redeem / redemption

The Greek and Hebrew terms that are translated as “redeem” or “redemption” in most English translations (see more on that below) are translated in Kissi as “buying back.” “Ownership of some object may be forfeited or lost, but the original owner may redeem his possession by buying it back. So God, who made us for Himself, permitted us to accept or reject Him. In order to reconcile rebellious mankind He demonstrated His redemptive love in the death of His Son on our behalf.

“The San Blas Kuna describe redemption in a more spiritual sense. They say that it consists of ‘recapturing the spirit.’ A sinful person is one in rebellion against God, and he must be recaptured by God or he will destroy himself. The need of the spirit is to be captured by God. The tragedy is that too many people find their greatest pleasure in secretly trying to elude God, as though they could find some place in the universe where He could not find them. They regard life as a purely private affair, and they object to the claims of God as presented by the church. They accuse the pastor of interfering with the privacy of their own iniquity. Such souls, if they are to be redeemed, must be ‘recaptured.'” (Source: Nida 1952, p. 138)

Click or tap here for more translations or “redeem” / “redemption”

In Ajië a term is used, nawi, that refers to the “custom of planting a small tree on land cursed either by the blood of battle or some calamity.” Clifford (1992, p. 83ff.) retells the story: “Maurice Leenhardt tells how he finally arrived at a term that would express ‘redemption.’ Previous missionaries had interpreted it as an exchange — an exchange of life, that of Jesus for ours. But in Melanesian thinking more strict equivalents were demanded in the exchanges structuring social life. It remained unclear to them how Jesus’ sacrifice could possibly redeem mankind. So unclear was it that even the natas [Melanesians pastors] gave up trying to explain a concept they did not understand very well themselves and simply employed the term “release.” So the matter stood, with the missionary driven to the use of cumbersome circumlocutions, until one day during a conversation on 1 Corinthians 1:30, [Melanesian pastor and Leenhardt’s co-worker] Boesoou Erijisi used a surprising expression: nawi. The term referred to the custom of planting a small tree on land cursed either by the blood of battle or some calamity. ‘Jesus was thus the one who has accomplished the sacrifice and has planted himself like a tree, as though to absorb all the misfortunes of men and to free the world from its taboos.’ Here at last was a concept that seemed to render the principle of ‘redemption’ and could reach deeply enough into living modes of thought. ‘The idea was a rich one, but how could I be sure I understood it right?’ The key test was in the reaction of students and natas to his provisional version. They were, he reports, overjoyed with the ‘deep’ translation.”

In Folopa, the translation team also found a deeply indigenous term. Neil Anderson (in Holzhausen 1991, p. 51) explains: “While I was explaining the meaning of the [concept] to the Folopa men, I could see their faces brighten. They said that this was a common thing among them: ‘If someone falls a tree and it tips to the wrong side, killing someone, the relatives of the injured party claim the life of the guilty party. But in order to save his life, his relatives make amends. Pigs, shells (which are still used as currency here) and other valuables are given to the relatives of the deceased as payment for the life of the guilty party. In this way he can live because others stand up for him.’ Full of joy, I began to utilize this thought to the difficult translation of the word ‘redemption.’ Mark 10:45 reads now, translated back from the Folopa: ‘Jesus came to make an atonement, by which he takes upon himself the punishment for the evil deeds of many. He came so that through his death many might be liberated.’ After working on this verse for half an hour, I read it to my friends. They became silent and moved their slightly bowed heads thoughtfully back and forth. Finally, one of them took the floor, ‘We give a lot to right a wrong. But we have never given a human being as a price of atonement. Jesus did a great work for us when he made restitution. Because he died, all of us now don’t have to bear the punishment we deserve. We are liberated.'”

In Samoan the translation is togiola which originally refers to a fine mat. John Bradshaw (in The Bible Translator 1967, p. 75ff. ) explains: “The rite of submission applies in cases of grave sin which demands an extreme punishment: offenses such as murder, adultery or disrespectful behavior towards a chief. Submission is made in expectation of forgiveness. The rite is normally enacted at dawn. The prisoner and his family, or even his whole village bow down in silence before the house of the chief or other offended party. The prisoner heads the group and is covered with a fine mat, offered as his ransom. In other words, he submits himself completely to the authority of those whom he has offended. Many such submissions have been successfully offered and received. Those inside the house will come out, and bring into it those offering submission. The priestly orators speak sweetly and all join in a meal. The fine mat is accepted, while the prisoner is set free and forgiven. He no longer goes in fear of retribution for his sin. (…) If now we turn to the relation between the believer and the Redeemer, we notice at once that the word togiola, literally the price of one’s life, was the word used to denote the fine mat with which the sinner covered himself in the rite of Submission. The acceptance of the togiola set free the prisoner. It was inevitable that togiola should render lutron, ransom, as in Matthew 20:28.”

Other translations include:

  • Manya: “buy” (source: Don Slager)
  • Uma: “freed (from suffering)” (source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “set free” (source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Bariai: “unbind” (source: Bariai Back Translation)

The translation into English also is noteworthy:

“In Hebrew there are two terms, ga’al and padah, usually rendered ‘to redeem,’ which have likewise undergone significant changes in meaning with resulting obscurity and misunderstanding. Both terms are used in the Old Testament for a person being redeemed from slavery. In the case of padah, the primary emphasis is upon the redemption by means of payment, and in ga’al the redemption of an individual, usually by payment, is made by some relative or an individual of the same clan or society. These two words, however, are used in the Old Testament in circumstances in which there is no payment at all. For example, the redemption of Jews from Egypt is referred to by these two terms, but clearly there was no payment made to the Egyptians or to Pharaoh.

“In the New Testament a related problem occurs, for the words agorázō and exagorazó, meaning literally ‘to buy’ or ‘to buy back’ and ‘to buy out,’ were translated into Latin as redimo and into English normally as ‘redeem.’ The almost exclusive association of Latin redimo with payment became such a focal element of meaning that during the Middle Ages a theory developed that God had to pay the Devil in order to get believers out of hell and into heaven.

“As in the case of the Old Testament, New Testament contexts employing the Greek verb lutroó, literally ‘to redeem’ or ‘to ransom,’ do not refer primarily to payment but focus upon deliverance and being set free. But even today there is such a heavy tradition of the theological concept of payment that any attempt to translate lutroó as ‘to deliver’ or ‘to set free’ is misjudged by some as being heretical.” (Source: Nida 1984, p. 114f.)

See also redeemer and next-of-kin / kinsman-redeemer / close relative.

complete verse (Isaiah 51:10)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Isaiah 51:10:

  • Kupsabiny: “Was it not you who made the ocean become dry,
    to dry up all that water?
    You turned the ocean to become a road
    so that the people you had saved could walk there.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
  • Newari: “You made a path in the middle of the Sea.
    And [for] the people you rescued
    you made the Sea into dry ground [for them] to go from that place
    that had become a valley.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon: “Was it not you (sing.) who dried-up the sea to make a path in its center/middle so-that your (sing.) people whom you (sing.) redeemed in Egipto can-cross-over?” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)

sea / lake

The various Greek, Aramaic, Ge’ez, and Latin and Hebrew terms that are translated as “sea,” “ocean,” or “lake” in English are all translated in Chichewa with one term: nyanja. Malawi, where Chichewa is spoken, has a lot of lakes but does not share a border with the ocean. (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)

In Malagasy culture, the sea is perceived as sacred because it was a path taken by the ancestors. That is why the Malagasy word for the “sea” is ranomasina, which literally means “the sacred water.” The word masina actually has two different meanings: “salted” and “sacred/holy.” Salt is used for the conservation of some foods, such as meat or fish, that are to be set aside for later use. In this sense, the Malagasy phrase for “Holy Spirit” has the literal meaning of “Salted Spirit.” (Source: Brigitte Rabarijaona in The Bible Translator 2022, p. 103ff.)

Translation commentary on Isaiah 51:10

In this verse God’s people move from mythical ideas to God’s actions that were important in their historical memory. Just as God separated the dry land from the sea in Gen 1.9-10, so at the time of the Exodus he made a passage through the sea to let the Israelites escape from Egypt.

Was it not thou that didst dry up the sea, the waters of the great deep…?: This rhetorical question begins in the same way as the previous one (see the comments there). It continues the mythical context and the reference to God’s power over the created world. Here the people say the sea is under God’s control entirely. The sea (yam in Hebrew) is personified in Canaanite mythology as the sea god Yam (see the comments on 23.4 and 27.1). What God did was dry up the sea, which is a possible reference to God dividing the sea to allow the dry land to appear (see Gen 1.9). The waters of the great deep (compare Gen 1.2; 7.11) is parallel to the sea. The Hebrew phrase rendered great deep is usually associated linguistically with the Canaanite god Tiamat. So the people continue to draw from mythical sources to speak of the power of God shown in his control over creation. Good News Translation combines the sea and the waters of the great deep, saying simply “the sea.” If possible, translators should keep parallel expressions here.

That didst make the depths of the sea a way for the redeemed to pass over: These two lines refer to the historical event of the Exodus when the people of Israel escaped from their Egyptian masters at the Reed Sea (or, Red Sea; see the comments on 44.27 and 50.2). The depths of the sea refers simply to the bottom of the sea, its deepest parts. The redeemed refers to the Israelites who were rescued by God from Egypt (see the comments on 43.1). There is a clear link in Isaiah between the rescue from Egypt at the time of Exodus and the freeing of the exiles from Babylonia.

For Good News Translation verse 10 speaks only of the Exodus. It rejects the mythical language referring to creation. However, Bible en français courant (1997) keeps both in view, providing this useful model for translation: “Wasn’t it you also who dried the sea, the waters of the great ocean? And you who traced a path in the depths of the sea in order to make those you freed pass through it?” Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch is similar, but it makes the connection with the Genesis creation story explicit by saying “It was you who in ancient times drove back the floods of the sea, so that the dry land appeared. And it was you who in the middle of the deepest sea made a road, through which your freed people could pass.” Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch renders the two parts of the rhetorical question in this verse as two strong statements, which other languages may find helpful (see also the second example below).

Translation examples for this verse are:

• Were you not the one who dried up the sea,
the waters of the great deep?
Were you not the one who made the bottom of the sea
[into] a path so that the freed people could cross?

• You were the one who dried up the sea,
the waters of the great ocean.
You were the one who made the bottom of the sea
into a way for the rescued ones to cross over.

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Sterk, Jan. A Handbook on Isaiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2011. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .