priest

Click here to view graphically

The Hebrew, Aramaic, Ge’ez, and Greek that are typically translated as “priest” in English (itself deriving from Latin “presbyter” — “elder”) is often translated with a consideration of existing religious traditions. (Click or tap for details)

Bratcher / Nida (1961) say this:

“However, rather than borrow local names for priests, some of which have unwanted connotations, a number of translations have employed descriptive phrases based on certain functions: (1) those describing a ceremonial activity: Pamona uses tadu, the priestess who recites the litanies in which she describes her journey to the upper or under-world to fetch life-spirit for sick people, animals or plants; Batak Toba uses the Arabic malim, ‘Muslim religious teacher;’ ‘one who presents man’s sacrifice to God’ (Bambara, Eastern Maninkakan), ‘one who presents sacrifices’ (Baoulé, Navajo (Dinė)), ‘one who takes the name of the sacrifice’ (Kpelle, and ‘to make a sacrifice go out’ (Hausa); (2) those describing an intermediary function: ‘one who speaks to God’ (Shipibo-Conibo) and ‘spokesman of the people before God’ (Tabasco Chontal).”

In Obolo it is translated as ogwu ngwugwa or “the one who offers sacrifice” (source: Enene Enene), in Mairasi as agam aevar nevwerai: “religious leader” (source: Enggavoter 2004), in Ignaciano as “blesser, one who does ritual as a practice” (using a generic term rather than the otherwise common Spanish loan word sacerdote) (source: Willis Ott in Notes on Translation 88/1982, p. 18ff.), and in Noongar as yakin-kooranyi or “holy worker” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).

For Guhu-Samane, Ernest Richert (in The Bible Translator, 1965, p. 81ff. ) reports this: “The [local] cult of Poro used to be an all-encompassing religious system that essentially governed all areas of life. (…) For ‘priest’ the term ‘poro father’ would at first seem to be a natural choice. However, several priests of the old cult are still living. Although they no longer function primarily as priests of the old system they still have a substantial influence on the community, and there would be more than a chance that the unqualified term would (in some contexts particularly) be equated with the priest of the poro cult. We learned, then, that the poro fathers would sometimes be called ‘knife men’ in relation to their sacrificial work. The panel was pleased to apply this term to the Jewish priest, and the Christian community has adopted it fully. [Mark 1:44, for instance, now] reads: ‘You must definitely not tell any man of this. But you go show your body to the knife man and do what Moses said about a sacrifice concerning your being healed, and the cause (base of this) will be apparent.'”

For a revision of the 1968 version of the Bible in Khmer Joseph Hong (in: The Bible Translator 1996, 233ff. ) talks about a change in wording for this term:

​​Bau cha r (បូជា‌ចារ្យ) — The use of this new construction meaning “priest” is maintained to translate the Greek word hiereus. The term “mean sang (មាន សង្ឃ)” used in the old version actually means a “Buddhist monk,” and is felt to be theologically misleading. The Khmer considers the Buddhist monk as a “paddy field of merits,” a reserve of merits to be shared with other people. So a Khmer reader would find unthinkable that the mean sang in the Bible killed animals, the gravest sin for a Buddhist; and what a scandal it would be to say that a mean sang was married, had children, and drank wine.

See also idolatrous priests.

Levite

The Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic and Latin that is transliterated “Levites” in English (only the Contemporary English Version translates it as “temple helpers”) is translated in Ojitlán Chinantec as “temple caretakers,” Yatzachi Zapotec as “people born in the family line of Levi, people whose responsibility it was to do the work in the important church of the Israelites,” in Alekano as “servants in the sacrifice house from Jerusalem place,” and in Tenango Otomi as “helpers of priests.” (Source: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)

In American Sign Language with a sign that combines “temple” + “servant.” (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)


“Levite” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor

For the sign in Spanish Sign Language, see Levi.

More information about Levites .

Jerusalem

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:


“Jerusalem” in French Sign Language (source: La Bible en langue des signes française )

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)

Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Jerusalem .

Translation commentary on Greek Esther 10:14

[Today’s English Version F.11; Revised Standard Version 11.1]

Three different people with the same name are mentioned in this verse: (1) Ptolemy, the king of Egypt, (2) Ptolemy, the son of Dositheus, and (3) Ptolemy, the father of Lysimachus.

In the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy and Cleopatra: Ptolemy and Cleopatra were Egyptian rulers, but since there were several Ptolemies who ruled for at least three years and who had a wife named Cleopatra, it is uncertain which Ptolemy is intended: either Ptolemy VIII (the year would be 114 B.C.), Ptolemy XII (78-77 B.C.), or, least likely, Ptolemy XIV (51-47 B.C.).

Some common language translations normally make explicit which ruler is referred to when more than one ruler had the same name. Jeroboam (2 Kgs 13.13), for example, is called Jeroboam II in Today’s English Version and Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje. In this verse in Esther, however, since there is no firm evidence to identify which Egyptian ruler is intended, it is preferable to say simply “Ptolemy” without stating which one. Translators may use a footnote to indicate the possible rulers and dates.

A priest and a Levite: in the period after the Babylonian exile, a clear distinction existed between priests and Levites, though priests were also descendants of the tribe of Levi. Today’s English Version and Revised English Bible understand these words to be hendiadys, that is, the two words express one idea, “a levitical priest.” Less likely, the word “Levite” may be taken as the proper noun Levitas, as in the marginal note in New Revised Standard Version (“Dositheus, who said that he was a priest, and Levitas, and his son Ptolemy”).

The words who said and which they said may be taken as straightforward statements that imply no doubt. Since, however, the Greek text of Esther exists in different forms, it is possible that the writer of this note had doubts about the truth of the claims made by Dositheus and his son Ptolemy. Anchor Bible therefore places these words in quotation marks: “who ‘said’ he was a priest” and “which they ‘said’ was authentic.” The interpretation represented by this punctuation in Anchor Bible is reasonable, but it should be noted that it will not be found in most major-language translations.

The words brought to Egypt are literally “brought in.” From the context it appears very probable that Egypt was the destination, and Revised Standard Version seems justified in adding “Egypt” to the text (so also New Revised Standard Version, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). In some languages it is difficult to say that something was “brought” without indicating its destination. If translators add the words “to Egypt,” they may wish to indicate in a footnote that those words are not in the Greek text.

The preceding Letter of Purim may refer to all of the book of Esther in Greek or possibly to only the letter mentioned in 9.29. As Today’s English Version makes clear, this letter is “about the Purim festival.” New Revised Standard Version says “the preceding Letter about Purim.”

Had been translated: the text does not identify the languages of the translation, either which language it had been translated from or which language it had been translated into. It may be necessary to make explicit that Lysimachus translated the letter into Greek.

Today’s English Version specifies that Lysimachus was “a member of a Jerusalem family.” It is preferable to stay closer to the text, which simply says “[one] of those in Jerusalem,” or as New Jerusalem Bible translates, “a member of the Jerusalem community.” Although he lived in Jerusalem, perhaps he was not born there. That is, he was a “person of Jerusalem” but not necessarily a “son of Jerusalem.”