The Greek that is translated as “the Alpha and the Omega” in English, referring to the first and the last letter of the Greek alphabet is translated in German as “das A und O.” Even though the German alphabet does not end with the letter O, “das A und O” has become an idiom, that — like the Greek — refers to the end and the beginning or the whole.
Languages that versions of “the Alpha and the Omega” have become an idiom with the same meaning include:
The Hebrew that is translated in most English versions as “wild ox” was translated by the Ancient GreekSeptuagint translation as μονόκερως (monókeros) or “unicorn” (though it actually is the Greek word for “rhinoceros” — see below).
Bibles in the Protestant tradition also used an equivalent of that translation up into the early 20th century. This includes translations like the EnglishKing James Version/Authorised Version (unicorn), the German translation by Luther (up to and including the revision of 1912) (Einhorn), or the SwedishCharles XII Bible of 1686 (enhörningen).
Since translations of the Orthodox traditions tend to follow the Septuagint (see above), they also use an equivalent of “unicorn,” such as the Russian Synod translation with единорог (yedinorog).
Translations in the Catholic tradition tended to use an equivalent of “rhinoceros,” going back to the LatinVulgate’srinoceros. Modern Catholic translations that follow the Hebrew text now also use “wild ox” or an equivalent.
The influential Literary / Classical ChineseDelegates Version (publ. 1854) used sì (兕), a mythological Chinese creature that also only had one horn (see here ).
Click or tap here for the rest of the entry about “wild ox” in United Bible Societies’ All Creatures Great and Small: Living things in the Bible.
Since the beginning of the twentieth century re’em has been translated as “wild ox” in English versions, following the original suggestion made by Canon Tristram in the previous century. However, there are problems connected with this rendering. The usual justifications for this translation are a) that the Akkadian equivalent word rimu refers to the wild ox or Aurochs Bos primigenius, which was frequently hunted by Akkadian kings and b) that wild ox or aurochs fits the description of the wild untameable animal referred to in the Bible.
Both of these arguments have weaknesses from a zoological point of view and the linguistic argument is also debatable. Firstly, the aurochs hunted by the Akkadian kings was an animal found in high rainfall areas with forests. In historical times it was found only in the wooded areas of central and southeastern Europe Armenia (including the southern coastland of the Black Sea) and Mesopotamia. The only aurochs remains found in the land of Israel and the Arabian Peninsula date from the early Pleistocene Age. It is highly unlikely that this animal lived in Israel in biblical times.
Secondly, while the Akkadian rimu is usually translated as “wild ox”, the Ugariticrum has been translated by some scholars as “buffalo”, and the Old Arabic rim is usually translated as “oryx”. Both of these words are related to the Hebrew re’em. Some scholars have argued that the re’em is really the oryx.
Furthermore, while the wild aurochs was very large, dangerous, and strong, it was not really “untameable”. Its dependence on water made it fairly easy to capture in nets and it was domesticated very early. It is the ancestor of all short-horned European cattle. Ancient pictures carved in limestone found in the excavations at Kujunjik in Iraq show carts being pulled by cattle that look exactly the same as the aurochs pictured in hunting scenes from an earlier period.
An animal similar to the aurochs was hunted by early Egyptian kings but it had disappeared from Egypt as early as the reign of Rameses III (about 1190 B.C.), who hunted instead “wild ox” (probably the Cape buffalo) in forested areas of the Sudan, where there is no evidence that the aurochs ever lived. (A commemorative painting of one of these hunts clearly shows aurochs-like animals being hunted from chariots, but this may be artistic license or a traditional stereotype-the lions in similar paintings are certainly fanciful stereotypes.)
Among the many animal mummies found in Egypt there are a number of bubal or red hartebeest and Cape buffalo. Both of these animals fit the biblical description of “wild ox”, and the hartebeest certainly lived in Arabia and the land of Israel.
The Septuagint translates re’em as monokerōs which literally means “one-horned” (hence the KJV “unicorn”) but is the ancient Greek word for rhinoceros. This translation needs to be taken seriously, because of its early date. The rhinoceros would have been an animal known to the Jews, since it was found in parts of Egypt. The ancient naturalist, Strabo of Amasia, who lived in the early part of the first century A.D., describes a rhinoceros that he saw in Egypt and refers to another naturalist of the time who had also described this animal. A variety of rhinoceros was found in Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia at the time of the Exodus, and a second variety was found in Mesopotamia.
At the time of the Exodus then, the aurochs would have been found in the forests of southeast Europe, the far north of Asia Minor, and Mesopotamia, but not in Egypt, Canaan, the Arabian Peninsula, Sinai, or Syria. However, the oryx and the bubal hartebeest would have been plentiful and well known, and the Cape buffalo and rhinoceros would have been known too, at least by hearsay.
There is another aspect of the question that needs to be kept in mind. Throughout human history large, prominent animals have had symbolic importance, even in societies that would never have seen the animal. Thus the lion has been important in Chinese and British culture for centuries, but there is no evidence that lions have ever lived in China or Britain. Thus the aurochs, while it may be a rather improbable interpretation, cannot be ruled out entirely.
Four things can be said for certain about the re’em. It was a wild, untameable animal, it had horns, it was very strong, and it was appropriate to contrast or compare it with domestic cattle and with lions.
Aurochs: The Aurochs Bos primigenius, which is now extinct, was a very large animal, with prominent forward-pointing horns. It looked very similar to the bulls used in Spain for bull-fighting in modern times, but it was probably even larger. The bulls were dark brown or black, with a pale stripe down the spine, while the females were a lighter brown. The German zoos of Berlin, Munich, and Frankfurt have been fairly successful in genetic engineering experiments that have been aimed at reintroducing the aurochs’ original genetic characteristics, by selective breeding from domestic cattle that have the required characteristics. The resulting animals seem to resemble closely the original aurochs.
Cape Buffalo: The Cape Buffalo Syncerus caffer is also a very large animal not as tall as the aurochs but heavier. It is found wherever there is adequate water supply all over sub-Saharan Africa. It prefers thick bush or riverine forest in which to take cover during the day. It has very thick horns that emerge from a broad boss on its forehead then sweep sideways and down before curving sharply upward toward the head. The males have thicker horns than the females. The skin is covered in short hair that varies from black to gray or brown and is usually covered with dry mud so that the buffaloes look the same color as the local soil.
Cape buffaloes live in large herds often numbering over five hundred animals. They are extremely strong cunning and fearless and are probably the most dangerous animals in Africa. Although they have become accustomed to man in some protected areas they are unpredictable and easily provoked. Unlike the Asian water buffalo or carabao the Cape buffalo has never been domesticated.
Rhinoceros: The rhinoceros found in Mesopotamia in biblical times was a subvariety of the Great Indian Rhinoceros Rhinoceros unicornis while the variety found in Egypt and Sudan would have been the Hook-lipped or Black Rhinoceros Diceros bicornis. The hook-lipped rhinoceros weighs up to 2000 kilograms (4400 pounds) and is about 1.7 meters (70 inches) tall at the shoulder. It has two horns above the nose, one behind the other, the front one growing over half a meter (20 inches) in length. They live in bushy country and feed on leaves and twigs. They are solitary animals with poor eyesight and are very aggressive. The great Indian rhinoceros was even larger and had a single horn.
Because of the uncertainty of identifying this animal, it is probably best to have an equivalent of “wild ox” or “wild bull” in the text and indicate in a footnote, each time the word is translated, that the word may mean “buffalo” and that the Septuagint has “rhinoceros”.
A problem in many countries is that using a phrase like “wild ox” suggests that this is a domestic ox that has gone wild. For this reason, it may be better to use a local name for a large strong, horned animal.
In Africa the obvious equivalent is the buffalo, and this choice is strengthened by the fact that re’em may even mean “buffalo”.
In the Indian subcontinent, Myanmar, Thailand, Malaysia, and western China, there is an animal (now nearly extinct) known as the Gaur Bibos gaurus. In Thailand it is called the ngua-kating, and in Malaysia, the seladang. It is sometimes incorrectly referred to as the “wild water buffalo”. This is a type of wild ox very similar to the aurochs. In the Himalayas and mountains of western China there is another smaller animal similar to a wild ox called the Takin Budorcas taxicolor. Another possibility in the Himalayas and Central Asia is an expression meaning “wild yak”.
In North America the Bison or American Buffalo Bison bison is the closest equivalent. Another possible equivalent in some Arctic regions is the Musk Ox Ovibos moschatus.
Elsewhere a transliteration or a word borrowed from a locally dominant language is a possible solution.
Greek, Hebrew, Latin, Ge’ez, and Aramaic all have one term only that refers to what can be expressed in English as “sky” or “heaven(s)” (as a physical and spiritual entity). While there is a slight overlap between the meaning of the two English terms, “sky” (from Old Norse sky meaning “cloud”) typically refers to the physical entity, and “heaven” (from Old English heofon meaning “home of God”) typically refers to the spiritual entity. While this enriches the English lexicon, it also forces English Bible translators to make decisions that can be found only in the context in the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic texts. Most versions tend to use “heaven(s)” even if the meaning is likely “sky,” but the Contemporary English Version (NT: 1991, OT: 1995, DC: 1999) is an English translation that attempted to be more specific in the separation of the two meanings and was used as the basis for the links to verses used for this and this record (“sky”).
Norm Mundhenk (in The Bible Translator 2006, p. 92ff. ) describes the difficulty that English translations face (click or tap here to see more):
“A number of years ago an old lady asked me a question. What did Jesus mean when he said, ‘Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away’? I do not remember what answer I gave, but I was surprised at how concerned she seemed to be about the verse. It was only later, after I had left her, that I suddenly realized what it was that she was so concerned about. She knew that death could not be far away, and all her life she had looked forward to being with God in heaven. But this verse said that ‘heaven will pass away’! What did that mean for her hopes? In fact, of course, in this verse Jesus was talking about the skies or the heavens, not about Heaven as the place of God’s presence. If I had realized the problem in time, I could easily have set the lady’s mind at rest on this question that was troubling her so much. However, I suspect that she is not the only person to be misled by the wording of this verse. Therefore, it is very surprising to find that even today many English versions (including the New International Version, New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, Good News Translation) still say ‘heaven and earth’ in verses like Matt 24:35 and its parallels (Mark 13:31 and Luke 21:33). The Contemporary English Version (CEV) and Phillips’ translation seem to be aware of the problem, and in Mark 13:31 both of these have ‘earth and sky’ instead of ‘heaven and earth.’ But in some other passages (such as Matt 5:18) the traditional wording is still found in both of those translations. The New Century Version (NCV) does have ‘earth and sky’ more consistently, and the New Jerusalem Bible (NJB) has ‘sky and earth’ in these passages. (Although ‘sky and earth’ is closer to the Greek, it seems more natural in English to say ‘earth and sky’; but either way, at least the meaning is correct.)
“Louw and Nida’s Lexical Semantics of the Greek New Testament (publ. 1992) suggests that the Greek expression being translated here, ho ouranos kai he ge is ‘a more or less fixed phrase equivalent to a single lexical unit’ and that it means everything that God created, that is, the universe. They then quote Mark 13:31 as an example, using ‘heaven and earth’ in their translation of it. However, they go on to say that there ‘may be certain complications involved in rendering ho ouranos kai he ge as ‘heaven and earth,’ since ‘heaven’ might be interpreted in some languages as referring only to the dwelling place of God himself. The referents in this passage are ‘the sky and the earth,’ in other words, all of physical existence, but not the dwelling place of God, for the latter would not be included in what is destined to pass away.’ In my opinion, English itself is one of the languages where the word ‘heaven’ will be interpreted as referring only to the dwelling place of God himself, and translations into English should not use ‘heaven’ in these passages. It is probably because these passages are so very familiar that translators do not realize the meaning they are giving their readers when they use the expression ‘heaven and earth’ here. In modern English we might talk about a rocket ‘soaring into the heavens,’ but we would certainly not describe it as ‘soaring into heaven,’ because ‘heaven’ is not another way of referring to the sky or to outer space.
“In fact, it is surely important in all languages to have some way of distinguishing the concept of ‘sky’ from the concept of ‘dwelling place of God.’ In these passages translators should never use a term meaning ‘the dwelling place of God.’ It may not be necessary to use a term meaning ‘sky’ either, if there is some other expression in the language which gives the correct meaning of ‘everything that has been created’ or ‘the universe.’ There are of course places in the New Testament where Heaven, as the place where God lives, is contrasted with the earth. In these passages, translators should be careful to give the correct meaning. A good example of this is in the Lord’s Prayer, in Matt 6:10: ‘Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.’ Similarly, 1 Cor 15:47 says that ‘the first man [a reference to Adam] was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven.’ Passages like these are referring to Heaven, not to the sky. Other NT passages where heaven refers to God’s dwelling place, in contrast with earth, are Matt 5:34-35, 16:19, 18:18, Acts 7:49, James 5:12, and Rev 5:3.
“Sometimes in the New Testament, the word ‘heaven’ is used because of the Jewish reluctance to use the name of God. ‘Heaven’ in these cases is used in place of ‘God’ and refers to God himself. This is the case in the many references in Matthew to ‘the kingdom of heaven’ where other gospels have ‘the kingdom of God’ (e.g., compare Matt 4:17 with its parallels in Mark 1:15 and Luke 10:9). It is also most likely the case in references like Matt 16:1, Luke 20:4, 5, John 3:27, and even perhaps Col 1:5.
“There are some places, such as Matt 11:25, where God is called ‘Lord of heaven and earth.’ Since God is of course the Lord of Heaven as well as of the universe, it may not matter so much which interpretation is given in these passages (others are Luke 10:21 and Acts 17:24). Nevertheless, the intended meaning here is likely to be ‘the universe.’ This is because this expression in Greek, as Louw and Nida say, is a set expression referring to everything that has been created. Acts 17:24 in fact combines the idea of the creation of the universe with the idea of God as Master or Lord of the universe. (…)
“Old Testament background The use of ‘heaven and earth’ in the New Testament is very similar to what we find in the Old Testament, because it is largely based on the Old Testament.
“The Old Testament begins with the story of creation, which is presented as the creation of the heavens and the earth, with lights to shine in the heavens and give light to the earth. Birds are created to live in the heavens, animals to live on earth, and fish to live in the sea (Gen 1:1-2:4).
“As we can see from the way the creation story is told, it is meant to be understood as the creation of the universe. Although in English the regions above the earth have traditionally been called ‘the heavens’ in the story of creation, they cannot be called ‘Heaven,’ in the sense of the place where God dwells. In terms of modern English, it would probably be better to say ‘the sky and the earth’ or ‘the earth and the sky.’ The story of creation then becomes an important theme throughout the Old Testament. (…)
“In most passages, whether in the Old Testament or the New Testament, when ‘heaven and earth’ or ‘the heavens and the earth’ are mentioned, the meaning is the created universe. It is not a reference to Heaven, as the dwelling place of God. In English, translators have not been careful to keep this distinction clear, and this is probably true in many other languages as well. However, as we have seen, this can lead to real confusion for ordinary Bible readers. It is better if translators find ways to make the meaning clear in these passages. ‘Heaven’ should be mentioned only in passages which clearly mean the dwelling place of God. In other passages, an expression should be used which means only ‘sky.’ Or else, the whole expression ‘heaven and earth’ can be translated in a way to show that the whole universe is meant.”
Other languages that have a semantic distinction similar to English include (click or tap here to see more):
Mossi: saase — “sky”; nyingeri — “the up above”(source for Loma and Mossi: Bratcher/Nida)
Roviana: mamaṉa — “sly”; maṉauru — “heaven” (an old word, meaning “empty, open space of the sky”) (source: Carl Gross)
Kayaw: mô̄la or “canopy-under”/mô̄khû̄la or “canopy-above-under” — “sky” (atmosphere where there is just air); mô̄khû̄ or “canopy-on/above” — “heaven” (invisible abode of God and angels)
Mairasi: Sinyavi — an indigenous term that is used for both “sky” and heaven”; Surga — loanword from Sanskrit via Indonesian referring to “heaven” (source: Enggavoter 2004)
Kupsabiny: “up” for “sky” vs. “God’s Homestead” for “heaven” (source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
In some languages, such as Yagaria, a term that was originally used as “sky” (gokudana) was adopted by the Christian community as “heaven.” This resulted in a language shift so that now all communities uses “empty space / air” (galogina or hakalogina) as “sky” and gokudana is exclusively used for the Christian concept of heaven. (Source: Renck 1990, p. 133)
Many languages follow the original biblical languages in not making that distinction, such as (click or tap here to see more):
Cherokee: galaladi (ᎦᎸᎳᏗ) or “up” — Bender / Belt (2025, p. 23) note that there is a related term — galvlohi (ᎦᎸᎶᎯ) — that is used “for the upperworld of Cherokee cosmology, [but] was not used, possibly to communicate a sharp distinction.”
In some languages, such as Wandala, the vocabulary for terms for either “heaven” or “sky” is much richer than just to include those two distinction. While zhegela, the term that is specifically used for the physical sky was only used in early translations of the New Testament for “sky,” other terms such as samaya (used for both “sky” and “heaven” — employed for instance in Matthew 10:32f.), zlanna (specifically used for the perfect abode of God and the goal of the faithful, as in Matthew 8:11), kwárá (a locational term used to speak of a chief’s rule [lit., “voice”] such as Matthew 3:2), or sleksire (“chieftaincy,” “kingship,” or “royalty” [originally from slekse “chief”] and used where there are no locational overtones, such as in Matthew 16:28) are used. (Source: Mona Perrin in Notes on Translation 1/1999, p. 51ff.)
Under the auspices of the Dhama Mate Swe Association , a new Burmese translation of the New Testament was published in 2024 which uses terminology that attempts to overcome “insurmountable barriers to the Buddhist world.” One term that this version uses is ရွှေမြို့တော် (shway myahoettaw) or “Golden City” for “heaven,” referring it to the golden city described in Revelation 21 but at the same time using a Buddhist term for a desired destination that does not have the Buddhist connotation of ကောင်း ကင် (kaungg kain) as being the Trāyastriṃśa (တာဝတိံသာ) heaven, home of Śakra/Indra. This Burmese translation formed the basis of translations of parts of the New Testament into other languages spoken in Burma, including Sumtu Chin, Ekai Chin, Songlai Chin, Danau, Kadu, Kanan, Khün, Lahta Karen, Rakhine, Marma (Northern Rakhine), Riang Lai, Samtao, Shwe Palaung, Tai Laing, Taungyo, Intha, Danu, Tavoyan (Dawei), and Chak (Thet). (Source: Jay Pratt)
The English translation by Sarah Ruden (2021) uses “sky” throughout. Ruden explains (p. li): “The Greek word ouranos refers evenhandedly to the physical sky and the place—often pictured as a royal court — where supreme divinity resides. ‘Sky’ seems generally better, first of all in avoiding the wackier modern imagery that comes with the English ‘heaven.’ And even when a supernatural realm is meant, ‘sky’ will often do, because the divine realm was thought to be located there, in addition to the weather and the heavenly bodies, whereas ‘heaven’ to us is fundamentally a religious term, and the ancients did not tend to separate linguistic domains in this way. I have retained the plural ‘skies’ where I see it in the Greek, because it is a Hebraism familiar in English translations of scripture and (I hope) not too archaic or jarring.”
The Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Ge’ez, and Latin terms that are typically translated as “mercy” (or “compassion” or “kindness”) in English are translated in various ways. Bratcher / Nida classify them in (1) those based on the quality of heart, or other psychological center, (2) those which introduce the concept of weeping or extreme sorrow, (3) those which involve willingness to look upon and recognize the condition of others, or (4) those which involve a variety of intense feelings.
While the Englishmercy originates from the Latinmerces, originally “price paid,” Romance languages (Italian, Spanish, Corsican, Catalan, Friulian) and other Germanic languages (German, Swedish, Danish — Barmherzigkeit, barmhärtighet and barmhjertighed, respectively) tend to follow the Latin misericordia, lit. “misery-heart.”
In the Hebrew text, each verse of the acrostic in Proverbs 31:10-31 is started with the successive 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet. While most translations mention that in a note or a comment, a number of Bible translations have been able to use the same the rhetorical device. The SwedishBibel 2000 had the advantage of an additional three letters in the Swedish alphabet aside from the 26 letters of the Latin alphabet (A-Z) — Å, Ä, and Ö are added behind Z — and by skipping some of the more difficult letters (source: Staphan Lindström). The letters that are successively employed are A, B, D, E, F, G, H, I, K, L, M, N, O, P, R, S, T, U, V, Å, Ä, Ö.
Click or tap here for the complete 22 verses in Swedish:
10 Att finna en driftig hustru, vem förunnas det —
långt mer än pärlor är hon värd.
11 Blint litar hennes man på henne,
och vinsten uteblir inte.
12 Dagligen är hon honom till nytta,
aldrig till skada.
13 Efter att ha skaffat ull och lin
arbetar hon med flinka händer.
14 Från avlägsna trakter hämtar hon förråd,
hon är som köpmannens skepp.
15 Gryningen är inte inne när hon stiger upp,
sätter fram mat åt familjen och ger pigorna deras portioner.
16 Hon ser ut en åker och köper den,
planterar en vingård för det hon själv har tjänat.
17 Ivrigt går hon till verket
och hugger i med starka armar.
18 Kan hon märka att affärerna går bra
får hennes lampa brinna hela natten.
19 Lätt hanterar hon sländtrissan
och håller sländan i handen.
20 Mot de svaga räcker hon ut handen,
hon öppnar sin famn för de fattiga.
21 När snön kommer ängslas hon inte:
hela familjen har kläder av ylle.
22 Också täcken väver hon själv,
hon är klädd i linne och purpur.
23 På hennes man ser alla med aktning,
där han sitter bland de äldste i porten.
24 Rockar av linne syr hon och säljer,
handlaren förser hon med bälten.
25 Styrka och värdighet utstrålar hon
och ser leende framtiden an.
26 Talar gör hon med klokhet,
vänliga förmaningar delar hon ut.
27 Uppmärksamt följer hon allt i huset,
aldrig äter hon lättjans bröd.
28 Välsignad blir hon av sina barn,
och hennes man lovprisar henne:
29 Åtskilliga duktiga kvinnor har jag sett,
men du överträffar dem alla! —
30 Älsklighet kan bedra, skönhet förgår,
för sin gudsfruktan skall en hustru prisas.
31 Överlämna åt henne hennes mödas lön,
må hon prisas i portarna för sina verk.
Likewise, Danish also has additional letters in its alphabet (Æ, Ø, and Å) and the DanishBibelen på Hverdagsdansk (publ. 1985, rev. 2015 et al.) also maintained an acrostic in this passage:
Click or tap here for the verses in Danish:
10 At finde den ideelle hustru er enhver mands drøm.
Lykkes det, har han fundet en uvurderlig skat.
11 Bedre kan ingen mand ønske sig det,
altid har hun hans fulde tillid.
12 Charmerende er hun tillige,
støtter og opmuntrer ham livet igennem.
13 Dagene bruger hun flittigt,
hun samler uld og hør og har travlt med at spinde.
14 Eksotiske retter forstår hun at frembringe,
for hun har en bred horisont.
15 Før daggry står hun op for at lave mad til familien
og fordele opgaverne mellem husets piger.
16 Går hun forbi et frugtbart jordstykke, køber hun det
og planter en vingård for, hvad hun har tjent.
17 Hun går energisk i gang
og arbejder med stor udholdenhed.
18 Indsatsen bærer frugt,
og der er lys i hendes vindue til langt ud på natten.
19 Jævnligt sidder hun ved sin rok
eller spinder dygtigt ved tenen.
21 Kulden er ikke noget problem,
for hun er klar med det varme tøj.
20 Lider de fattige nød,
er hun der straks med en hjælpende hånd.
23 Man ser hendes mand som en af byens ledere,
for han er en mand, der aftvinger respekt.
22 Nydeligt er hun klædt i dragter af det fineste stof,
hun syr selv sit tøj og væver sine tæpper.
25 Optimistisk ser hun fremtiden i møde,
hun optræder værdigt og karakterfast.
24 Penge har hun nok af,
for hun sælger af det pragtfulde tøj, hun fremstiller.
26 Råd og opmuntring giver hun gerne,
hun taler med visdom og venlige ord.
27 Sit hus har hun styr på,
hun kender ikke til lediggang.
28 Til hver en tid får hun ros af sine børn,
og hendes mand lovpriser hende med følgende ord:
29 „Utallige kvinder er dygtige,
men du overgår dem alle!”
30 Ydre skønhed falmer, og charme kan bedrage,
men en kvinde, der følger Herren, er al beundring værd.
31 Ære og hæder fortjener hun fuldt ud,
og hendes gerninger lovprises overalt i byen.
Like the Hebrew alphabet, the Tok Pisin alphabet has 22 letters (A, B, D, E, F, G, H, I, K, L, M, N, O, P, R, S, T, U, V, W, Y) which the translators saw as a challenge to maintain the Hebrew acrostic: “One of the ways the Israelites followed in writing was a bit different. In the Hebrew alphabet there are 22 letters. Well sometimes they used to divide the talk that they wanted to write into 22 parts, and each part had to start with a different letter. When people translate Hebrew into other languages, they are not able to follow this custom in the translation. But Tok Pisin has 22 letters in its alphabet, the same number as in Hebrew. So in just this one passage in the Bible, we (translators) have followed this custom and reproduced it (the form of the Hebrew), so that you can see how it goes.” (Source: Note in the translation, translated by Timothy Lloyd Wilt in The Bible Translator 1993, p. 207ff. ).
Click or tap here for the verses in Tok Pisin:
10 Ating man i laik maritim meri i gat gutpela pasin tru, a? Orait bai em i hatwok tru long painim. Kain meri olsem i winim olkain ston i dia tumas.
11 Bai man bilong dispela kain meri i save gut long meri i bihainim gutpela pasin oltaim. Na meri bai i helpim em na em i gat planti samting.
12 Dispela meri i save mekim gutpela pasin tasol long man bilong en.
13 Em i save wokim kain kain tret na em i amamas long lumim olkain laplap.
14 Famili bilong en i gat planti kain kaikai, long wanem, em i save go longwe tumas long kisim kaikai, olsem ol bikpela sip i save mekim.
15 Gutpela meri olsem i save kirap taim tulait i no bruk yet na i kukim kaikai bilong famili bilong en na makim wok bilong ol wokmeri bilong en.
16 Hapmeri olsem i save lukluk gut pastaim long graun em i laik baim, na bihain em i baim. Na bihain, em i kisim mani long bisnis bilong em na baim ol yangpela diwai wain bilong planim.
17 I no gat wanpela taim em i les. Em i strongpela meri na i save taitim bun na i wok.
18 Jak bilong lam bilong en i pulap long wel na lam i lait i stap, na em i wok i go inap biknait tru long taim em i lukim bisnis bilong en i go het gut.
19 Kain meri olsem i save wokim ol tret bilong em yet na lumim ol laplap.
20 Long taim em i lukim ol man i sot long ol samting na i rabis, em i save givim ol samting long ol.
21 Maski ren ais i pundaun, em i no save wari long ol famili bilong en, long wanem, em i bin wokim klos bilong ol long laplap i gutpela tumas.
22 Na em yet i save wokim ol blanket bilong ol bet long haus bilong en. Na em i save kisim ol gutpela waitpela laplap na ol gutpela retpela laplap na wokim ol klos bilong en.
23 Ol hetman bilong ples i givim biknem long man bilong en. Na man bilong en i wanpela bilong ol dispela hetman.
24 Planti taim dispela meri i save samapim ol gutpela klos na wokim ol let, na ol bisnisman i save kam baim.
25 Rispek na biknem i olsem klos bilong en na em i gat strong. Em i no save wari long ol samting bai i kamap bihain.
26 Sapos em i skulim ol manmeri, em i mekim tok isi tasol. Na olgeta tok bilong en i kamapim gutpela tingting na save bilong en.
27 Taim em i lukautim ol samting long haus bilong en, em i no save les. Nogat. Em i save wok strong na mekim gutpela wok tumas.
28 “Ure, ure long mama bilong mipela.” Ol pikinini bilong dispela meri i save tok olsem. Na man bilong en i litimapim nem bilong em moa yet na i tok,
29 “Viles na taun bilong yumi i gat planti meri i save mekim gutpela pasin tru, tasol yu winim ol moa yet.”
30 Wanpela meri inap givim switpela tok long yumi, tasol pasin bilong en i narakain. Na maski meri i luk nais tru, em i no inap i stap olsem oltaim. Mobeta yumi litimapim nem bilong meri i save aninit long Bikpela.
31 Yumi mas tingting long gutpela pasin bilong meri na long gutpela wok em i bin mekim, na givim biknem long em. Olgeta manmeri i ken litimapim nem bilong en.
The English Bible translation by Ronald Knox (publ. 1950) is the only English translation that — aside from Psalm 9/10 — maintains every Hebrew acrostic (even though Knox’s translation itself is based on the Latin text of the Vulgate rather than the Hebrew):
10 A man who has found a vigorous wife has found a rare treasure, brought from distant shores.
11 Bound to her in loving confidence, he will have no need of spoil.
12 Content, not sorrow, she will bring him as long as life lasts.
13 Does she not busy herself with wool and thread, plying her hands with ready skill?
14 Ever she steers her course like some merchant ship, bringing provision from far away.
15 From early dawn she is up, assigning food to the household, so that each waiting-woman has her share.
16 Ground must be examined, and bought, and planted out as a vineyard, with the earnings of her toil.
17 How briskly she girds herself to the task, how tireless are her arms!
18 Industry, she knows, is well rewarded, and all night long her lamp does not go out.
19 Jealously she sets her hands to work, her fingers clutch the spindle.
20 Kindly is her welcome to the poor, her purse ever open to those in need.
21 Let the snow lie cold if it will, she has no fears for her household; no servant of hers but is warmly clad.
22 Made by her own hands was the coverlet on her bed, the clothes of lawn and purple that she wears.
23 None so honoured at the city gate as that husband of hers, when he sits in council with the elders of the land.
24 Often she will sell linen of her own weaving, or make a girdle for the travelling merchant to buy.
25 Protected by her own industry and good repute, she greets the morrow with a smile.
26 Ripe wisdom governs her speech, but it is kindly instruction she gives.
27 She keeps watch over all that goes on in her house, not content to go through life eating and sleeping.
28 That is why her children are the first to call her blessed, her husband is loud in her praise:
29 Unrivalled art thou among all the women that have enriched their homes.
30 Vain are the winning ways, beauty is a snare; it is the woman who fears the Lord that will achieve renown.
31 Work such as hers claims its reward; let her life be spoken of with praise at the city gates.
In English, the Greek term Pneûma tò Hagion is translated as “Holy Ghost” or “Holy Spirit.” The English terms referring to Pneûma are synonyms: “ghost” is derived from Old Englishgast (“breath” or “good or bad spirit”) and “spirit” from Latinspiritus (“breath” or “supernatural immaterial creature”). Until the late 19th century, English translators of all traditions used “Holy Ghost” (or “holy Ghost”) but generally switched to “Holy Spirit” (or “holy Spirit”) thereafter, likely because the meaning of “ghost” had transitioned to predominantly refer to the spirit of a dead person.
Other languages with a long tradition in Bible translation translate Pneûma (for “holy” see holy) as follows (click or tap here to see more):
While a few Germanic languages still use terms derived from gast (see above) including German and Dutch (Geist and Geest respectively), the majority use forms of Proto*-Germanic anadô (“breath,” “spirit,” “zeal” — used in Latin as anima), including Danish (Ånden), Swedish (Ande/ande — for more on the gender of the Swedish translation, see below), Icelandic (andi), and Norwegian (Ånd/ånd). (*”Proto” refers to the most recent common, often hypothetical language ancestor). Note that the earliest-known German translation was “holy breath” (wîh atum) (source: Renck 1990, p. 105)
The majority of Romance languages use a form of the LatinSpiritus (French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, and Catalan among others). (Note that in the French 1985 translation by Chouraqui, souffle sacré or “sacred breath” is used [source: Watson 2023, p. 52])
Slavic languages derive their translation from the Proto-Slavic dȗxъ (“breath,” “wind,” “spirit”), including Russian, Belarusian, Ukrainian, and Bulgarian (all: Дух)
Most Semitic languages (Hebrew, Arabic, Assyrian, Chaldean — with the exception of Maltese which uses the Latin-based l-Ispirtu s-Santu), Iranian languages (Urdu, Tajik, Dari, Persian, Pashto), Turkic languages (Uzbek, Turkish), Malayic languages (Indonesian, Balinese, Sangir, and Malay — for further information on Malay, see below) use a derivative of the Proto-Semitic rūḥ- (“to blow,” “breathe”). Compare the Hebrew term ruach (רוּחַ: “breath,” “wind,” “spirit”) in the Old Testament. (For the use of Roho in Swahili, see below)
Bratcher / Nida say this about the translation into languages that do not have an existing Bible translation (click or tap here to see more):
“Undoubtedly no word has given quite so much trouble to the Bible translator as spirit, for (1) it includes such a wide range of meaning, from ‘evil spirit’ to ‘poor in spirit’ to ‘Holy Spirit’ and (2) it touches so vitally the crucial comparison and contrast between Christianity and so-called ‘animism.’
“There are four principal dangers in the choice of a word for Holy Spirit: (1) the term may identify an essential malevolent spirit, and no mere addition of the word ‘holy’ or ‘good’ is likely to change the basic connotation of the word, (2) the word may mean primarily the spirit of a deceased person (hence God must have died — a not infrequent error in Bible translations), (3) the expression used to mean ‘spirit’ may denote only an impersonal life force, a sort of soul-stuff which may be conceived as indwelling all plant, animal, and human substances (therefore, to say that ‘God is spirit’ is to deny His essential personality), and (4) a borrowed term may signify next to nothing to the people, and can only be explained by another term or terms, which, if they are adequate to explain the borrowing, should have been used in the first place. It is true that in some instances a borrowed word has seemed to be the only alternative, but it should be chosen only as a last resort.
“There is no easy formula to be employed in finding an adequate equivalent for Holy Spirit, for what seems to work quite well in one area may not serve in another. One thing, however, is certain: one should not select a term before making a comprehensive study of all kinds of words for spirits and for parts or aspects of personality and thus having as complete a view as possible of all indigenous beliefs about supernatural beings.”
Following are ways that languages without a long tradition Bible translation have translated Pneûma (click or tap here to see more):
Western Highland Chatino: “God’s perfect heart” J. Hefley (1968, p. 210) tells this story (click or tap here to read more):
“Ninu [a Chatino translation assistant] told his translator that the word ‘holy’ could be used to modify an idol, a household god, the witch doctor, an altar, a lion, the sea which had caused a flood and disaster, a sacred mushroom, and several other things. The translator and his consultant deduced that holy had two main components of meanings for Chatinos. It referred to persons purported to hold supernatural powers, and to objects which, if not properly respected, would bring evil upon one. With this and other information, they agreed that they could not use the Chatino word for ‘holy’ and ‘spirit’ in defining the third person of the Trinity. Their approved translation for Holy Spirit became ‘God’s perfect heart’ (referring primarily to the life principles of one who is living).”
Malay (Today’s Malay Version, publ. 1987): Roh Allah: “Spirit of God.” Barclay Newman (in The Bible Translator 1974, p. 432ff. ) explains this as follows (click or tap here to see more):
“A third difficult phrase that had to be dealt with was ‘Holy Spirit,’ since in popular Islamic theology there are many ‘holy spirits.’ In order to overcome this problem it was decided that ‘the Holy Spirit’ would always be rendered ‘God’s Spirit,’ and that wherever ‘Spirit’ or ‘the Spirit’ was used as a reference to God’s Spirit this would be clearly marked.
“Other illustrations could be given of the clearing up of ambiguous and difficult phrases, but only one more will be selected, and it will serve as a transition to the next major section of this article. In John 6:63 the phrase ‘Spirit and life’ (in the expression ‘the words I have spoken to you are Spirit and life’) is taken to refer to one thing not two. That is, even though the words are connected by the conjunction ‘and’ they are not in the relationship to one another that ‘and’ normally suggests. Moreover, ‘spirit’ in John’s Gospel, unless otherwise indicated, always refers to God’s Spirit. So then, the Common Malay has translated with the meaning, ‘the words which I speak come from God’s Spirit and bring life.’ This exegesis also has the advantage of tying in the meaning closely to the previous verse.
“As previously indicated, except in the passages where the context clearly indicates otherwise (John 11:33; John 13:21; John 19:30), it was assumed that ‘spirit’ or ‘the spirit’ refer to God’s Spirit, and so the translator always made this information explicit. For example, John the Baptist’s words in John 1:32 become ‘I saw God’s Spirit come down like a dove from heaven.’ The one exception to this rule is in 3:8a, where there is a play on words. In Greek, as in Hebrew, the same word may mean either ‘wind’ or ‘spirit.’ In this context most translations take ‘wind’ to be the basic comparison, and so have translated in this way; and some have even provided a footnote, indicating the play on words. Since the basic comparison here is seen to be ‘wind,’ the Malay New Testament translated the text in this way.”
Japanese uses the “divine” honorific prefix mi- (御 or み) when the referent is God, as in mi-tama (御霊) or “Spirit (of God)” (source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
“The Shipibo consider all spirits evil, with the exception of certain entities making up a human personality. It would be a manifest contradiction to say ‘Good Evil-Spirit’ for ‘Holy Spirit,’ and it would be completely misinterpreted if one should say that Jesus perceived in his evil-spirit that some of the scribes thus questioned within their hearts (Mark 2:8).
“For these reasons we have translated this word (…) when it unmistakably refers to a disembodied evil personality yoshin ‘demon.’ (‘Unclean spirit’ we have translated ‘harmful demon.’)
“When it refers to the ‘Holy Spirit,’ we have finally translated it ‘Spotless Spirit,’ using for ‘Spirit’ a word designating one of the larger entities of human personality, the one which includes most of the others and which is always used of a live person.”
Sranan Tongo: Santa Yeye (from previously Santa Winti). Marlon Winedt explains (click or tap here to see more):
“One of the translators in Sranan Tongo followed the historically and scientifically correct analysis that the word for Holy Spirit should be ‘Santa Winti.’ However, the churches had traditionally used ‘Santa Yeye.’ Although in the spiritual world-mapping of the afro-descendants of the country Santa Yeye refers to a more limited spirit, it was the most acceptable choice because ‘winti’ besides meaning ‘spirit, wind’ also refers to the afro-Caribbean religion /spiritual practice ‘winti’ which can be compared to voodoo or other forms in the Caribbean. The Catholic lectionary used this translation (Santa Winti) though there was a heated debate about the use. The then-bishop of Paramaribo advised the faithful to choose whether they wanted to say Santa Winti or Santa Yeye when reading the text. In the interior of Suriname, Catholic catechists actually burned the lectionary because they found the term Santa Winti to be blasphemous.
“When the Sranan Tongo New Testament translation project was underway an attempt to merge two teams did not succeed partially based on this issue. Ultimately the remaining SIL/Bible Society of Suriname team did not chose to use Santa Winti but the accepted Santa Yeye. [This version was published in 2002.]”
“In Anuak there is no term for ‘spirit’ in the sense of the Holy Spirit.
“There is a word (ywey) which may be used to translate human soul or spirit, but which is essentially the ‘life principle.’ One cannot speak of the ywey of God, for the Anuaks insist that God does not have a ywey and that He is not a ywey. It is God who has given ywey to all people, animals and plants, but He Himself is of a different order of existence.
“To speak of the ywey of God would be to equate him with earthly creation. There seems to be no easy solution to this problem, but for the time being ‘Spirit’ is to be translated as ‘that which comes from God’, in the sense of that which emanates from or has its origin in God.”
Kaingang: Topẽ kuprĩg (God’s Spirit — kuprĩg is often to the spirit of a dead person). Ursula Wiesemann (in Notes on Translation 1978, p. 32ff.) explains how the translation team reached that conclusion (click or tap here to see more):
“All human beings have a kãnhvég which has as an outward manifestation the shadow or the reflection of that person. It is closely linked to the body and cannot leave it. It is an indication of life in the body. According to one language helper, it lives in our chest (that is, heart), but this may be a carry-over from his Christian teaching.
“The kãnhvég at death becomes vẽnh kuprĩg. Vẽnh is a pronoun meaning ‘someone’s’. The vẽnh kuprĩg seem to live in groups and can be heard at night making a peculiar humming noise. They may do mischievous things like throwing dirt on the house which scares the inhabitants. A vẽnh kuprĩg may also appear to an individual, be recognized by him for whose spirit he is, speak kindly to him, and even touch him. The purpose is to take the living person along to the place where the dead live. It is reported that in this way the vẽnh kuprĩg cause death, or that they might even choke babies to death during the night. In describing an encounter with a vẽnh kuprĩg, the Indians say: ‘I saw a vẽnh kuprĩg. It was so-and-so.’ Whereas kãnhvég collocates with all pronouns and names (that is, can be directly identified as belonging to a specific person), kuprĩg collocates most naturally with vẽnh when it refers to the spirit of a dead person.
“Such conflicting reports on the meaning of the terms is difficult to choose the right terms for the Spirit of God. In Rio das Cobras and in Guarita, God is said to have a kuprĩg and a kãnhvég, but it is His kuprĩg who has a life of his own without being tied to God’s body. In both localities (and some others, where, however, the question was not looked into in detail as in the three areas identified), the definite and unquestioned choice of all people asked was to identify the ‘Holy Spirit’ as Topẽ kuprĩg ‘Spirit of God’. In Nonoai (same dialect area as Guarita but different dialect area from Rio das Cobras), however, the definite and unquestioned choice is Topẽ kãnhvég ‘because kuprĩg refers to the spirit of one who died.’ So it will be necessary to use both terms in a paraphrase to satisfy everyone. The objection to kãnhvég is its close tie to a body, and only in Nonoai this connection seems to be broken.
“Postscript: Since writing the above, several years have passed, and the New Testament has been completed, and the revision committee, composed of three Indians from as many dialect areas, unanimously chose Topẽ kuprĩg for ‘Spirit of God,’ rejecting the word kãnhvég as being ‘too weak and not meaningful’ — that is, the kãnhvég is not a spirit at all but just a sign of life, so it has been dropped in the last revision, as well as the reference to the ‘kãnhvég not dying’ as eternal life.”
Papiamento: Spiritu. Since the term on its own means “bad spirit,” in any case that no modifier is used (such as “Holy” or “of truth”), the translators used Spiritu di Dios (“Spirit of God”) to differentiate it from the negative connotation (source: Marlon Winedt).
Ditammari: “Air of God.” Loewen (in The Bible Translator 1983, p. 213ff. ) explains that a search for the term “spirit” was conducted (especially as in “Holy Spirit”). Since faith healers often avoided using the name of unclean spirits by saying “impure air” a suggestion was made to call Holy Spirit “clean/pure air”. This was accepted but changed to “air of God” to avoid ambiguity with air that we breath.
Warlpiri: Pirlirrpa Kaatu-kurlangu: “God’s Eternal Spirit,” since “holy’ carries the meaning of taboo and cannot be used (source: Stephen Swartz in The Bible Translator 1985, p. 415ff. )
Eastern Highland Otomi: “God’s Good Spirit” (source: John Beekman in Notes on Translation November 1964, p. 1-22.)
Kahua: the term for “Spirit” is a generic term for a spirit which never had a body (i.e., not the spirit of a dead ancestor). (Source: David Clark)
Keapara: Vea’a Palaguna (“Holy Spirit” but can also be “Holy God” or “angels” — “there is not a strong contrast between the meaning of God and Holy Spirit” since “God” is translated with “Palagu”) (source: Norm Mundhenk in The Bible Translator 2004, p. 222f. )
Naro: Tc’ẽe: a word that refers to the “thinking/willing part” of one’s personality. (Source: van Steenbergen)
Tibetan: thugs nyid (ཐུགས་ཉིད།།), an honorific form for sems nyid (སེམས་ཉིད།) or “spirit” (source: gSungrab website )
Nias: Geheha (or: Eheha). “The word Eheha is known all over Nias, except for the Batu Islands. Eheha means charisma, strength and wisdom possessed only by some nobles. Eheha can be passed down to the eldest son when someone dies, by putting one’s mouth on his dying father’s mouth before he breathes his last breath. Eheha looks like foam or animal fat. If the son is not strong enough he may fall unconscious while receiving his father’s eheha. In the case that the son is still a young boy the eheha can be kept in a tokosa vessel made of gold. The Ono Niha [literally ‘child of human,’ the term by which the original inhabitants of Nias and the Batu Islands call themselves] believed that eheha gives wisdom, skills and charisma and is a very important element in leadership.” (Source: Hummel / Telaumbanua 2007, p. 253)
Many Bantu languages translate Pneûma with a word that originally means “soul,” including Luganda and Haya (both: mwoyo), Ndebele (uMoya), Sotho (Moya). Fang uses Nsísim: “shadow” or “separate soul” (anima separata) (source: Bühlmann 1950, p. 176)
The grammatical gender of the Greek Pneûma is neuter (and the Hebrew ruach has a feminine gender). While many languages either do not have a grammatical gender or have a word for Pneûma that grammatically is masculine, other languages found various ways of dealing with this. (Click or tap here to read more):
The earliest example is Classical Syriac which, like Hebrew, used a term — Ruhä — that was of feminine gender. According to Ashbrook (1993), in early documents the feminine gender was not only used in a grammatical sense but the Spirit was often described with feminine imagery as well. “Around the year 400 [though], a change emerges in our texts. Starting in the fifth century, and almost universally by the sixth, the Spirit is masculine in Syriac writers. Ruhä when referring to wind or spirit continues to follow rules of grammar and to be construed in the feminine; but when referring to the Holy Spirit, it is now construed as masculine, although this does violence to the fabric of the language.” (Source: Ashbrook 1993)
A similar process of ungrammatical usage was attempted in Asháninka. The “Good Spirit of God” required a feminine, inanimate pronoun which was artificially changed to masculine. After a while this was changed back to its true grammatical form with no perceptible difference in the understanding of the Trinity. Will Kindberg (in The Bible Translator 1964, 197f. ) tells that story (click or tap here to read more):
“For the past several years Mr Sylvester Dirks of the Mennonite Brethren Mission and I have been engaged in missionary work with the Asháninka sub-group of the Campa tribe in Peru, and have collaborated on Christian vocabulary items and translation as well as other phases of our missionary activities. For the ‘Holy Spirit’ we are using ‘the Good Spirit of God’. The normal pronominal reference for spirit, whether it be a human spirit or the spirit of a god, is third person feminine inanimate. Long ago, Sylvester and I agreed that we would force the use of the third person masculine animate pronoun to refer to the Holy Spirit, although we recognized it was contrary to the grammatical system of Asháninka. We did this because of a theological bias: the Holy Spirit is referred to in English as masculine, and we think of the Spirit as a masculine member of the Godhead. We ignored the fact that it has a neuter reference in Greek.
“In the Gospel of Mark and also in the book of Acts, my translation consistently uses the third person masculine pronoun to refer to the feminine inanimate spirit. There has been a reaction against this by the people as they hear or read these portions of Scripture, though some of the believers have accepted it when it was explained to them why it had been done.
“This past year while I was continuing working on other portions of Scripture, I was again troubled by the non-grammatical use of the pronominal referent.
“I checked again with some of my colleagues here in Peru and they agreed with me that it might be wise to switch back to the correct grammatical usage. So I checked with Mr Dirks and he did not object to the change.
“Because of the importance of the issue, I also wrote to Dr Eugene Nida and Dr John Beekman for their opinions. They both suggested the use of the grammatically correct forms. The following is a quote from Dr Beekman’s letter:
“‘There is a distinction between animate and inanimate reference in one of the Zapoteco dialects of Mexico. All spirits fall into the inanimate class. The weight of theological considerations led the translators to use the animate form contrary to usage. In consultation, however, it was agreed that it would be preferable not to violate the grammatical pattern especially since the informants felt that the use of the inanimate form did not necessarily mean that the Holy Spirit was not a person. The translators are now using the inanimate form to the satisfaction of all of the believers.’
“I have switched the pronominal reference throughout John and it has just been printed. The reaction of the few people with whom I have checked this has been good. The question has been asked: ‘How does having two masculine members and a feminine-inanimate member affect the Asháninka’s idea of a triune God?’
“One day I was talking to my informant (still a relatively untrained believer) about the different gods in which his fellow tribesmen believe. And I said, ‘What does the Bible teach about God? How many are there?’ (Note that I used the unmarked form that might be either singular or plural.) He answered, ‘There is one God’. Then after thinking a minute, he said, ‘There are two—there’s Jesus. Then afterwards he said, ‘There are three— there’s God’s Spirit’. It seems to me he has understood the doctrine of the Trinity about as well as most Christians. For the last few months we have been using a feminine inanimate referent for the Holy Spirit and this has not seemed to hinder his understanding of the Trinity. Time will tell the reaction of the rest of the people.”
In Swahili, the translation of Pneûma tò Hagion is Roho Mtakatifu. Roho, derived from the Semitic / Arabic Rūḥ, should be in the noun class for loan words but to prevent the misunderstanding of Roho as an inanimate object, it is (grammatically incorrectly) used in the first class of nouns which is specifically reserved for people (source: Bühlmann 1950, p. 176). While some Bantu languages use similar strategies, Lamba left Umupasi Uswetelele in the third noun class that is also used for trees and plants, making a grammatically a non-person. But, as C. M. Doke (in The Bible Translator 1958, p. 57ff. ) remarks, “it is [left] to numerous references in the Scriptures to establish that the Holy Spirit is a person, the third person of the Trinity.”
While Swedish used to have three genders (masculine, feminine, neuter), modern Swedish only uses two genders (common [utrum] and neuter). Until the Bibel 2000, “Holy Spirit” was translated as helige Ande which used a masculine adjective and paired it with ande (“Spirit”), which historically could be read as masculine. With the merging of the masculine gender into the common gender it is now translated as the common-gendered heliga ande, matching a more widely-used gender-equal language practice in Swedish. (Source: Mikael Winninge and Sara Rösare)
The following is a stained glass window from ca. 1660 by Gian Lorenzo Bernini. The “Dove of the Holy Spirit” is installed at Saint Peter’s Basilica, Vatican City:
Photo and accompanying text by Wilfredor, hosted by Wikimedia Commons under a Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication license
Stained glass is not just highly decorative, it’s a medium which has been used to express important religious messages for centuries. Literacy was not widespread in the medieval and Renaissance periods and the Church used stained glass and other artworks to teach the central beliefs of Christianity. In Gothic churches, the windows were filled with extensive narrative scenes in stained glass — like huge and colorful picture storybooks — in which worshipers could ‘read’ the stories of Christ and the saints and learn what was required for their religious salvation. (Source: Victoria and Albert Museum )
About the translation of the Greek (and Ge’ez) term that is usually transliterated with the terms “baptism” or “baptize” in English (for other English translations see below), Bratcher / Nida (1961) say this (click or tap for details):
“[It] has given rise not only to an immense amount of discussion in terms of its meaning within the Judaeo-Christia historical context, but also continues to introduce serious problems for translators today. In many instances the recommendation has been to transliterate, i.e. employing some indigenous equivalent of the sounds of the word in some more prestigious language spoken in the region, e.g. English, French, Spanish, or Portuguese. Though this solution tends to remove some theological controversies, it does not completely satisfy everyone, for not only does it avoid the problem of the mode of baptism, but it leaves the Scriptures with a zero word. Unfortunately, many of the controversies over the indigenous equivalent of baptism arise because of a false evaluation of a word’s so-called etymology. For example, in Yucateco the word for baptism means literally ‘to enter the water’, but this term is used freely by both Presbyterians and Roman Catholics, even though it might appear to be strictly ‘Baptist nomenclature.’ Similarly, in Kekchí, an even ‘stronger’ term ‘to put under the water’ is employed by Nazarenes and Roman Catholics. Obviously the meanings of these Yucateco and Kekchí words are not derivable from their literal significance but from the fact that they now designate a particular kind of Christian rite. To insist on changing such a well-established usage (and one to which immersionists could certainly not object) would seem quite unwarranted. The situation may, on the other hand, be reversed. There are instances in which immersionists are quite happy to use a term which though it means literally ‘to put water on the head’ [see below for the translations in Northern Emberá and Ewe] has actually lost this etymological value and refers simply to the rite itself, regardless of the way in which it is performed. A translator should not, however, employ an already existing expression or construct a new phrase which will in its evident meaning rule out any major Christian constituency.
“There are, of course, a number of instances in which traditional terms for ‘baptism’ need modification. In some situations the word may mean only ‘to give a new name to’ (one aspect of christening) or ‘to be one who lights’ (referring to a custom in some traditions of lighting a candle at the time of baptism). However, in order to reproduce the core of significant meaning of the original Biblical term, it is important to explore the entire range of indigenous usage in order that whatever term is chosen may have at least some measure of cultural relevance. In Navajo (Dinė), for example, there were four principal possibilities of choice: (1) borrowing some transliterated form of the English word, (2) constructing a phrase meaning ‘to touch with water’ (an expression which would have been acceptable with some groups in the field, but not with others), (3) using a phrase meaning ‘ceremonial washing’ (but this expression seemed to be too closely related to indigenous practices in healing ceremonies), and (4) devising an expression meaning ‘to dedicate (or consecrate) by water’, without specifying the amount of water employed. This last alternative was chosen as the most meaningful and the best basis for metaphorical extension and teaching.
“On the other hand, it would be wrong to think that the meaning of ‘washing’ must be rejected in all languages. For example, it is quite appropriate in Kpelle culture, since it ties in with male puberty rites, and in the San Blas Kuna society, since washing is a very important aspect of female puberty ceremonies, in some translations ‘water’ is introduced into the expression for baptism, but the quantity and means of administrating it are left quite ambiguous, e.g. ‘to get (take, receive) water’ (Tzeltal). Toraja-Sa’dan, Pamona and Batak Toba render the verb ‘to pour water over, give a bath’.” (Source: Bratcher / Nida)
Other examples of translation include:
Javanese, Indonesian and many others: transliterated forms of the Greek “baptizo”
Balinese: ngelukat (a Balinese initiation ceremony in which persons were sprinkled with consecrated water) (source for this and above: Biblical Terms in The Bible Translator 1952, p. 225ff. )
Yagaria: “gospel water” (bono’ nina) for “baptism” and “wash (or: rub) with gospel water” (bono’ ni’ folo-) for “baptize” (source for this and two above: Renck 1990, p. 84; 115)
Halh Mongolian: argon ochial (“holy washing”) (“The people in Mongolia are strictly religious and understand the meaning very well. They are familiar with the idea of water being used as a symbol of a new life and having received ‘holy washing’ means to have entered into a new sphere of life.”) (Source: A. Marthinson in The Bible Translator 1954, p. 74ff. ) (Note: In more recent Mongolian translations a transliteration of baptizo is used instead)
Yatzachi Zapotec: (Spanish loan word and transliteration of the Greek term) bautizar (click or tap for details):
“The Yatzachi Zapotec know the practice of baptism and have a word to express it. There would thus seem to be no problem involved. Unfortunately, however, the word for ‘baptize’ is a compound, one part being a word nowhere else used and the other part being the word for ‘water.’ Perhaps ‘water-baptize’ is the closest equivalent in English. For most contexts this presents no problem, but if the word is used in Mark 1:8, it would say, ‘He will water-baptize you with the Holy Ghost.’ In Zapotec the idea is unintelligible. To meet the problem, the Spanish word ‘bautizar’ was introduced at this point though the Zapotec word is ordinarily used. The disadvantages of this substitution are obvious, but no better solution was found.” (Source: Otis M. Leal in The Bible Translator 1951, p. 164ff.
Uab Meto: antam oe (“to enter into the water”) (click or tap for details):
“Formerly in Uab Meto the word used for ’baptism’ was ‘nasrami’ which actually came by way of Arabic from ‘Nazarene.’ Its meaning was ‘to make a Christian’ and the idea was that the one who baptized actually made Christians. Such an expression was obviously inadequate. We have used for ‘baptize’ the phrase in ‘antam oe’ which means ‘to enter into the water.’ This phrase can be used for sprinkling, for water is used as a symbol of the new life, and being baptized means for the Uab Meto to enter into a new sphere of life. Baptism is so frequently spoken of in connection with the giving of the Holy Spirit that the proper associations have arisen in the thinking of the people.” (Source: P. Middelkoop in The Bible Translator 1952 p. 165ff. )
Mandarin Chinese: Catholic: 洗 xǐ (“washing”); non-Baptist Protestant 聖洗 shèngxǐ (“holy washing”); Baptist: 浸洗 jìnxǐ (“immerse and wash”) (In the history of Chinese Bible translation the translation of the Greek baptizo was a point of great contention, so much so that in the 19th Century Baptists had a completely different set of Bible translations and even today are using different editions with the different term of the same versions that other Protestants use.) (Source: Zetzsche 2008)
The Germandas Buch translation by Roland Werner (publ. 2009-2022) uses a variety of translations, including “immersed (in water)” (eintauchen or untertauchen) but also the traditional German term for “baptism (Taufe)” or in the combination “immersed in baptism”
The disagreement about whether the translation of the Greek baptizo needed to include “immersion” not only caused conflict in China, it also led to splits — and different translations — in English-speaking countries: “The influential British and Foreign Bible Society had been a major supporter of the [Baptist] Serampore mission, but it finally severed its support in 1836 because of the Baptist interpretation of the Bible translations produced there. This led to the formation of the separate Baptist Bible Translation Society in Great Britain in 1840. Almost concurrently, in 1837, the American and Foreign Bible Society was founded in the United States as an offspring of the American Bible Society, over a controversy about a Baptist Bengali Bible translation. The American and Foreign Bible Society itself experienced another split in 1850, when a sub-group rejected the transliteration of baptizo in the English Bible and formed the American Bible Union, which published its own English New Testament in 1862/63 that used the term immerse instead of “baptize” (see here ). (Source: Zetzsche 2008)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Genesis 1:2:
Kankanaey: “However this earth, it was not arranged/put-in-order while also nothing could-be-seen, because it-was-dark and submerged by strong waves. But the Spirit (Ispirito) of God was there seeing (connotes watching-over, being in charge).” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Newari: “The earth was empty and without shape. Everywhere above the deep ocean, it was dark. The Spirit of God was moving about above the ocean.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “The earth previously still had no form and still was empty. The water that was-covering the earth was-engulfed with darkness. And the Spirit of God was-moving above the water.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “When he began to create the earth, it was shapeless and completely desolate/chaotic. Darkness covered the deep water that surrounded the earth. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the water.” (Source: Translation for Translators)
.jpg){kind=link}