11and the priest shall offer one as a purification offering and the other as a burnt offering and make atonement for them, because they incurred guilt by reason of the corpse. They shall sanctify the head that same day
The Hebrew olah (עֹלָה) originally means “that which goes up (in smoke).” English Bibles often translates it as “burnt-offering” or “whole burnt-offering,” focusing on the aspect of the complete burning of the offering.
The GreekSeptuagint and the LatinVulgate Bibles translate it as holokautōma / holocautōsis (ὁλοκαύτωμα / ὁλοκαύτωσις) and holocaustum, respectively, meaning “wholly burnt.” While a form of this term is widely used in many Romance languages (Spanish: holocaustos, French: holocaustes, Italian: olocausti, Portuguese: holocaustos) and originally also in the Catholic tradition of English Bible translations, it is largely not used in English anymore today (the preface of the revised edition of the Catholic New American Bible of 2011: “There have been changes in vocabulary; for example, the term ‘holocaust’ is now normally reserved for the sacrilegious attempt to destroy the Jewish people by the Third Reich.”)
Since translation into Georgian was traditionally done on the basis of the Greek Septuagint, a transliteration of holokautōma was used as well, which was changed to a translation with the meaning of “burnt offering” when the Old Testament was retranslated in the 1980’s on the basis of the Hebrew text.
In the Koongo (Ki-manianga) translation by the Alliance Biblique de la R.D. Congo (publ. in 2015) olah is translated as “kill and offer sacrifice.” (Source: Anicet Bassilua)
The English translation of Everett Fox uses offering-up (similarly, the German translation by Buber-Rosenzweig has Darhöhung and the French translation by Chouraqui montée).
The Greek and Hebrew that is usually translated in English as “atonement” is translated in Luchazi with minina mata: “to swallow another’s spittle.” “The human bite [is traditionally thought of] as being the most poisonous and dangerous and the poison lies in the saliva. So in swallowing another’s spittle, one takes into oneself all the poison or evil of the other and thus actually ‘becomes sin’ on behalf of the other. The substitute then proceeds to deal with the case as though he were the guilty one.” (Source: E. Pearson in The Bible Translator 1954, p. 160ff. )
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).
“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.
The Hebrew and Greek that is typically translated as “sin” in English has a wide variety of translations.
The Greek ἁμαρτάνω (hamartanō) carries the original verbatim meaning of “miss the mark.” Likewise, many translations contain the “connotation of moral responsibility.” Loma has (for certain types of sin) “leaving the road” (which “implies a definite standard, the transgression of which is sin”) or Navajo uses “that which is off to the side.” (Source: Bratcher / Nida). In Toraja-Sa’dan the translation is kasalan, which originally meant “transgression of a religious or moral rule” and has shifted its meaning in the context of the Bible to “transgression of God’s commandments.” (Source: H. van der Veen in The Bible Translator 1950, p. 21ff. ).
In Shipibo-Conibo the term is hocha. Nida (1952, p. 149) tells the story of its choosing: “In some instances a native expression for sin includes many connotations, and its full meaning must be completely understood before one ever attempts to use it. This was true, for example, of the term hocha first proposed by Shipibo-Conibo natives as an equivalent for ‘sin.’ The term seemed quite all right until one day the translator heard a girl say after having broken a little pottery jar that she was guilty of ‘hocha.’ Breaking such a little jar scarcely seemed to be sin. However, the Shipibos insisted that hocha was really sin, and they explained more fully the meaning of the word. It could be used of breaking a jar, but only if the jar belonged to someone else. Hocha was nothing more nor less than destroying the possessions of another, but the meaning did not stop with purely material possessions. In their belief God owns the world and all that is in it. Anyone who destroys the work and plan of God is guilty of hocha. Hence the murderer is of all men most guilty of hocha, for he has destroyed God’s most important possession in the world, namely, man. Any destructive and malevolent spirit is hocha, for it is antagonistic and harmful to God’s creation. Rather than being a feeble word for some accidental event, this word for sin turned out to be exceedingly rich in meaning and laid a foundation for the full presentation of the redemptive act of God.”
In Kaingang, the translation is “break God’s word” and in Sandawe the original meaning of the Greek term (see above) is perfectly reflected with “miss the mark.” (Source: Ursula Wiesemann in Holzhausen / Riderer 2010, p. 36ff., 43)
Martin Ehrensvärd, one of the translators for the DanishBibelen 2020, comments on the translation of this term: “We would explain terms, such that e.g. sin often became ‘doing what God does not want’ or ‘breaking God’s law’, ‘letting God down’, ‘disrespecting God’, ‘doing evil’, ‘acting stupidly’, ‘becoming guilty’. Now why couldn’t we just use the word sin? Well, sin in contemporary Danish, outside of the church, is mostly used about things such as delicious but unhealthy foods. Exquisite cakes and chocolates are what a sin is today.” (Source: Ehrensvärd in HIPHIL Novum 8/2023, p. 81ff. )
Verses 10-11a form one sentence in Revised Standard Version, which may be too long or complex for many languages. If so, translators may break it into several sentences (so Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version).
And the priest shall offer one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering: The priest must sacrifice one of the birds as a sin offering and the other as a burnt offering. The cleansing on the seventh day is not complete until these two sacrifices are offered on the eighth day. La Nouvelle Bible Segond renders sin offering as “sacrifice for the sin,” which may give the wrong impression that the Nazirite’s sin was intentional. The context here makes it clear that only an unintentional sin is meant. A sin offering was a sacrifice to cleanse people from unintentional sins, so that God would forgive. This offering restored a person to a state of ritual purity when, as in this case, a taboo was unintentionally broken (so Budd, page 72). So a more accurate rendering for sin offering is “purification-offering” (Revised English Bible, De Nieuwe Bijbelvertaling), which focuses on the outcome rather than the cause of this offering. Another possible model is “offering to make a person pure,” but some languages may need to say “sacrifice to make a person pure” since an animal’s death is involved.
A burnt offering (ʿolah in Hebrew) involved burning the whole sacrificial animal, except for the skin (see Lev 1.3-17): no one received any flesh to eat. Revised English Bible says “whole-offering,” which emphasizes that the entire animal was offered to the LORD. This offering also symbolized that the individual was wholly surrendering to the LORD in personal devotion. Other possible models are “sacrifice burnt whole” and “sacrifice of complete burning.”
And make atonement for him: For the Hebrew verb rendered make atonement, which literally means “cover,” see 5.8. The offerings appease or make amends, so that fellowship is restored between the defiled Nazirite and the LORD. Good News Translation expresses this clause well, saying “to perform the ritual of purification for you.”
Because he sinned by reason of the dead body: This clause in Revised Standard Version may give the wrong impression that the Nazirite’s sin was intentional. However, Good News Translation goes too far by omitting the idea of sin completely, saying “because of your contact with a corpse.” New Revised Standard Version is better with “because they incurred guilt by reason of the corpse.” Revised English Bible is similar with “for the sin he has incurred through contact with the dead body.” Our recommended model is “because they incurred sin [or, guilt] through contact with the dead body.”
And he shall consecrate his head that same day: Consecrate is literally “make holy.” Instead of head, Good News Translation has “hair,” as in verse 7. But in this context consecrate his head is better rendered “consecrate himself” or even “reconsecrate themselves” (see the comments on verse 9). That same day refers to the eighth day on which the sacrifices are made.
And separate himself to the LORD for the days of his separation expresses the same idea as the previous clause for emphasis. The Revised Standard Version translation may be confusing. Good News Translation renders this clause clearly, saying “and rededicate to the LORD your time as a nazirite.” The Hebrew verb for separate himself and the noun for separation come from the same root as the word for “Nazirite” (see the comments on verse 2 and 4).
And bring a male lamb a year old for a guilt offering: The Hebrew word for male lamb is keves, which usually refers to a young ram. A young ram is clearly in view here (compare verse 14, where a young ewe is also mentioned). A guilt offering was essentially about making compensation for damage done (see Lev 5.14–6.7), so Good News Translation is more accurate with “repayment offering”. Even better models are “reparation offering” (NET Bible, Bible en français courant) and “restoration offering” (De Nieuwe Bijbelvertaling), since these renderings avoid any possible association with the payment of money.
But the former time shall be void: Defiled Nazirites will not get credit for the time they separated themselves to serve the LORD before going near a corpse. They must start over their vow of separation. The former time refers to all the prior time that the person had spent as a Nazirite. Shall be void (literally “will fall”) may be rendered “doesn’t count” (Good News Translation; similarly New International Version), “shall be lost” (King James Version), or “is not to be included” (Revised English Bible).
Because his separation was defiled explains why such Nazirites will not get credit for their former separation to the LORD. It is because they became ritually impure by going near a corpse. For his separation, which refers to the Nazirite’s vow of separation, see verse 4. Luther changes the Hebrew text to read “his consecrated head” (similarly Good News Translation with “your consecrated hair”), but we prefer the Hebrew text here (so also Hebrew Old Testament Text). For was defiled, see 5.13. De Nieuwe Bijbelvertaling translates this clause as “because of the desecration of his naziriteship.” Another possible model is “because he became defiled during his vow of separation.”
Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Numbers. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.