12If one carries consecrated meat in the fold of one’s garment and with the fold touches bread, or stew, or wine, or oil, or any kind of food, does it become holy?” The priests answered, “No.”
The Greek and Hebrew that are translated as “consecration” or “consecrate” in English is translated in Poqomchi’ as “set apart” (when applying to a ritual not to a moral status). (Source: Robert Bascom)
In Newari it is translated as “make holy” (source: Newari Back Translation) and in Kwere as “put to holy work” when it refers to making someone or something suitable for priestly duties, when it refers to individual consecration outside of the priestly duty, “offer (yourselves) for my sake” is also used. (Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
The Hebrew and Greek that is translated with “clothes” or similar in English is translated in Enlhet as “crawling-in-stuff” (source: Jacob Loewen in The Bible Translator 1971, p. 169ff. ) and in Noongar as bwoka or “Kangaroo skin” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).
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.
In Cuban Sign Language (the Jewish) priest is translated referencing the ephod , the traditional apron that was worn by priests:
Alain Montano (in: The Bible Translator 2026, p. 173ff.) explains: “A second challenge arose in translating the term ‘priest’ in Luke 10:31, referring to the priest who was descending from the temple. The translation team consisted primarily of Evangelical translators and included one Catholic translator. The initial sign proposed for ‘priest’ referenced the clerical collar, a symbol commonly associated with clergy across multiple Christian denominations, such as Methodists, Anglicans, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Reformed, Catholics, Moravians, and others. While most team members considered this option acceptable, the Catholic translator raised concerns that this representation could generate confusion, as it encompassed denominational identities not directly related to the priest described in the biblical text.
“Given this observation, the team began searching for a sign that accurately represented the priest in question and his role, with the aim of ensuring that the translation and interpretation of the text was as faithful as possible. Signs referencing a bishop’s miter or the skullcap worn by cardinals and popes were discarded, as the priest in question did not belong to the Catholic tradition as the evangelical translators initially understood it.
“The possibility of representing the high priest—using the breastplate and the Urim and Thummim — was also rejected, since the character in the text was not the high priest, but a Levitical priest serving his assigned turn in the temple. The challenge was ultimately resolved through the creation of a new sign referencing the ephod, which more accurately represented this type of priest, who served as an assistant in the work of the temple of Israel.”
The Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek that are translated as “wine” in English is translated into Pass Valley Yali as “grape juice pressed long ago (= fermented)” or “strong water” (source: Daud Soesilo). In Guhu-Samane it is also translated as “strong water” (source: Ernest L. Richert in The Bible Translator 1965, p. 198ff. ), in Noongar as “liquor” (verbatim: “strong water”) (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang), in Hausa as ruwan inabi or “water of grapes” (with no indication whether it’s alcoholic or not — source: Mark A. Gaddis), in sar as kasə nduú or “grape drink” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin), or in Papantla Totonac and Coyutla Totonac as “a drink like Pulque” (for “Pulque,” see here ) (source: Jacob Loewen in The Bible Translator 1971, p. 169ff. ).
In Swahili, Bible translations try to avoid local words for alcoholic drinks, because “drinking of any alcohol at all was one of the sins most denounced by early missionaries. Hence translators are uncomfortable by the occurrences of wine in the Bible. Some of the established churches which use wine prefer to see church wine as holy, and would not refer to it by the local names used for alcoholic drinks. Instead church wine is often referred to by terms borrowed from other languages, divai (from German, der Wein) or vini/mvinyo (from ltalian/Latin vino/vinum). Several translations done by Protestants have adapted the Swahili divai for ‘wine,’ while those done by Catholics use vini or mvinyo.” (Source: Rachel Konyoro in The Bible Translator 1985, p. 221ff. )
The Swahili divai was in turn borrowed by Sabaot and was turned into tifaayiik and is used as such in the Bible. Kupsabiny, on the other hand, borrowed mvinyo from Swahili and turned it into Finyonik. (Source: Iver Larsen)
In Nyamwezi, two terms are used. Malwa ga muzabibu is a kind of alcohol that people specifically use to get drunk (such as in Genesis 9:21) and ki’neneko is used for a wine made from grapes (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext).
In some Hindi translations (such as the Common Language version, publ. 2015 ), one term (dākharasa दाखरस — grape juice) is used when that particular drink is in the focus (such as in John 2) and another term (madirā मदिरा — “alcohol” or “liquor”) when drunkenness is in the focus (such as in Eph. 5:18).
In Mandarin Chinese, the generic term jiǔ (酒) or “alcohol(ic drink)” is typically used. Exceptions are Leviticus 10:9, Numbers 6:3, Deuteronomy 29:6, Judges 13:4 et al., 1 Samuel 1:15, and Luke 1:15 where a differentiation between weak and strong alcohol is needed. The Mandarin Chinese Union Version (2010) translates that as qīngjiǔ lièjiǔ (清酒烈酒) and dànjiǔ lièjiǔ (淡酒烈酒), both in the form of a Chinese proverb and meaning “light alcohol and strong drink.” (Source: Zetzsche)
Click or tap here to see a short video clip about wine in biblical times (source: Bible Lands 2012)
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)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Haggai 2:12:
Kupsabiny: “‘When/If a person has taken (out) a piece of meat that is set aside/consecrated for a ceremony of burning of sacrifices and he closes it in where his dress is rolled up, and then he touches with that dress bread or food which has been prepared, or wine, or oil, or any kind of food, will that food then be set aside/consecrated to become clean?’ ’ The priests answered, ‘Not at all.’” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “If someone bundles up consecrated meat in his clothes and if in that bundle it touches bread, prepared food, new wine, or oil, does it also become consecrated in that way?’ The priests answered, "No, it does not.’"” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “For-example, one/a person is-carrying holy meat in his garment/clothes. Now, his garment/clothes has-touched bread, or soup, wine, oil or any kind of food. So, will- that food -become holy?’ When Haggai asked the priests their answer (was), ‘No.’” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “‘If one of you priests takes from the altar some meat that was sacrificed and is carrying it in his robes, if his robe touches some bread or stew or wine or olive oil or some other food, does that food also become holy/acceptable for a sacrifice?’’ When he said that to the priests, they replied, ‘No.’” (Source: Translation for Translators)
If one carries holy flesh: The meaning of the expression holy flesh is given in fuller form in Good News Translation as “a piece of consecrated meat from a sacrifice.” Holy (Good News Translation “consecrated”) means “offered to the LORD.” Some translators may need to expand this a little further and say, “If a person takes [or, carries] a piece of meat from an animal sacrificed to the LORD.” In certain languages it will be necessary to make it clear that priests first sacrificed an animal, cut it up and offered the meat to the LORD. In such cases translators may say, “If a person takes a piece of meat from an animal that priests have sacrificed and offered to the LORD.”
In the skirt of his garment: Good News Translation has “in a fold of his robe.” The people of that time and place wore long and flowing garments, so it was quite possible for a man to make a kind of bag from “a fold of his robe,” and carry things in it. Presumably a fold made in this way would be somehow hitched around a belt to prevent the loss of the items carried. In the case of meat, presumably it would have been wrapped up to stop the robe becoming stained. Any robe used in this way to carry consecrated meat itself became holy (Lev 6.24-28). Garment or “robe” will be translated in many languages as “long outer garment.”
And touches with his skirt bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any kind of food: The basic foods, bread, wine, and olive oil had been referred to in 1.11, though the Hebrew words used were different there. Here the list is extended by the mention of pottage or “cooked food” (Good News Translation), and finally any kind of food. Pottage is a fairly general term referring mainly to “stew” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Contemporary English Version, New Living Translation) or “broth” (Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible, New English Bible/Revised English Bible), probably made mostly from vegetables (Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). So in some languages translators may render pottage as “cooked vegetables” or even “vegetable stew.”
Does it become holy?: The main point of the question was whether the robe could then pass on holiness to any other items of food it touched. This is expressed very clearly in Good News Translation: “If he then lets his robe touch any bread, cooked food, wine, olive oil, or any kind of food at all, will it make that food consecrated also?” Translators could also say, “Is it also consecrated to the LORD,” or even “Would those foods that were touched then become acceptable for sacrifice?” (Contemporary English Version). In some languages different words may be required to express become holy in relation to the different kinds of food mentioned.
The priests answered, “No”: The Hebrew text never states that Haggai obeyed the command in verse 11 to ask the question. However, this is assumed, and in many languages it will be helpful to state it. One way of doing this is found in the opening words of Good News Translation, “When the question was asked….” Another way is found in Bible en français courant and Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, which say in effect, “ ‘No,’ replied the priests to Haggai’s question.” Such renderings avoid giving the impression that the priests answered directly to the LORD. This kind of logical gap in a narrative is called an ellipsis. In languages with no passive, translators may say, “When Haggai asked the question…” (compare Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch).
Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Haggai. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
2:12a If a man carries consecrated meat in the fold of his garment,
One of you (plur.) might carry a piece of meat from a holy sacrifice in the fold of your garment. -or-
Someone might take a part of consecrated meat ⌊offered from a sacrifice⌋ and carry it in a fold of his ⌊outer⌋ clothes.
2:12b and it touches bread, stew, wine, oil, or any other food,
And that fold might come in contact with bread, cooked food, wine, olive oil or some other kind of food. -or-
And that fold ⌊that carries the consecrated meat⌋ might touch some bread, boiled dish, wine, olive oil or some other food.
2:12c does that item become holy?’”
⌊If that happens,⌋ will those items become holy?’” -or-
⌊If that happens,⌋ will ⌊the consecrated meat⌋ cause ⌊the food⌋ it ⌊touches⌋ to become ritually acceptable before God?’”
2:12d “No,” replied the priests.
The priests said, “⌊The food will⌋ not ⌊become holy before God⌋ .” -or-
The priests said, “No. ⌊When holy food touches other food, the holy food will not make the other food holy⌋ .”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.