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 (Zechariah 11:10)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Zechariah 11:10:

  • Kupsabiny: “Then I took my stick that I had called "Mercy’ and I broke it to show that the covenant that God made with all his clans has been broken.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
  • Newari: “And I took the stick called ‘mercy’ and broke it into two pieces to show that I had broken the covenant with all the nations.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon: “‘Then I took the staff called Pleasant and I broke it as a symbol that the LORD cancelled/abolished his agreement/covenant to all the people.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
  • English: “Then I took the staff that I had named ‘Kindness’ and I broke it. That showed that Yahweh was annulling/canceling the agreement that he had made with all the people-groups.” (Source: Translation for Translators)

Translation commentary on Zechariah 11:10

And I took my staff Grace: This is the first staff mentioned in verse 7, and translators should ensure that they give it the same name here as there.

And I broke it: In languages where there are different verbs for different kinds of breaking, translators may assume that the staff was snapped (New English Bible/ Revised English Bible, New Living Translation) across the middle, possibly more than once so that it may have ended up in more than the two pieces mentioned in New English Bible/ Revised English Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, and New Living Translation. In some languages I took … and I broke will be very natural, but in others it may be too wordy. In such cases it may be sufficient to say just “I broke my staff called Grace.” Translators should try to choose a term for broke which can also be used in the parallel context in verse 14.

Annulling the covenant which I had made with all the peoples: To annul means to “cancel” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version), “revoke” (New International Version, New Living Translation), or just “break” (Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible). Breaking the staff symbolizes breaking the covenant. Again translators should use a verb that will also fit the parallel context in verse 14. The difficulties in this part of the verse arise more from interpretation than from translation as such, but in this case the decisions made about the interpretation do affect the translation. There are three questions to be answered:
(1) Who is the I? Some scholars see these words as coming from the mouth of the LORD, but others see them as the words of the prophet speaking on behalf of the LORD. This second view fits the flow of the paragraph better. Some scholars like Delcor think that the Hebrew words underlying “my covenant which I had made” (King James Version, Revised Version) twice contain an abbreviation for the divine name, and should be understood to mean “the LORD’s covenant which the LORD made.” Of available versions, New English Bible/ Revised English Bible and Jerusalem Bible incorporate this view, but it is abandoned by New Jerusalem Bible. Its advantage is that it avoids having the prophet speak of himself as making a covenant, but there is no serious problem anyway in having the prophet identify himself with the one on whose behalf he is speaking. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament also advises against the abbreviation view, and we recommend that translators render “my [or, the] covenant which I had made.”
(2) Who are all the peoples? The Hebrew noun is plural, and some scholars take it to refer to the gentile “nations” (New English Bible/ Revised English Bible, Good News Translation, New International Version, New Living Translation) surrounding the Jews. Compare Hos 2.18-20. Driver, Cashdan, Lamarche, Delcor, and Petersen assume that the LORD had made a covenant with these nations that would prevent them from attacking Israel (compare Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch), and that now this embargo would be lifted. The problem with this view is that there is no evidence of the existence of any such covenant. Mitchell, Gaide, Chary, Meyers & Meyers, Merrill, and Redditt (1995) prefer to understand all the peoples to refer to all the tribes of Israel, as in 1 Kgs 22.28. In a context where the prophet is concerned more with Israel’s relationship with the LORD than with its relationship with other nations, this view seems more convincing, so translators may say “with all the people of Israel.”
(3) What sort of covenant is referred to? Those who think in terms of a covenant with gentile nations tend to want to give the term a meaning weaker than that which it normally bears, and so use a word different from the usual one (Bible en français courant, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente), one more like “pact,” “armistice,” or “truce.” In English Moffatt uses “safe-guard,” which both sounds and looks rather odd. It seems more consistent with the context to understand the covenant God made with his own people, and to translate the word in the usual way. For covenant see 9.11.

The following are possible alternative models:

• I took my staff called “Grace” and I snapped it. In this way I showed that the covenant I had made with the whole nation of Israel was broken.

• … that I had canceled the agreement that I had made with all the people of Israel.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Zechariah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .