image

The Greek that is rendered as “image” in English translations is translated in Pökoot with körkeyïn, a word that is also used to translate words like parable and example.

See also parable.

sacrifice

The Greek that is translated as “sacrifice” in English is translated in Huba as hatǝmachi or “shoot misfortune.”

David Frank (in this blog post ) explains: “How is it that ‘shoot misfortune’ comes to mean sacrifice, I wanted to know? Here is the story: It is a traditional term. Whenever there were persistent problems such as a drought, or a rash of sickness or death, the king (or his religious advisor) would set aside a day and call on everyone to prepare food, such as the traditional mash made from sorghum, or perhaps even goat. The food had to be put together outside. The king or his religious advisor would give an address stating what the problem was and what they were doing about it. Then an elder representing the people would take a handful of that food and throw it, probably repeating that action several times, until it was considered to be enough to atone for all the misfortune they had been having. With this action he was ‘shooting (or casting off) misfortune’ to restore well-being to his people. As he threw the food, he would say that this is to remove the misfortune that had fallen on his people, and everybody would respond by saying aɗǝmja, ‘let it be so.’ People could eat some of this food, but they could not bring the food into their houses, because that would mean that they were bringing misfortune into their house. There is still a minority of people in this linguistic and cultural group that practices the traditional religion, but the shooting of misfortune is no longer practiced, and the term ‘shoot misfortune’ is used now in Bible translation to refer to offering a sacrifice. Aɗǝmja is how they translate ‘amen.'”

complete verse (Hebrews 10:1)

Following are a number of back-translations of Hebrews 10:1:

  • Uma: “The Lord’s Law that Musa delivered is merely like a picture. In that Law we do not yet really know the goodness that we get from Kristus. We just see its shadow, not its real image. According to the Law of Musa, every-every year, people who want to approach God bring their worship-gifts that are always the same, but they do not become straight in God’s sight by their bringing those worship-gifts.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “The law that God gave to the Yahudi in old times is only like a shadow. That is the true thing, the different good things that Almasi brought when he came here to earth. The law says hep that every year without end sacrifices have to be made to God but these sacrifices cannot make straight/righteous the livers of the people worshipping God.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “We (incl.) now understand that the Law left behind by Moses was just a shadow. And all of the good things that come by means of Christ, these are the true things that the Law reflected. It was commanded by the Law that every year it was necessary for the sacrifices to be made; because of this we understand also that by means of these sacrifices it was not possible for people to be made righteous.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “The law of Moses, it is like a mere shadow or drawing which was-showing the nature of the good blessings that Cristo gives, but it is not the same as those blessings. Therefore even though every-year those who worshipped God continued to offer what the law commanded, it was absolutely not possible for them to become people who had no faults/lacks righteous on-account-of their doing that.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “As for those laws which God put into the hands of the Jews, this is not the means-of-obtaining the good things that are coming. Those things that the law can obtain, they (are) only like a shadow of these which are coming. For those animals that they are-making-sacrifices-of year after year, which-are-a-means-of-asking for forgiveness for sin, they certainly cannot erase the sin of those going-to- God -for-help.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “Moses wrote the law by which the Jews walk. But this law he wrote is like the shadow of the good which must come afterwards. Because with the law it doesn’t appear well about the word which will come afterwards. Those people who worshipped God made sacrifices which the law commanded. But the sacrifice the people made did not take away the people’s sins because year after year the people made the sacrifices over again.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)

law

The Greek, Hebrew, and Ge’ez that is translated in English as “Law” or “law” is translated in Mairasi as oro nasinggiei or “prohibited things” (source: Enggavoter 2004) and in Noongar with a capitalized form of the term for “words” (Warrinya) (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).

In Yucateco the phrase that is used for “law” is “ordered-word” (for “commandment,” it is “spoken-word”) (source: Nida 1947, p. 198) and in Central Tarahumara it is “writing-command.” (Source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.)

In a 1922 translation into Chagatai, a precursor language of both Uzbek and Uighur, it is translated with the Arabic loan word shari’at (شريعت), originally meaning “(Islamic) law (Shari’a).” (Source: F. Erbay and F.N. Küçükballı in Acta Theologica 2025 45/2, p. 133ff. )

See also teaching / law (of God) (Japanese honorifics).

Translation commentary on Hebrews 10:1

Jewish is implied, as in verse 11. This term is not historically correct, since Israelites were not called “Jews” until after the exile, while the first five books of the Bible are set in an earlier period. However, the writer is not concerned with the distinction between the various periods of Old Testament history. Nor are most modern readers concerned, for whom “Jews” are a recognizable group, whereas “Israelites” or “Hebrews” are not. Jewish is therefore widely used in common language translations. See comment on 8.4.

The phrase The Jewish Law may be rendered as “The Law given to the Jews” or “The Law for the Jews.” Note, however, that in many languages it may be necessary to employ a plural form, namely, “The laws given to the Jews.”

As a comparison with Revised Standard Version shows, Good News Translation reverses the original order of not a full and faithful model and only a faint outline. This change makes the verse easier to understand, by putting the more important negative statement first. The translator should consider whether or not this is natural and effective in his own language.

In contrasting the full and faithful model and the faint outline, the writer returns to the contrast expressed in partly different words in 8.5 between the pattern and the shadow (also Col 2.17). For model, King James Version uses “image,” which is appropriate in Mark 12.16 and Colossians 1.15, but is misleading here; the writer does not mean “the image of an original” but the original itself, the reality itself, of which the Old Testament worship is only a “shadow.”

Not a full and faithful model has a textual problem. For the Greek, “not the true form,” one early manuscript has “and the true form,” and others have different readings. Both old and modern translations choose the same text as Good News Translation and Revised Standard Version.

The expression for the real things is as general in meaning in the Greek as its equivalent is in English; all the stylistic emphasis falls on “true form.”

The phrase the real things can be almost completely obscure, especially in a literal translation in which the equivalent of things may indicate merely objects. It would appear that the real things must in some way be related to the good things to come, but in view of what has been said about what is real in the previous two chapters, the real things may relate to “that which exists in heaven.”

Is not a full and faithful model of the real things may be expressed as “does not look just like the real things.”

The good things were to come, from the point of view of the Law, but have now already come, from the point of view of the writer (see 9.11). For this reason Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch‘s “a weak indication of what God wanted to do for men in the future” is preferable to Moffatt‘s “a mere shadow of the bliss that is to be” or Barclay‘s “no more than a shadow of the good things which are to come.” Phillips has “a dim outline of the benefits Christ would bring,” and New English Bible “the good things which were to come.” These renderings are similar to that of GECL.

It may be difficult to translate the phrase a faint outline of the good things to come. In some languages the equivalent may be “words which are difficult to understand about the things that are to come,” “only some few words about the things that are to come,” “only a picture which is difficult to see clearly, which shows those good things that are to come,” or “… those good things in the future.”

On sacrifices, see comments on 5.1; 7.27.

The passive are offered is like the English impersonal pronoun “they,” since it does not specify who does the offering; it means quite generally “people offered.” The writer is now less concerned with the High Priest than with the sacrifice. The same sacrifices are offered may be expressed in some languages as “The same sacrifices happen” or “… occur.”

The writer is more interested in Old Testament texts on worship than with what was happening in the Jerusalem Temple in his own lifetime. The writer is unlikely to have meant that sacrifices would go on being offered forever in the Temple (see 8.13; 9.8), but rather “repeatedly” or “indefinitely” (see Traduction œcuménique de la Bible; similarly Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch). This is true whether or not the Jerusalem Temple was still in use when Hebrews was written. On this matter scholars disagree. The New English Bible text solves this problem by taking the Greek for forever (“continually”) with make perfect, thereby translating “can never bring the worshippers to perfection for all time.” However, this translation, and the New English Bible footnote “bring to perfection the worshippers who come continually,” go against the natural flow of the Greek sentence.

It may be possible to indicate in an effective and idiomatic way the meaning of forever, year after year as “day after day, year after year, always.” Instead of are offered forever, one may use a negative expression, for example, “never cease,” and then add “day after day and year after year.”

Revised Standard Version‘s “never” is strongly emphasized. Good News Translation brings this out by turning the negative statement “it can never … make perfect…” into a rhetorical question, How can the Law … make perfect…? Translators must decide how far it is natural to follow this example in their own languages.

Instead of Revised Standard Version‘s “it [that is, the Law] can never,” many good manuscripts have “they can never,” referring to “sacrifices” or to those who offer them, leaving “the Law” without further explanation. Translations and commentators generally choose the text followed by Revised Standard Version, but one or two mention the alternative in a note.

On make perfect, see comments on 2.10.

On come to God or “draw near” (Revised Standard Version), see comments on 4.16.

It may be difficult to speak of “the Law making something perfect,” for in many languages the Law is not regarded as being an agent. However, one can often say “How can the people who come to God become perfect by following the laws which tell about these sacrifices?” or “… the laws which indicate how sacrifices are to be performed?”

Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Letter of the Hebrews. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .