“disciples” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor
In British Sign Language a sign is used that depicts a group of people following one person (the finger in the middle, signifying Jesus). Note that this sign is only used while Jesus is still physically present with his disciples. (Source: Anna Smith)
“Disciple in British Sign Language (source: Christian BSL, used with permission)
See also disciples (Japanese honorifics).
inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (John 21:24)
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 exclusive form (excluding the addressee). (Source: Velma Pickett and Florence Cowan in Notes on Translation January 1962, p. 1ff. and SIL International Translation Department (1999))
In Huautla Mazatec, Tok Pisin and Jarai, however, the translators selected the inclusive we.
complete verse (John 21:24)
Following are a number of back-translations of John 21:24:
- Uma: “That disciple is the one who saw all that happened, and who says his testimony. He is the one who writes this letter. And we (incl.) know the truth of his words.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
- Yakan: “The disciple of Isa whom this was said of, he is the one telling about these happenings and he is also the one who has written all this. And we (excl.) know that what he says is true.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
- Western Bukidnon Manobo: “I am that disciple he was talking about. I am the one who testifies that all of this is true. I am the one who wrote all of this, and we (excl.) know that what I write is true.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
- Kankanaey: “I am the very disciple that Jesus was talking-about there. I confirm/verify that what is written here is true, because I am the very one who wrote-it, and we (excl.) know that everything that is here is true.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
- Tagbanwa: “Well, this same disciple who was following after Jesus and Pedro, he is testifying to all of this concerning Jesus. He also is the one who wrote these things. We(excl.) really know that this which he is testifying is true.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
- Tenango Otomi: “This one is the learner who testifies to the truth of this word and wrote here on this paper what he said. And we know that what he says is true.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Sung version of John 21
Translation commentary on John 21:24
A witness was referred to in 19.35, though he was not explicitly identified. This verse also mentions a witness, who is responsible for writing at least part of the Gospel and is identified as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (verse 20). At least four problems are involved in the interpretation and translation of this verse:
(1) Who spoke of these things is in the present tense in Greek (Revised Standard Version “who is bearing witness to these things”; Goodspeed “who testifies to these things”), in contrast to the past (aorist) tense of wrote them down. What is the significance of the present tense here? Some commentators believe that the use of the present indicates that the witness on whose testimony the Gospel depends (or the part of the Gospel referred to in these things) was still alive at the time this verse was written; and this interpretation seems to be the one followed by most translations. However, the present tense may simply signal that the disciple’s testimony was considered to be present in the Gospel which he wrote.
(2) What is the precise reference of these things? Does it refer to what immediately precedes (verses 20-23), to all of Chapter 21, to Chapters 1-20, or to the entire Gospel? Since no answer to this question is agreed on by all, the translator should render these things with a term which can refer to any of the possibilities mentioned.
(3) What is the meaning of wrote them down (so also Moffatt, New American Bible; Jerusalem Bible “has written them down”)? Did the disciple write down these things himself or did he cause them to be written down? In 19.19 wrote was used causatively: Pilate did not personally write the inscription on the cross. If wrote is understood causatively in 21.24, does it mean that the disciple dictated the Gospel, that he supervised the writing, or merely that his testimony was the source for the material used (compare 19.35)? If wrote is understood as referring to the testimony behind the Gospel, then it tells us nothing about the authorship of the work. Commentators are sharply divided on the meaning of wrote, and the translator should not favor a particular interpretation in rendering the text.
(4) Who does we refer to (we know that what he said is true)? Some have maintained that the reference is to the disciple who spoke of these things. However, there is no parallel for the third person (he) and the first person (we) being used within the same sentence to designate the same individual. Therefore, it is best to take we as referring to a group which includes the writer of verse 24 but does not include the disciple, whom Jesus loved (verse 20). In languages which distinguish between an inclusive and an exclusive first person plural, the exclusive form should be used here.
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 .

Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.