Following are a number of back-translations of Hebrews 3:7:
Uma: “So, listen to the advice/scolding of the Holy Spirit that is written in the Holy Book long ago. He says like this: ‘Today, if you hear the voice of God,” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “Therefore we (incl.) should really think about what is written in the holy-book spoken by the Holy Spirit. It says, ‘When/if you hear God’s voice speaking this day,” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “For there’s a written word of the Holy Spirit which says, ‘Today if you hear the word of God to you,” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Therefore we must obey/believe what the Holy Spirit caused-to-be-written which says, ‘Today, if you hear God’s words,” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Now, therefore, let us consider that warning of the Espiritu Santo which says, ‘Now/today, if you have heard what God is saying,” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “Therefore, concerning the word the Holy Spirit speaks in the Holy Book, pay attention to the word which says: ‘Concerning this day, listen to the word God speaks to you.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
In English, the Greek term Pneûma tò Hagion is translated as “Holy Ghost” or “Holy Spirit.” The English terms referring to Pneûma are synonyms: “ghost” is derived from Old Englishgast (“breath” or “good or bad spirit”) and “spirit” from Latinspiritus (“breath” or “supernatural immaterial creature”). Until the late 19th century, English translators of all traditions used “Holy Ghost” (or “holy Ghost”) but generally switched to “Holy Spirit” (or “holy Spirit”) thereafter, likely because the meaning of “ghost” had transitioned to predominantly refer to the spirit of a dead person.
Other languages with a long tradition in Bible translation translate Pneûma (for “holy” see holy) as follows (click or tap here to see more):
While a few Germanic languages still use terms derived from gast (see above) including German and Dutch (Geist and Geest respectively), the majority use forms of Proto*-Germanic anadô (“breath,” “spirit,” “zeal” — used in Latin as anima), including Danish (Ånden), Swedish (Ande/ande — for more on the gender of the Swedish translation, see below), Icelandic (andi), and Norwegian (Ånd/ånd). (*”Proto” refers to the most recent common, often hypothetical language ancestor). Note that the earliest-known German translation was “holy breath” (wîh atum) (source: Renck 1990, p. 105)
The majority of Romance languages use a form of the LatinSpiritus (French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, and Catalan among others). (Note that in the French 1985 translation by Chouraqui, souffle sacré or “sacred breath” is used [source: Watson 2023, p. 52])
Slavic languages derive their translation from the Proto-Slavic dȗxъ (“breath,” “wind,” “spirit”), including Russian, Belarusian, Ukrainian, and Bulgarian (all: Дух)
Most Semitic languages (Hebrew, Arabic, Assyrian, Chaldean — with the exception of Maltese which uses the Latin-based l-Ispirtu s-Santu), Iranian languages (Urdu, Tajik, Dari, Persian, Pashto), Turkic languages (Uzbek, Turkish), Malayic languages (Indonesian, Balinese, Sangir, and Malay — for further information on Malay, see below) use a derivative of the Proto-Semitic rūḥ- (“to blow,” “breathe”). Compare the Hebrew term ruach (רוּחַ: “breath,” “wind,” “spirit”) in the Old Testament. (For the use of Roho in Swahili, see below)
Bratcher / Nida say this about the translation into languages that do not have an existing Bible translation (click or tap here to see more):
“Undoubtedly no word has given quite so much trouble to the Bible translator as spirit, for (1) it includes such a wide range of meaning, from ‘evil spirit’ to ‘poor in spirit’ to ‘Holy Spirit’ and (2) it touches so vitally the crucial comparison and contrast between Christianity and so-called ‘animism.’
“There are four principal dangers in the choice of a word for Holy Spirit: (1) the term may identify an essential malevolent spirit, and no mere addition of the word ‘holy’ or ‘good’ is likely to change the basic connotation of the word, (2) the word may mean primarily the spirit of a deceased person (hence God must have died — a not infrequent error in Bible translations), (3) the expression used to mean ‘spirit’ may denote only an impersonal life force, a sort of soul-stuff which may be conceived as indwelling all plant, animal, and human substances (therefore, to say that ‘God is spirit’ is to deny His essential personality), and (4) a borrowed term may signify next to nothing to the people, and can only be explained by another term or terms, which, if they are adequate to explain the borrowing, should have been used in the first place. It is true that in some instances a borrowed word has seemed to be the only alternative, but it should be chosen only as a last resort.
