redeem, redemption

The Greek and Hebrew terms that are translated as “redeem” or “redemption” in most English translations (see more on that below) are translated in Kissi as “buying back.” “Ownership of some object may be forfeited or lost, but the original owner may redeem his possession by buying it back. So God, who made us for Himself, permitted us to accept or reject Him. In order to reconcile rebellious mankind He demonstrated His redemptive love in the death of His Son on our behalf.

“The San Blas Kuna describe redemption in a more spiritual sense. They say that it consists of ‘recapturing the spirit.’ A sinful person is one in rebellion against God, and he must be recaptured by God or he will destroy himself. The need of the spirit is to be captured by God. The tragedy is that too many people find their greatest pleasure in secretly trying to elude God, as though they could find some place in the universe where He could not find them. They regard life as a purely private affair, and they object to the claims of God as presented by the church. They accuse the pastor of interfering with the privacy of their own iniquity. Such souls, if they are to be redeemed, must be ‘recaptured.'” (Source: Nida 1952, p. 138)

For more information click or tap here

In Ajië a term is used, “nawi,” that refers to the “custom of planting a small tree on land cursed either by the blood of battle or some calamity.” Clifford (1992, p. 83ff.) retells the story: “Maurice Leenhardt tells how he finally arrived at a term that would express ‘redemption.’ Previous missionaries had interpreted it as an exchange — an exchange of life, that of Jesus for ours. But in Melanesian thinking more strict equivalents were demanded in the exchanges structuring social life. It remained unclear to them how Jesus’ sacrifice could possibly redeem mankind. So unclear was it that even the natas [Melanesians pastors] gave up trying to explain a concept they did not understand very well themselves and simply employed the term “release.” So the matter stood, with the missionary driven to the use of cumbersome circumlocutions, until one day during a conversation on 1 Corinthians 1:30, [Melanesian pastor and Leenhardt’s co-worker] Boesoou Erijisi used a surprising expression: nawi. The term referred to the custom of planting a small tree on land cursed either by the blood of battle or some calamity. ‘Jesus was thus the one who has accomplished the sacrifice and has planted himself like a tree, as though to absorb all the misfortunes of men and to free the world from its taboos.’ Here at last was a concept that seemed to render the principle of ‘redemption’ and could reach deeply enough into living modes of thought. ‘The idea was a rich one, but how could I be sure I understood it right?’ The key test was in the reaction of students and natas to his provisional version. They were, he reports, overjoyed with the ‘deep’ translation.”

In Folopa, the translation team also found a deeply indigenous term. Neil Anderson (in Holzhausen 1991, p. 51) explains: “While I was explaining the meaning of the [concept] to the Folopa men, I could see their faces brighten. They said that this was a common thing among them: ‘If someone falls a tree and it tips to the wrong side, killing someone, the relatives of the injured party claim the life of the guilty party. But in order to save his life, his relatives make amends. Pigs, shells (which are still used as currency here) and other valuables are given to the relatives of the deceased as payment for the life of the guilty party. In this way he can live because others stand up for him.’ Full of joy, I began to utilize this thought to the difficult translation of the word ‘redemption.’ Mark 10:45 reads now, translated back from the Folopa: ‘Jesus came to make an atonement, by which he takes upon himself the punishment for the evil deeds of many. He came so that through his death many might be liberated.’ After working on this verse for half an hour, I read it to my friends. They became silent and moved their slightly bowed heads thoughtfully back and forth. Finally, one of them took the floor, ‘We give a lot to right a wrong. But we have never given a human being as a price of atonement. Jesus did a great work for us when he made restitution. Because he died, all of us now don’t have to bear the punishment we deserve. We are liberated.'”

In Samoan the translation is togiola which originally refers to a fine mat. John Bradshaw (in The Bible Translator 1967, p. 75ff. ) explains: “The rite of submission applies in cases of grave sin which demands an extreme punishment: offenses such as murder, adultery or disrespectful behavior towards a chief. Submission is made in expectation of forgiveness. The rite is normally enacted at dawn. The prisoner and his family, or even his whole village bow down in silence before the house of the chief or other offended party. The prisoner heads the group and is covered with a fine mat, offered as his ransom. In other words, he submits himself completely to the authority of those whom he has offended. Many such submissions have been successfully offered and received. Those inside the house will come out, and bring into it those offering submission. The priestly orators speak sweetly and all join in a meal. The fine mat is accepted, while the prisoner is set free and forgiven. He no longer goes in fear of retribution for his sin. (…) If now we turn to the relation between the believer and the Redeemer, we notice at once that the word togiola, literally the price of one’s life, was the word used to denote the fine mat with which the sinner covered himself in the rite of Submission. The acceptance of the togiola set free the prisoner. It was inevitable that togiola should render lutron, ransom, as in Matt. 20: 28.”

In Manya it is translated as “buy.” (Source: Don Slager)

The translation into English also is noteworthy:

“In Hebrew there are two terms, ga’al and padah, usually rendered ‘to redeem,’ which have likewise undergone significant changes in meaning with resulting obscurity and misunderstanding. Both terms are used in the Old Testament for a person being redeemed from slavery. In the case of padah, the primary emphasis is upon the redemption by means of payment, and in ga’al the redemption of an individual, usually by payment, is made by some relative or an individual of the same clan or society. These two words, however, are used in the Old Testament in circumstances in which there is no payment at all. For example, the redemption of Jews from Egypt is referred to by these two terms, but clearly there was no payment made to the Egyptians or to Pharaoh.

“In the New Testament a related problem occurs, for the words agorázō and exagorazó, meaning literally ‘to buy’ or ‘to buy back’ and ‘to buy out,’ were translated into Latin as redimo and into English normally as ‘redeem.’ The almost exclusive association of Latin redimo with payment became such a focal element of meaning that during the Middle Ages a theory developed that God had to pay the Devil in order to get believers out of hell and into heaven.

“As in the case of the Old Testament, New Testament contexts employing the Greek verb lutroó, literally ‘to redeem’ or ‘to ransom,’ do not refer primarily to payment but focus upon deliverance and being set free. But even today there is such a heavy tradition of the theological concept of payment that any attempt to translate lutroó as ‘to deliver’ or ‘to set free’ is misjudged by some as being heretical.” (Source: Nida 1984, p. 114f.)

See also redeemer and next-of-kin / kinsman-redeemer / close relative.

O Death where are your plagues . . .

For the phrase “O Death, where are your plagues? O Sheol, where is your destruction?” see 1 Corinthians 15:55.

Note that this quote in the New Testament is not taken from the Hebrew Bible but from the Greek Septuagint (LXX) which translates into English as “O Death, where is your sentence? O Hades, where is your goad?” (Translation by NETS — for the Greek version see the title’s tooltip)

Translation commentary on Hosea 13:14

We have here another example of Hebrew poetic structure, a so-called chiastic structure: Sheol … Death … Death … Sheol.

Shall I ransom them from the power of Sheol? Shall I redeem them from Death?: In these two parallel lines, instead of speaking about Israel as a single person, the text now uses the plural pronoun them. In Good News Translation the shift to plural is made gradually by first identifying them as “this people.”

The Hebrew verb for ransom means to set someone free by paying a price of some kind, usually money (see comments on 7.13, where it is rendered “redeem”). The verb for redeem means almost the same thing, except that this word is often used when a relative, a next of kin, rescues someone, often by paying a price. And this word can refer to help from a relative when one is in any kind of difficult situation. Boaz was Ruth’s “redeemer.”

The Hebrew word for Sheol refers to the place of the dead which is located somewhere deep in the earth. So it is a place of darkness from which the dead will not return. Some cultures have their own way of referring to such a place. In other languages it may be clearer to say “the world of the dead” (Good News Translation) or “the grave” (New Living Translation).

The Hebrew text of these two lines has problems of interpretation, some of which are seen in the various modern translations. These lines may be translated literally as statements:

From the hand [or, power] of Sheol I will ransom them,
from death I will redeem them.

Because the previous verses and the next verses speak of God’s anger and judgment upon the people of Israel, most translations do as Revised Standard Version and render these lines as rhetorical questions (so New Revised Standard Version, Contemporary English Version, New Living Translation, English Standard Version, New Jerusalem Bible). Typical of rhetorical questions is that no answer is expected. In fact, rhetorical questions are often used as a way to emphasize a point. In this case, the LORD will do the opposite: he will not ransom or redeem the people. Good News Translation translates the lines as negative statements. If rhetorical questions are familiar in the receptor language, translators should use them here. New International Version is one of the very few modern translations that render these lines literally as positive statements. However, in view of the context, especially the last line of this verse (Compassion is hid from my eyes), we do not recommend this option.

Some scholars suggest that we have here a picture of Yahweh in agony over whether he can really punish his people, whom he has loved: “Can I really rescue them, or must I punish them?” In any case, the context of this verse favors translating these two lines as questions:

Shall I ransom them from the hand of Sheol?
Shall I redeem them from death?

O Death, where are your plagues? O Sheol, where is your destruction?: In these two parallel lines scholars differ as to whether the first Hebrew word of each line should be one meaning “Where” or “I will be” (Revised Standard Version footnote). Are these lines questions or statements? The Hebrew text has “I will be,” which Hebrew Old Testament Text Project favors (a {B} decision). Revised Standard Version follows the Septuagint and the Peshitta with its reading. As in verse 10, the Hebrew for “I will be” is changed to read “Where.”

If the Hebrew text is followed here, the sense of the first four lines is as follows: Shall I save them from Sheol and from Death? No! In fact, Death, I will be your plagues! Sheol, I will be your destruction! That is, God is ready himself to carry out the work of Sheol and Death with no help from these two. The Hebrew of lines three and four may therefore be translated as follows:

I will be your plagues, Death!
I will be your destruction, Sheol!

If the emended text in Revised Standard Version is followed, then these two lines should be rendered as rhetorical questions that invite Death and Sheol to bring on deadly diseases (so New Revised Standard Version, New International Version, English Standard Version, New Jerusalem Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). Good News Translation renders these questions as strong statements, which some languages may find helpful.

Both Death and Sheol are personified here. If possible, translators should keep this personification. If this is not possible, a model of these two lines that removes it is “I will allow them to be killed by diseases; I will imprison them in the world of the dead.”

The Hebrew word for plagues refers to diseases, illnesses, or similar things that cause many people in a community to die. The word for destruction in this context can refer to “pestilence” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) or to the result of it, that is, the death of many people.

In 1 Cor 15.55 these two lines are quoted as follows: “O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?” (King James Version). However, this quotation was taken from the Septuagint, which was more widely used and understood in those days by Paul’s audience than was the original Hebrew. In the New Testament it is therefore turned into an important word of comfort by Paul. But it is clearly not a word of comfort in this context.

Compassion is hid from my eyes: This figurative line emphasizes the idea that, although the Israelites are Yahweh’s own people, he will not have mercy on them any longer. The decision is final. The Hebrew word for Compassion refers to the way someone, such as a mother, feels the pain or sorrow that her child is experiencing. The imagery here does not mean that Yahweh will not see the suffering of his people, but that he will not have pity for them even if he sees their suffering. Good News Translation uses nonfigurative language, saying “I will no longer have pity for this people.” New American Bible keeps the imagery by saying “My eyes are closed to compassion.” This line serves as both a summary of the previous lines and an introduction to the message of verse 15.

A translation model for this verse is:

• Should I ransom them from the power of the grave?
Should I rescue them from death?
Death, where are your plagues?
Grave, where is your pestilence?
I no longer feel compassion.

Quoted with permission from Dorn, Louis & van Steenbergen, Gerrit. A Handbook on Hosea. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2020. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .