priest

Click here to view graphically

The Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek that are typically translated as “priest” in English (itself deriving from Latin “presbyter” — “elder”) is often translated with a consideration of existing religious traditions. (Click or tap for details)

Bratcher / Nida (1961) say this:

“However, rather than borrow local names for priests, some of which have unwanted connotations, a number of translations have employed descriptive phrases based on certain functions: (1) those describing a ceremonial activity: Pamona uses tadu, the priestess who recites the litanies in which she describes her journey to the upper or under-world to fetch life-spirit for sick people, animals or plants; Batak Toba uses the Arabic malim, ‘Muslim religious teacher;’ ‘one who presents man’s sacrifice to God’ (Bambara, Eastern Maninkakan), ‘one who presents sacrifices’ (Baoulé, Navajo), ‘one who takes the name of the sacrifice’ (Kpelle, and ‘to make a sacrifice go out’ (Hausa); (2) those describing an intermediary function: ‘one who speaks to God’ (Shipibo-Conibo) and ‘spokesman of the people before God’ (Tabasco Chontal).”

In Obolo it is translated as ogwu ngwugwa or “the one who offers sacrifice” (source: Enene Enene), in Mairasi as agam aevar nevwerai: “religious leader” (source: Enggavoter 2004), in Ignaciano as “blesser, one who does ritual as a practice” (using a generic term rather than the otherwise common Spanish loan word sacerdote) (source: Willis Ott in Notes on Translation 88/1982, p. 18ff.), and in Noongar as yakin-kooranyi or “holy worker” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).

For Guhu-Samane, Ernest Richert (in The Bible Translator, 1965, p. 81ff. ) reports this:

“The [local] cult of Poro used to be an all-encompassing religious system that essentially governed all areas of life. (…) For ‘priest’ the term ‘poro father’ would at first seem to be a natural choice. However, several priests of the old cult are still living. Although they no longer function primarily as priests of the old system they still have a substantial influence on the community, and there would be more than a chance that the unqualified term would (in some contexts particularly) be equated with the priest of the poro cult. We learned, then, that the poro fathers would sometimes be called ‘knife men’ in relation to their sacrificial work. The panel was pleased to apply this term to the Jewish priest, and the Christian community has adopted it fully. [Mark 1:44, for instance, now] reads: ‘You must definitely not tell any man of this. But you go show your body to the knife man and do what Moses said about a sacrifice concerning your being healed, and the cause (base of this) will be apparent.'”

For a revision of the 1968 version of the Bible in Khmer Joseph Hong (in: The Bible Translator 1996, 233ff. ) talks about a change in wording for this term:

​​Bau cha r (បូជា‌ចារ្យ) — The use of this new construction meaning “priest” is maintained to translate the Greek word hiereus. The term “mean sang (មាន សង្ឃ)” used in the old version actually means a “Buddhist monk,” and is felt to be theologically misleading. The Khmer considers the Buddhist monk as a “paddy field of merits,” a reserve of merits to be shared with other people. So a Khmer reader would find unthinkable that the mean sang in the Bible killed animals, the gravest sin for a Buddhist; and what a scandal it would be to say that a mean sang was married, had children, and drank wine.

David

The name that is transliterated as “David” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language with the sign signifying king and a sling (referring to 1 Samuel 17:49 and 2 Samuel 5:4). (Source: John Elwode in The Bible Translator 2008, p. 78ff.)


“Elizabeth” in Spanish Sign Language, source: Sociedad Bíblica de España

In German Sign Language it is only the sling. (See here ).


“David” in German Sign Language (source )

The (Protestant) Mandarin Chinese transliteration of “David” is 大卫 (衛) / Dàwèi which carries an additional meaning of “Great Protector.”

Click or tap here to see a short video clip about David (source: Bible Lands 2012)

king

Click here to view graphically

Some languages do not have a concept of kingship and therefore no immediate equivalent for the Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Latin that is translated as “king” in English. Here are some (back-) translations:

(Click or tap here to see details)

  • Piro: “a great one”
  • Highland Totonac: “the big boss”
  • Huichol: “the one who commanded” (source for this and above: Bratcher / Nida)
  • Ekari: “the one who holds the country” (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
  • Una: weik sienyi: “big headman” (source: Kroneman 2004, p. 407)
  • Pass Valley Yali: “Big Man” (source: Daud Soesilo)
  • Ninia Yali: “big brother with the uplifted name” (source: Daud Soesilio in Noss 2007, p. 175)
  • Nyamwezi: mutemi: generic word for ruler, by specifying the city or nation it becomes clear what kind of ruler (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
  • Ghomála’: Fo (“The word Fo refers to the paramount ruler in the kingdoms of West Cameroon. He holds administrative, political, and religious power over his own people, who are divided into two categories: princes (descendants of royalty) and servants (everyone else).” (Source: Michel Kenmogne in Theologizing in Context: An Example from the Study of a Ghomala’ Christian Hymn))

