1But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive opinions. They will even deny the Master who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves.
Following are a number of back-translations of 2 Peter 2:1:
Uma: “But there were also lying prophets of old in the midst of the people who followed God. So also at this time there will certainly be lying religious teachers in your midst. They will announce teachings that are not true that cause the downfall of people, and they reject the Lord who redeemed them. Because of that behavior of theirs they will bring about their own downfall [lit., cause their own selves to fall], and it will happen very quickly.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “In old times there were people who said that they were prophets from God but it was not true. Likewise also nowadays there will be people appearing among you who say that they are religious-teachers but their teaching is not true. They will teach teachings that destroy your trust in Isa Almasi. Even though Isa, their master, died to take away their sins, they reject him. Therefore suddenly God’s wrath will come to them.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “Long ago there were some lying people who pretended to be prophets of God, and in the same way also, there are some people who will appear today teaching lies to you. They teach error secretly, and this can destroy the relationship of you believers. They teach that Jesus who might have redeemed them is not our (incl.) Lord. And because of that, they will be suddenly surprised when they are punished.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “But there were also false (lit. not true) prophets who appeared to the people back then. And so also there will be crafty-ones who teach what isn’t true who will join you. They will teach lies which are-able-to-destroy faith, and even our Lord who redeemed them, they will turn-their-backs-on-him (in Kankanaey, ‘deny’ is only verbal). Their sudden punishment will thus be their deserved-recompense.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “But even back in the past, there were those falsely-claiming-to-be-prophets among the Israelita. Well today, like that too, there will emerge among you also those who say they are teachers. But their teaching will be agitating your mind/thinking, that which can cause destruction of your believing/obeying, for it is really far from the truth. For they really are rejecting the rule of Jesu-Cristo, he who like bought them so that they would be his people. For they don’t acknowledge him to be their Master whom whey must serve. But well, they really will without doubt be reached by punishment.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “In the past times there arose some Jews where were lying prophets. Also there where you are now will arise lying teachers. Secretly they will introduce the word they teach which is not true. And they will spoil those who believe what they say. These lying teachers will deny the Lord Jesus Christ who saved them. But they are hurrying to punishment by means of the word they speak.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Eugene Nida wrote the following about the translation of the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek terms that are typically translated with “prophet” in English:
“The tendency in many translations is to use ‘to foretell the future’ for ‘prophesy,’ and ‘one who foretells the future’ for ‘prophet.’ This is not always a recommended usage, particularly if such expressions denote certain special native practices of spirit contact and control. It is true, of course, that prophets of the Bible did foretell the future, but this was not always their principal function. One essential significance of the Greek word prophētēs is ‘one who speaks forth,’ principally, of course, as a forth-teller of the Divine will. A translation such as ‘spokesman for God’ may often be employed profitably.” (1947, p. 234f.)
Following is a list of (back-) translations from other languages (click or tap for details):
Ayutla Mixtec: “one who talks as God’s representative”
Isthmus Mixe: “speaker for God” (source for this and two above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
Mezquital Otomi / Paasaal: “God’s messenger” (source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff. and Fabian N. Dapila in The Bible Translator 2024, p. 415ff.)
Noongar: Warda Marridjiny or “News Traveling” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
Kutu: mtula ndagu or “one who gives the prediction of the past and the future” (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
Ebira: ọnịsẹ, a neologism that combines the prefix ọn for “a person” with ịsẹ for “prediction” (source: Scholz /Scholz 2015, p. 49)
French 1985 translation by Chouraqui: inspiré or “inspired one” (“someone in whom God has breathed [Latin: in + spiro]) (source: Watson 2023, p. 45)
In Ixcatlán Mazatec a term is used that specifically includes women. (Source: Robert Bascom)
“In some instances these spiritual terms result from adaptations reflecting the native life and culture. Among the Northern Grebo people of Liberia, a missionary wanted some adequate term for ‘prophet,’ and she was fully aware that the native word for ‘soothsayer’ or ‘diviner’ was no equivalent for the Biblical prophet who spoke forth for God. Of course, much of what the prophets said referred to the future, and though this was an essential part of much of their ministry, it was by no means all. The right word for the Gbeapo people would have to include something which would not only mean the foretelling of important events but the proclamation of truth as God’s representative among the people. At last the right word came; it was ‘God’s town-crier.’ Every morning and evening the official representative of the chief goes through the village crying out the news, delivering the orders of the chief, and announcing important coming events. ‘God’s town-crier’ would be the official representative of God, announcing to the people God’s doings, His commands, and His pronouncements for their salvation and well-being. For the Northern Grebo people the prophet is no weird person from forgotten times; he is as real as the human, moving message of the plowman Amos, who became God’s town-crier to a calloused people.” (source: Nida 1952, p. 20)
In British Sign Language it is is translated with a sign that depicts a message coming from God to a person (the upright finger) and then being passed on to others. (Source: Anna Smith)
“Prophet” in British Sign Language (source: Christian BSL, used with permission)
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)
Yagaria: Souve, originally “war lord” (source: Renck, p. 94)
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)
Chichewa: AmbuyeAmbuye comes from the singular form Mbuye which is used to refer to: (1) someone who is a guardian or protector of someone or group of people — a grandparent who has founded a community or village; (2) someone who is a boss or master over a group of people or servants and has absolute control over them; (3) owner of something, be it a property, animals and people who are bound under his/her rule — for people this was mostly commonly used in the context of slaves and their owner. In short, Mbuye is someone who has some authorities over those who call him/her their “Mbuye.” Now, when the form Ambuye is used it will either be for honorific when used for singular or plural when referring to more than one person. When this term is used in reference to God, it is for respect to God as he is acknowledged as a guardian, protector, and ruler of everything. (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation).
Hdi uses rveri (“lion”) as a title of respect and as such it regularly translates adon in the Old Testament. As an address, it’s most often with a possessive pronoun as in rvera ɗa (“my lion” = “my lord” or “sir”). So, for example, Genesis 15:2 (“O Lord God”) is Rvera ɗa Yawe (“My lion Yahweh”) or Ruth to Boaz in Ruth 2:13: “May I find your grace [lit. good-stomach] my lion.” This ties in nicely with the imagery of the Lord roaring like a lion (Hosea 11:10; Amos 3:8; Joel 3:16). Better still, this makes passages like Revelation 5:5 even richer when we read about rveri ma taba məndəra la Yuda, “the Lion of the tribe of Judah”. In Revelation 19:16, Jesus is rveri ta ghəŋa rveriha “the lion above lions” (“lord of lords”). (Source: Drew Maust)
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.”
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between.
One way to do this is through the usage (or a lack) of an honorific prefix as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. When the referent is God, the “divine” honorific prefix mi- (御 or み) can be used, as in mi-sumai (御民) or “people (of God)” in the referenced verses.
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between.
One way Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the choice of a formal plural suffix to the second person pronoun (“you” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. In these verses, anata-gata (あなたがた) is used, combining the second person pronoun anata and the plural suffix -gata to create a formal plural pronoun (“you” [plural] in English).
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between. One way Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the choice of a benefactive construction as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017.
Here, kaitotte (買い取って) or “buy” is used in combination with kudasaru (くださる), a respectful form of the benefactive kureru (くれる). A benefactive reflects the good will of the giver or the gratitude of a recipient of the favor. To convey this connotation, English translation needs to employ a phrase such as “for me (my sake)” or “for you (your sake).” (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
Living Water is produced for the Bible translation movement in association with Lutheran Bible Translators. Lyrics derived from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®).
False prophets is a term used for people who claim to be sent by God to proclaim his message, when in fact God has not sent them at all. See, for example, Deut 18.22 (Good News Bible), “If a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord and what he says does not come true, then it is not the Lord’s message.” The word “prophet” itself is sometimes used to refer to someone who predicts events in the future, but in most cases it refers to someone who is called and sent by God to proclaim a certain message. Therefore prophets may be effectively translated as “people who speak for God” or “people who proclaim God’s message.” False prophets can then be rendered as “fake (or, counterfeit) prophets,” “people who pretend to speak God’s message,” or “people who pretend to speak on behalf of God.” There were many false prophets who appeared among the Israelites at various times in their history. The punishment for false prophets was usually death: “But if any prophet dares to speak a message in my name when I did not command him to do so, he must die for it” (Deut 18.20, TEV; and see also Jer 14.15; 23.15; 28.16-17).
Arose translates the past tense of the verb “to be” and indicates that this refers to an event or events “in the past” (Good News Translation), that is, in the history of Israel. Other ways of rendering “in the past” are “in olden times,” “long ago,” “years that are gone,” or “many generations ago.” People here refers to the Israelites as God’s chosen people. To make this clear it is possible to translate people as “God’s people.”
Just as: in many languages translators will need to begin the verse with these words; for example, “Just as false prophets … so also false teachers….”
The equivalent of false prophets in the present is false teachers. The focus here is not so much that these people claim to be sent by God when in fact they are not, or that they lay claim to the office of teacher to which they have no right, but that they have been teaching ideas and doctrines that are wrong. Their teachings are based not on any revelation from God but on their own ingenious inventions. This is made clear by the statement that these false teachers will secretly bring in destructive opinions. False teachers may be translated using the same sort of expressions as those used for false prophets. In certain languages false teachers can be expressed idiomatically; for example, “Teachers who weave lies with their mouths.”
Secretly bring in translates a Greek verb that appears only here in the New Testament and that means either to bring in without indicating how it is done, or “to bring in under false pretenses.” In this context secrecy is perhaps intended; they will introduce these teachings without anyone noticing it. Another word that fits this context is “unobtrusively.” In some languages translators will be able to find an idiomatic expression like “slip in”; for example, “slipped in destructive opinions” (see Gal 2.4, where Paul uses the same Greek word but in a different context).
Heresies: in Greek thought the term “heresy” was used to refer to a particular school of thought or the teachings of such a group. This positive sense was later lost, and the negative sense of “faction” (as in 1 Cor 11.19) or “false teaching” became its primary meaning. In the present context heresies refers to teachings or doctrines that are false and against accepted Christian teaching (as in Good News Translation “untrue doctrines”). These heresies taught by the false teachers are also described as destructive. It is possible, as some commentators suggest, that there were some heresies that were positive and useful, and that the addition of the term destructive indicates that these particular teachings were not useful. It is more likely, though, that destructive here refers not to the teachings themselves but to the bad effects of these teachings on the members of the Christian community. They are destructive because those who follow them become immoral and are therefore subject to judgment. And so destructive can also be rendered as “cause people to go astray” or “cause people to come under judgment.” Some commentators notice irony here: the false teachers taught that there would be no final judgment; but in reality their teaching had the effect of leading people to experience the judgment that these teachers themselves had denied.
One part of these false doctrines is now mentioned: denying the Master who bought them. The Greek word translated deny can also mean “disown” or “renounce.” Here the focus is on their not acknowledging the Master. Master can be used for either God or Christ, but in the present context it clearly refers to Christ. The Greek word translated Master is the general term for “owner.” Bought strengthens the idea of ownership and gives the sense that, since Christ has bought them, he now owns them and they belong to him. (For further discussion, please see Jude 4.) In certain languages it will be necessary to include the name “Christ” in this context and say “who do not acknowledge Christ as their Master,” or “who do not recognize Christ as their Lord,” or even “who say that they no longer belong to Christ.”
The word translated bought is the general word for buying anything, including slaves; here it is used with the extended sense of “ransom” or “redeem.” The terms “ransom” and “redeem” include the component of paying a price and therefore raise the problem of who paid what to whom. This theological problem is at least avoided by stressing that we are here dealing with figurative language: by dying on the cross Christ gave his life as a “payment” for us, enabling us to be free from the power of sin and to belong to Christ, who now owns us. So we may translate the phrase who bought them as “who set them free,” “who set them free from the power of sin,” or even “who ransomed (or, paid for) them and set them free (from sin).”
The results of the activities of these false teachers are now mentioned. They will first of all bring swift destruction upon themselves. That this is a result is made clear in Good News Translation by the use of “and so.” The word swift can also be translated “fast,” “speedy,” “sudden” (Good News Translation), “quick.” The focus here is twofold: the suddenness with which destructive forces come upon the false teachers, and the quickness with which the teachers are destroyed. Destruction translates the same word translated destructive in destructive heresies earlier in this verse; perhaps a play on words is intended: in much the same way that these false teachers introduce teachings that destroy people’s faith, so also these false teachers will be destroyed. Other ways of saying this are “and so they will cause themselves to suddenly receive destruction” or “Because they do this, God will destroy them suddenly.”
An alternative translation model for this verse is:
• Just as people who pretended to speak God’s message appeared long ago, so false teachers will appear among you. They will slip in untrue teachings that will cause people to stop believing in Christ (or, people’s beliefs to be destroyed). These false teachers will even refuse to acknowledge Christ as their Master who owns them and freed them from the power of sin. In this way they will cause themselves to be destroyed suddenly.
Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Second Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.