15Then Solomon awoke; it had been a dream. He came to Jerusalem, where he stood before the ark of the covenant of the Lord. He offered up burnt offerings and offerings of well-being and provided a feast for all his servants.
The Hebrew, Greek, and Latin that is sometimes translated as “ark of the covenant” in English (other English options: “pact chest” [translation by John Goldingay, 2018] or “Coffer of the Covenant” [translation by Everett Fox, 1995]) is translated in various ways:
Mairasi: Anasi Farjora or “Covenant Place” (source: Enggavoter 2004)
In American Sign Language it is translated with a sign that combines “box” and the wings of the cherubim on top of the ark (see Exod 25:18 and following). (Source: RuthAnna Spooner, Ron Lawer)
“Ark of the covenant” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor
The Hebrew olah (עֹלָה) originally means “that which goes up (in smoke).” English Bibles often translates it as “burnt-offering” or “whole burnt-offering,” focusing on the aspect of the complete burning of the offering.
The GreekSeptuagint and the LatinVulgate Bibles translate it as holokautōma / holocautōsis (ὁλοκαύτωμα / ὁλοκαύτωσις) and holocaustum, respectively, meaning “wholly burnt.” While a form of this term is widely used in many Romance languages (Spanish: holocaustos, French: holocaustes, Italian: olocausti, Portuguese: holocaustos) and originally also in the Catholic tradition of English Bible translations, it is largely not used in English anymore today (the preface of the revised edition of the Catholic New American Bible of 2011: “There have been changes in vocabulary; for example, the term ‘holocaust’ is now normally reserved for the sacrilegious attempt to destroy the Jewish people by the Third Reich.”)
Since translation into Georgian was traditionally done on the basis of the Greek Septuagint, a transliteration of holokautōma was used as well, which was changed to a translation with the meaning of “burnt offering” when the Old Testament was retranslated in the 1980’s on the basis of the Hebrew text.
In the Koongo (Ki-manianga) translation by the Alliance Biblique de la R.D. Congo (publ. in 2015) olah is translated as “kill and offer sacrifice.” (Source: Anicet Bassilua)
The English translation of Everett Fox uses offering-up (similarly, the German translation by Buber-Rosenzweig has Darhöhung and the French translation by Chouraqui montée).
Natügu: nzesz’tikr drtwr: “oneness of mind” (source: Brenda Boerger in Beerle-Moor / Voinov, p. 164)
Tagalog: tipan: mutual promising on the part of two persons agreeing to do something (also has a romantic touch and denotes something secretive) (source: G. Henry Waterman in The Bible Translator 1960, p. 24ff. )
Tagbanwa: “initiated-agreement” (source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Guhu-Samane: “The concept [in Mark 14:24 and Matthew 16:28] is not easy, but the ritual freeing of a fruit and nut preserve does afford some reference. Thus, ‘As they were drinking he said to them, ‘On behalf of many this poro provision [poro is the traditional religion] of my blood is released.’ (…) God is here seen as the great benefactor and man the grateful recipient.” (Source: Ernest Richert in The Bible Translator, 1965, p. 81ff. )
Law (2013, p. 95) writes about how the Ancient GreekSeptuagint‘s translation of the Hebrew berith was used by the New Testament writers as a bridge between the Old and New Testaments (click or tap here to read more):
“Right from the start we witness the influence of the Septuagint on the earliest expressions of the Christian faith. In the New Testament, Jesus speaks of his blood being a kaine diatheke, a ‘new covenant.’ The covenant is elucidated in Hebrews 8:8-12 and other texts, but it was preserved in the words of Jesus with this language in Luke 22:20 when at the Last Supper Jesus said, ‘This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood. Jesus’s blood was to provide the grounds for the ‘new covenant,’ in contrast to the old one his disciples knew from the Jewish scriptures (e.g., Jeremiah 31:31-34). Thus, the earliest Christians accepted the Jewish Scriptures as prophecies about Jesus and in time began to call the collection the ‘Old Testament’ and the writings about Jesus and early Christianity the ‘New Testament,’ since ‘testament’ was another word for ‘covenant.’ The covenant promises of God (berith in Hebrew) were translated in the Septuagint with the word diatheke. In classical Greek diatheke had meant ‘last will, testament,’ but in the Septuagint it is the chosen equivalent for God’s covenant with his people. The author of Hebrews plays on the double meaning, and when Luke records Jesus’ announcement at the Last Supper that his blood was instituting a ‘new covenant,’ or a ‘new testament,’ he is using the language in an explicit contrast with the old covenant, found in the Jewish scriptures. Soon, the writings that would eventually be chosen to make up the texts about the life and teachings of Jesus and the earliest expression of the Christian faith would be called the New Testament. This very distinction between the Old and New Testaments is based on the Septuagint’s language.”
The name that is transliterated as “Jerusalem” in English is signed in French Sign Language with a sign that depicts worshiping at the Western Wall in Jerusalem:
While a similar sign is also used in British Sign Language, another, more neutral sign that combines the sign “J” and the signs for “place” is used as well. (Source: Anna Smith)
“Jerusalem” in British Sign Language (source: Christian BSL, used with permission)
The Hebrew, Latin and Greek that is transliterated as “Solomon” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language with the sign for “wise” referring to 1 Kings 3:12. (Source: Steve Parkhurst)
With this verse the writer picks up from verse 5, which says God had appeared to Solomon in a dream at night. All of verses 5-14 are the content of this dream.
The Hebrew particle translated behold focuses the reader’s attention on the following words: it was a dream. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh attempts to express the force of this particle by using an exclamation mark: “it was a dream!” On the other hand, Revised English Bible attempts to reflect this sudden recognition of the fact that he had been dreaming by using the verb “realized” with Solomon as the subject. This version also makes a paragraph break at the end of this sentence in an attempt to show that Solomon’s going to Jerusalem marked a new episode in the story. Instead of translating literally it was a dream, some common language translations say that he realized “that God had spoken to him in the dream” (Good News Translation, Bible en français courant, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente).
He came to Jerusalem may be rendered “He returned [or, went back] to Jerusalem” (Contemporary English Version, New Jerusalem Bible, Bible en français courant), since verse 4 implies that he went to Gibeon from Jerusalem.
The ark of the covenant of the LORD: See the comments on 1 Kgs 2.26. A covenant is an agreement that two persons or groups of persons make in which both promise either to do or not to do certain things.
Burnt offerings and peace offerings: These two types of offering are explained in detail in Lev 1.2-17 and 3.1-17. Regarding burnt offerings, see the comments on verse 4. The purpose of peace offerings (see also Lev 7.11-38) was to establish or maintain good relations with God. In peace offerings the fat and certain parts of the sacrifice were completely burned on the altar, but most of the meat was eaten by those who made the offering. The translation of these two kinds of sacrifices varies in English translations. Peace offerings are also called “fellowship offerings” (Good News Translation, New International Version), “offerings of well-being” (New Revised Standard Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), “shared-offerings” (Revised English Bible), and “communion sacrifices” (New Jerusalem Bible). Translators should ensure that their use of such terms is consistent throughout the Bible.
And made a feast for all his servants: The wording of Revised Standard Version and many other versions makes it sound as if the banquet took place in front of the ark. But if the common Hebrew conjunction rendered and by Revised Standard Version is translated “Then” (Contemporary English Version) or “After that” (New Century Version), the reader will be more likely to understand that Solomon moved on from that spot before the banquet was offered for those in his service. This is much more likely to have been the case. For servants see the comments on 1 Kgs 1.2.
Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .