אֲשֶׁ֣ר צִוִּ֗יתָ בְּיַ֨ד עֲבָדֶ֣יךָ הַנְּבִיאִים֮ לֵאמֹר֒ הָאָ֗רֶץ אֲשֶׁ֨ר אַתֶּ֤ם בָּאִים֙ לְרִשְׁתָּ֔הּ אֶ֤רֶץ נִדָּה֙ הִ֔יא בְּנִדַּ֖ת עַמֵּ֣י הָאֲרָצ֑וֹת בְּתוֹעֲבֹֽתֵיהֶ֗ם אֲשֶׁ֥ר מִלְא֛וּהָ מִפֶּ֥ה אֶל־פֶּ֖ה בְּטֻמְאָתָֽם׃
11which you commanded by your servants the prophets, saying, ‘The land that you are entering to possess is a land unclean with the pollutions of the peoples of the lands, with their abominations. They have filled it from end to end with their uncleanness.
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.
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Ezra 9:11:
Eugene Nida wrote the following about the translation of the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek terms that are typically translated with “prophet” in English:
“The tendency in many translations is to use ‘to foretell the future’ for ‘prophesy,’ and ‘one who foretells the future’ for ‘prophet.’ This is not always a recommended usage, particularly if such expressions denote certain special native practices of spirit contact and control. It is true, of course, that prophets of the Bible did foretell the future, but this was not always their principal function. One essential significance of the Greek word prophētēs is ‘one who speaks forth,’ principally, of course, as a forth-teller of the Divine will. A translation such as ‘spokesman for God’ may often be employed profitably.” (1947, p. 234f.)
In Ixcatlán Mazatec a term is used that specifically includes women. (Source: Robert Bascom)
About the translation into Northern Grebo:
“In some instances these spiritual terms result from adaptations reflecting the native life and culture. Among the Northern Grebo people of Liberia, a missionary wanted some adequate term for ‘prophet,’ and she was fully aware that the native word for ‘soothsayer’ or ‘diviner’ was no equivalent for the Biblical prophet who spoke forth for God. Of course, much of what the prophets said referred to the future, and though this was an essential part of much of their ministry, it was by no means all. The right word for the Gbeapo people would have to include something which would not only mean the foretelling of important events but the proclamation of truth as God’s representative among the people. At last the right word came; it was ‘God’s town-crier.’ Every morning and evening the official representative of the chief goes through the village crying out the news, delivering the orders of the chief, and announcing important coming events. ‘God’s town-crier’ would be the official representative of God, announcing to the people God’s doings, His commands, and His pronouncements for their salvation and well-being. For the Northern Grebo people the prophet is no weird person from forgotten times; he is as real as the human, moving message of the plowman Amos, who became God’s town-crier to a calloused people.” (source: Nida 1952, p. 20)
In American Sign Language it is a person who sees into the future:
“Prophet” in American Sign Language (source )
In British Sign Language it is is translated with a sign that depicts a message coming from God to a person (the upright finger) and then being passed on to others. (Source: Anna Smith)
“Prophet” in British Sign Language (source: Christian BSL, used with permission)
See also prophesy and prophesy / prophetic frenzy.
Learn more on Bible Odyssey: How to Recognize a Biblical Prophet .
See also seer.
Translators of different languages have found different ways with what kind of formality God is addressed.
Like many languages (but unlike Greek or Hebrew or modern English), Tuvan uses a formal vs. informal 2nd person pronoun (a familiar vs. a respectful “you”). Unlike other languages that have this feature, however, the translators of the Tuvan Bible have attempted to be very consistent in using the different forms of address in every case a 2nd person pronoun has to be used in the translation of the biblical text.
As Voinov shows in Pronominal Theology in Translating the Gospels (in: The Bible Translator 2002, p. 210ff. ), the choice to use either of the pronouns many times involved theological judgment. While the formal pronoun can signal personal distance or a social/power distance between the speaker and addressee, the informal pronoun can indicate familiarity or social/power equality between speaker and addressee.
In these verses, in which humans address God, the informal, familiar pronoun is used that communicates closeness.
Voinov notes that “in the Tuvan Bible, God is only addressed with the informal pronoun. No exceptions. An interesting thing about this is that I’ve heard new Tuvan believers praying with the formal form to God until they are corrected by other Christians who tell them that God is close to us so we should address him with the informal pronoun. As a result, the informal pronoun is the only one that is used in praying to God among the Tuvan church.”
In Gbaya, “a superior, whether father, uncle, or older brother, mother, aunt, or older sister, president, governor, or chief, is never addressed in the singular unless the speaker intends a deliberate insult. When addressing the superior face to face, the second person plural pronoun ɛ́nɛ́ or ‘you (pl.)’ is used, similar to the French usage of vous.
