covenant

Click here to view graphically

The Hebrew, Greek, 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)
  • Nyamwezi: ilagano: “agreement, contract, covenant, promise” (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
  • 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)
  • 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. )
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).

Translation commentary on Job 31:1

This verse seems to open the chapter in an abrupt manner. Consequently some transfer it to another position. See discussion below.

I have made a covenant with my eyes: Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation differ significantly in the way they relate the two lines of this verse. Good News Translation interprets line b as the content of the covenant in line a, whereas Revised Standard Version makes line b a rhetorical question that assumes a negative answer. Made a covenant translates a Hebrew phrase which is literally “cut a covenant,” as demonstrated in Genesis 15.7-21. There Abraham cut animals into two parts, and the covenantor (the LORD) passed between the halves of the animals. The probable implication was “May I be cut in half like these animals if I fail to keep my promise.” See also Jeremiah 34.18. Covenant is a formal “agreement, treaty, pact” between two parties, in which each assumes some obligation. In the Old Testament covenants were made between God and Abraham, Laban and Jacob, David and Jonathan, as well as between husband and wife, and between nations. In verse 1 Job says he has made such a treaty or agreement with my eyes. Since the usage is metaphorical, we need not ask what obligation his eyes undertook. Accordingly Good News Translation “I have made a solemn promise” expresses the thought appropriately. Bible en français courant says “I have solemnly forbidden myself….” Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch retains the metaphor: “I have concluded a treaty with my eyes.” In many languages this line must be expressed differently; for example, “I have promised that I…,” “I have agreed never to…,” or “I have agreed to prevent my eyes from….”

How then could I look upon a virgin?: Revised Standard Version interprets a Hebrew word here as a question marker, but it may also be taken as a negative indicator, which then translates literally as “I could not look intently at a virgin.” The negative use of a rhetorical question, as in 16.6 “how much,” is followed by most modern translations. Look upon translates a verb meaning “pay close attention to,” and Good News Translation qualifies it as “to look with lust,” which is clearly implied in this context. Moffatt says “to look with longing,” and Bible en français courant “every look of desire.” Such a qualification is usually required. Virgin in English refers to a young woman who has not had sexual relations; the Hebrew term, however, refers more often than not to an unmarried woman. The English term tends to emphasize the absence of sexual contact, but the covenant Job has made with his eyes is against having sexual desire for the kind of person virgin represents, and so it is more generally “young girl,” Bible en français courant jeune fille, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy soltera, and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch Mädchen. Some scholars think virgin is out of place in verse 1, since sexual matters are taken up later. Consequently New English Bible places verse 1 after 5, while others place it after verse 12. Pope thinks that transferring verse 1 leaves verses 2-4 without connection, and so proposes keeping verse 1 in its traditional place but suggests a change in the term virgin to get “folly.” However, there is no need to change nor to transfer verse 1. Job is citing sexual desire as an example which would be recognized immediately. Translations of this line will depend on the construction used in the previous line; for example, “I have promised never to stare lustfully at a young woman,” “I have taken it upon myself to avoid looking with desire at a young woman,” or “I have sworn not to look with sexual desire at young women.”

Quoted with permission from Reyburn, Wiliam. A Handbook on Job. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1992. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .