covenant

Click here to view graphically

The Hebrew, Greek, Ge’ez, and Latin that are translated as “covenant” in English are translated in a variety of ways. Here are some (back-) translations:

  • Mossi: “helping promise”
  • Vai: “a thing-time-bind” (i.e. “an arrangement agreed upon for a period of time”)
  • Loma (Liberia): “agreement”
  • Northwestern Dinka: “agreement which is tied up” (i.e. “secure and binding”)
  • Chol: “a word which is left”
  • Huastec: “a broken-off word” (“based on the concept of ‘breaking off a word’ and leaving it with the person with whom an agreement has been reached”)
  • Tetelcingo Nahuatl: “a death command” (i.e. “a special term for testament”)
  • Piro: “a promised word”
  • Eastern Krahn: “a word between”
  • Yaka: “promise that brings together” (source for this and all above: Bratcher / Nida)
  • Nabak: alakŋaŋ or “tying the knot” (source: Fabian 2013, p. 156)
  • Kâte: ʒâʒâfic or “tie together” (source: Renck 1990, p. 108)
  • Nyamwezi: ilagano: “agreement, contract, covenant, promise” (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
  • Bariai: “true talk” (source: Bariai Back Translation)
  • Q’anjob’al: “put mouths equal” (representing agreement) (source: Newberry and Kittie Cox in The Bible Translator 1950, p. 91ff. )
  • Manikion, Indonesian: “God’s promise” (source: Daud Soesilo)
  • 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. )
  • Chichewa: pangano. This word can also be translated as a contract, agreement, or a treaty between two parties. In Chewa culture, two people or groups enter into an agreement to help each other in times of need. When entering into an agreement, parties look at the mutual benefits which will be gained. The agreement terms are mostly kept as a secret between the parties and the witnesses involved. (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
Law (2013, p. 95) writes about how the Ancient Greek Septuagint‘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.”

See also establish (covenant) and covenant (book).

Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Covenant in the Hebrew Bible .

abomination

The Hebrew that is translated as “abomination” or similar in English is translated in Vidunda as “hated thing” and in Kwere as zitibusa which means “evil” but also something that causes horror or disgust and revolts people. (Source for both: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)

in Ngambay it is nékɔb or “taboo.” (Source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)

See also detestable in the sight of God and holy.

fat, oil

The different Hebrew and Greek terms that are translated as “(olive) oil” and “(animal) fat” in English are translated in Kwere with only one term: mavuta. (Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)

sanctuary

The Hebrew, Greek and Latin that is translated as “sanctuary” in English is translated in the Contemporary Chichewa translation (2002/2016) with opatulika or “separated place.” This is understood in a religious setup as a place designated for worship. (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)

complete verse (Ezekiel 44:7)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Ezekiel 44:7:

  • Kupsabiny: “You insulted that house of mine by allowing foreigners who do not know me to enter where/when you make for me sacrifices of fat and blood. You broke/destroyed my covenant by all the bad things you did.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon: “You cause- the non Israelinhon who do- not -believe in me -to-enter into my temple. In this way you defile my temple while you offer food, fat, and blood. Aside from your detestable deeds, you still trespass my covenant with you.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
  • English: “In addition to all the other detestable things that you do, you brought into my temple foreign men who had not been circumcised and who were godless. By doing that, you caused my temple to be an unacceptable place to worship me, while you offered food and fat and blood, and you disobeyed my agreement with you.” (Source: Translation for Translators)

1st person pronoun referring to God (Japanese)

Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.

Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between.

One way Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the choice of a first person singular and plural pronoun (“I” and “we” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. The most commonly used watashi/watakushi (私) is typically used when the speaker is humble and asking for help. In these verses, where God / Jesus is referring to himself, watashi is also used but instead of the kanji writing system (私) the syllabary hiragana (わたし) is used to distinguish God from others.

(Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )

See also pronoun for “God”.

formal 2nd person plural pronoun (Japanese)

Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.

Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between.

One way Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the choice of a formal plural suffix to the second person pronoun (“you” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. In these verses, anata-gata (あなたがた) is used, combining the second person pronoun anata and the plural suffix -gata to create a formal plural pronoun (“you” [plural] in English).

(Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )

Translation commentary on Ezekiel 44:7

This verse lists some of the sinful things that the Israelites had done.

In admitting foreigners, uncircumcised in heart and flesh, to be in my sanctuary: They allowed people who were not entitled to be there to come into the holy areas of the Temple compound. In this context my sanctuary does not refer only to the Temple building, but to the two courtyards surrounding it as well. Although most translations refer to foreigners in this verse, the usual Hebrew expression for a person from another country does not occur here. Instead, this expression seems to refer to people who were not of the priestly line, people who were not ritually allowed to take part in the activities of the Temple. Possible translations for this expression are “people who are not qualified” and “people who are not ritually allowed to be in the sanctuary.” These people are further described as uncircumcised in heart and flesh. Uncircumcised in heart refers to “people who do not obey” God (Good News Translation), people who are “stubborn” (Contemporary English Version, New International Reader’s Version), “people who have no heart for God” (New Living Translation). Since this is figurative language for the internal attitude of these people, it is better to avoid referring to circumcision, which could be embarrassing for people to read or hear. On the other hand, uncircumcised in … flesh refers to physical circumcision, which was a sign that a Jew was part of God’s community (see the comments on 28.10). A man who was not physically circumcised would certainly not be allowed to take part in the activities of the Temple. If readers are not familiar with circumcision or if it carries a very different meaning in their culture, translators may say “men who have not cut off the foreskin [of the penis] to show they are God’s people” or, perhaps better, “people who are not part of God’s community.”

Profaning it: By allowing such people to enter the Temple compound and take part in the activities, they “dishonored” (New Century Version), “disgraced” (Contemporary English Version), the Temple and made it ritually unclean. For profaning see 7.21.

When you offer to me my food, the fat and the blood shows that these unqualified people were in the Temple compound during the sacred sacrifices. Fat and blood were the two most important parts of a sacrifice (see Exo 23.18). In the ancient world sacrifices were often understood as feeding the gods. Although the writers of the Old Testament did not take this literally, it is described in that familiar way here. Some translations omit the reference to my food (so Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version), but most languages should be able to keep it.

You have broken my covenant: By allowing unqualified people into the Temple compound, the Israelites broke the covenant, that is, the “solemn agreement” (Contemporary English Version) between God and them. This probably refers to the covenant made at Mount Sinai during the Exodus (see the comments on 16.8). Instead of the pronoun you, which is in the Septuagint and other ancient translations, the Hebrew text has the pronoun “they” (King James Version / New King James Version, New American Standard Bible, Revised English Bible). Hebrew often swaps between second and third person pronouns when referring to the same people. Here they both refer to the Israelites. Translators should use whatever form is most meaningful and natural in their language. Broken may be rendered “violated” (Moffatt) or “made … void” (New American Standard Bible).

In addition to all your abominations: The breaking of the covenant was over and above the wicked things they had done. For abominations see 5.9. Many translations follow the Septuagint here to say that it was “due to” the abominations that they broke the covenant, not that the breaking of the covenant was in addition to the abominations; for example, Good News Translation renders the last sentence of this verse as “So my people have broken my covenant by all the disgusting things they have done” (similarly New Revised Standard Version, Contemporary English Version, New International Reader’s Version, King James Version / New King James Version, Revised English Bible, Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, Christian Community Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Moffatt). This is acceptable, but the meaning in addition to is preferable.

A model for this verse is:

• You allowed people who were not qualified to enter the Temple area. They were people who did not obey me [God] and were not part of my community [or, who were not circumcised]. When you let them in while you were offering the fat and the blood of sacrifices to me, you made the Temple not fit for my worship. You have broken our solemn agreement. This is in addition to all the wicked things you have done.

Quoted with permission from Gross, Carl & Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on Ezekiel. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .