The writer begins a series of three quotations. He says: the writer thinks of the Old Testament words (Psa 22.22) as spoken by Jesus. Jesus remains the subject of the verb. To God is not in the Greek but is implied. Biblia Dios Habla Hoy weakens the meaning by translating “as scripture says.”

In order to indicate clearly that the following statement is a quotation from Scripture, it would be possible to translate He says to God as “He says to God by using words from the holy writings.” However, the reference system may itself be sufficient to indicate to readers that the words are a quotation.

A literal rendering of I will tell my brothers what you have done could be a reference only to Jesus’ own kin. It may therefore be necessary to translate “I will tell my followers what you have done.” Though the term brothers in a number of biblical contexts can be translated as “fellow believers,” such an expression would not be appropriate in this context.

The two halves of this quotation are parallel; see the discussion on parallelism in 1.7. In an Old Testament setting, my brothers … in their meeting means fellow members of the people of God (Israel) gathered for worship in the Temple. For the writer of Hebrews, it means Jesus’ followers gathered in worship.

Tell … what you have done is literally “proclaim your name,” which means “tell people what you are like,” for the “name” and the person are one (see comment on 1.4).

The Greek word for meeting became in New Testament times the common term for describing Christians meeting for worship, and only later became the specifically Christian word “church” (King James Version). I will praise you in their meeting may be expressed as “I will praise you when they gather for worship” or “when they gather to worship you, I will praise you.”

In some languages it is necessary to indicate praise by suggesting something of the content; for example, I will praise you may be expressed as “I will say how wonderful you are.” Sometimes even direct discourse is required; for example, I will praise you may be rendered as “I will say to them, ‘You are truly great.’ ”

Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Letter of the Hebrews. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

As Revised Standard Version‘s “So then” shows, this is the statement to which the whole argument of verses 3-8 has led up. Good News Translation‘s As it is, however should not be misunderstood as indicating a contrast only with verse 8. In order to indicate a result, one may employ some such expression as “As a result of all this” or “Therefore.”

In place of the English construction which employs there in the subject position and retains for the predicate position the so-called “new information,” many languages use quite a different construction; for example, “God’s people will still be able to rest” or “it is still possible for God’s people to rest.”

Still is implied in the Greek. Bible en français courant has “a rest … remains offered to the people of God.”

The simile a rest like God’s resting on the seventh day is literally “a sabbath rest,” a word which the author may have invented but whose meaning is clear from verse 4. The two problems for the translator are (a) whether a note on “sabbath” is needed (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch has simply “time of rest”) and (b) whether the “rest” of God’s people is simply compared (Good News Translation like) to God’s resting on the seventh day, or whether the two are identified. The references to the passage of time in verses 3 and 7 suggest that different “Todays” are involved, but that God’s resting place remains the same. If so, this would imply the translation “the resting place God used on the seventh day is still available to his people.”

Like God’s resting on the seventh day may be combined with the previous statement by saying “for God’s people to rest in the way similar to the manner in which God rested on the seventh day.” In some instances, however, the particular seventh day must be stated: “on the seventh day after he began to create the world.”

Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Letter of the Hebrews. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

When God made his promise to Abraham: virtually all translations expand the text, which is literally “When God promised to Abraham.” God is emphasized in the Greek by being placed at the end of the clause.

Translators in European languages expand the text in three main ways: (a) “made a promise” (Revised Standard Version, Translator’s New Testament); (b) made the promise (Good News Bible first through third editions, Jerusalem Bible, Bible en français courant, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy); (c) made his promise (Good News Translation fourth edition, New American Bible, Phillips, Barclay, New English Bible, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). The writer’s main concern is to stress by every possible means that God’s promise cannot be broken because he confirmed it by an oath. (b) and (c) therefore seem better than (a), and his promise is clearer and more specific than “the promise.”

Made refers to a particular event in time, that is, the event recorded in Genesis 22.16-17.

In a number of languages promise can only be expressed as a verb, not as a noun, and therefore When God made his promise to Abraham may be translated as “When God promised something to Abraham” or “When God declared that he would give something to Abraham.”

A vow: vows and oaths are distinct in the Bible, and neither is to be confused with cursing or general bad language. The equivalent of vow is often “to make a promise by calling God to witness” or “to use strong words in the presence of God.” Obviously this formula cannot be used in this context, since God vows on the basis of his own name. Sometimes the most appropriate equivalent for he made a vow to do what he had promised is “he used strong words when he said he would do what he had promised.” In some instances the only apparent equivalent is “he said that he would most certainly do what he had promised.”

“He had no one greater by whom to swear” (Revised Standard Version) is the word-for-word rendering on which most translations are based, but Moffatt translates “since he could swear by none greater.” No one greater may also mean “nothing greater” (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch), which is more inclusive, but the personal expression no one is more appropriate here.

Since there was no one greater than himself may be expressed as “Since no one was more powerful than himself.” In some instances greater needs to be expressed in terms of authority, “Since no one has greater authority than God himself.”

The phrase used his own name (literally, “by himself,” Revised Standard Version) is emphasized and is the only part of the quotation on which the author comments. “He swore by himself” (Revised Standard Version) is in fact part of the quotation, but it is not desirable to show this by double quotation marks, since the author makes these words part of his own sentence.

He used his own name when he made his vow may be almost meaningless if translated literally, since “name” may not be a substitute for someone’s personality or reputation. Sometimes he used his own name may be rendered as “he exposed his own reputation” or “he offered himself as a witness.” In some cases the process of vowing on the basis of one’s own self may be rendered as “he declared that he himself would bear all the blame if he did not do what he had promised.”

Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Letter of the Hebrews. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Other is implied, as in verse 23. The background of this verse is the order of worship on the Day of Atonement; see Leviticus 9.7; 16.6, 15 (where “Aaron” means the High Priest); see also Hebrews 5.3. This, however, was an annual, not a daily event. If other is added in translation (as in Good News Translation), it may be necessary to choose between the meanings “different in kind” and “different as individuals.” In this context the meaning “different in kind” is appropriate.

This verse includes a double contrast which should be kept in translation: (a) every day … once and for all; (b) offer sacrifices … offered himself.

He does not need to offer sacrifices may be expressed as “it is not necessary for him to offer sacrifices” or “… to sacrifice.” In some languages to offer sacrifices may be rendered as “to kill gifts for God” or “to kill animals as gifts to God.”

In rendering for his own sins, it is essential to avoid a wording which would suggest “for the benefit of his sins” in the sense of “to enhance his sins.” It is also important to avoid a rendering of for which will suggest “to pay for,” as though sacrifices were made in order to pay for sins and thus to enjoy them.

Good News Translation‘s second sentence in the Greek is literally “for this he did once-for-all, having offered himself.” “For” introduces the reason for the statement in the first part of the verse. “This,” in the light of 4.15, cannot mean “offered sacrifice both for his own sins and those of the people.” It means “offered sacrifice for the people.” This is the basis of Good News Bible‘s rearrangement.

Offered (9.28; 13.15; James 2.21; 1 Peter 1.5) is often used of “offering up” or “carrying up” a sacrifice to an altar. The meaning here is that of offering a sacrifice “up” to God, but this is not emphasized and Good News Translation leaves it implicit. This theme will be developed in chapter 9.

Once and for all and “once” (compare 6.4) in the Greek are keywords in the letter: “once and for all” 9.12 ; 10.10; “once” 9.7, 26-28; 10.2; 12.26, 27. Once and for all is an English idiom which means the same as “once,” but it is more emphatic, like the Greek word which it translates. It means “one time for all times,” not “for all people.”

When he offered himself may be rendered as “when he gave himself to God” or “when he gave himself to God as a sacrifice.”

Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Letter of the Hebrews. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The writer now turns back from the illustration of a will to the main subject, which is the covenant. That is why is a possible translation of the Greek, but this verse does not in fact draw a logical conclusion from verses 11-17. The link between verses 16-17 and 18 is the play on different senses of the word for will or covenant. This play on words is made possible by the fact that blood or “death” was involved in both. Jerusalem Bible has “the earlier covenant needed something to be killed in order to take effect.” A comparison or analogy, not a proof, is involved. Therefore some more general translation, such as “So,” “In this way” (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch and Traduction œcuménique de la Bible), “Hence” (Revised Standard Version, Moffatt, New American Bible), or “Thus,” may be more appropriate than That is why or “It was for this very reason” (Barclay).

The Greek word used for went into effect is not a legal term. It is most often used in the Bible in speaking of the dedication or inauguration of the Temple; in 10.20 it means “to open a path.” Here and in verse 19 the writer is concerned with the ceremonies which took place when the first covenant came into effect. The Greek is different for reasons of style, but the meaning is close to the term translated goes into effect in verse 17, with the added suggestion of a ceremony. Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch has simply “So the first covenant became valid only through blood.”

The concept of went into effect or “was inaugurated” is sometimes expressed idiomatically; for example, “was cut,” “was made to stand,” “was tied,” or “bound the persons.”

As in verse 7, Good News Translation simplifies the double negative, meaning “not without blood,” into only with the use of blood, which is more usual in common language. With the use of blood may be expressed as “by means of blood” or “by means of death.”

Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Letter of the Hebrews. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse recalls Isaiah 26.11 in the Septuagint. A literal translation of all that is left may be confusing, since it might suggest that something has been “left” in the sense of being abandoned. The meaning is simply “the only thing we can do” or “there is nothing else for us to do but.”

To wait in fear for the coming Judgment repeats in more detail the reference to the “Day” in verse 25. The Greek contains an element of indefiniteness which King James Version translates “a certain fearful looking for of judgment.” The judgment is certain, but exactly what it will involve is not. The Greek for “fearful” means “causing fear” or “(rightly) to be feared.” See also 10.31 and 12.21.

To wait: the Greek noun here which Revised Standard Version translates “prospect,” and New English Bible more literally “expectation,” is related in form and meaning to the verb translated waits in 10.13 and waiting in 11.10.

The phrase to wait in fear may need to be expressed by two verbs; for example, “to wait and to fear” or “while we are waiting, to fear.”

For the coming Judgment may be expressed as “God’s judging will soon happen” or “the time when God will judge is near.”

The fierce fire may be expressed as “the hot fire” or “the very hot fire,” but it may be better to speak of the fire in terms of its extent; for example, “the very great fire” or “the exceedingly large fire.”

Destroy is literally “eat” (Translator’s New Testament “devour”), but clearly in an extended meaning, making fire assume the figure of a wild beast.

Those who oppose God may be rendered as “those who are enemies of God” or “those who fight against God.” However, the writer avoids the common Greek word for “enemies,” except in quotations from the Old Testament; a somewhat milder word such as “adversaries” (Revised Standard Version) may be appropriate in translation. In those who oppose God, in the Greek God is implied as in Isaiah 26.11, to which the writer may be referring; Hebrews 10.29 suggests that opposition to Christ may also be included.

Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Letter of the Hebrews. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

See Exodus 2.11-12. Be called the son of the king’s daughter implies really having the position and privileges of Pharaoh’s grandson. Le Nouveau Testament. Version Synodale renders refuse to be called as “renounced the title of.” The king’s is literally “of Pharaoh.” “Pharaoh” is the title of kings of Egypt, not a proper name. There are various ways of dealing with this unfamiliar title, depending on the intended readers and whether the translation of Hebrews is to be published as a separate book or in a complete Bible. Normally the title “Pharaoh” should be translated the same way in both the Old and the New Testaments. Possibilities include (a) using the title “Pharaoh,” but anticipating that it will be understood in the light of the king in verse 27; (b) adding a glossary note, as for example in Good News Bible and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch; (c) translating as “the king of Egypt” as in Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch and Biblia Dios Habla Hoy. Choice (a) is possible for readers who know the Bible well, but (b) is better for others, and (c) may be necessary in translations of Hebrews which are published separately.

Made Moses … refuse to be called the son of the king’s daughter may be rendered as “Moses refused to have people treat him as the son of the king’s daughter,” “… as the adopted son of the king’s daughter,” “… as the person whom the king’s daughter had adopted,” or “… had adopted as her son.”

The temporal clause when he had grown up must sometimes be made a separate sentence; for example, “He did this when he had grown up” or “This is what he did after he had become a man.”

Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Letter of the Hebrews. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The quotation is from Exodus 19.12-13; compare Deuteronomy 5.23-25. The order which said: it is clearly implied that the order was given by God, and it may be better to say so in translation. Barclay turns the sentence into indirect speech, and this may be more natural in some languages: “they were appalled by the order that, if even a beast touched the mountain, it should be stoned to death.”

Because they could not bear the order which said may be rendered as “because they could not bear what God had ordered” or “… what God had commanded.” In some instances they could not bear may be expressed as “they could not accept,” or “they refused to accept,” or “they did not want to accept.”

The writer of Hebrews increases the emphasis of the Old Testament verse he quotes. The differences may be expressed as follows:

Exodus 19.12-13 “Whoever touches the mountain … whether beast or man, shall be put to death.”

Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Letter of the Hebrews. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Hebrews “Not even a wild animal is allowed to touch the mountain, however lightly.” Even is important; Hebrews condenses the Old Testament passage, but the writer knows that human beings are also threatened with death.

To death is implied; see comment on 11.37. King James Version‘s “or thrust through with a dart” is not part of the original text of Hebrews. It may be too easy for the reader to understand even as applying to touching the mountain rather than as applying to an animal. Therefore it may be better to make the meaning explicit; for example, “If anyone, even an animal, touches the mountain.” Accordingly the final part of the command may be rendered as “you must stone to death that person or animal.”

Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Letter of the Hebrews. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .