circumcise, circumcision

Click here to view graphically

The Hebrew and Greek terms that are translated as “circumcise” or “circumcision” in English (originally meaning of English term: “to cut around”) are (back-) translated in various ways:

  • Chimborazo Highland Quichua: “cut the flesh”
  • San Miguel El Grande Mixtec, Navajo (Dinė): “cut around”
  • Javanese: “clip-away”
  • Uab Meto: “pinch and cut” (usually shortened to “cut”)
  • North Alaskan Inupiatun, Western Highland Purepecha: “put the mark”
  • Tetelcingo Nahuatl: “put the mark in the body showing that they belong to God” (or: “that they have a covenant with God”)
  • Indonesian: disunat — “undergo sunat” (sunat is derived from Arabic “sunnah (سنة)” — “(religious) way (of life)”)
  • Ekari: “cut the end of the member for which one fears shame” (in Gen. 17:10) (but typically: “the cutting custom”) (source for this and above: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
  • Cheke Holo: “peel for the purpose of making a sign” (source: Freddy Boswell in The Bible Translator 2009, p. 132ff. )
  • Hiri Motu: “cut the skin” (source: Deibler / Taylor 1977, p. 1079)
  • Garifuna: “cut off part of that which covers where one urinates”
  • Bribri: “cut the soft” (source for this and the one above: Ronald Ross)
  • Amele: deweg cagu qoc — “cut the body” (source: John Roberts)
  • Eastern Highland Otomi: “cut the flesh of the sons like Moses taught” (source: Ronald D. Olson in Notes on Translation January, 1968, p. 15ff.)
  • Totontepec Mixe: “cut so that a sign remains in one’s body” (source: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
  • Newari: “put the sign in one’s body” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
  • Central Mazahua: “sign in his flesh”
  • Hopi: “being cut in a circle in his body” (source for this and above: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.)
  • Mandarin Chinese: gēlǐ (割礼 / 割禮) or “rite of cutting” (Protestant); gēsǔn (割损 / 割損) or “cut + loss” (Catholic) (Source: Zetzsche)
  • Tibetan: mdun lpags gcod (མདུན་​ལྤགས་​གཅོད།), lit. “fore + skin + cut” (source: gSungrab website )
  • Kutu: “enter the cloth (=undergarments)” (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
  • Cherokee: “de-head” (source: Bender / Belt 2025, p. 33)

Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Circumcision .

complete verse (Romans 3:1)

Following are a number of back-translations of Romans 3:1:

  • Uma: “The Jews and the non-Jews are just the same, they are all guilty in God’s sight. But let’s not say/think like this, the Jews are not more blessed/fortunate than other people and there is no value to their custom of circumcision.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “Perhaps someone says that there is no good/advantage if we (dual) are of the Yahudi tribe/nation and if we (dual) follow the custom of circumcision.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And if that’s the case, it seems as if there is no value in our (excl.) being Jews and there’s also no value in our religious practice of circumcision.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “Perhaps, you are saying to yourselves (lit. with your minds), ‘What then is the advantage/superiority (lit. place-of-distinguishing) of the Jew over the Gentile? Is there also no use for our getting-circumcised?'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “Concerning this word I speak, I am not saying that it is of no value in what God did in choosing the Jew and commanding them to be marked with circumcision.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)

Translation commentary on Romans 3:1

Over the Gentiles is not an actual part of the Greek text, but it is assumed in Paul’s argument, and is made explicit in the Good News Translation. Perhaps it should be noted also, that whereas the Greek has the singular “Jew,” the Good News Translation renders by a plural Jews, because in English discourse structure this is more natural. Or is there any value in being circumcised? means “What good does it do for the Jews to be circumcised?”

This first section in Romans 3 (vv. 1-8) involves a number of structural problems, primarily because of the question-answer structure. For languages in which rhetorical questions are permitted, this is a very effective means of highlighting an issue and then providing a satisfactory response. However, for languages which do not employ this rhetorical device, it is not easy to find an appropriate and satisfactory equivalent. While it is true that some languages do not permit a rhetorical question such as Do the Jews have any advantage over the Gentiles, then?, they do permit rhetorical questions which begin with some such introductory phrase as “Do you think therefore that…?” or “Do you suppose that…?” Such a question borders on the rhetorical type of interrogation, but it is often regarded as perfectly appropriate, since it would seem natural that Paul might himself ask his audience in Rome about their reactions to such issues. It is also possible to deal with such rhetorical questions by introducing them in another manner—for example, “Someone may ask, Do the Jews have any advantage over the Gentiles?” Placing the question into the speech of someone else frequently makes it completely admissible, and it is precisely this type of question which is important in a passage such as this, in which very definite responses to the question are included in the text.

It is not always easy to find a ready equivalent to the expression have any advantage over. However, there are always ways in which the same concept may be expressed, often in an idiomatic form—for example, “how do the Jews go ahead of the Gentiles?” or “how are the Jews lifted up higher than the Gentiles?” Any value in being circumcised? may be translated as “any good to be circumcised?” or “does it help at all to be circumcised?”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

SIL Translator’s Notes on Romans 3:1

Section 3:1–8

God is faithful and righteous

In chapter two, Paul spoke about some wrong ideas that the Jews had. In this section, Paul spoke to someone, probably a Jew, who might think that Paul implied that God was unfaithful to his covenant with the Jews. Paul showed that regardless of how God’s people had behaved, God was always faithful to what he said.

Keep in mind that Paul himself was a Jew. He knew how Jews thought, and he knew how to answer their objections.

