this to modern currencies such as pounds or francs, but if a literal translation is unacceptable, they can say “thirty pieces of money made from silver.”
Acts 19:19 NASB state: And many of those who practiced magic brought their books together and began burning them in
the sight of everyone; and they counted up the price of them and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver.
And in commenting on Acts 19:19, TH states: “Fifty thousand dollars is literally “fifty thousand pieces of silver.” The reference is to some silver
coin, though the commentators are not in agreement as to which one Luke had in mind. The point is that the amount of money was very large, and so the TEV has rendered this as fifty thousand
dollars, probably the closest dynamic equivalent. In translating fifty thousand dollars into some other language there are a number of possibilities.
One may, for example, use a somewhat general term: “fifty thousand valuable silver coins.” This would carefully represent the Greek text, and since the particular size of coin is not stipulated,
devaluations would not render the text meaningless, as has so often happened in various parts of the world where strictly local currencies were stipulated. It is perfectly legitimate to introduce the
term “valuable” since any silver coin in ancient time had considerable more buying power than equivalent sized coin would have today. One can also translate the fifty thousand dollars into
some local currency provided it is relatively stable; but in making all such adjustments in quantities, it is important to use rounded-off figures rather than attempt some precise or detailed
calculations.”
5.4 On translating monetary values
Money values—in terms of buying power—change all the time, so that amounts converted into modern currencies are likely to soon become outdated estimates. Nevertheless Fry 1978 argues that estimates
of equivalents should be given, so as to better help the reader—even in the Old Testament. But this is a problematic approach, not only because of ongoing devaluation of today’s currency, but also because one
faces difficulties in coming up with appropriate “equivalents,” since today’s incomes and prices are in no way uniform. On top of that, one needs to take into consideration the fact that the value of a coin is
usually higher than the value of the metal it contains.
For monetary values in the Old Testament, I refer the reader to my previous discussion under “Weight.” Here I state no more than—even if weights were functioning as “money”—still rendering the weight
measurements in modern weight equivalents is good enough to convey an idea of proportionality. Minimally, this is a method to remain consistent.
In the New Testament, one might wonder how to come up with enough terms for eight different units. However, there may not be a need to find a term for each of them. If one goes with LN 6.79, for
example, then—regarding lepton, quadrans and assarion—“in practically all instances, references may be made in terms of ‘a very small coin’ or ‘a coin with very little value’...”
And in Mark 12:42, where two coins are compared, one can follow TEV, where it says, “A poor widow came along and dropped in two little copper coins, worth about a penny.” This rendering talks without
specificity of “two little copper coins,” and then gives the value in terms of a “penny.” Many other languages should have a similarly small unit that can be used for comparison.
The highest units, the mina and the talent, as well as the drachma, only occur in parables, where it is not difficult to avoid a specific equivalent.
Then, there is the denarius. For this monetary unit, the following examples show creative solutions: TEV in Matthew 20:2 states, “He agreed to pay them the regular wage, a silver coin a day.”—which is close to
the text and gives an idea of how much that was. In Matthew 22:19, where Jesus is tested in regard to
paying taxes, TEV states, “’Show me the coin for paying the tax’ They brought him the coin...” This solution avoids having to give details, and for the flow of the argument, it works perfectly well. In John
6:7, instead of “200 denarii,” NIV has “eight months’ wages.”
The only remaining units to be considered are the two-drachma and the tetradrachma stater mentioned in Matthew 17:24–27. Regarding the Greek term “Collectors of the double drachma,” NET explains in the
footnote:
This is a case of metonymy, where the coin formerly used to pay the tax the double drachma coin, or δίδραχμον dídrachmon was put for the tax itself.
g
Even though this coin was no longer in circulation in NT times and other coins were used to pay the tax, the name for the coin was still
used to refer to the tax itself. cf.
g
: BDAG 241 s.v. Several English translations simply say “temple tax,” which is elegant and more meaningful than a “two-
drachma tax.” If one uses “silver coin” for the denarius, and a “large silver coin” for the stater, it would be difficult to come up with yet another qualifier for the didrachma in the middle. Thus, it appears all the
more helpful to call it simply the “temple tax.”
The stater fits exactly the needs of Jesus and Peter. English translations suggest different ways of dealing with this. NIV uses the paraphrasing term “four-drachma coin,” NLT expresses the difference to the
denarius by stating: “a large silver coin.” TEV makes explicit the value by adding “a coin worth enough for my Temple tax and yours.”
One needs to be cautious with the term “silver coin.” Fry 1978 points out that nowadays, with banknotes being used in abundance, “silver coins” can be misunderstood as “small change” rather than
being a substantial amount of money. The reverse is true too: A “silver coin” can be associated with “gold and silver”; that is, riches. However, if one wants to use it for the denarius, it is supposed to denote
a normal coin of the every-day currency. Testing, of course, is needed to find out whether or not “silver coin” conveys the right idea.
6 Time
6.1 “Hours” and “night watches”
