Following are a number of back-translations of Luke 6:19:
Noongar: “All the people wanted Jesus. They touched him because power was coming from him. Jesus healed all the people.” (Source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
Uma: “Many people searched for a way wanting to touch Yesus, because there was power that appeared from his body that healed them all.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “And all these crowds of people tried hard to touch (lit. reach) Isa with their hands for there was power coming from his body therefore they all got well.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And many of those people wanted to touch Jesus because there was power which came out from him, and by means of this they were all being healed.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “All who were there did all in their power (lit. did their ability) to touch him, because there was power coming-from him to heal all who were sick.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “The people really were persevering to be able to touch Jesus because there was supernatural-power in him which healed illness,” (Source: Tagbanwa 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 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. ).
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®).
kai pas ho ochlos ezētoun haptesthai autou ‘and the whole crowd tried to touch him.’ pas ho ochlos refers in a loose way to all people who were there; it is virtually plural, hence ezētoun ‘tried’ is in the plural. For haptomai cf. on 5.13.
hoti dunamis par’ autou exērcheto ‘for power came forth from him.’ As in 5.17 and 8.46 the conception is that of a spiritual power or substance residing as it were in Jesus and becoming effective when Jesus addresses, or touches sick people, or is touched by them. In 8.46 the last happens even without Jesus knowing who touches him. par’ autou is synonymous with ap’ autou (cf. on 4.35 and 8.46). The imperfect tense exērcheto (as the subsequent iato ‘healed’) is durative.
kai iato pantas ‘and (he) healed all.’ The subject is dunamis, or Jesus himself, preferably the latter, since both iaomai and therapeuō occur always in the New Testament with a personal subject. The clause is governed by hoti.
Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.
The entire crowd was trying to touch Him: In this context, the entire crowd refers to the people there who were sick or demon-possessed. They wanted to touch Jesus in order that they might be healed by the touch. For example:
the people all tried to touch him ⌊in order to be healed⌋
6:19b
because power was coming from Him and healing them all: This clause states the reason why the people wanted to touch him.
In some languages, it may not be possible to say that power came from Jesus or that this power healed people. In other languages a literal translation might wrongly imply that after he healed someone Jesus was less powerful than before. In all these languages it may be necessary to say something like:
Jesus was powerfully healing everyone. -or-
Jesus had the power/ability to heal everyone.
General Comment on 6:19a–b
In some languages it may be more natural to place the reason in 6:19b before its result in 6:19a. For example:
19bPower was coming from Jesus and healing all of them, 19aso all the people tried to touch him. -or-
19bPower was coming from Jesus and healing all of them, 19athat is why all the people tried to touch him.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.