Here are other possible headings for this section:

God is faithful to his covenant even if his people are not
-or-
God keeps his word and does what is right

Paragraph 3:1–4

3:1a

What, then, is the advantage of being a Jew?: This is a rhetorical question. It causes the reader to think about what the answer might be. Paul answered this question in 3:2.

then: This conjunction introduces something more that Paul wanted to say about circumcision (2:25–29). Based on what he said there, he now has another question for his readers. For example:

So (New Century Version)

But the connection is not introducing a logical conclusion. Your translation should not introduce a logical conclusion here. Additionally, the Berean Standard Bible places this word after “What.” Place this connecting word in a place that is natural for your language.

advantage: The Greek word that the Berean Standard Bible translates as advantage means “something greater.” Jews have their covenant with God and his words. This is more than what the Gentiles have. Here are other ways to translate this word:

benefit (New Jerusalem Bible)
-or-
privilege/bonus

3:1b

Or: This word introduces another question similar in meaning to the question in 3:1a.

what is the value of circumcision?: In 2:25 Paul wrote “circumcision…is of value.” Here the clause is a what question. If possible, translate it using similar words to that verse. For example:

is circumcision valuable?
-or-
what is the worth of circumcision?
-or-
what is the use/benefit of being circumcised?
-or-
what good is circumcision?

© 2020 by SIL International®
Made available under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License (CC BY-SA) creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0.
All Scripture quotations in this publication, unless otherwise indicated, are from The Holy Bible, Berean Standard Bible.
BSB is produced in cooperation with Bible Hub, Discovery Bible, OpenBible.com, and the Berean Bible Translation Committee.

Commentaire sur la traduction de la lettre aux Romains 3.1

3.1-8

Dans ce qui suit, Paul utilise toujours le style littéraire de la diatribe (voir Rom 2.1). Qu’il évoque des arguments réellement émis par ses adversaires ou des arguments théoriques, le ton général reste le même. On peut déduire de la discussion précédente que les Juifs n’ont aucun avantage par rapport aux non-Juifs. Utilisant des citations de l’AT, Paul essaie de démontrer que, d’un point de vue historique, Dieu a favorisé les Juifs par rapport aux non-Juifs.

Alors que dans la Bible en français courant ce passage dépend du sous-titre placé avant Rom 2.17, la Traduction œcuménique de la Bible place un nouveau sous-titre ici, allant de Rom 3.1, intitulé L’universalité de la désobéissance. D’autres versions offrent de meilleurs modèles : « Tous les hommes sont coupables devant Dieu » (La Bible du Semeur), « Personne n’est juste » (Parole de Vie). Les traducteurs sont toujours libres de proposer des sous-titres qui conviennent mieux dans leur langue.

Dans cette section ( Rom 3.1) Paul utilise un procédé « questions-réponses », qui diffère légèrement de la question rhétorique. Dans ce cas, l’apôtre répond souvent à ses propres questions. Il crée une sorte d’échange imaginaire avec ses destinataires à Rome. Dans les langues où de telles questions peuvent convenir, celles-ci sont un moyen efficace de mettre en valeur son argumentation. Dans certaines langues, il est bon de souligner ces questions en ajoutant « Pensez-vous donc que… ? » ou « Supposez-vous que… ? » Il est également possible de les introduire en disant « Quelqu’un peut demander : les Juifs ont-ils un avantage sur les non-Juifs ? » Les traducteurs essayeront d’imiter ce genre de style dans leur langue.

Quelle est donc la supériorité du Juif ? : la section commence par une question qui annonce le thème du discours qui suivra. Paul demande s’il y a des avantages à être Juif (Voir Bible en français courant). Dans ce qui précède, Paul vient de démontrer que, d’une certaine façon, les non-Juifs sont à pied d’égalité avec les Juifs. Mais maintenant, il va parler de certains avantages que les Juifs ont par rapport aux non-Juifs. Le choix de la Traduction œcuménique de la Bible et de la Bible de Jérusalem du mot supériorité est regrettable. Paul n’est pas en train de parler de la supériorité d’une race ou ethnie par rapport à une autre. Il pose la question à savoir « Quel est l’avantage (ou l’intérêt) d’être Juif ? En quoi être Juif est profitable ? » En fait, Paul pense qu’il y a plusieurs avantages. On pourrait dire « Les Juifs ont-ils donc un avantage quelconque sur les non-Juifs ? » ou « les Juifs ont-ils des avantages par rapport aux autres peuples ? »

Juif : le texte grec a toujours le singulier mais avec une valeur collective, d’où le pluriel « les Juifs » dans la majorité des versions. Cette valeur de pluriel est confirmée en Rom 3.2 où le pronom « eux » renvoie aussi aux Juifs.

Quelle est l’utilité de la circoncision ? : en grec, cette question commence par la conjonction « ou ». Les traducteurs mettront le mot de transition qu’il faut ou l’omettront, selon les contraintes de leur langue. Le mot rendu par utilité n’apparaît qu’ici et dans Jude (1.16). Il parle du bénéfice, de l’intérêt ou de l’utilité d’une chose. La Bible en français courant le formule autrement : « En quoi est-il bon pour les Juifs d’être circoncis ? » Pour circoncision, voir Rom 2.25.

Notons qu’exceptionnellement, Paul répond à ces deux questions rhétoriques ( Rom 3.2). C’est un procédé stylistique qui se trouve aussi dans certains Psaumes, par exemple, Ps 15, où une question posée par l’auteur amène à une réponse importante.

Source: Margot, Jean-Claude & Zogbo, Lynell. La lettre aux Romains – Manuel de traduction – Commentaire linguistique et exégétique de la Bible. Alliance biblique universelle, 2021.