Western Bukidnon Manobo: “high sacrificer” (source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Tagbanwa as “Most-important Priest of God” (source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Bariai: “Big leader of offerings” (source: Bariai Back Translation)
In Khoekhoe the translation for “high priest” is only capitalized when it refers to Jesus (as is Hebrews 2:17 et al.). (Source: project-specific notes in Paratext)
The Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin, Ge’ez, and Greek that is translated in English as “holy” has many translations that often only cover one aspect of its complex meaning. (Note that “holy” as well as related words in other Germanic languages originally meant “whole, uninjured.”)
In an article from 2017, Andrew Case (in The Bible Translator 2017, p. 269ff. ) describes some of the problems of the concept of “holiness” in English as well as in translation in other languages and asks for “a creative effort to turn the tide toward a more biblical understanding. He challenges the standard understanding of God’s holiness as “separation,” “transcendence,” or “infinite purity,” and suggests that in certain contexts it also carries the meaning of “totally devoted.” (Click here to read more of his article.)
“For a long time there has been considerable confusion regarding the meaning of the word ‘holy’. For the limited scope of this paper, we will focus on this confusion and its development within the English-speaking world, which has a widespread influence in other countries. The word for holy in English can be traced back at least to the eleventh century (although there is evidence of its use in Old Norse around A.D. 825). The Oxford English Dictionary describes the use of holy as applied to deities, stating: ‘the development of meaning has probably been: held in religious regard or veneration, kept reverently sacred from human profanation or defilement; (hence) of a character that evokes human veneration and reverence; (and thus, in Christian use) free from all contamination of sin and evil, morally and spiritually perfect and unsullied, possessing the infinite moral perfection which Christianity attributes to the Divine character.’
“Thus ‘infinite moral perfection’ persists as an understood meaning by many in the English-speaking world today. Others gloss this as ‘purity’ or ‘cleanness,’ and the effects of this interpretation can be seen in residual missionary influence in different parts of the world. These effects manifest themselves in people groups who have long-standing traditions of referring to the Holy Spirit as the ‘clean’ Spirit or the ‘pure’ Spirit. And subsequently, their idea of what it means for God to be holy remains limited by a concept of high sinlessness or perfection. After years of this mentality embedding itself into a culture’s fabric, it turns out to be extremely difficult to translate the Bible into their language using any terminology that might differ from the ingrained tradition handed down to them by missionaries who had a faulty understanding of the word holy. One of the purposes of this paper is to offer persuasive biblical evidence that translations and traditions like those mentioned may be limited in what they convey and may often be unhelpful.
“The persistence of this confusion around the word ‘holy’ in our present day stems from various factors, of which two will be mentioned. First, English translations of the Bible have insisted on retaining the term ‘holy’ even though few modern people intuitively understand the meaning of the term. This phenomenon is similar to the use of the word hosts in phrases like ‘LORD of hosts’ or ‘heavenly hosts,’ which most modern people do not know refers to armies. Within much of the English-speaking church there is an assumption that Christians understand the word ‘holy’, yet at the same time authors continue to write books to help explain the term. These varied explanations have contributed to a conceptual muddiness, which is related to the second primary factor: the promotion and proliferation of an etymological fallacy. This etymological fallacy’s roots can be traced back to the influence of W. W. Baudissin, who published The Concept of Holiness in the Old Testament in 1878. In this work he proposed that the Hebrew קדשׁ originally came from קד, which meant ‘to cut’ (Baudissin 1878). This led to the widespread notion that the primary or essential meaning of ‘holy’ is ‘apart, separate.’ This meaning of holy has been further engrafted into the culture and tradition (….) by influential authors and speakers like R. C. Sproul. His book The Holiness of God, which has sold almost 200,000 copies since it was first released in the 1980s, tends to be a staple volume on every pastor’s shelf, and became an immensely popular video series. In it he writes,
“‘The primary meaning of holy is ‘separate.’ It comes from an ancient word meaning ‘to cut,’ or ‘to separate.’ To translate this basic meaning into contemporary language would be to use the phrase ‘a cut apart.’ . . . God’s holiness is more than just separateness. His holiness is also transcendent. . . . When we speak of the transcendence of God, we are talking about that sense in which God is above and beyond us. Transcendence describes His supreme and absolute greatness. . . . Transcendence describes God in His consuming majesty, His exalted loftiness. It points to the infinite distance that separates Him from every creature.’ (Sproul 1985, 37)
“J. I. Packer also contributes to the spread of this idea in his book Rediscovering Holiness: ‘Holy in both biblical languages means separated and set apart for God, consecrated and made over to Him’ (Packer 2009, 18).
“Widely influential author A. W. Tozer also offers a definition:
“‘What does this word holiness really mean? . . . Holiness in the Bible means moral wholeness — a positive quality which actually includes kindness, mercy, purity, moral blamelessness and godliness. It is always to be thought of in a positive, white intensity of degree.’ (Tozer 1991, 34)
“Thus one can imagine the average Christian trying to juggle this hazy collection of abstractions: infinite moral purity and wholeness, kindness, mercy, blamelessness, godliness, transcendence, exalted loftiness, and separateness. Trying to apply such a vast definition to one’s reading of Scripture can be baffling. (. . .)
“In the levitical and priestly tradition of the Pentateuch, the term ‘holy’ is applied to people (priests, Nazirites, the congregation), places (especially the sanctuary), gifts and offerings, occasions (all the feasts), as well as to Yahweh. While we cannot assume that the meaning is totally different when applied to these different categories, neither should we assume that it is the same. This paper does not propose to address the meaning of holy when referring to things. The purpose is to explore how holy should be understood when applied mainly to persons. It is common for a word to carry a different meaning when applied to a human being than when applied to a thing. In English, for example, a person can be ‘tender’ in a way a steak cannot. Context is king. Also, it should be understood that the semantic range of a word is not permanently fixed and may shift considerably over time. It would be linguistically disingenuous to say that a word always means ‘such and such.’ As Nida explains, a word’s meaning is a ‘set of relations for which a verbal symbol is a sign’ (Nida 1975, 14). Words are not infinitely malleable, but they are also not completely static or inextricably bound by their root or history. Thus this paper acknowledges that ‘holy’ may connote other things such as ‘purity, separate, set apart,’ depending on the context. In summary, this paper should be considered a simple beginning to a discussion that may help stir up others to develop the idea further. (…)
“As mentioned at the beginning of this paper, translations that gloss ‘holy’ as ‘pure’ or ‘clean’ in reference to God or the Spirit are limited and potentially misleading. Therefore, what is the alternative way forward? Obviously, when considering the issue of perceived authenticity, many will not be able to change decades or even centuries of tradition within their communities. Once the translation of a name is established, especially a name so pervasive and primal as Holy Spirit, it is exceedingly difficult to reverse the decision. As in all cases with translation of key terms, best practice involves letting the community make an informed decision and test it amongst themselves.
“In all probability, communities who already use terms such as ‘Clean/Pure Spirit’ will opt to maintain them, even after gaining a better understanding as presented in this paper. In those cases it may be helpful to encourage them to include a clarifying discussion of what it means for God to be holy, in a glossary or a footnote.
“In cultures that have assimilated a loan word from English or some other language, there must be corrective teaching on the term, since it will be impossible to change. We are forever stuck with holy in the English-speaking world, but pastors, leaders, and writers can begin to turn the tide towards a better understanding of the term. Likewise, other cultures can begin to resurrect the biblical meaning through offering wise guidance to their congregations.
“In pioneering contexts where no church or Christian terminology has been established, translators have a unique opportunity to create translations that communicate more accurately what Scripture says about God’s holiness. The equivalent of a single abstract term ‘devoted’ or ‘dedicated’ may often be lacking in other languages, but there are always creative and compelling ways to communicate the concept. Even the translation ‘Faithful Spirit’ would be closer to the meaning than ‘pure.’ ‘Committed’ would be better than ‘separate’ or ‘blameless.’ Nevertheless, it should be clearly understood that finding a viable alternative for translation will be a difficult challenge in many languages.
“Although our devotion to God will involve separating ourselves from certain things and striving to be blameless, they are not equal concepts, just as loving one’s wife is not the same as avoiding pornography (even though it should include that). The one is positive and the other negative. What we want to communicate is the positive and fundamental aspect of holiness, wherein God pours himself out for the good of his people, and people offer their hands and hearts to God and his glory.
“A helpful tool for eliciting a proper translation would be to tell a story of a father (or a mother in some cultures) who was totally devoted to the well-being of his children, or of a husband who was totally devoted to the welfare of his wife. After choosing culturally appropriate examples of how the man went above and beyond the normal call of duty because of his devotion, ask, ‘What would you call this man? What was he like?’ This would open up a potentially valuable discussion that may unveil the right word or phrase.
“Ultimately God’s manifestation of his covenantal character in action towards humanity (his people in particular) and his people manifesting the covenantal character of God in their lives — that is, holiness — complements our understanding of the gospel. God poured out the life of his Son as a demonstration not only of his righteousness (Rom 3:25), but also to show his holiness. Jesus himself was obedient unto death for his Father’s chosen ones, and thus it is no surprise that he is referred to by the quaking demons as ‘the Holy One of God’ (Mark 1:24). And it is the Holy Spirit who manifests God’s holiness through the gospel, enabling people to understand it, bringing them to embrace it, and empowering them to live it.
In the 1960s Bratcher / Nida described the difficulty of translation the concept (in connection with “Holy Spirit”) like this:
“An almost equally difficult element in the phrase Holy Spirit is the unit meaning ‘holy,’ which in the Biblical languages involves a concept of separation (i.e. unto God or for His service). In general, however, it is difficult to employ a term meaning primarily ‘separated’, for this often leads to the idea of ‘cast out’. One must make sure that the concept of ‘separated’ implies not merely ‘separated from’ (hence, often culturally ostracized), but ‘separated to’ (in the idea of consecrated, dedicated, or ‘taboo’ — in its proper technical sense). Perhaps the most naive mistakes in rendering Holy have been to assume that this word can be translated as ‘white’ or ‘clean’, for we assume that “Cleanliness is next to godliness,” a belief which is quite foreign to most peoples in the world. Holy may, however, be rendered in some languages as ‘clear’, ‘pure’ (in Toraja-Sa’dan, Pamona and Javanese ‘clean’ or ‘pure’), ‘shining’, or ‘brilliant’ (with the connotation of awesomeness), concepts which are generally much more closely related to ‘holiness’ than is ‘whiteness’ or ‘cleanness’.”
Tboli: “unreserved obedience” (“using a noun built on the expression ‘his breath/soul is conformed'”) (source for this and three above: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
Folopa: “separate (from sin) / pure / distinct” (source: Anderson / Moore 2006, p. 202)
Bariai: “straight” (source: Bariai Back Translation)
Khmer: visoth (វិសុទ្ធ) — “unmixed, exceptional” (rather than Buddhist concept of purity, borisoth (បរិសុទ្ធ), though the translator welcomed the fact that these words rhymed) (source: Joseph Hong in The Bible Translator 1996, p. 233ff. )
Yagaria: “alone, apart, special, separate” but also “strange, unknown” (source: Renck 1990, p. 104)
Lama: “belonging especially to God” or “set apart for God’s purposes” (source: Joshua Ham)
Naro: tcom-tcomsam — “lucky” (“the concept of holiness is unknown”) (source: van Steenbergen)
Makonde: wanaswe or “white” and kuva vya Nnungu or “belonging to God.” These choices became problematic when God is declared as holy (such as in Psalm 22:3). “The second one obviously doesn’t work since it’s God, and the second one could possibly be confused as a white god or maybe saying he’s bright. So, for the idea of holiness here we’re going for the idea of there not being anyone else like him: ‘you alone are God’.” (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific notes in Paratext)
Aguaruna: “blameless” (Source: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation 1970, p. 1ff.)
Highland Totonac: “that which belongs to God” (source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.)
Mofu-Gudur: pal or “one” (in instances such as Exod. 15:11 or Isaiah 6:3, where the emphasis is on “the idea of ‘alone, only, unique.’ — Source: James Pohlig)
Zulu (and Xhosa): Ngcwele — “smooth,” “beautiful,” “bright” (click or tap here):
“Ngcwele is originally a noun from the Xhosa language, meaning ‘smoothness,’ ‘beauty,’ ’brightness.’ But it is also related to other words of the same stem, some used in Zulu, like cwala, ‘to polish.’ and gcwala, ‘to become full.’ The quality of being exalted and therefore being object for fear is well brought out in ngcwele, the side of brightness expressing the glory, and the fullness expressing the perfection which inspires reverential fear. The moral equality implied in ‘holy’ is then derived from these two meanings. What is full of glory and awe-inspiring also becomes moral perfection.” (Source: O. Sarndal in The Bible Translator1955, p. 173ff. )
Mandara: tamat (“In the Mandara culture, there is a place where only the traditional leaders of high standing can enter, and only during special feasts. This place is tamat, meaning set apart, sacred.” — Source: Karen Weaver)
Awabakal: yirri yirri — Lake (2018, p. 71) describes that choice: “As language historian Anne Keary has explained, yirri yirri meant ‘sacred, reverend, holy, not to be regarded but with awe’. It also had the more concrete meaning of an initiation site, ‘the place marked out for mystic rites, not to be profaned by common use’. As such, yirri yirri was not a generic term for ‘holy’: it invoked a specifically male spiritual domain.”
The use of the word tapu (from which the English word “taboo” derives) in translations of various languages in the South Pacific is noteworthy. The English term “taboo” was first used by Captain Cook in 1785. It does not only mean “forbidden, prohibited, untouchable,” but also “sacred, holy.” This concept is attested in almost all South Pacific islands (see this listing for the use of forms of tapu in many of the languages — for a modern-day definition of tapu, according to Māori usage, see here ).
While some Bible translators working in South Pacific languages did not use tapu for the Hebrew Old Testament term qôdesh/קֹדֶשׁ (“holy” in English translation), many did, including in Tongan (tapuha), Gilbertese (tabu), Tuvalu (tapu), Rarotongan (tapu), and Māori (tapu). (See: Joseph Hong, The Bible Translator 1994, p. 329 .)
In some of those languages, for instance in the Kiribati (Gilbertese) New Version Bible of 2016, other Old (and New) Testament terms that don’t contain a “Holy” marker in the source language, use tabu as a modifier for terms that are rendered in English as “Bread of Presence (shewbread),” “Sabbath,” or “Temple.”
Some South Pacific languages also use forms of tapu in translation of the “Holy” (Hagios/Ἅγιον) in “Holy Spirit.”
In American Sign Language it is translated with a sign that combines “unique,” “set apart,” and “cherished.” (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)
“Holy” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor
The Hebraist Franz Steiner gave a series of lectures on the topic of “taboo” and the Old Testament idea of “holy” or “sacred” that are now considered classic. Steiner died shortly after giving the lectures and they were published posthumously. While he never actually arrives at an actual definition of “taboo” in his lectures the following excerpts show something of the difficult relationship between “taboo” and “qôdesh/קֹדֶשׁ” (Click or tap here):
“The most common form of the word is tapu. That is the Maori, Tahitian, Marquesan, Rarotongan, Mangarevan and Paumotan pronunciation, which in some cases sounds more like tafu. The Hawaiian form is kapu [today: hoʻāno], the Tongan tabu. Forms like tambu and tampu are not unknown, particularly in the mixed linguistic area or in the Polynesian periphery. The word is used extensively outside Polynesia proper. Thus in Fiji tabu means unlawful, sacred, and superlatively good; in Malagassy, tabaka, profaned, polluted.
“Up to this point my report is straightforward, and I only wish I could continue, as so many have done, with the following words: ‘A brief glance at any compilation of the forms and meanings of this word in the various Polynesian languages shows that in all of them the word has two main meanings from which the others derive, and these meanings are: prohibited and sacred.’ The comparison of these data, however, suggests something rather different to me; namely, (i) that the same kind of people have compiled all these dictionaries, assessing the meaning of words in European terms, and (a) that, with few exceptions, there are no Polynesian words meaning approximately what the word ‘holy’ means in contemporary usage without concomitantly meaning ‘forbidden’. The distinction between prohibition and sacredness cannot be expressed in Polynesian terms. Modern European languages on the other hand lack a word with the Polynesian range of meaning; hence Europeans discovered that taboo means both prohibition and sacredness. Once this distinction has been discovered, it can be conveyed within the Polynesian cultural idiom by the citation of examples in which only one of the two European translations would be appropriate. I have no wish to labor this point, but I do want to stress a difficulty all too seldom realized. It is for this reason that it is so hard to accept uncritically the vocabulary-list classifications of meanings on which so much of the interpretation of taboo has been based. Tregear’s (Tregear Edward: ‘The Maoris of New Zealand,’ 1890) definition of the Maori tapu is an example: ‘Under restriction, prohibited. Used in two senses: (i) sacred, holy, hedged with religious sanctity; (2) to be defiled, as a common person who touches some chief or tapued property; entering a prohibited dwelling; handling a corpse or human bones . . .’ and so forth.
“This sort of classification almost suggests that there was in Polynesian life a time in which, or a group of objects and situations in relation to which, the notion of prohibition was employed while the society did not yet know, or related to a different group of objects and situations, the notion of sacredness. This is not so. Taboo is a single, not an ‘undifferentiated’, concept. The distinction between prohibition and sacredness is artificially introduced by us and has no bearing on the concept we are discussing. (…)
“Before we go on to the meaning of impurity in taboo, I should like to mention the exceptions I alluded to before: when, according to dictionary evidence, taboo means only ‘sacred’ and not ‘prohibited’. As translations of tapu Tregear gives for the island of Fotuna ‘sacred’, and for the island of Aniwan, ‘sacred, hallowed’. There they are, but I think one is entitled to be suspicious of such cases, since they are not accompanied by any examples of non-Christian, non-translatory use, for the word taboo was widely used by missionaries in the translation of the Bible: in the Lord’s Prayer for ‘hallowed’, ‘sacred’, and as an adjective for words like Sabbath. On the other hand, Tregear’s second point is plausible: that the notion of impurity is derived from that of prohibition (or, as one should rather say, prohibition and sacredness). A mere glance into Polynesian dictionaries reaffirms this statement, for while there is no use of a word — with, as I said, a few exceptions — which connotes sacredness without implying prohibition, there are many words meaning dirty, filthy, not nice, putrid, impure, defiled, etc. Thus it was possible to convey a notion of an object’s unfitness for consumption, or unsatisfactory surface or state of preservation, without any reference to sacredness and prohibition. Only some of the notions of impurity were connected with taboo notions. (p. 33-34) (…)
“Qodesh [קדש] is, for the man of the Pentateuch, unthinkable without manifestation. Furthermore, it is a relation, and what is related to God becomes separated from other things, and separation implies taboo behavior. According to taboo concepts, man must behave in a certain way once the relationship has been established, whether or not he is part of the qodesh relationship. For it does not follow from either the behavioral or the doctrinal element of qodesh that (1) in the establishment of the relationship the incipient part must be God, or that (2) man must be the other part.
“The full relationship, including the ritual behavior which it to some extent explains, is basically a triangular one, but two corners of the triangle may coincide. Thus the Pentateuch tells us of qodesh, holiness: (1) when God manifests Himself, then the spot is qodesh for it has been related to Him. Here the notion of contagion operates. (2) When some thing, animal, or human being has been dedicated to Him, then it is qodesh and hence taboo. Contagion, however, is in no way involved in this case. (3) The baruch relationship, the so-called blessing, also establishes holiness. God himself — this comes as a shock to most superficial Bible readers — is never called holy, qodesh, unless and in so far as He is related to something else. He is holy in His capacity as Lord of Hosts, though He is not here related to man. Very often the Bible says. The Holy One, blessed be He, or blessed be His name. The name is, in the framework of the doctrinal logic of the Pentateuch, always qodesh because it establishes a relationship: it has, so we primitives think, to be pronounced in order to exist.” (p. 85-86)
Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)
The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).
For this verse, translators typically select the inclusive form (including the writer and the readers of this letter).
Source: Velma Pickett and Florence Cowan in Notes on Translation January 1962, p. 1ff.
The Greek that is translated in English as “brother” or “brother and sister” (in the sense of fellow believers), is translated with a specifically coined word in Kachin: “There are two terms for brother in Kachin. One is used to refer to a Christian brother. This term combines ‘older and younger brother.’ The other term is used specifically for addressing siblings. When one uses this term, one must specify if the older or younger person is involved. A parallel system exists for ‘sister’ as well. In [these verses], the term for ‘a Christian brother’ is used.” (Source: Gam Seng Shae)
In Matumbi is is translated as alongo aumini or “relative-believer.” (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific notes in Paratext)
In Martu Wangka it is translated as “relative” (this is also the term that is used for “follower.”) (Source: Carl Gross)
In the German New Testament translation by Berger / Nord (publ. 1999) it is often translated as Mitchristen or “fellow Christians.”
Following are a number of back-translations of Hebrews 3:1:
Uma: “Relatives who belong to God and whom he has called to enter heaven! Consider / Pay-attention-to who the Messenger [Apostle] of God and the Big Priest that we believe-in is, He is Yesus.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “My brothers trusting in Almasi, you also were chosen by God being made his people. Think about Isa. He was sent here by God to us (incl.) and he was made High/Leading Priest of our (incl.) religion.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And because of this, my brothers in the faith who are also invited by God to live in the future in Heaven, just think about Jesus. He is the one God sent here to the earth, so that He might become the high priest who helps us in our submitting ourselves to God.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Therefore my brothers whom God has chosen as his people and has called to join him in heaven, let us think about Jesus, because as concerning the faith that we confess, he is the one whom God sent as his Apostle and the Highest Priest who represents us to God.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Now therefore, my siblings who have been like set apart by God, you whom he determined would be able to stay/reside in heaven in the future, it would be good if you think about (lit. walk your minds on) this Jesus. According to the truth which we are believing/obeying, he was the one God caused to come here, and he is the Most-important Priest who is standing up for us.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “Listen, my brothers, God called you to be his people. And now consider very well about the work of Jesus Christ. He is God’s representative here on earth and he has become the high priest of God where God lives in order to help us. Because in the word which we believe, this is apparent.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
The Greek Iēsous is “only” a proper name but one with great importance. The following quote by John Ellington (in The Bible Translator1993, p. 401ff. ) illustrates this:
“In Matthew’s account of the birth of Jesus Christ, Joseph is told that when Mary gives birth to a son ‘you will name him Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins’ (1:21). This name is a Greek transliteration of the Hebrew name [Yeshua (יֵשׁוּעַ) which is a short form of a name meaning] ‘the Lord [Yahweh] saves.’ The name is very significant and is in itself especially dear to Christians around the world. (…) Unquestionably great importance is attached to the name of Jesus by Christians of all persuasions and backgrounds.”
While Iēsous (pronounced: /i.ɛː.suːs/) is transliterated as “Jesus” (pronounced /ˈdʒiːzəs/) in English (but was translated as “Hælend” [the “healing one”] in Old English — see Swain 2019) it is transliterated and pronounced in a large variety of other ways as well, following the different rules of different languages’ orthographies, writing systems and rules of pronunciation. The following is a (partial) list of forms of Jesus in Latin characters: aYeso, Azezi, Boiyesuq, Cecoc, Chesús, Chi̍i̍sū, Chisɔsi, Ciisahs, Ciise, Ciisusu, Djesu, Ɛisa, Ƹisa, Eyesu, Gesù, Gesû, Gesü, Ġesù, Ghjesù, Giêsu, ꞌGiê‑ꞌsu, Giê-xu, Gyisɛse, Hesu, Hesús, Hisus, Hisuw, Ià-sŭ, Iesen, Ié:sos, Iesu, Iesui, Iesusɨn, Iesusiva, Ié:sos, Ihu, Iisus, Iisussa, Ijeesu, iJisọsị, Iji̍sɔ̄ɔsi, Iosa, Íosa, Ìosa, İsa, I’sa, Isiso, Isõs, Ísu, Isus, Isusa, Iisussa, Isuthi, Itota, Îtu, Isuva, Izesu, Izesuq, Jasus, Jeeju, Jeesus, Jeesuse, Jeezas, Jehu, Jeisu, Jeju, Jejus, Jeshu, Jeso, Jesoe, Jesosa, Jesoshi, Jesosy, Jesu, Jesû, Jesua, Jesuh, Jesuhs, Jesuo, Jesús, Jésus, Jesúsu, Jethu, Jezed, Jezi, Jézi, Ježiš, Jezu, Jezus, Jézus, Jėzus, Jēzus, Jezusi, Jėzus, Jezuz, Jiijajju, Jíísas, Jiisusi, Jiizas, Jíìzọ̀s, Jisas, Jisase, Jisasi, Jisasɨ, Jisaso, Jisesi, Jisɛ̀, Jisos, Jisọs, Jisɔs, Jisu, Jiszs, Jizọs, Jizɔs, Jizọsi, Jizọsu, Jòso, Jusu, Jweesus, Ketsutsi, Njises, Sesi, Sisa, Sísa, Sisas, Sīsū, Sizi, Txesusu, uJesu, Ujísɔ̄si, ŵaYesu, Xesosi, ´Xesús, Xesús, Yasu, Ya:su, Ɣaysa, Yecu, Yeeb Sub, Yeeh Suh, Yeesey, Yeeso, Yeesso, Yēēsu, Yehsu, Yëësu, Yeiqsul, Yeisu, Yeisuw, Yeshu, Yē shú, Yeso, Yéso, Yesò, Yëso, Yɛso, ye-su, Yésu, Yêsu, Yẹ́sụ̃, Yěsù, Yésʉs, Yeswa, Yet Sut, Yetut, Yexus, Yezo, Yezu, Yiesu, Yiisa, Yiisu, Yiitju, Yis, Yisɔs, Yisufa, Yitati, Yusu, ‑Yusu, :Yusu’, Zeezi, Zezi, Zezì, Zezuz, Zezwii, Ziizɛ, Zisas, Zîsɛ, Zjezus, Zozi, Zozii, and this (much more incomplete) list with other writings systems: ᔩᓱᓯ, ᒋᓴᔅ, Հիսուս, ᏥᏌ, ኢየሱስ, ያሱስ, ܝܫܘܥ, Ісус, Їисъ, 耶稣, იესო, ईसा, イエス, イイスス, イエスス, 예수, येशू, येशो, ਈਸਾ, ພຣະເຢຊູ, ජේසුස්, যীশু, ଯୀଶୁ, ཡེ་ཤུ་, ‘ঈছা, இயேசு, ಯೇಸು, ພຣະເຢຊູ, ယေရှု, ઇસુ, जेजू, येसु, เยซู, យេស៊ូ, ᱡᱤᱥᱩ, ယေသှု, యేసు, ᤕᤧᤛᤢ᤺ᤴ, އީސާގެފާނު, ਯਿਸੂ, ꕉꖷ ꔤꕢ ꕞ, ⵏ⵿ⵗⵢⵙⴰ, ଜୀସୁ, يَسُوعَ,ㄧㄝㄙㄨ, YE-SU, ꓬꓰ꓿ꓢꓴ, 𖽃𖽡𖾐𖼺𖽹𖾏𖼽𖽔𖾏, ꑳꌠ, ᠶᠡᠰᠦᠰ (note that some of these might not display correctly if your device does not have the correct fonts installed).
Click or tap here to read more.
In some languages the different confessions have selected different transliterations, such as in Belarusian with Isus (Ісус) by the Orthodox and Protestant churches and Yezus (Езус) by the Catholic church, Bulgarian with Iisus (Иисус) by the Orthodox and Isus (Исус) by the Protestant church, Japanese with Iesu (イエス) (Protestant and Catholic) and Iisusu (イイスス) (Orthodox), or Lingala with Yesu (Protestant) or Yezu (Catholic). These differences have come to the forefront especially during the work on interconfessional translations such as one in Lingala where “many hours were spent on a single letter difference” (source: Ellington, p. 401).
In Literary and Mandarin Chinese where transliterations of proper names between the Catholic and Protestant versions typically differ vastly, the Chinese name of Jesus (Yēsū 耶稣) remarkably was never brought into question between and by those two confessions, likely due to its ingenious choice. (Click or tap here to see more).
The proper name of God in the Old Testament, Yahweh (YHWH), is rendered in most Chinese Bible translations as Yēhéhuá 耶和華 — Jehovah. According to Chinese naming conventions, Yēhéhuá could be interpreted as Yē Héhuá, in which Yē would be the family name and Héhuá — “harmonic and radiant” — the given name. In the same manner, Yē 耶 would be the family name of Jesus and Sū 稣 would be his given name. Because in China the children inherit the family name from the father, the sonship of Jesus to God the Father, Jehovah, would be illustrated through this. Though this line of argumentation sounds theologically unsound, it is indeed used effectively in the Chinese church (see Wright 1953, p. 298).
Moreover, the “given name” of Sū 稣 carries the meaning ‘to revive, to rise again’ and seems to point to the resurrected Jesus. (Source: J. Zetzsche in Malek 2002, p. 141ff., see also tetragrammaton (YHWH))
There are different ways that Bible translators have chosen historically and today in how to translate the name of Jesus in predominantly Muslim areas: with a form of the Arabic Isa (عيسى) (which is used for “Jesus” in the Qur’an), the Greek Iēsous, or, like major 20th century Bible translations into Standard Arabic, the Aramaic Yēšūaʿ: Yasua (يَسُوعَ). (Click or tap here to see more.)
Following are languages and language groups that use a form of Isa include the following (note that this list is not complete):
In Indonesian, while most Bible translations had already used Yesus Kristus rather than Isa al Masih, three public holidays used to be described using the term Isa Al Masih. From 2024 on the government is using Yesus Kristus in those holiday names instead (see this article in Christianity Today ).
Some languages have additional “TAZI” editions (TAZI stands for “Tawrat, Anbiya, Zabur, and Injil” the “Torah, Prophets, Psalms and Gospel”) of the New Testament that are geared towards Muslim readers where there is also a translation in the same language for non-Muslims. In those editions, Isa is typically used as well (for example, the Khmer TAZI edition uses Isa (អ៊ីសា) rather than the commonly used Yesaou (យេស៊ូ), the Thai edition uses Isa (อีซา) rather than Yesu (เยซู), the Chinese edition uses Ěrsā (尔撒) vs. Yēsū (耶稣), and the English edition also has Isa rather than Jesus.)
In German the name Jesus (pronounced: /ˈjeːzʊs/) is distinguished by its grammatical forms. Into the 20th century the grammatical rules prescribed a unique Greek-Latin declination: Jesus (nominative), Jesu (genitive, dative, vocative), Jesum (accusative), from which today only the genitive case “Jesu” is still in active use. Likewise, in Seediq (Taroko), the morphological treatment of “Jesus” also occupies a special category by not falling under the normal rule of experiencing a vowel reduction when the object-specific suffix an is added “since it was felt that the readers might resent that the name has been changed that drastically.” (Compare Msian for “Moses” (Mosi) as an object, but Yisuan for “Jesus” (Yisu).) (Source: Covell 1998. p. 249)
In Lamba the name ŵaYesu consists of a transliteration Yesu and the prefix ŵa, a plural form for “proper names when addressing and referring to persons in any position of seniority or honor.” While this was avoided in early translations to avoid possible misunderstandings of more than one Jesus, once the church was established it was felt that it was both “safe” and respectful to use the honorific (pl.) prefix. (Source C. M. Doke in The Bible Translator 1958, p. 57ff. )
In virtually all sign languages, “Jesus” is signed with the middle finger of each hand pointing to the palm (or wrist) of the other in succession (signing the nails of the cross). In the context of Bible translation this has been pointed out as theologically problematic since the “semantic connections of the original name Jesus do point towards ‘salvation,’ they do not naturally lead to crucifixion.” (Source: Phil King in Journal of Translation 1 (2020), p. 33ff.)
Following is the oldest remaining Ethiopian Orthodox icon of Jesus from the 14th or possibly 13th century (found in the Church of the Saviour of the World in Gurji, Ethiopia). As in many Orthodox icons, Jesus’ right hand forms the Greek letters I-C-X-C for IHCOYCXPICTOC or “Jesus Christ.” Another interpretation of the right hand is that it shows three fingers pointing to the Trinity, while the two other fingers point to Jesus’ two natures.
Orthodox icons are not drawings or creations of imagination. They are in fact writings of things not of this world. Icons can represent our Lord Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary, and the Saints. They can also represent the Holy Trinity, Angels, the Heavenly hosts, and even events. Orthodox icons, unlike Western pictures, change the perspective and form of the image so that it is not naturalistic. This is done so that we can look beyond appearances of the world, and instead look to the spiritual truth of the holy person or event. (Source )
The following is the so-called “Wales Window for Alabama.” It is a stained-glass window by the artist John Petts from Carmarthenshire, Wales, created in response to the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing which took place in 1963:
Stained glass is not just highly decorative, it’s a medium which has been used to express important religious messages for centuries. Literacy was not widespread in the medieval and Renaissance periods and the Church used stained glass and other artworks to teach the central beliefs of Christianity. In Gothic churches, the windows were filled with extensive narrative scenes in stained glass — like huge and colorful picture storybooks — in which worshipers could ‘read’ the stories of Christ and the saints and learn what was required for their religious salvation. (Source: Victoria and Albert Museum )
The style of the following drawing of Jesus by Annie Vallotton is described by the artist as this: “By using few lines the readers fill in the outlines with their imagination and freedom. That is when the drawings begin to communicate.” (see here ; see also We All are One in Christ)
Illustration by Annie Vallotton, copyright by Donald and Patricia Griggs of Griggs Educational Service.
My Christian brothers is literally “holy brothers” (see Revised Standard Version). The Greek word for “holy” describes either God himself or any person or thing that belongs to him in a special way (compare discussion of pure, purifies in 2.11). In English and in some other languages, “holy” and “saint” belong so much to church language that many modern translations avoid them. Bijbel in Gewone Taal has “Brothers, you are called by God and belong to him,” Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch “My brothers, you belong to God, for he has called you into his heavenly world,” and Translator’s New Testament “my brothers, whom God has set apart for himself and called to share the life of heaven.” Good News Translation gives essentially the same sense, but My is not explicit (nothing until 13.19 shows whether the letter comes from an individual or a group).
The Greek expression of direct address, literally “holy brothers,” is rather unusual. But as in so many contexts of the New Testament, the Greek term traditionally translated as “saints” is frequently better rendered as “people of God.” In this type of context Good News Translation has understandably used Christian. In a number of languages, however, it may be difficult, if not impossible, to use a word meaning “brothers.” Therefore the Good News Bible phrase My Christian brothers may be rendered as “My fellow believers in Jesus” or “My fellow Christians.” In some languages the closest equivalent is simply “You who also believe in Christ.”
Also is not in the text. It is implied by “share” (Revised Standard Version) and means “as well as me.”
Revised Standard Version‘s “share in a heavenly call” is a very compact expression which can be understood in several slightly different ways:
(a) “Share” and “call” almost certainly go together, but it is not clear whether the writer means that they share their call with one another, or with God who called them, or with Christ (as in 1.9, where the same Greek word was translated companions). In view of the term “brothers,” it is likely that “to share” refers to what is shared among fellow believers. “You who share the heavenly calling” may therefore be rendered as “you who are also called by God” or “you whom God has also called.”
(b) “Heavenly call” may mean “call from God” or “call to heaven.” The first possibility may suit verses 7-10 and 5.4 rather better, but Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch follows the second, which is taken up in chapter 4 and in 12.1-2. If one assumes that the Greek phrase “heavenly calling” refers to “a call from God to go to heaven,” it will be necessary to make the relation rather explicit; for example, “God’s call to you to be those who will go to heaven.” But this interpretation seems to be rather unlikely.
Think is less strong than keep our eyes fixed on Jesus in 12.2; compare Think in 12.3, where a different Greek word is used. King James Version‘s “Christ” before “Jesus” is probably not part of the original text. The admonition to “keep Jesus in mind” is not simply a matter of “thinking about Jesus” or “meditating upon him.” An equivalent in some languages is “consider how Jesus was the Apostle and High Priest of our faith.” It might also be possible to translate the Greek term as “reckon with the fact that.”
Whom God sent is literally “apostle.” Both “apostle” and “angel” mean “someone who is sent.” In secular language an “apostle” is an ambassador. In the New Testament it is usually someone sent by Jesus. Nowhere else in the New Testament is Jesus himself called an apostle. Perhaps the comparison with angels, last mentioned in 2.16, is still in the writer’s mind; a translation such as whom God sent allows for this without emphasizing it. Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch translates “apostle” in the secular meaning as “plenipotentiary,” an ambassador with full powers, which makes good sense, though “plenipotentiary” would not be common language in English. Some of the meaning of the Greek term traditionally rendered “apostle” may be expressed as “God’s messenger” or “God’s ambassador.” In some languages this is expressed literally as “one who speaks God’s words” or “one who announces what God has said.”
High Priest: see 2.17.
The faith we profess: Good News Translation makes it clear that the word which Revised Standard Version translates “confession” is confession of faith, not confession of sin. What is meant is not the act of confessing but what is confessed; Biblia Dios Habla Hoy says “our religion.” The faith we profess may be rendered as “what we believe” or perhaps better “what we say we believe.”
In some languages there may be a problem involved in relating High Priest to the faith we profess. Sometimes this may be expressed as “High Priest in relation to what we say we believe” or “High Priest to assist us in everything relating to what we say we believe.” It is often obscure and even misleading to say only “High Priest of the faith we profess” or even “High Priest of our religion.”
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 .
Jesus is greater than Moses, and he leads us to a greater rest
In chapters 1 and 2, the author showed that God has now spoken through his Son Jesus. Jesus is greater than the angels, so people must pay more attention to him than to the angels.
In 3:1–4:13, the author showed that Jesus was also greater than Moses, who led God’s people, the people of Israel, out of Egypt. Moses led them as God’s faithful servant, but Jesus leads them as God’s own Son. Now God’s people include all the people who follow his Son, whether they are people of Israel or not. Jesus is the high priest of the better covenant that God made with his people.
Section 3:1–6
Jesus is greater than Moses
In this section the author explained how Jesus is greater than Moses. Moses was faithful as a servant in God’s house, but Jesus is God’s Son. He is faithful as a Son, taking care of God’s household for God. Because of that he is worthy of more honor than Moses.
Some other examples of headings for this section are:
Moses was God’s faithful servant, but Jesus was God’s faithful Son -or-
Jesus and Moses (NET Bible)
Some English versions include all of chapter 3 in one section. However, Section 3:7–19 is the second of the important warning sections in the book of Hebrews. (The first warning was in 2:1–4.) It is often helpful to readers to provide separate headings for each of these warning sections.
Paragraph 3:1–6
3:1
This verse is complex. In some languages it is more natural to change the order of clauses or to translate the clauses as two sentences. For examples of how to reorder the clauses in this verse, see the General Comment on 3:1a–b at the end of 3:1b.
3:1a
Therefore: The Greek word which the Berean Standard Bible translates as Therefore introduces the exhortation in 3:1 to “set your focus on Jesus.” The Greek word implies that readers should focus on him because of what was said about him in chapters 1 and 2, and more specifically because of 2:17–18. Those verses indicate that Jesus is a merciful and faithful high priest for his followers. Therefore they must think about him and pay attention to him.
Some other ways to translate this connection are:
So (New Century Version) -or-
Because of ⌊all⌋ this -or-
Now therefore -or-
Because of ⌊all that I have said⌋
Translate the connection in a natural and clear way in your language.
holy brothers, who share in the heavenly calling: Scholars differ about what the word holy describes in this phrase:
(1) It describes holy brothers. For example:
holy brothers and sisters (New International Version)
(2) It describes share. For example:
holy partners (New Revised Standard Version)
It is recommended that you follow interpretation (1), along with most English versions and many commentaries.
Here the author addressed his readers directly for the first time in Hebrews. The phrase holy brothers, who share in the heavenly calling addresses the readers directly, as if the phrases were names. The author used them to focus special attention on what he was about to say in 3:1b (“set your focus on Jesus”).
In some languages it may not be natural to use a long phrase to address someone directly. So it may be more natural to translate 3:1a in a different way. For example:
holy brothers and sisters, you share in a heavenly calling -or-
relatives, you belong to God and he has called you to enter heaven
In this sermon (letter) the author rarely used this type of direct address. The only other places are in 3:12, 10:19, 13:22 (“brothers”), and in 6:9 (“dear friends”).
holy brothers: The phrase holy brothers refers back to 2:11, where the author mentioned Jesus as the one who makes people holy. He said also that Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers and sisters. They are brothers and sisters of Jesus and of each other. Translate the words holy and brothers in a similar way as you did in 2:11.
Some ways to translate holy brothers here are:
brothers and sisters dedicated to God -or-
Relatives who belong to God
holy: The word holy means “dedicated to God,” “belonging to God,” “sanctified.” In 2:11, the author spoke of Jesus as the one who “sanctifies.” That means that he is the one who dedicates people to God so that they belong to him. See the examples in the preceding note.
The fact that God’s people are holy is one of the themes of the book. See also 10:10, 10:14, 12:10, and 12:14. For more information, see holy, sense A3(a), in Key Biblical Terms.
brothers: The Greek word that the Berean Standard Bible translates as brothers refers here to fellow believers in Christ. It includes both male and female. Believers call each other “brothers and sisters” because they have all been received into God’s family through becoming followers of Jesus.
Some ways to translate the word here are:
My Christian friends (Good News Translation) -or-
dear brothers and sisters who belong to God (New Living Translation (2004))
who share in the heavenly calling: The Greek word that the Berean Standard Bible translates as who share (“sharers”) means “people who use or own (something) in common or participate together in (something).” Here it indicates that the author and readers have all been called by God (they share that calling).
In some languages, it may not be natural to share a calling. If that is true in your language, some other ways to translate the meaning are:
who share in being called by God -or-
whom God called along with others to be in his family
This word is also used in 3:14 in the phrase “to share in Christ.” In 2:14 another form of the word referred to Jesus “sharing” blood and flesh.
heavenly calling: There are two ways to interpret the phrase heavenly calling in this context:
(1) It indicates that the calling is from God. The word heavenly is a way to refer to God. For example:
called by God (Good News Translation)
(Good News Translation, New Century Version, Contemporary English Version)
(2) It refers to being called to heaven. For example:
called to heaven (New Living Translation (2004))
(New Living Translation (2004))
Most English versions are ambiguous, and the interpretations are similar. However, if you must choose, it is recommended that you follow interpretation (1). In this context the author focuses more on the call to be in God’s family than on our call to heaven.
A heavenly calling indicates that God has invited or chosen people to be his children. Some other ways to translate this are:
God chose you to be his people. -or-
you whom God invited/told ⌊to be his children⌋
In some languages “God called” a person implies a wrong meaning here. It implies that the person died. If that is true in your language, you should use a different word.
3:1b
In this verse the author compared Jesus to Moses. The Berean Standard Bible and other English versions use a different order of words than the Greek text uses. In Greek, 3:1b–2 is literally:
consider carefully the apostle and high priest of our confession, Jesus
Notice that the name “Jesus” is the last word in the verse. Another way to translate this order is:
Pay attention to the one who is the apostle of God and the High Priest that we believe in: He is Jesus.
In Greek this order of words emphasizes Jesus. English versions have probably changed the order to emphasize Jesus more clearly in English. Use an order of words in your language that emphasizes Jesus.
set your focus on Jesus: The Greek phrase that the Berean Standard Bible translates as set your focus on Jesus is more literally “consider…Jesus.” This phrase means “think carefully about.” Some other ways to translate the phrase set your focus on are:
reflect on Jesus (New American Bible) -or-
think seriously about Jesus
In some languages there is an idiom to express this. For example:
fix your thoughts on Jesus (New International Version) -or-
turn your minds to Jesus (New Jerusalem Bible)
Jesus, the apostle and high priest whom we confess: The phrase Jesus, the apostle and high priest whom we confess indicates that we believe and publicly declare that Jesus is our apostle and high priest. In this context the word confess refers to “confessing the faith.” To confess the faith refers to making a statement that tells what followers of Jesus believe.
Some other ways to translate the apostle and high priest whom we confess are:
Jesus, the apostle and chief priest about whom we make our declaration of faith (God’s Word) -or-
this Jesus whom we declare to be God’s Messenger and High Priest (New Living Translation (1996))
the apostle and high priest: The phrase that the Berean Standard Bible translates as the apostle and high priest indicates the roles that God gave Jesus. God sent him (so he is called apostle), and God made him the high priest for us.
apostle: The English word apostle comes from the Greek word which means “one who is sent.” An apostle can be sent to say something or to do something. In the New Testament the word apostle usually refers to the disciples whom Jesus sent to tell people the Gospel. Here it refers to Jesus. It indicates that Jesus is the one whom God sent to people for a special purpose.
Some ways to translate apostle in this context are:
God’s Messenger (New Living Translation (2004)) -or-
who was sent to us (New Century Version)
In some languages, the term for apostle in the Gospels is “the messenger of Jesus Christ.” Here in Hebrews a term like that should be changed. The term should indicate that God sent Jesus as the apostle (messenger). Also be sure to use a different term for apostle than you use for “prophet” or “angel.” For more information, see apostle, sense 1, in Key Biblical Terms.
high priest: Here the author repeated the phrase high priest that he used in 2:17. He repeated it here because he was about to teach people more about Jesus being our high priest. He gave the main part of this teaching from 4:14 onwards. Translate high priest in the same way as you did in 2:17.
whom we confess: The phrase whom we confess means “what we say/declare that we believe.” In this context the word confess refers to people making a statement in public about what they believe. It does not refer here to confessing sins.
The word that the Berean Standard Bible translates here as confess occurs six times in the New Testament. For translation examples, see the note on “Jesus, the apostle and high priest whom we confess” earlier in this part of the verse.
General Comment on 3:1a–b
The clauses in 3:1 are complex. In some languages it is more natural to translate the connections in a simpler way or to use more than one sentence. For example:
My Christian friends, who also have been called by God! Think of Jesus, whom God sent to be the High Priest of the faith we profess. (Good News Translation) -or-
My holy brothers/relatives, you share in being called by God. Think about Jesus. He is the one whom God sent to us, and he is the supreme priest of our faith.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.