By Mark D. Taylor, NLT Bible Translation Committee

The word doulos is used 124 times in the New Testament. In the Greek culture of the New Testament era, the term generally referred to someone who was enslaved. English translations have often used the word servant to render doulos. But the terms servant and slave tend to have different connotations in our minds. We often think of a servant as someone who is hired and then paid for work, whereas we tend to think of a slave as being owned by a master, completely under someone else’s control. Since there are both similarities and differences between ancient notions of servitude and slavery and those of our modern world, how should doulos be translated?

In many passages, the term can be translated either way. While “slave” might generally be the best corresponding word for doulos, in some contexts, especially a number of Jesus’ parables, the agency attributed to the doulos may be better understood by modern readers through the notion of “servant” (for example, Matthew 24:45-51; 25:14-30).

Sometimes, the term doulos appears alongside another word that connotes “servant.” For example, in Luke 7:1-10 we read about a Roman centurion whose young slave (or servant) was sick and near death. The centurion was eager for Jesus to heal the servant, but he sent some friends to tell Jesus, “Lord, don’t trouble yourself by coming to my home, for I am not worthy of such an honor. I am not even worthy to come and meet you. Just say the word from where you are, and my servant will be healed. I know this because I am under the authority of my superior officers, and I have authority over my soldiers. I only need to say, ‘Go,’ and they go, or ‘Come,’ and they come. And if I say to my slaves, ‘Do this,’ they do it.” [NLT]

The Greek text uses two different words in describing the individual who was sick—doulos and pais (which refers to a young person, often a slave or servant). The narrator uses doulos throughout (7:2, 3, 10), but pais is used in the centurion’s plea of 7:7. And when the centurion refers to those who are under his authority, doulos is used. The NLT distinguishes these two Greek terms in this passage by rendering doulos as slave and pais as servant. Whether we understand this young person who was healed as a slave or a servant, the key point of the story is that the centurion had great faith in Jesus’ ability to heal.

In Luke 7:1-10, some translations render doulos as “servant,” and others render it as “slave”:

Another challenge translators face is deciding how to translate doulos when the apostles use that term in describing themselves. For example in Romans 1:1, Paul introduces himself as “a doulos of Christ Jesus.” Is he referring to himself as a servant of Christ or a slave of Christ? (See also James 1:1; 2 Peter 1:1; and Jude 1:1.)

Look at how various translations render doulos in these passages where the writer refers to himself as a doulos. In Romans 1:1, for example:

In this context, the NLT translators translated doulos as “slave,” which is generally conceived as a much stronger term than “servant.” Their understanding is that these writers saw themselves not just as servants of Christ, but as actual slaves of Christ. They considered themselves to be in complete submission to Christ. Like a centurion’s slaves, they would do whatever their master (Christ) told them to do. No arguing, no exceptions. Just do it.

Do we see ourselves as slaves of Christ? Or even servants of Christ? It’s all too easy for us to say that Jesus is our friend and that we will follow his bidding when we choose to do so. But to the apostles, there was no choice. They were 100% in submission to Christ. He was not only their Savior; he was also their Lord. May we learn to view our relationship with Christ with the same level of devotion.

by Jonathan W. Bryant, PhD; Senior Editor, Tyndale Bibles; Bible Translation Committee

When we hear or see the word recline, we might picture someone seated in a large, comfortable chair, pulling a lever, and leaning back as the top of the chair angles back. For the most part, we would not associate that image of reclining with eating a meal, an activity we typically do while sitting straight up at a table.

So it might surprise us to discover that in the first-century Jewish and Greco-Roman worlds, meals were often eaten in a reclined position. When people shared a meal at a dinner party or banquet, they would indeed surround a table, but they would lie on a couch or cushion with their heads near the table and feet away from the table, eating while propped up on an elbow. As such, the Greek word used throughout the Gospels to describe eating at a shared meal is a word that means “recline.”

The term ἀνάκειμαι (pronounced ah-NAHK-ay-mai) essentially means “to recline.” But in the New Testament, this term always occurs in the context of a shared meal. So the NLT employs dining language to help readers understand that this form of reclining refers specifically to a posture taken while eating a meal. For example:

• “Meanwhile, Jesus was in Bethany at the home of Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy. While he was eating, a woman came in with a beautiful alabaster jar of expensive perfume and poured it over his head.” (Matthew 26:6-7)
• “When it was evening, Jesus sat down at the table with the Twelve. While they were eating, he said, ‘I tell you the truth, one of you will betray me.’” (Matthew 26:20-21 // Mark 14:17-18)
• “Who is more important, the one who sits at the table or the one who serves? The one who sits at the table, of course. But not here! For I am among you as one who serves.” (Luke 22:27)
• “A dinner was prepared in Jesus’ honor. Martha served, and Lazarus was among those who ate with him.” (John 12:2)

The NLT makes explicit that contexts of dining are in view when this Greek word appears. In John’s portrayal of the Last Supper, this word appears in a description of one disciple’s posture in relation to Jesus. A literal rendering of this description would be, “One of his disciples, the one whom Jesus loved, was reclining on the bosom of Jesus” (John 13:23; see KJV). The reader should not have the image of a disciple snuggling up to Jesus as a young child might do with a parent. Rather, we should picture a person eating next to Jesus, with his head in relative proximity to Jesus’ chest due to the customary eating posture. Hence, the NLT renders this verse, “The disciple Jesus loved was sitting next to Jesus at the table.”

Anakeimai twice appears as a substantive (a participle functioning as a noun) in Matthew’s account of Jesus’ parable of the great feast. After the king’s initial invitees refuse to come to the feast, the king invites people from off the streets. These attendees are identified as “those reclining” (anakeimai) at the feast. Given the context, in which the emphasis is on attendance rather than eating, the NLT, along with other translations (including ESV, NIV, NKJV, and NRSV), renders anakeimai here as “guests.”

As these examples suggest, the translation of an ancient-language term into a modern language involves an attentiveness to particular historical contexts.

• Do we always translate a Greek word with the same English word across different contexts? For example, should anakeimai be rendered the same in the context of
  • a typical shared meal,
  • the Last Supper, and
  • a wedding banquet?
• Or do the different emphases in different contexts merit a distinct rendering?

It also involves an attentiveness to what a typical reader today would understand about the ancient context. For example, would the simple translation “reclining” help a reader truly understand what’s going on when there is no prior knowledge of ancient dining practices?

These are the types of questions translators must regularly answer. And these questions are best discussed in community (hence the value of a “Bible Translation Committee”), perhaps around a table, though probably not while reclining!

English:     singular: brother; a person
plural: brothers; brothers and sisters

by Mark D. Taylor, NLT Bible Translation Committee

The Greek word adelphos (pronounced ah-del-FOS) appears 343 times in the New Testament—often in the plural adelphoi (pronounced ah-del-FOI). Its most common translation into English is “brother” or “brothers,” as in Matthew 4:18:

One day as Jesus was walking along the shore of the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers—Simon, also called Peter, and his brother Andrew.

Simon Peter and Andrew were indeed siblings. In the Gospels, this is the most common meaning of adelphos. It refers to a male sibling.

But sometimes adelphos refers generically to an unspecified person. For example, in Matthew 5:23-24 we read:

So if you are presenting a sacrifice at the altar in the Temple and you suddenly remember that someone has something against you, leave your sacrifice there at the altar. Go and be reconciled to that person. Then come and offer your sacrifice to God.

The context suggests that this principle is to be applied in one’s relationship with anyone, not simply a male sibling.

The term is also used in a metaphorical sense to refer to other believers. Those in the early churches began to view one another in a warm, familial sense akin to how they would view a sibling. This usage is especially prevalent in Acts and the Epistles. For instance, in Romans 1:13 we read:

I want you to know, dear brothers and sisters,* that I planned many times to visit you, but I was prevented until now. I want to work among you and see spiritual fruit, just as I have seen among other Gentiles.
^{1:13 Greek brothers.}

The Greek text here in Romans (and also in other NT letters) uses adelphoi, a grammatically masculine noun. But note that the NLT renders it as “brothers and sisters,” as it does frequently throughout Acts and the NT letters. Many of the messages in Paul’s letters include greetings to particular women, making it clear that he was writing to both men and women in the church. Thus, we can rightly understand that Paul frequently had both male and female believers in mind when he used this umbrella term.

Many modern translations recognize this meaning through the use of a footnote. When the NLT renders adelphoi as “brothers and sisters,” it includes a footnote that reads “Greek brothers.” The NIV also renders it as “brothers and sisters” (with a similar footnote). The ESV renders it as “brothers,” with a footnote that reads “Or brothers and sisters. In New Testament usage, depending on the context, the plural Greek word adelphoi (translated “brothers”) may refer either to brothers or to brothers and sisters.”

In some instances, the text uses adelphoi in a context that clearly refers specifically to the male believers. For example, in Acts 1:14-16 we read,

¹⁴ They all met together and were constantly united in prayer, along with Mary the mother of Jesus, several other women, and the brothers of Jesus.
¹⁵ During this time, when about 120 believers were together in one place, Peter stood up and addressed them. ¹⁶ “Brothers,” he said, “the Scriptures had to be fulfilled concerning Judas, who guided those who arrested Jesus. This was predicted long ago by the Holy Spirit, speaking through King David.

The highlighted term in verse 15 reflects the metaphorical use of adelphoi (see the mention of women in verse 14), so the NLT renders it as “believers.” But in verse 16 the Greek text uses two words that can be literally translated as “Men, brothers.” So it is clear that Peter was speaking specifically to the men in the crowd. Accordingly, the NLT renders it as “Brothers” rather than “Brothers and sisters.”

Today, you might hear a pastor refer to the believers in the congregation as “brothers and sisters,” and such family-type language is appropriate in light of New Testament usage. May we indeed consider fellow believers as near and dear to us, treating them with love and care—just as we should treat our actual siblings.

If you compare two or more Bible translations, you will occasionally find differences in the breakup of paragraphs or major sections of the text. What’s going on?

For starters, we need to recognize that the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts upon which our translations are based did not have chapter breaks, verse numbers, paragraph breaks, or punctuation. In fact, the earliest Greek manuscripts didn’t even have spaces between the words. All those features have been added by Bible copyists and scholars through the centuries.

The standard Greek text used by most students today, published by the United Bible Societies (UBS), includes chapter and verse numbers and a minimal level of punctuation. The scholars who compiled that Greek text have also inserted section headings in the text, but translators have to make their own judgment as to the placement of paragraph breaks and section headings.

An example where translations differ comes in the section break at Ephesians 5:20-21. The syntax of the Greek text suggests that verses 18-24 comprise one long sentence, yet the UBS text introduces a paragraph break and a new section header beginning at verse 21. Some translations (e.g., RSV, NIV²⁰¹¹, NLT) follow the UBS text and introduce a section header prior to verse 21. Other translations (e.g., NASB, NIV¹⁹⁸⁴, NKJV, NRSV, ESV) introduce a section header prior to verse 22. We can see the difference when we compare this passage in the NLT and the ESV:

Why the difference? It relates to the translators’ understanding of what Paul is saying in verse 21. Is the concept of “submitting to one another” the end of a thought and therefore the end of a major section, as in the ESV? Or is verse 21 the beginning of a new thought that is continued in verses 22-33? If the section break comes before verse 22 rather than before verse 21, it implies that submitting to one another (v. 21) is somehow unrelated to the instruction for wives to submit to their husbands (v. 22).

The NLT translators see verse 21 as an introduction to the relationships within a marriage. Believers are to submit to one another (v. 21). This thought is then fleshed out in terms of the relationship between wives and husbands. Wives are to submit to their husbands as to the Lord (v. 22), and husbands are to love their wives, just as Christ loved the church (v. 25).

We must remember, though, that the section headings in any translation have been created by the translators as a tool to help readers understand the flow of the text. Those headings were not in the original Hebrew or Greek texts.

This is just one small glimpse into the kinds of decisions that Bible translators make as they prepare the text for print. Translators take their work very seriously since they are dealing with God’s message for all people in all cultures and languages. May we as readers also take the text seriously as we read it and apply it to our own lives.

by Jonathan W. Bryant, PhD, Senior Editor, Tyndale Bibles

Sometimes when a word is being translated from one language to another, it can be difficult to find a direct correspondence in a single word. In such cases, the word in the source language (e.g., ancient Greek) carries a meaning known to that audience but for which the target language (e.g., English) doesn’t have an equivalent word. The concept may be present in the target language, but to adequately put the ancient concept into words requires more explanation than a single word can give.

The Greek word paraklētos (pronounced pah-RAH-klay-tahs) provides one such example. This noun (which appears in John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7; 1 John 2:1) is related to the frequently used verb parakaleō, which at its core means “to call to one’s side.” This “calling” can be for various purposes (e.g., encouragement, an appeal or entreaty, exhortation, or comfort), so the verb can be rendered in various ways in the New Testament, depending on the context. The noun paraklētos similarly means something to the effect of “one who is called to the side of another to provide aid.” To translate this meaning into a single English word proves difficult.

A further complication that emerges in translating paraklētos is that, as a reference to the Holy Spirit, it has been treated as a title (some simply prefer to use the transliterated term Paraclete). Modern English translations have thus generally attempted to render paraklētos with a singular, titular term in English. But note the variation of terms used among popular English translations in, for example, John 14:26:

• NIV: And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever—
• NLT: And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate, who will never leave you.
• ESV: And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever,
• KJV: And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
• NKJV: And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever—
• CSB: And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever.
• NRSV: And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate, to be with you forever.
• NASB: I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, so that He may be with you forever;

The NLT translators opted for the English term advocate, as a general way of referring to someone who is “called to come alongside.” While advocate may sound like an attorney for some readers, other terms like comforter or helper can narrow the sense to coming alongside simply for encouragement or material aid. Similarly, counselor carries for many the sense of either verbal advice or a therapeutic connotation. The overarching notion of “coming alongside another to provide aid” can involve numerous purposes, so any singular-word rendering is likely to leave readers with an understanding of the Holy Spirit that is at least somewhat incomplete. As a way of accounting for this, the NLT translators opted to include a footnote that provides multiple alternative options for translating paraklētos, along with noting the transliterated Greek term Paraclete. See, for example, the NLT rendering of John 14:16 along with the textual footnote:

“And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate,* who will never leave you.”

                14:16 Or Comforter, or Encourager, or Counselor. Greek reads Paraclete; also in 14:26.

This textual note (which also appears at John 15:26; 16:7) acknowledges the complexity of rendering this Greek term with a single English term and allows the reader to see a fuller picture of what may be involved in the Holy Spirit’s work as described by John.

May we recognize in our own lives the presence and work of the Holy Spirit—the One Who Has Come Alongside Us. Jesus has not left us alone but has sent his Spirit to dwell in us.

by Mark D. Taylor, NLT Bible Translation Committee

The Greek word diathēkē (pronounced dee-ah-THAY-kay, with a soft TH, as in “thaw”) appears thirty-three times in the New Testament. In English translations, it is usually rendered as “covenant,” even though that word is not used much in everyday speech. But “covenant” is an extremely important word in biblical theology, so English translations, including the NLT, generally retain it.

When Jesus instituted the new covenant at the Last Supper, the Gospel writers used the word diathēkē:

After supper he took another cup of wine and said, “This cup is the new covenant (diathēkē) between God and his people—an agreement confirmed with my blood, which is poured out as a sacrifice for you.” (Luke 22:20)

But what did Jesus mean by saying that he was instituting a new covenant? For context, we have to go back to the covenants of the Old Testament. The Hebrew text uses the word berith (typically translated “covenant”) to describe the nature and terms of God’s relationship with his people. God established multiple covenants in the Old Testament. We see the first covenant in the story of Noah:

I have placed my rainbow in the clouds. It is the sign of my covenant with you and with all the earth. (Genesis 9:13)

God later established a covenant with Abram (Abraham):

So the Lord made a covenant with Abram that day and said, “I have given this land to your descendants, all the way from the border of Egypt to the great Euphrates River.” (Genesis 15:18)

This covenant with Abraham (and his descendants) forms the basis for God’s intervention on behalf of his people in the Exodus:

God heard their groaning, and he remembered his covenant promise to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. (Exodus 2:24)

Following the Exodus, God established another covenant with his people through Moses:

Then Moses took the blood from the basins and splattered it over the people, declaring, “Look, this blood confirms the covenant the Lord has made with you in giving you these instructions” (Exodus 24:8).

Finally, God established a covenant with David, promising that his descendants would reign forever:

But the Lord did not want to destroy David’s dynasty, for he had made a covenant with David and promised that his descendants would continue to rule. (2 Chronicles 21:7; see 2 Samuel 7:1-17)

Throughout the Old Testament the term berith (“covenant”) is used to describe the relationship between God and the people of Israel. As the Hebrew Scriptures were translated into Greek in the Septuagint, the translators employed the Greek term diathēkē, which can refer to an agreement, a will, or a testament, to render berith. So diathēkē was a familiar term to the Jewish people of Jesus’ day. With this background, Jesus indicated that his death (his blood) would institute a new relationship with his people. This notion is explicated in depth in the letter to the Hebrews, for example, in Hebrews 9:15:

That is why he [Christ] is the one who mediates a new covenant between God and people, so that all who are called can receive the eternal inheritance God has promised them. For Christ died to set them free from the penalty of the sins they had committed under that first covenant.

We are very familiar with the term testament (another possible rendering of diathēkē) because we refer to the two parts of the Bible as the Old Testament and the New Testament (though they could also be called the Old Covenant and the New Covenant). The King James Version uses the very term “new testament” in Jesus’ words at the Last Supper:

Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament [diathēkē] in my blood, which is shed for you. (Luke 22:20)

The NLT translators have opted to use the term covenant in line with the familiarity of the Old Testament covenants and its importance as a theological term.

May we be people who fully enter into a covenant relationship with God by accepting Jesus’ gift of an abundant life, which he freely offers to us.

by Jonathan W. Bryant, Senior Editor, Tyndale Bibles

The Greek word Christos appears in the New Testament over five hundred times—not surprising given the association of the term with the New Testament’s central character, Jesus. Upon seeing the English transliteration of the word (Christos), it might seem obvious that English translators would simply use the term “Christ” as a translation. But some translations, including the New Living Translation, have opted not to use “Christ” in all instances.

The term christos (originally an adjective meaning “anointed”) appears in nonbiblical Greek literature, but it took on a particular meaning in Jewish literature in relation to the Hebrew term mashiach, which also means “anointed.” This Hebrew term could be used in relation to an individual who was anointed with oil and thus set apart for a special office, such as a priest or a king (for example, David, as seen in 2 Samuel 23:1). As the Hebrew Scriptures were translated into Greek in the Septuagint, the translators employed the Greek term christos to render mashiach.

During the period between the Old and New Testaments, messianic expectations became more developed, as seen, for example, in the communities that produced the literature now known as the Dead Sea Scrolls. Scripture passages such as 2 Samuel 7:1-17, Isaiah 11:1-5, Daniel 7:13-14, and Zechariah 3:8 offered hope that God would send a great “Anointed One” who would deliver his people. Such ideas and texts stood in the background of Jewish thought in the first century AD when Jesus entered the scene. Jesus’ early Jewish followers began to identify Jesus as the mashiach, the Messiah (see, for example, Peter’s confession in Mark 8:29), undoubtedly using the term mashiach (or the related Aramaic term meshicha). As Jesus’ followers began to record in the Greek language the stories of Jesus’ life, ministry, death, and resurrection, they used the Greek term christos.

The NLT translators opted to translate christos as “Messiah” throughout the Gospels and Acts when the context assumes a Jewish audience (see, for example, Mark 8:29), while translating the term as “Christ” whenever a predominantly Gentile audience can be assumed (which is typically the case in the Letters and Revelation; see, for example, Romans 5:9). By doing so, the NLT retains the connection between the Greek term christos and the Hebrew term mashiach, treating the English words “Messiah” and “Christ” synonymously since both terms have the same meaning. There is actually a precedent for using the terms interchangeably in the New Testament itself. The Gospel writer John twice used the Greek term Μεσσίας (Messias), which is simply a Greek transliteration of the Hebrew mashiach, placed once on the lips of the disciple Andrew (John 1:41) and once on the lips of the Samaritan woman who met Jesus at a well (John 4:25). In both cases, Jewish messianic expectations are in view; and in both cases, the interchangeability of Messias and Christos is highlighted.

As the Good News concerning Jesus spread across the Roman Empire, the term Christos essentially became a proper name for Jesus among his followers (who themselves came to be known as Christianoi, “Christians”; see Acts 11:26). The connection between the term christos and the expectations regarding a coming mashiach (“Messiah”) would have been clear to most Jewish believers.

As we reflect on this term, let us remember how Jesus, the Anointed One, fulfilled the promises of the Old Testament. His coming was according to God’s plan, spoken through the prophets. And as the Anointed One, he perfectly fulfilled the roles of both king and priest, ushering in the Kingdom of God and allowing us access to his throne.

The New Living Translation and Tyndale House Publishers family mourns the loss of Dr. Philip W. Comfort who passed away on December 31, 2022, at the age of 72. Phil (as he was fondly known by all who knew him) was a member of the Bible Translation Committee for the Holy Bible, New Living Translation, serving for many years as New Testament Coordinating Editor. He also was a member of the Bible editorial team at Tyndale House for 34 years, from 1984 until his retirement in 2018, serving as Senior Bible Reference Editor.

Dr. Comfort was well known in the world of biblical scholarship as a world-class specialist and expert on the early manuscripts of the New Testament. He served as Professor of Greek and New Testament studies at Trinity School for Ministry and visiting professor of New Testament at Wheaton College. He wrote several comprehensive reference books, including New Testament Text and Translation Commentary (Tyndale House Publishers) and The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts (Kregel Academic). He also served as General Editor for the NLT Cornerstone Biblical Commentary series for Tyndale. Additionally, he and other scholars collaborated on several lay-oriented reference works published by Tyndale, such as Tyndale Bible Dictionary, The Complete Book of Who’s Who in the Bible, and Who’s Who in Christian History.

Dr. Comfort lived on Pawleys Island, South Carolina. He was preceded in death by his wife, Georgia Comfort, and is survived by his three sons, Jeremy, John, and Peter.

Our love and prayers go out to his family and we are thankful to God for Phil’s impact on our lives.

by Mark D. Taylor, NLT Bible Translation Committee

The New Testament uses the term magos in two different contexts: In Matthew 2, it refers to the magi from the east who came to visit the young Jesus, and in Acts 13, it is used to describe a sorcerer or magician named Bar-Jesus (note the relationship of the word magos and our word magician). Our focus here is on the magi who are traditionally part of the Christmas story and whose arrival to visit the Christ child is commemorated in the Christian celebration of Epiphany.

Matthew’s text tells us only a few details about the magoi (this is the plural form) who came to visit Jesus. We don’t know their names or their number, though ancient legend says there were three (corresponding to the number of gifts brought to Jesus), and that their names were Caspar, Melchior, and Balthazar. We do know that they came “from eastern lands” (Matthew 2:1). But which eastern lands exactly, we don’t know. One legend states that they were kings from Arabia, Ethiopia, and Tarsus. These magoi may have been part of a priestly class of Persia, and as Matthew 2 indicates, they were involved in observing the stars.

The question for Bible translators is how to render this term in the receptor language (in our case, English). As in many passages, William Tyndale’s translation proved quite influential in the English-speaking world. In Matthew 2:1, Tyndale rendered magoi as “wyse men.” The KJV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, and ESV follow suit and call these visitors “wise men.” The NASB and NIV break ranks and simply transliterate the term as “magi.” (But the NIRV, which is an adaptation of the NIV for young readers, uses the traditional term “wise men.”) The Living Bible and the J. B. Phillips translation both use the term “astrologers,” and The Message calls the magoi “a band of scholars.”

The translators of the NLT had long discussions about this term. In the end, they decided to retain the traditional term “wise men.” They reasoned that since the term “wise men” was so familiar (every child has heard the story of the “wise men” with their gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh), it would be prudent to use this general term—and avoid potential confusion. But the NLT does add a footnote that says, “Or royal astrologers; Greek reads magi.”

Is “magi” more accurate than “wise men”? Only in the sense that it is a transliteration (i.e., a transferring of the sounds from one language to another) of the Greek word into English. Do most readers understand the transliterated term “magi”? If they don’t, it seems that we do them no favor by using an unfamiliar term.

Whether we call them “magi” or “wise men,” let us learn a life lesson from them. When they arrived in Jerusalem, they asked, “Where is the newborn king of the Jews? We saw his star as it rose, and we have come to worship him.” I have a coffee mug that reminds me “Wise men still seek him.” May we also seek and worship him—no matter our backgrounds, prior associations, or occupations. And may we recognize, along with these first Gentile worshipers of Jesus, that the hope and salvation provided through Jesus is for all people.

by Mark D. Taylor, NLT Bible Translation Committee

The New Testament’s use of the Greek word sarx is both straightforward and complicated. The NLT uses a variety of words to translate sarx. In this article, these different English translations of sarx are marked with yellow highlights for clarity.

The literal meaning of sarx is simply “flesh,” as in the outer layer of the human body. So we read in Hebrews 2:14, “Because God’s children are human beings—made of flesh and blood—the Son also became flesh and blood. For only as a human being could he die, and only by dying could he break the power of the devil, who had the power of death.” Or in Revelation 17:16: “The scarlet beast and his ten horns all hate the prostitute. They will strip her naked, eat her flesh, and burn her remains with fire.”

In a similar sense, sarx can also represent the physical body as a whole. Jesus says to Peter in the Garden of Gethsemane, “Keep watch and pray, so that you will not give in to temptation. For the spirit is willing, but the body is weak” (Matthew 26:41).

Paul makes reference to his present, temporary physical body—in implied contrast to something more permanent—when he writes, “My old self has been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me. So I live in this earthly body by trusting the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me” (Galatians 2:20).

Sarx can also represent humankind in general, as we see in Luke 3:6, where Luke is quoting Isaiah: “And then all people will see the salvation sent from God.”

It gets more complicated when sarx is used to refer to Jesus’ human existence on earth. In the passage where Jesus says “I am the bread of life,” he goes on to say:

51 “I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Anyone who eats this bread will live forever; and this bread, which I will offer so the world may live, is my flesh.”
     52 Then the people began arguing with each other about what he meant. “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” they asked.
     53 So Jesus said again, “I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you cannot have eternal life within you. 54 But anyone who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise that person at the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Anyone who eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him” (John 6:51-56).

Throughout this passage the NLT renders sarx as “flesh.” Jesus is looking ahead to his death, which would be a sacrifice for humanity. Sarx here refers to his physical, earthly life as the true sustenance (“the living bread”) that people need for eternal life. It is essentially a synonym for the Greek term sōma, which means “body.” Sōma is the term used in connection to the Last Supper: “As they were eating, Jesus took some bread and blessed it. Then he broke it in pieces and gave it to the disciples, saying. ‘Take this and eat it, for this is my body [sōma]’” (Matthew 26:26).

In Jesus’ teaching about divorce, we read, “This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one” (Matthew 19:5; Mark 10:7-8). In these two passages, most translations render sarx mia literally as “one flesh.” Here sarx is used in a metaphorical sense to show the absolute union of a married couple in their life together—physically, spiritually, and emotionally. So the NLT (both in these passages and in Genesis 2:24, which Jesus quotes here) renders the metaphor as “united into one.”

Paul uses sarx frequently in a different metaphorical sense. For example, he uses it to refer to our (sinful) human nature in contrast with our spiritual nature:

When we were controlled by our old nature,* sinful desires were at work within us, and the law aroused these evil desires that produced a harvest of sinful deeds, resulting in death (Romans 7:5).

7:5 Greek When we were in the flesh.

The footnote in the NLT is provided to clarify that the Greek text uses the word sarx (“flesh”), but Paul is using the term as a metaphor for our old nature.

In twenty-four instances where Paul uses sarx in this metaphorical sense, the NLT translates the term as “sinful nature.” Many translations (including KJV, NASB, NKJV, and ESV) render sarx as “flesh” in most or all of these passages. Interestingly, the 1984 edition of the NIV used “sinful nature,” but the 2011 edition uses the more traditional “flesh.” But occasionally, the NIV (2011) adds an explanatory footnote. For example, we find this footnote at Romans 8:3: “In contexts like this, the Greek word for flesh (sarx) refers to the sinful state of human beings, often presented as a power in opposition to the Spirit; also in verses 4-13.”

We see that sarx is used with a wide range of meanings in the New Testament. For that reason, the NLT uses a wide range of terms to translate it rather than simply translating it across the board as “flesh,” a term that in modern English usually refers to the outer layer of the human body. As with many other words that appear in Scripture, the NLT seeks to translate sarx in a way that makes its meaning immediately clear to today’s readers in whatever context it appears and with whatever meaning the ancient authors meant it to carry.