Faye Edgerton retells how the term in Navajo was determined:

“[This term was] easily expressed in the language of Biblical culture, which had kings and noblemen with their brilliant trappings and their position of honor and praise. But leadership among the Navajos is not accompanied by any such titles or distinctions of dress. Those most respected, especially in earlier days, were their headmen, who were the leaders in raids, and the shaman, who was able to serve the people by appealing for them to the gods, or by exorcising evil spirits. Neither of these made any outward show. Neither held his position by political intrigue or heredity. If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior. If the shaman failed many times in his healing ceremonies, it was considered that he was making mistakes in the chants, or had lost favor with the gods, and another was sought. The term Navajos use for headman is derived from a verb meaning ‘to move the head from side to side as in making an oration.’ The headman must be a good orator, able to move the people to go to war, or to follow him in any important decision. This word is naat’áanii which now means ‘one who rules or bosses.’ It is employed now for a foreman or boss of any kind of labor, as well as for the chairman of the tribal council. So in order to show that the king is not just a common boss but the highest ruler, the word ‘aláahgo, which expresses the superlative degree, was put before naat’áanii, and so ‘aláahgo naat’áanii ‘anyone-more-than-being around-he-moves-his-head-the-one-who’ means ‘the highest ruler.’ Naat’áanii was used for governor as the context usually shows that the person was a ruler of a country or associated with kings.”

(Source: Faye Edgerton in The Bible Translator 1962, p. 25ff. )

Translation commentary on 2 Chronicles 24:25

When they had departed from him: The pronoun they refers to the Syrians, and the pronoun him points to Joash. Contemporary English Version and Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje make the referents for both of these pronouns explicit, which others languages may find helpful.

Leaving him severely wounded is literally “for they left him in great diseases” (King James Version) or “for they left him in many sicknesses.” The Hebrew connector ki (“for”) introduces how the Syrians left Joash. The Hebrew word for “diseases/sicknesses” occurs only here in the Old Testament, and the root for this word has a broad range of meanings indicating a state of bodily weakness. Depending on the context, the Hebrew verb from this root and related nouns may refer to sickness or to injuries. The Hebrew noun here refers to the wounds Joash received in the battle against the Syrians. God’s Word and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh reflect the plural of the Hebrew, speaking of “many wounds.” Good News Translation reverses the order of the first two clauses of this verse. New Century Version provides a helpful model that keeps the original order, saying “When the Arameans left, Joash was badly wounded.”

His servants conspired against him …: This verse says only that Joash’s servants plotted against him and killed him, without saying how many servants there were. However, the next verse says there were two, and some translations bring this information forward to verse 25 (so Good News Translation, Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje). The Hebrew noun translated servants refers here to “officials” (Good News Translation) as it often does in the Old Testament, and not to menial domestic servants.

Because of the blood of the son of Jehoiada the priest: Blood is an image that may be rendered nonfiguratively as “murder” (Good News Translation, New American Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, An American Translation) or “death” (Bible en français courant, Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje). Instead of the singular word son, the Masoretic Text reads “sons.” However, Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation follow the Septuagint and the Vulgate (so also Revised English Bible, An American Translation, Bible en français courant, Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje). Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives an evaluation of {D} for the reading with the singular, suggesting that a scribe accidentally repeated the initial letter in the name Jehoiada, resulting in the reading “sons of Jehoiada” instead of “son of Jehoiada.” However, Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament also suggests that the plural may be original, with the sense of “all male posterity” of Jehoiada, without intending any specific number; that is, by killing his one son, they in fact killed any other descendants (sons) that he might have had through that one son.

And slew him on his bed: New Revised Standard Version replaces the archaic English word slew with “killed.” New Living Translation says “assassinated.”

So he died; and they buried him in the city of David, but they did not bury him in the tombs of the kings: See the comments on 2 Chr 21.20. As in verse 16, the pronoun they is indefinite. They buried him may be translated by a passive expression in those languages where this is more natural; for example, Good News Translation says “He was buried.” Others may say “his people buried him.” Unlike the parallel text of 2 Kgs 12.21, the writer says that Joash was not buried in the tombs of the kings.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .