καὶ πᾶς ἀνὴρ Ισραηλ καὶ γυνὴ καὶ τὰ παιδία οἱ κατοικοῦντες ἐν Ιερουσαλημ ἔπεσον κατὰ πρόσωπον τοῦ ναοῦ καὶ ἐσποδώσαντο τὰς κεφαλὰς αὐτῶν καὶ ἐξέτειναν τοὺς σάκκους αὐτῶν κατὰ πρόσωπον κυρίου·
11And all the Israelite men, women, and children living at Jerusalem prostrated themselves before the temple and put ashes on their heads and spread out their sackcloth before the Lord.
The now commonly-used German idiom Asche auf mein Haupt (literally “ashes on my head”), which today is primarily used meaning “mea culpa,” often humorously, was made popular in 1534 in the German Bible translation by Martin Luther. (Source: Redewendungen aus der Bibel )
For other idioms or terms in German that were coined by Bible translation, see here.
The Hebrew or Greek which are translated into English as “sackcloth” are rendered into Chamula Tzotzil as “sad-heart clothes.” (Source: Robert Bascom)
Pohnpeian and Chuukese translate it as “clothing-of sadness,” Eastern Highland Otomi uses “clothing that hurts,” Central Mazahua “that which is scratchy,” Tae’ and Zarma “rags” (Source: Reiling / Swellengrebel), and Tangale as “torn clothes that show contrition on the body” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin). In the English translation by Goldingay (2018), “put on sackcloth” is translated as wrap on sack.
“In Turkana, a woman removes her normal everyday skin clothes and ornaments and wears rather poor skins during the time of mourning. The whole custom is known as ngiboro. It is very difficult to translate putting on sackcloth because even material like sacking is unfamiliar. The Haya, on the other hand, have a mourning cloth made out of the bark of a tree; and the use of this cloth is similar to the Jewish use of sackcloth. It was found that in both the Turkana and Ruhaya common language translations, their traditional mourning ceremonies were used.” (Source: Rachel Konyoro in The Bible Translator 1985, p. 221ff. )
See also mourning clothes and you have loosed my sackcloth.
Other languages make a distinction: (Click or tap here to see more)
Languages that, like English, German, Dutch, Danish, or Afrikaans, don’t make that distinction include:
Another distinction that tends to be overlooked in translations is that between hieron (“temple” in English) and sunagógé (“synagogue” in English). Euan Fry (in The Bible Translator 1987, p. 213ff. ) reports on this:
“Many older translations have simply used transliterations of ‘temple’ and ‘synagogue’ rather than trying to find equivalent terms or meaningful expressions in their own languages. This approach does keep the two terms separate; but it makes the readers depend on explanations given by pastors or teachers for their understanding of the text.
“Translators who have tried to find meaningful equivalents, for the two terms ‘temple’ and ‘synagogue’ have usually made a distinction between them in one of two ways (which focus on the contrasting components of meaning). One way takes the size and importance of the Temple to make a contrast, so that expressions such as ‘sacred meeting/ worship house of the Jews’ and ‘big sacred meeting/worship house of the Jews’ are used. The other way focuses on the different nature of the religious activity at each of the places, so that expressions such as ‘meeting/worship house of the Jews’ and ‘sacrifice/ceremony place of the Jews’ are used.
“It is not my purpose in this article to discuss how to arrive at the most precise equivalent to cover all the components of meaning of ‘temple’. That is something that each translator really has to work through for himself in the light of the present usage and possibilities in his own language. My chief concern here is that the basic term or terms chosen for ‘temple’ should give the reader of a translation a clear and correct picture of the location referred to in each passage. And I am afraid that in many cases where an equivalent like ‘house of God’ or ‘worship house’ has been chosen, the readers have quite the wrong picture of what going to the Temple or being in the Temple means. (This may be the case for the word ‘temple’ in English too, for many readers.)”
Here are some examples:
Bangandu: “the great house of God” vs. “house of prayer” (Source: Ervais Fotso Noumsi in Le Sycomore, 16/1, 2022 )
See also this devotion on YouVersion .
The name that is transliterated as “Jerusalem” in English is signed in French Sign Language with a sign that depicts worshiping at the Western Wall in Jerusalem:
“Jerusalem” in French Sign Language (source: La Bible en langue des signes française )
While a similar sign is also used in British Sign Language, another, more neutral sign that combines the sign “J” and the signs for “place” is used as well. (Source: Anna Smith)
“Jerusalem” in British Sign Language (source: Christian BSL, used with permission)
Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Jerusalem .
The Hebrew adonai in the Old Testament typically refers to God. The shorter adon (and in two cases in the book of Daniel the Aramaic mare [מָרֵא]) is also used to refer to God but more often for concepts like “master,” “owner,” etc. In English Bible translations all of those are translated with “Lord” if they refer to God.
In English Old Testament translations, as in Old Testament translations in many other languages, the use of Lord (or an equivalent term in other languages) is not to be confused with Lord (or the equivalent term with a different typographical display for other languages). While the former translates adonai, adon and mare, the latter is a translation for the tetragrammaton (YHWH) or the Name of God. See tetragrammaton (YHWH) and the article by Andy Warren-Rothlin in Noss / Houser, p. 618ff. for more information.
In the New Testament, the Greek term kurios has at least four different kinds of use:
In the first and fourth case, it is also translated as “Lord” in English.
Most languages naturally don’t have one word that covers all these meanings. According to Bratcher / Nida, “the alternatives are usually (1) a term which is an honorific title of respect for a high-ranking person and (2) a word meaning ‘boss’, ‘master’, or ‘chief.’ (…) and on the whole it has generally seemed better to employ a word of the second category, in order to emphasize the immediate personal relationship, and then by context to build into the word the prestigeful character, since its very association with Jesus Christ will tend to accomplish this purpose.”
When looking at the following list of back-translations of the terms that translators in the different languages have used for both kurios and adonai to refer to God and Jesus respectively, it might be helpful for English readers to recall the etymology of the English “Lord.” While this term might have gained an exalted meaning in the understanding of many, it actually comes from hlaford or “loaf-ward,” referring to the lord of the castle who was the keeper of the bread (source: Rosin 1956, p. 121).
Following are some of the solutions that don’t rely on a different typographical display (see above):
We have come to rely on another term which emphasizes God’s essential nature as YHWH, namely jukurrarnu (see tetragrammaton (YHWH)). This word is built on the same root jukurr– as is jukurrpa, ‘dreaming.’ Its basic meaning is ‘timelessness’ and it is used to describe physical features of the land which are viewed as always being there. Some speakers view jukurrarnu in terms of ‘history.’ In all Genesis references to YHWH we have used Kaatu Jukurrarnu. In all Mark passages where kurios refers to God and not specifically to Christ we have also used Kaatu Jukurrarnu.
New Testament references to Christ as kurios are handled differently. At one stage we experimented with the term Watirirririrri which refers to a ceremonial boss of highest rank who has the authority to instigate ceremonies. While adequately conveying the sense of Christ’s authority, there remained potential negative connotations relating to Warlpiri ceremonial life of which we might be unaware.
Here it is that the Holy Spirit led us to make a chance discovery. Transcribing the personal testimony of the local Warlpiri pastor, I noticed that he described how ‘my Warlaljamarri called and embraced me (to the faith)’. Warlaljamarri is based on the root warlalja which means variously ‘family, possessions, belongingness’. A warlaljamarri is the ‘owner’ or ‘possessor’ of something. While previously being aware of the ‘ownership’ aspect of warlaljamarri, this was the first time I had heard it applied spontaneously and naturally in a fashion which did justice to the entire concept of ‘Lordship’. Thus references to Christ as kurios are now being handled by Warlaljamarri.” (Source: Stephen Swartz, The Bible Translator 1985, p. 415ff. )
Law (2013, p. 97) writes about how the Ancient Greek Septuagint‘s translation of the Hebrew adonai was used by the New Testament writers as a bridge between the Old and New Testaments: “Another case is the use of kurios referring to Jesus. For Yahweh (in English Bibles: ‘the Lord‘), the Septuagint uses kurios. Although the term kurios usually has to do with one’s authority over others, when the New Testament authors use this word from the Septuagint to refer to Jesus, they are making an extraordinary claim: Jesus of Nazareth is to be identified with Yahweh.”
See also Father / Lord.
All … prostrated themselves before the temple: At this point (compare 4.9) all the Israelites in Jerusalem—men, women, and children—become involved in the supplication. Good News Translation‘s “lay face down on the ground in front of the Temple” precisely describes prostrated themselves before the temple.
Put ashes on their heads: Putting ashes on one’s head was, like the wearing of sackcloth, a symbolic act demonstrating sorrow or distress.
Spread out their sackcloth before the Lord: The reference to spreading out the sackcloth is unusual. There is a reference in 2 Sam 21.10 to spreading out sackcloth, but the passage is not really parallel. Our text does not say that the sackcloth spread out was that being worn, but some translations assume this; for example, New American Bible has “displaying their sackcloth covering before the Lord,” but this makes the situation sound like a fashion showing. Good News Translation‘s “all in sackcloth” is ambiguous. Presumably “all in sackcloth” refers to everyone being in sackcloth, which is correct, but it sounds like they may have been covered from head to toe in sackcloth, which is not necessarily the case; compare the note on 4.10. In all probability the sackcloth they spread out is that which they are wearing. Perhaps they lift it, or wave it, or do something else with it to call God’s attention to their prayer, since they do it before the Lord, that is, “in the Lord’s presence” (Good News Translation). Good News Translation‘s interpretation is reasonable, and certainly understandable. See the first model below. For Lord see Tob 3.2.
They even surrounded the altar with sackcloth: Covering the altar with the sackcloth is the author’s way of expressing the desperation of the people. Nowhere else in Scripture is such an act mentioned. Good News Translation has combined verses 11-12 in order to move this sentence to the beginning of these verses, where it fits in a logical order. First the people put the sackcloth on themselves and their livestock, then they put it on the altar, and then they begin the ceremony of prayer. Yet a truer impression might be conveyed by using the author’s order. It is somewhat chaotic and that is part of the point. Revised Standard Version has a nice touch with They even surrounded …. New Revised Standard Version is better with “They even draped….” The even conveys that the act was radical, unprecedented.
Cried out in unison: “Joined together” (Good News Translation) is better. The wailing on this scene would probably not be in unison.
The God of Israel could be translated “their God,” since obviously they as Israelites are praying to their own God. However, some force would be lost. The writer says it this way because he wants to emphasize the connection between God and Israel as his people.
Not to give up their infants as prey and their wives as booty: Not to give up means “not to let their enemies capture their children….” There is probably no essential difference between the nouns prey and booty used to describe the fate they wish their children and their women to escape. Good News Translation‘s “captured” and “carried off” mean much the same, but the very use of different, almost synonymous verbs for the two groups emphasizes the frustration involved.
The cities they had inherited to be destroyed: Good News Translation has “their home towns destroyed,” but this misses the point of inheritance. These are the “towns/cities of their inheritance.” This does not just mean home towns or even ancestral towns, but towns given them by God as their own share in the Promised Land. So we may say “towns that God had given them” (compare Jdg 2.6; Neh 11.20; 1 Macc 15.33).
And the sanctuary to be profaned and desecrated to the malicious joy of the Gentiles: The prayer on behalf of the temple is that it not be profaned and desecrated. The two verbs are roughly synonymous. They pray that it not be dishonored in such a way that it is no longer a sacred site. Dishonoring Israel’s holy place would be a source of malicious joy (“satisfaction” in Good News Translation) to the invading Gentiles. The malicious joy of the Gentiles pictures the Gentiles as taking joy in the evil act of desecrating the sanctuary. Gentiles may also be rendered as “foreigners” or “people who do not worship God.” Contemporary English Version has a helpful rendering for this final sentence: “They begged him not to give foreigners the joy of taking over the temple and polluting the place of worship.”
In languages that do not have the passive voice for the verbs destroyed, profaned, and desecrated, one may render verses 11-12 as follows:
• They even took sackcloth and covered the altar with it [or, draped it over the altar]. Then every man, woman, and child in Jerusalem lay face down on the ground in front of the temple, in the Lord’s presence. They were wearing sackcloth, and had covered their heads with ashes. Then they all prayed earnestly to the God of Israel not to let their enemies capture and take away their wives and children or let them destroy the towns that God had given them. They begged him not to let foreigners have the joy of taking over the temple and making it an unacceptable place of worship.
In languages that require direct speech for the prayer, one may translate:
• They even took sackcloth … Then they all prayed earnestly to the God of Israel, saying, “Please do not let our enemies capture and take away our wives and children. Don’t let them destroy the towns that you have given us. Please don’t let foreigners have the joy of taking over the temple and….”
Quoted with permission from Bullard, Roger A. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Judith. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here.
No comments yet.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.