Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)
The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).
For this verse, translators typically select the inclusive form (including the writer and the readers of this letter).
Source: Velma Pickett and Florence Cowan in Notes on Translation January 1962, p. 1ff.
Following are a number of back-translations of Hebrews 2:3:
Uma: “So, how much heavier the punishment of God on people who do not regard/pay-attention-to the news of goodness [salvation] that the Child of God delivered to us! For that news is better than the words delivered by angels long ago. So, if we do not pay attention to that goodness [salvation], we will certainly not be released from punishment! The Lord Yesus himself was the first to spread that news of goodness [salvation]. And people who heard that news from his very lips, they were the ones who recounted it to us, with the result that we know that it is true.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “Therefore how shall we (dual) escape from God’s wrath if we (dual) disregard (lit. not do what) this great salvation? The Lord Isa, he is hep the first one to spread/make-known about this salvation, then those who heard him made sure to us (incl.) that this is true.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “In the same also, as for us (incl.) human beings, we also cannot avoid the punishment of God if we pay no attention to and we do not obey, that which was taught to us about the powerful setting us free from punishment. The first one who told about this was our Lord Jesus; and the people who heard Him, they’ve testified here to us that these things are true.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “If like that is what happened to those who didn’t obey what angels told, will we indeed (rhet. quest.) be able-to-escape punishment if we ignore the extremely-valuable salvation of people that the Lord Jesus spoke-of? Because the Lord Jesus was the first to tell concerning this salvation of ours, and the ones who heard him, they confirmed the truth of it to us.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Well, if it’s like that, it’s certain we will not be able to run away if we still disregard this far-from ordinary salvation. The Lord Jesus was the first one to explain about this salvation and then, those who heard him, they have also testified about it to us.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “Therefore now, how much greater will be the punishment we will meet up with if we do not pay attention to the good news which tells us how to save our souls? Because the Lord Jesus Christ himself told how our souls would be saved. Concerning the people who believed the word he spoke, they were assured that this word is true. Therefore they passed the word on to us.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
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:
referring to “God,” especially in Old Testament quotations,
meaning “master” or “owner,” especially in parables, etc.,
as a form of address (see for instance John 4:11: “Sir, you have no bucket”),
or, most often, referring to Jesus
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).
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight
Following are some of the solutions that don’t rely on a different typographical display (see above):
Iyansi: Mwol. Mwol is traditionally used for the “chief of a group of communities and villages” with legal, temporal, and spiritual authority (versus the “mfum [the term used in other Bantu languages] which is used for the chief of one community of people in one village”). Mwol is also used for twins who are “treated as special children, highly honored, and taken care of like kings and queens.” (Source: Kividi Kikama in Greed / Kruger, p. 396ff.)
Binumarien: Karaambaia: “fight-leader” (Source: Oates 1995, p. 255)
Warlpiri: Warlaljamarri (owner or possessor of something — for more information tap or click here)
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. )
Mairasi: Onggoao Nem (“Throated One” — “Leader,” “Elder”) or Enggavot Nan (“Above-One”) (source: Enggavoter 2004)
Obolo: Okaan̄-ene (“Owner of person(s)”) (source: Enene Enene)
Lotha Naga: Opvui (“owner of house / field / cattle”) — since both “Lord” and YHWH are translated as Opvui there is an understanding that “Opvui Jesus is the same as the Opvui of the Old Testament”
Seediq: Tholang, loan word from Min Nan Chinese (the majority language in Taiwan) thâu-lâng (頭儂): “Master” (source: Covell 1998, p. 248)
Thai: phra’ phu pen cao (พระผู้เป็นเจ้า) (divine person who is lord) or ong(kh) cao nay (องค์เจ้านาย) (<divine classifier>-lord-boss) (source: Stephen Pattemore)
Arabic often uses different terms for adonai or kurios referring to God (al-rabb الرب) and kurios referring to Jesus (al-sayyid الـسـيـد). Al-rabb is also the term traditionally used in Arabic Christian-idiom translations for YHWH, and al-sayyid is an honorary term, similar to English “lord” or “sir” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin).
Tamil also uses different terms for adonai/kurios when referring to God and kurios when referring to Jesus. The former is Karttar கர்த்தர், a Sanskrit-derived term with the original meaning of “creator,” and the latter in Āṇṭavar ஆண்டவர், a Tamil term originally meaning “govern” or “reign” (source: Natarajan Subramani).
Burunge: Looimoo: “owner who owns everything” (in the Burunge Bible translation, this term is only used as a reference to Jesus and was originally used to refer to the traditional highest deity — source: Michael Endl in Holzhausen / Riderer 2010, p. 48)
Aguacateco: Ajcaw ske’j: “the one to whom we belong and who is above us” (source: Rita Peterson in Holzhausen / Riderer 2010, p. 49)
Konkomba: Tidindaan: “He who is the owner of the land and reigns over the people” (source: Lidorio 2007, p. 66)
Law (2013, p. 97) writes about how the Ancient GreekSeptuagint‘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.”
How … shall we escape…? refers to a real future event, that is, the last judgment, and so Barclay‘s “how can we escape…?” (compare Translator’s New Testament) is too weak.
How, then, shall we escape must be amplified in some instances to indicate from what one is to escape. Furthermore, the meaning of escape in this context is not that of “escaping from prison” or “getting out of confinement” but rather “avoidance.” Accordingly, How, then, shall we escape…? may be rendered as “How, then, can we possibly avoid being punished…?”
Such a great salvation: great is explicit in the text; Knox‘s “such a message of salvation” is weaker. Pay no attention to … salvation and also a … salvation are stylistically awkward, at least in English. “Pay no attention to the news of such great salvation” is smoother and is what the text means. Several translations make explicit the implied contrast between two “messages,” the law and the gospel: Knox “a message of salvation,” Barclay “a way to salvation,” and Translator’s New Testament “an offer of salvation.”
It may be necessary to make specific the relationship of persons to such a great salvation, that is to say, attention should not be paid to the fact of someone else being saved but to the possibility of the people themselves being saved. Therefore if we pay no attention to such a great salvation may be rendered “if we pay no attention to how God wants to save us in such a wonderful way.”
The Lord in this context must mean Jesus, since God is mentioned separately in verse 4. The Lord was a common title of God in the Old Testament, and the writer of Hebrews has previously shown no hesitation in applying to Jesus Old Testament texts which he believed called Jesus “Lord” and “God” (1.8, 10). However, the writer often uses the name “Jesus” without any title (2.9; 3.1; 6.20; 7.22; 10.19; 12.2, 24; 13.12), so the translator should not replace The Lord by “Jesus” in this passage. If there is any real danger of misunderstanding, “The Lord Jesus” may be used. The emphatic expression The Lord himself may be expressed as “It was the Lord who” or “It was indeed the Lord who.”
The Greek word for announced is usually used of speech rather than writing; King James Version has “spoken.”
The adverb first, though related to the verb announced, must in some languages be related to the subject, since the Lord was the first one to make such an announcement. Therefore The Lord himself first announced must be rendered as “The Lord was the first one to announce.” Otherwise a literal translation of The Lord himself first announced might mean that the first among many statements which the Lord made was a statement about salvation.
Again, the expression this salvation must be expressed in some instances as “this way in which God saves.”
Him after heard is implied, but Barclay‘s “those who actually heard it from his own lips” seems too strong. The context distinguishes between (a) those who heard Jesus directly, and (b) those who handed on the message to the writer and his readers. The two groups are distinguished but not sharply contrasted; both those who heard Jesus with their own ears, and those who heard the message indirectly, are said to “hear” (see Heb. 2.1).
Proved (Moffatt, Knox, Jerusalem Bible, Barclay “guaranteed”; Phillips, New English Bible, Translator’s New Testament “confirmed”): this verb corresponds to the adjective translated true in verse 2. It is important in selecting a rendering of proved to avoid any implication of “argument” or “reasoned discussion.” Here the meaning is “to demonstrate clearly,” and obviously this was by experience. Accordingly, proved to us that it is true may be rendered as “showed clearly to us that it is true” or “… to be trusted.”
Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Letter of the Hebrews. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.