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)

Click or tap here for more translations or “redeem” / “redemption”

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 Matthew 20:28.”

Other translations include:

  • Manya: “buy” (source: Don Slager)
  • Uma: “freed (from suffering)” (source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “set free” (source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Bariai: “unbind” (source: Bariai Back Translation)

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.

anger

The Hebrew, Latin and Greek that is translated as “anger” or similar in English in this verse is translated with a variety of solutions (Bratcher / Nida says: “Since anger has so many manifestations and seems to affect so many aspects of personality, it is not strange that expressions used to describe this emotional response are so varied”).

  • Chicahuaxtla Triqui: “be warm inside”
  • Mende: “have a cut heart”
  • Mískito: “have a split heart”
  • Tzotzil: “have a hot heart”
  • Mossi: “a swollen heart”
  • Western Kanjobal: “fire of the viscera”
  • San Blas Kuna: “pain in the heart”
  • Chimborazo Highland Quichua: “not with good eye”
  • Chichewa: “have a burning heart” (source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation) (see also anger burned in him)
  • Citak: two different terms, one meaning “angry” and one meaning “offended,” both are actually descriptions of facial expressions. The former can be represented by an angry stretching of the eyes or by an angry frown. The latter is similarly expressed by an offended type of frown with one’s head lowered. (Source: Graham Ogden)

In Akan, a number of metaphors are used, most importantly abufuo, lit. “weedy chest” (the chest is seen as a container that contains the heart but can also metaphorically be filled with other fluids etc.), but also abufuhyeε lit. “hot/burning weedy chest” and anibereε, lit. “reddened eyes.” (Source: Gladys Nyarko Ansah in Kövecses / Benczes / Szelid 2024, p. 21ff.)

See also God’s anger and angry.

complete verse (Deuteronomy 19:6)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Deuteronomy 19:6:

  • Kupsabiny: “Make those cities one flees to be close to people. Then a relative of the person who was killed is not able to pursue that person who is at fault and go and kill (him) wanting to avenge the blood of his person. The person at fault should not be killed because he did not have a bad intention/word against that person he killed.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
  • Newari: “The path for him must not be so long that the avengers of blood might meet him on the road and kill him in anger. Since it was by accident that he killed his neighbor and not in hatred or enmity, he is not someone to be killed.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon: “If the town of refuge is only one this may be far for a man who killed, and he will-be-pursued by a man who wants to take-revenge on him, and he will-die. He should not be-put-to-death for his killing is untentional and without grudge.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
  • English: “Because he accidentally killed someone, and because the man was not his enemy, he can try to run to one of those cities. If there were only one city, it may be a long distance to that city. Then if the relative of the man who was killed , the man who is supposed/expected to get revenge, is very angry, he may be able to catch the other person before he arrives at that city.” (Source: Translation for Translators)

Translation commentary on Deuteronomy 19:6

This verse gives the reason why there had to be three towns of refuge; if there were only one, it might be so far away from where an accidental death had occurred that the dead man’s relative would overtake the killer before he reached the town of refuge. Good News Translation emphasizes the need for three cities over one, with “If there were only one city, the distance to it might be too great, ….”

The avenger of blood: traditionally this has been taken to mean the dead man’s nearest relative, whose duty it would be to avenge the death. But some believe that the designated avenger would be named by the local authorities. There is not enough evidence to determine which is correct; it is recommended that the idea of a relative be the one expressed by the translation. Good News Translation has “the relative who is responsible to take revenge for the killing,” and Revised English Bible translates “the dead man’s next-of-kin on whom lies the duty of vengeance” (see Num 25.12). “Avenge” or “revenge” means to “pay back” or “punish” someone in a way that fits the crime. So avenger of blood may also be expressed as “the relative who is responsible for punishing the murderer [or, killer].”

In hot anger: in Hebrew this is a verbal form meaning “to boil over.” Alternative ways of expressing this are “be very angry” or “have a very hot heart,” and so on.

Pursue the manslayer and overtake him, because the way is long: the meaning is clear enough, but the order of the clauses may be a problem. Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje has “If there were only one city of refuge, it might be so far away that the relative responsible for avenging the death might have time to catch the man who killed his friend.” (In Portuguese “his friend” is not ambiguous; it is the “friend” of the killer.)

Wound him mortally: more simply, “kill him.”

The man did not deserve to die: this is why the three towns of refuge are needed. Good News Translation translates this as “an innocent man.” In some languages this will be expressed as “a pure [or, clean] person.”

He was not at enmity with his neighbor in time past: as in verse 4.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Deuteronomy. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2000. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .