covenant

Click here to view graphically

The Hebrew, Greek, Ge’ez, and Latin that are translated as “covenant” in English are translated in a variety of ways. Here are some (back-) translations:

  • Mossi: “helping promise”
  • Vai: “a thing-time-bind” (i.e. “an arrangement agreed upon for a period of time”)
  • Loma (Liberia): “agreement”
  • Northwestern Dinka: “agreement which is tied up” (i.e. “secure and binding”)
  • Chol: “a word which is left”
  • Huastec: “a broken-off word” (“based on the concept of ‘breaking off a word’ and leaving it with the person with whom an agreement has been reached”)
  • Tetelcingo Nahuatl: “a death command” (i.e. “a special term for testament”)
  • Piro: “a promised word”
  • Eastern Krahn: “a word between”
  • Yaka: “promise that brings together” (source for this and all above: Bratcher / Nida)
  • Nabak: alakŋaŋ or “tying the knot” (source: Fabian 2013, p. 156)
  • Kâte: ʒâʒâfic or “tie together” (source: Renck 1990, p. 108)
  • Nyamwezi: ilagano: “agreement, contract, covenant, promise” (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
  • Bariai: “true talk” (source: Bariai Back Translation)
  • Q’anjob’al: “put mouths equal” (representing agreement) (source: Newberry and Kittie Cox in The Bible Translator 1950, p. 91ff. )
  • Manikion, Indonesian: “God’s promise” (source: Daud Soesilo)
  • Natügu: nzesz’tikr drtwr: “oneness of mind” (source: Brenda Boerger in Beerle-Moor / Voinov, p. 164)
  • Tagalog: tipan: mutual promising on the part of two persons agreeing to do something (also has a romantic touch and denotes something secretive) (source: G. Henry Waterman in The Bible Translator 1960, p. 24ff. )
  • Tagbanwa: “initiated-agreement” (source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Cherokee: “that which is told” (source: Bender / Belt 2025, p. 16)
  • Guhu-Samane: “The concept [in Mark 14:24 and Matthew 16:28] is not easy, but the ritual freeing of a fruit and nut preserve does afford some reference. Thus, ‘As they were drinking he said to them, ‘On behalf of many this poro provision [poro is the traditional religion] of my blood is released.’ (…) God is here seen as the great benefactor and man the grateful recipient.” (Source: Ernest Richert in The Bible Translator, 1965, p. 81ff. )
  • Chichewa: pangano. This word can also be translated as a contract, agreement, or a treaty between two parties. In Chewa culture, two people or groups enter into an agreement to help each other in times of need. When entering into an agreement, parties look at the mutual benefits which will be gained. The agreement terms are mostly kept as a secret between the parties and the witnesses involved. (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
Law (2013, p. 95) writes about how the Ancient Greek Septuagint‘s translation of the Hebrew berith was used by the New Testament writers as a bridge between the Old and New Testaments (click or tap here to read more):

“Right from the start we witness the influence of the Septuagint on the earliest expressions of the Christian faith. In the New Testament, Jesus speaks of his blood being a kaine diatheke, a ‘new covenant.’ The covenant is elucidated in Hebrews 8:8-12 and other texts, but it was preserved in the words of Jesus with this language in Luke 22:20 when at the Last Supper Jesus said, ‘This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood. Jesus’s blood was to provide the grounds for the ‘new covenant,’ in contrast to the old one his disciples knew from the Jewish scriptures (e.g., Jeremiah 31:31-34). Thus, the earliest Christians accepted the Jewish Scriptures as prophecies about Jesus and in time began to call the collection the ‘Old Testament’ and the writings about Jesus and early Christianity the ‘New Testament,’ since ‘testament’ was another word for ‘covenant.’ The covenant promises of God (berith in Hebrew) were translated in the Septuagint with the word diatheke. In classical Greek diatheke had meant ‘last will, testament,’ but in the Septuagint it is the chosen equivalent for God’s covenant with his people. The author of Hebrews plays on the double meaning, and when Luke records Jesus’ announcement at the Last Supper that his blood was instituting a ‘new covenant,’ or a ‘new testament,’ he is using the language in an explicit contrast with the old covenant, found in the Jewish scriptures. Soon, the writings that would eventually be chosen to make up the texts about the life and teachings of Jesus and the earliest expression of the Christian faith would be called the New Testament. This very distinction between the Old and New Testaments is based on the Septuagint’s language.”

See also establish (covenant) and covenant (book).

Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Covenant in the Hebrew Bible .

complete verse (Jeremiah 34:18)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Jeremiah 34:18:

  • Kupsabiny: “And the people who broke my covenant that (they) made in front of me, I will do to them to be similar to the calf that was cut in two and (people) walked in the midst (of the pieces) when you made that covenant.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon: “The officials of Juda and Jerusalem and the officials of the palace, as-well-as the priests and all the residents made a covenant with me by their walking in between the cutting-in-two a one-year-old-female cow. But they did not fulfill their covenant with me, therefore I will-also -do to them what they did with the calf.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
  • English: “Because you have disregarded what I said in my agreement with you, I will do to you just like you did to the calves that you cut in half to show that you would surely do what you solemnly promised that you would do. I will enable your enemies to cut you into pieces, you officials of Judah and you officials of Jerusalem, and you officials in the palace, and you priests and all you common people. I will do that because you have disregarded what you solemnly promised about freeing your slaves.” (Source: Translation for Translators)

1st person pronoun referring to God (Japanese)

Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.

Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between.

One way Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the choice of a first person singular and plural pronoun (“I” and “we” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. The most commonly used watashi/watakushi (私) is typically used when the speaker is humble and asking for help. In these verses, where God / Jesus is referring to himself, watashi is also used but instead of the kanji writing system (私) the syllabary hiragana (わたし) is used to distinguish God from others.

(Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )

See also pronoun for “God”.

Translation commentary on Jeremiah 34:18

Good News Translation (also Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch and Bible en français courant) places verses 18-19 together as a unit to achieve better restructuring. This makes the verses much easier to read and understand, and translators may find that this restructuring will make their own translations more natural too.

The men are those persons mentioned in verse 19, which is the basis for placing the two verses together as a unit.

Transgressed and did not keep the terms of may be understood as either equivalent in meaning or else as a general statement (transgressed), followed by a qualifying statement (“by failing to keep the terms of the covenant”). The first expression is generally translated as “broke the covenant,” and the second as “did not do what the covenant required.”

Before me: This is better expressed as “in my presence.”

As Revised Standard Version indicates, like the calf does not represent the Hebrew, which has “the calf.” It is felt that the text as it stands is ungrammatical, and the shift from “the calf” to like the calf requires a change in only one letter of the Hebrew text, and so a number of scholars accept this as the best rendering (New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, Revised English Bible). However, the text may be rendered with good sense as it stands if (1) calf is placed after they cut and (2) the main verb of verse 18 make, which is literally “give,” is assumed to be resumed in verse 20 “I will give them.” The resulting translation would then be “I will hand over the men who … when they cut the calf [literally young bull] in two and passed between its parts….” Translators may follow either interpretation. If they follow the Revised Standard Version text, then Good News Translation is a useful model: “So I will do to these people what they did to the bull.”

Which they cut in two and passed between its parts: This reflects the manner in which a covenant was ratified in ancient Israel (see Gen 15.7-18a, especially verse 17).

The princes … the eunuchs, the priests …: In verse 19 the persons referred to are listed and the ritual act of passing between the parts of the calf is mentioned again; then in verse 20 the LORD indicates who it is that he will hand them over to (“their enemies”). As elsewhere, princes does not refer only to the royal family, but was used for the leaders. See 1.18. For eunuchs see 29.2. Good News Translation renders “palace officials” and Traduction œcuménique de la Bible “the personnel of the court.” In this context a literal translation may not be the best approach, because it could put the focus on their physical condition rather than on their positions in the court. For priests see 1.1.

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on Jeremiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2003. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .