God's anger, wrath of God

The Hebrew and Greek What is translated into English as “the wrath of God” (Good News Translation: “God’s anger”) has to be referred to in Bengali as judgment, punishment or whatever fits the context. In Bengali culture, anger is by definition bad and can never be predicated of God. (Source: David Clark)

In Kikuyu the whole phrase that is translated in English as “storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath” or similar is translated as “you are increasing for yourself God’s wrath.” (Source: Jan Sterk)

In Quetzaltepec Mixe it is translated with a term “that not only expresses anger, but also punishment” (source: Robert Bascom), in Western Bukidnon Manobo as “the coming punishment of God on mankind” (source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation), in Kankanaey as “God’s fearful/terrible future punishing of people” (source: Kankanaey Back Translation), in Tagbanwa as “the coming anger/hatred of God” (source: Tagbanwa Back Translation), and in Tenango Otomi as “the punishment which will come” (source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation).

See also anger.

Translation commentary on Jeremiah 33:4 - 33:5

The Hebrew text at the end of verse 4 and the beginning of verse 5 is extremely difficult and problematic. A fairly literal translation would say “… torn down to the siege mounds and to the sword by coming to fight with the Chaldeans….” Most translators resolve the difficulty by assuming that the picture is of people destroying houses in order to get materials to plug up the city wall and raise barricades against the attacking enemy. But other scholars object, on the grounds that the siege mounds were set up by the attackers and that the willful destruction of property is not mentioned in the description of the reconstruction (verse 6). If this conclusion is followed, then there is no real connection between verses 4 and 5. In verse 5 Revised Standard Version alters the Hebrew by making Chaldeans the subject rather than the object of the verb to fight. If the Hebrew text is followed as it stands, then New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh is a good representation of it: “… torn down for [defense] against the siege-mounds and against the sword, 5 and were filled by those who went to fight the Chaldeans….”

Were torn down is a passive construction, and in many languages it will be necessary to have an agent. Following the suggested interpretation above, translators can say “[houses] which the people tore down to make a defense.” However, Good News Translation “torn down as a result of the siege and the attack” could mean either that the people tore the houses down or that the attackers did. Translators may then find Bible en français courant a useful model: “They are in ruins.” In fact, Bible en français courant represents a good way to relate verses 4 and 5: “I have something to say about the houses of this city and the dwellings of the kings of Judah. They are in ruins. To oppose the siege mounds and fight the Babylonians is useless; this only serves to fill the city with the corpses of men who are the victims of my furious anger.”

As elsewhere in these chapters, Good News Translation renders Chaldeans as “Babylonians” to maintain consistency. See 21.4.

For siege mounds, see 6.6.

The siege mounds and the sword were two of the ways of attacking against which the people were trying to defend themselves. Therefore against the siege mounds and before the sword can be expressed as “[for defense] against the siege mounds and swords of the attackers” or “against the siege mounds and the attackers.”

For my anger and my wrath, see 7.20.

I have hidden my face from this city is a gesture indicating displeasure (see Deut 31.17). Translators can say something like “I do not care about this city” or “I will not concern myself with this city.”

For wickedness see 1.16.

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on Jeremiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2003. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .