priest

Click here to view graphically

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 Cherokee (Jewish) priests are translated as atsilv-anelohi (ᎠᏥᎸ-ᎠᏁᎶᎯ), “fire feeders.” Bender / Belt (2025, p. 26) explain: “[This] provides a point of semantic overlap between the Jewish priests mentioned in the book of John and traditional Cherokee leaders who would have maintained a ceremonial fire. No loanword or semantic extension would have highlighted this specific similarity. Just as the New Testament Christ seeks to supersede the priests of his day, the missionaries working to translate the New Testament hoped to replace traditional ceremonialism with Christian beliefs and practices. Describing the Jewish priests as ‘fire feeders’ may have been a way to emphasize the obsolescence of fire-based ceremonialism. Strikingly, this word has become the term for Catholics. The vast majority of Cherokee converts to Christianity are Protestants.”

In Cuban Sign Language (the Jewish) priest is translated referencing the ephod , the traditional apron that was worn by priests:


“Priest” in Cuban Sign Language (source: La Biblia Para Personas Sorde )

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.”

See also idolatrous priests and Aaron.

complete verse (Hebrews 9:6)

Following are a number of back-translations of Hebrews 9:6:

  • Uma: “Like that was the arrangement of the Worship Tent long ago. When all was thus arranged, every day the ordinary priests entered the first room to do their work.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “Na, like this it looked in their place of worship in old times. The priests went every day into the room that one first entered to do their work.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And when they had prepared everything here, everyday the priests entered into the first room called the ‘Precious Room’ for they would carry out what they had been made to do.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “The nature of the Tent in-which-they-worshipped God back then was like that. And the priests, they entered daily into the first room to fulfill their work.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “Well, when everything had been fixed/arranged like that in their worshipping-place, as for the priests, every day they would go into that first room which was the Far-from-ordinary Room, for they would do their work.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “Thus was the form of how the church was before. Concerning the first room, day after day priests entered to do their work.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)

Translation commentary on Hebrews 9:6

This verse marks a minor step in the argument, expressed by King James Version‘s “Now,” and in other translations by beginning a new paragraph. Verses 2-5 have described the sanctuary; verses 6-7 will describe what happened there.

The first few words are literally “These things having thus been prepared.” Before translating This is how those things have been arranged, it is essential to determine whether the sentence in question refers back to the preceding paragraph (and thus involves the location of various objects) or whether this sentence refers to what follows, namely, the various rituals to be performed. If, as is more probable, the first sentence of verse 6 refers specifically to the arrangement of objects, it may be combined with the preceding paragraph as a concluding statement; for example, “This, then, is how the various things in the sanctuary have been arranged” or “… were arranged.” If another possible interpretation of the Greek is used, and the first part of verse 6 is combined with what follows, it may be rendered as “In view of how the objects in the sanctuary are arranged, the following is what happened.” The Greek word for arranged is the same used in verse 2 (Good News Translation put up). Here as in other places the author passes smoothly from one aspect of the subject to another—in this case, from the description of what the tent contained to an account of what went on in it. This and those things probably refer back to verses 1-5. Knox emphasizes this by linking verse 6a with verse 5b as follows: “We have no time to treat of these more particularly, but this was the general fashion of it.” Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch links verse 6a with what follows, but somewhat undertranslates it: “So the whole holy place consists of two parts. Each day the priests go into the first tent….” The translation will vary slightly according to whether the “preparations” (Revised Standard Version) are thought of as being (a) for a particular service, for example, lighting the candles and preparing the bread, or (b) the more permanent furnishings of the sanctuary. (b) fits the context better; this is brought out by Phillips‘ “Under this arrangement” and Jerusalem Bible‘s “Under these provisions.”

On tent, see 8.2 and 9.1-2. Barclay translates “first tent” here and “second tent” in verse 7 as “the outer part of the tabernacle” and “the inner part of the tabernacle.” It is often better to speak of the outer tent as “the first part of the tent” or “the first room of the tent.”

Every day is more precisely “continually” (Revised Standard Version). The priests, in fact, went twice a day into the outer part of the sanctuary; see Numbers 18.2-6.

To perform their duties may be rendered as “to do what they must do” or “to do what their work as priests requires them to do.” On duties, see comments on “worship” at Heb. 9.1.

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 .