Accordingly, the translators of the current version of the Gbaya Bible chose to use the plural ɛ́nɛ́ to address God. There are a few exceptions. In Psalms 86:8, 97:9, and 138:1, God is addressed alongside other “gods,” and here the third person pronoun o is used to avoid confusion about who is being addressed. In several New Testament passages (Matthew 21:23, 26:68, 27:40, Mark 11:28, Luke 20:2, 23:37, as well as in Jesus’ interaction with Pilate and Jesus’ interaction with the Samaritan woman at the well) the less courteous form for Jesus is used to indicate ignorance of his position or mocking.” (Source Philip Noss)
In the most recent Manchu translation of 1835 (a revision of an earlier edition from 1822), God is never addressed with a pronoun but with “father” (ama /ᠠᠮᠠ) instead. Chengcheng Liu (in this post on the Cambridge Centre for Chinese Theology blog ) explains: “In Manchu tradition, as in Chinese etiquette, second-person pronouns could be considered disrespectful when speaking to superiors or spiritual beings. Manchu Shamanist prayers avoided si [‘you’] and sini [‘your’] for this very reason. To use them for God would be, in Lipovzoff’s [one of the two translators] words, ‘the most uncouth and indecent way to speak to the Almighty — as if He were a servant or slave.’ There was also a grammatical problem. In Manchu, si and sini could refer to both singular and plural subjects. For a faith that insisted on the singularity of God, this was potentially confusing. By contrast, repeating ama removed any ambiguity.”
In Dutch, Afrikaans, Gronings, and Western Frisian translations, God is always addressed with the formal pronoun.
See also formal pronoun: disciples addressing Jesus, female second person singular pronoun in Psalms.
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. )
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 usage of an honorific construction where the morpheme rare (られ) is affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, meijiteo-rare-ru (命じておられる) or “commanding” is used.
(Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
Quoted with permission from Noss, Philip A. and Thomas, Kenneth J. A Handbook on Ezra. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2005. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Ezra expands on the commandments that the people have disobeyed. He does not confess general faithlessness here in verses 11-12. Instead, he confesses that they had broken specific prohibitions. These commandments are a combination of texts and ideas, mainly from Deuteronomy, especially from 7.1-3. Implicitly, by quoting largely from Moses’ words in Deuteronomy, Ezra draws a parallel and a relationship between the first exodus from the bondage of the Israelites in Egypt and the second exodus from their exile in Babylonia.
Which thou didst command by thy servants the prophets: Although Ezra’s words are taken essentially from the words of Moses, this expression refers to the succession of prophets beginning with Moses himself (Deut 18.15). For servants see Ezra 5.11. For prophets see Ezra 5.1. Revised Standard Version quotes the words of the prophets in direct speech. Note that they are a quotation within the quotation of Ezra’s prayer. Revised Standard Version marks them by single opening and closing quotation marks. Good News Translation avoids two levels of quotation by restating the prophets’ words as an indirect quotation. Translators should use the form of quotation that is appropriate for this narrative in the receptor culture.
The land which you are entering: The original context of this expression is the time when the people of Israel were about to enter the promised land after their delivery and exodus from Egypt (see Deut 4.1).
To take possession of it: The promise given to their ancestors was that they would possess the land and it would become theirs (see Deut 1.8). Translators should use a verb that is appropriate for taking possession of land in contrast with possessing objects. Many languages have expressions that are equivalent to the English “occupy” of Good News Translation.
Is a land unclean with the pollutions of the peoples of the lands, with their abominations: In Deuteronomy the land of Canaan is described as “a good land” (8.7) and “a land flowing with milk and honey” (11.9). Here it is described as a land that is unclean. The idea that the land became unclean with the pollutions of the peoples of the lands from their abominations is from Lev 18.24-30. Unclean and pollutions render two forms of the same word in Hebrew, which is used for ritual uncleanness and metaphorically for the pollution of the land due to sin and immoral practices. For abominations see verse 1 above.
For the peoples of the lands, see Ezra 3.3; 9.1. Although the plural is used here, the peoples specifically referred to are those who dwell in the land of Canaan, as Good News Translation makes clear. In a broader sense, the expression here means peoples in Canaan who are not Israelites.
Which have filled it from end to end with their uncleanness: For uncleanness see the comments on “pollutions” at Ezra 6.21 since it translates the same word in Hebrew.
Quoted with permission from Noss, Philip A. and Thomas, Kenneth J. A Handbook on Ezra. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2005. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
9:11a that You gave through Your servants the prophets, saying:
that you gave through your prophets who serve you when you said,
-or-
You gave us (excl.) the following instructions through/by your servants the prophets:
-or-
what your prophets speaking on your behalf told us to do. They said that
9:11b ‘The land that you are entering to possess is a land polluted by the impurity of its peoples
‘The land you (plur.) are entering to settle/occupy is polluted/filthy/dirty because of the wicked activities of the people there.
-or-
The country that you go to in order to make it yours is spoiled by the sin of the different peoples who live there.
-or-
the land that you were giving us (excl.) to live in is full of wicked people who do terrible things.
9:11c and the abominations with which they have filled it from end to end.
By their disgusting practices they have filled the land from end to end with evil.
-or-
For they have made it totally impure/unclean by their horrible acts. Every part of it is spoiled.
-or-
These wicked people exist everywhere throughout the land and are always doing terrible/evil/vile things.
© 2020 by SIL International®
Made available under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License (CC BY-SA) creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0.
All Scripture quotations in this publication, unless otherwise indicated, are from The Holy Bible, Berean Standard Bible.
BSB is produced in cooperation with Bible Hub, Discovery Bible, OpenBible.com, and the Berean Bible Translation Committee.
No comments yet.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.