“There is no easy formula to be employed in finding an adequate equivalent for Holy Spirit, for what seems to work quite well in one area may not serve in another. One thing, however, is certain: one should not select a term before making a comprehensive study of all kinds of words for spirits and for parts or aspects of personality and thus having as complete a view as possible of all indigenous beliefs about supernatural beings.”
Following are ways that languages without a long tradition Bible translation have translated Pneûma (click or tap here to see more):
Western Highland Chatino: “God’s perfect heart” J. Hefley (1968, p. 210) tells this story (click or tap here to read more):
“Ninu [a Chatino translation assistant] told his translator that the word ‘holy’ could be used to modify an idol, a household god, the witch doctor, an altar, a lion, the sea which had caused a flood and disaster, a sacred mushroom, and several other things. The translator and his consultant deduced that holy had two main components of meanings for Chatinos. It referred to persons purported to hold supernatural powers, and to objects which, if not properly respected, would bring evil upon one. With this and other information, they agreed that they could not use the Chatino word for ‘holy’ and ‘spirit’ in defining the third person of the Trinity. Their approved translation for Holy Spirit became ‘God’s perfect heart’ (referring primarily to the life principles of one who is living).”
Malay (Today’s Malay Version, publ. 1987): Roh Allah: “Spirit of God.” Barclay Newman (in The Bible Translator 1974, p. 432ff. ) explains this as follows (click or tap here to see more):
“A third difficult phrase that had to be dealt with was ‘Holy Spirit,’ since in popular Islamic theology there are many ‘holy spirits.’ In order to overcome this problem it was decided that ‘the Holy Spirit’ would always be rendered ‘God’s Spirit,’ and that wherever ‘Spirit’ or ‘the Spirit’ was used as a reference to God’s Spirit this would be clearly marked.
“Other illustrations could be given of the clearing up of ambiguous and difficult phrases, but only one more will be selected, and it will serve as a transition to the next major section of this article. In John 6:63 the phrase ‘Spirit and life’ (in the expression ‘the words I have spoken to you are Spirit and life’) is taken to refer to one thing not two. That is, even though the words are connected by the conjunction ‘and’ they are not in the relationship to one another that ‘and’ normally suggests. Moreover, ‘spirit’ in John’s Gospel, unless otherwise indicated, always refers to God’s Spirit. So then, the Common Malay has translated with the meaning, ‘the words which I speak come from God’s Spirit and bring life.’ This exegesis also has the advantage of tying in the meaning closely to the previous verse.
“As previously indicated, except in the passages where the context clearly indicates otherwise (John 11:33; John 13:21; John 19:30), it was assumed that ‘spirit’ or ‘the spirit’ refer to God’s Spirit, and so the translator always made this information explicit. For example, John the Baptist’s words in John 1:32 become ‘I saw God’s Spirit come down like a dove from heaven.’ The one exception to this rule is in 3:8a, where there is a play on words. In Greek, as in Hebrew, the same word may mean either ‘wind’ or ‘spirit.’ In this context most translations take ‘wind’ to be the basic comparison, and so have translated in this way; and some have even provided a footnote, indicating the play on words. Since the basic comparison here is seen to be ‘wind,’ the Malay New Testament translated the text in this way.”
“The Shipibo consider all spirits evil, with the exception of certain entities making up a human personality. It would be a manifest contradiction to say ‘Good Evil-Spirit’ for ‘Holy Spirit,’ and it would be completely misinterpreted if one should say that Jesus perceived in his evil-spirit that some of the scribes thus questioned within their hearts (Mark 2:8).
“For these reasons we have translated this word (…) when it unmistakably refers to a disembodied evil personality yoshin ‘demon.’ (‘Unclean spirit’ we have translated ‘harmful demon.’)
“When it refers to the ‘Holy Spirit,’ we have finally translated it ‘Spotless Spirit,’ using for ‘Spirit’ a word designating one of the larger entities of human personality, the one which includes most of the others and which is always used of a live person.”
Sranan Tongo: Santa Yeye (from previously Santa Winti). Marlon Winedt explains (click or tap here to see more):
“One of the translators in Sranan Tongo followed the historically and scientifically correct analysis that the word for Holy Spirit should be ‘Santa Winti.’ However, the churches had traditionally used ‘Santa Yeye.’ Although in the spiritual world-mapping of the afro-descendants of the country Santa Yeye refers to a more limited spirit, it was the most acceptable choice because ‘winti’ besides meaning ‘spirit, wind’ also refers to the afro-Caribbean religion /spiritual practice ‘winti’ which can be compared to voodoo or other forms in the Caribbean. The Catholic lectionary used this translation (Santa Winti) though there was a heated debate about the use. The then-bishop of Paramaribo advised the faithful to choose whether they wanted to say Santa Winti or Santa Yeye when reading the text. In the interior of Suriname, Catholic catechists actually burned the lectionary because they found the term Santa Winti to be blasphemous.
“When the Sranan Tongo New Testament translation project was underway an attempt to merge two teams did not succeed partially based on this issue. Ultimately the remaining SIL/Bible Society of Suriname team did not chose to use Santa Winti but the accepted Santa Yeye. [This version was published in 2002.]”
“In Anuak there is no term for ‘spirit’ in the sense of the Holy Spirit.
“There is a word (ywey) which may be used to translate human soul or spirit, but which is essentially the ‘life principle.’ One cannot speak of the ywey of God, for the Anuaks insist that God does not have a ywey and that He is not a ywey. It is God who has given ywey to all people, animals and plants, but He Himself is of a different order of existence.
“To speak of the ywey of God would be to equate him with earthly creation. There seems to be no easy solution to this problem, but for the time being ‘Spirit’ is to be translated as ‘that which comes from God’, in the sense of that which emanates from or has its origin in God.”
Kaingang: Topẽ kuprĩg (God’s Spirit — kuprĩg is often to the spirit of a dead person). Ursula Wiesemann (in Notes on Translation 1978, p. 32ff.) explains how the translation team reached that conclusion (click or tap here to see more):
“All human beings have a kãnhvég which has as an outward manifestation the shadow or the reflection of that person. It is closely linked to the body and cannot leave it. It is an indication of life in the body. According to one language helper, it lives in our chest (that is, heart), but this may be a carry-over from his Christian teaching.
“The kãnhvég at death becomes vẽnh kuprĩg. Vẽnh is a pronoun meaning ‘someone’s’. The vẽnh kuprĩg seem to live in groups and can be heard at night making a peculiar humming noise. They may do mischievous things like throwing dirt on the house which scares the inhabitants. A vẽnh kuprĩg may also appear to an individual, be recognized by him for whose spirit he is, speak kindly to him, and even touch him. The purpose is to take the living person along to the place where the dead live. It is reported that in this way the vẽnh kuprĩg cause death, or that they might even choke babies to death during the night. In describing an encounter with a vẽnh kuprĩg, the Indians say: ‘I saw a vẽnh kuprĩg. It was so-and-so.’ Whereas kãnhvég collocates with all pronouns and names (that is, can be directly identified as belonging to a specific person), kuprĩg collocates most naturally with vẽnh when it refers to the spirit of a dead person.
“Such conflicting reports on the meaning of the terms is difficult to choose the right terms for the Spirit of God. In Rio das Cobras and in Guarita, God is said to have a kuprĩg and a kãnhvég, but it is His kuprĩg who has a life of his own without being tied to God’s body. In both localities (and some others, where, however, the question was not looked into in detail as in the three areas identified), the definite and unquestioned choice of all people asked was to identify the ‘Holy Spirit’ as Topẽ kuprĩg ‘Spirit of God’. In Nonoai (same dialect area as Guarita but different dialect area from Rio das Cobras), however, the definite and unquestioned choice is Topẽ kãnhvég ‘because kuprĩg refers to the spirit of one who died.’ So it will be necessary to use both terms in a paraphrase to satisfy everyone. The objection to kãnhvég is its close tie to a body, and only in Nonoai this connection seems to be broken.
“Postscript: Since writing the above, several years have passed, and the New Testament has been completed, and the revision committee, composed of three Indians from as many dialect areas, unanimously chose Topẽ kuprĩg for ‘Spirit of God,’ rejecting the word kãnhvég as being ‘too weak and not meaningful’ — that is, the kãnhvég is not a spirit at all but just a sign of life, so it has been dropped in the last revision, as well as the reference to the ‘kãnhvég not dying’ as eternal life.”
Papiamento: Spiritu. Since the term on its own means “bad spirit,” in any case that no modifier is used (such as “Holy” or “of truth”), the translators used Spiritu di Dios (“Spirit of God”) to differentiate it from the negative connotation (source: Marlon Winedt).
Ditammari: “Air of God.” Loewen (in The Bible Translator 1983, p. 213ff. ) explains that a search for the term “spirit” was conducted (especially as in “Holy Spirit”). Since faith healers often avoided using the name of unclean spirits by saying “impure air” a suggestion was made to call Holy Spirit “clean/pure air”. This was accepted but changed to “air of God” to avoid ambiguity with air that we breath.
Warlpiri: Pirlirrpa Kaatu-kurlangu: “God’s Eternal Spirit,” since “holy’ carries the meaning of taboo and cannot be used (source: Stephen Swartz in The Bible Translator 1985, p. 415ff. )
Eastern Highland Otomi: “God’s Good Spirit” (source: John Beekman in Notes on Translation November 1964, p. 1-22.)
Kahua: the term for “Spirit” is a generic term for a spirit which never had a body (i.e., not the spirit of a dead ancestor). (Source: David Clark)
Keapara: Vea’a Palaguna (“Holy Spirit” but can also be “Holy God” or “angels” — “there is not a strong contrast between the meaning of God and Holy Spirit” since “God” is translated with “Palagu”) (source: Norm Mundhenk in The Bible Translator 2004, p. 222f. )
Naro: Tc’ẽe: a word that refers to the “thinking/willing part” of one’s personality. (Source: van Steenbergen)
Tibetan: thugs nyid (ཐུགས་ཉིད།།), an honorific form for sems nyid (སེམས་ཉིད།) or “spirit” (source: gSungrab website )
Many Bantu languages translate Pneûma with a word that originally means “soul,” including Luganda and Haya (both: mwoyo), Ndebele (uMoya), Sotho (Moya). Fang uses Nsísim: “shadow” or “separate soul” (anima separata) (source: Bühlmann 1950, p. 176)
The grammatical gender of the Greek Pneûma is neuter (and the Hebrew ruach has a feminine gender). While many languages either do not have a grammatical gender or have a word for Pneûma that grammatically is masculine, other languages found various ways of dealing with this. (Click or tap here to read more):
The earliest example is Classical Syriac which, like Hebrew, used a term — Ruhä — that was of feminine gender. According to Ashbrook (1993), in early documents the feminine gender was not only used in a grammatical sense but the Spirit was often described with feminine imagery as well. “Around the year 400 [though], a change emerges in our texts. Starting in the fifth century, and almost universally by the sixth, the Spirit is masculine in Syriac writers. Ruhä when referring to wind or spirit continues to follow rules of grammar and to be construed in the feminine; but when referring to the Holy Spirit, it is now construed as masculine, although this does violence to the fabric of the language.” (Source: Ashbrook 1993)
A similar process of ungrammatical usage was attempted in Asháninka. The “Good Spirit of God” required a feminine, inanimate pronoun which was artificially changed to masculine. After a while this was changed back to its true grammatical form with no perceptible difference in the understanding of the Trinity. Will Kindberg (in The Bible Translator 1964, 197f. ) tells that story (click or tap here to read more):
“For the past several years Mr Sylvester Dirks of the Mennonite Brethren Mission and I have been engaged in missionary work with the Asháninka sub-group of the Campa tribe in Peru, and have collaborated on Christian vocabulary items and translation as well as other phases of our missionary activities. For the ‘Holy Spirit’ we are using ‘the Good Spirit of God’. The normal pronominal reference for spirit, whether it be a human spirit or the spirit of a god, is third person feminine inanimate. Long ago, Sylvester and I agreed that we would force the use of the third person masculine animate pronoun to refer to the Holy Spirit, although we recognized it was contrary to the grammatical system of Asháninka. We did this because of a theological bias: the Holy Spirit is referred to in English as masculine, and we think of the Spirit as a masculine member of the Godhead. We ignored the fact that it has a neuter reference in Greek.
“In the Gospel of Mark and also in the book of Acts, my translation consistently uses the third person masculine pronoun to refer to the feminine inanimate spirit. There has been a reaction against this by the people as they hear or read these portions of Scripture, though some of the believers have accepted it when it was explained to them why it had been done.
“This past year while I was continuing working on other portions of Scripture, I was again troubled by the non-grammatical use of the pronominal referent.
“I checked again with some of my colleagues here in Peru and they agreed with me that it might be wise to switch back to the correct grammatical usage. So I checked with Mr Dirks and he did not object to the change.
“Because of the importance of the issue, I also wrote to Dr Eugene Nida and Dr John Beekman for their opinions. They both suggested the use of the grammatically correct forms. The following is a quote from Dr Beekman’s letter:
“‘There is a distinction between animate and inanimate reference in one of the Zapoteco dialects of Mexico. All spirits fall into the inanimate class. The weight of theological considerations led the translators to use the animate form contrary to usage. In consultation, however, it was agreed that it would be preferable not to violate the grammatical pattern especially since the informants felt that the use of the inanimate form did not necessarily mean that the Holy Spirit was not a person. The translators are now using the inanimate form to the satisfaction of all of the believers.’
“I have switched the pronominal reference throughout John and it has just been printed. The reaction of the few people with whom I have checked this has been good. The question has been asked: ‘How does having two masculine members and a feminine-inanimate member affect the Asháninka’s idea of a triune God?’
“One day I was talking to my informant (still a relatively untrained believer) about the different gods in which his fellow tribesmen believe. And I said, ‘What does the Bible teach about God? How many are there?’ (Note that I used the unmarked form that might be either singular or plural.) He answered, ‘There is one God’. Then after thinking a minute, he said, ‘There are two—there’s Jesus. Then afterwards he said, ‘There are three— there’s God’s Spirit’. It seems to me he has understood the doctrine of the Trinity about as well as most Christians. For the last few months we have been using a feminine inanimate referent for the Holy Spirit and this has not seemed to hinder his understanding of the Trinity. Time will tell the reaction of the rest of the people.”
In Swahili, the translation of Pneûma tò Hagion is Roho Mtakatifu. Roho, derived from the Semitic / Arabic Rūḥ, should be in the noun class for loan words but to prevent the misunderstanding of Roho as an inanimate object, it is (grammatically incorrectly) used in the first class of nouns which is specifically reserved for people (source: Bühlmann 1950, p. 176). While some Bantu languages use similar strategies, Lamba left Umupasi Uswetelele in the third noun class that is also used for trees and plants, making a grammatically a non-person. But, as C. M. Doke (in The Bible Translator 1958, p. 57ff. ) remarks, “it is [left] to numerous references in the Scriptures to establish that the Holy Spirit is a person, the third person of the Trinity.”
While Swedish used to have three genders (masculine, feminine, neuter), modern Swedish only uses two genders (common [utrum] and neuter). Until the Bibel 2000, “Holy Spirit” was translated as helige Ande which used a masculine adjective and paired it with ande (“Spirit”), which historically could be read as masculine. With the merging of the masculine gender into the common gender it is now translated as the common-gendered heliga ande, matching a more widely-used gender-equal language practice in Swedish. (Source: Mikael Winninge and Sara Rösare)
The following is a stained glass window from ca. 1660 by Gian Lorenzo Bernini. The “Dove of the Holy Spirit” is installed at Saint Peter’s Basilica, Vatican City:
Photo and accompanying text by Wilfredor, hosted by Wikimedia Commons under a Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication license
Stained glass is not just highly decorative, it’s a medium which has been used to express important religious messages for centuries. Literacy was not widespread in the medieval and Renaissance periods and the Church used stained glass and other artworks to teach the central beliefs of Christianity. In Gothic churches, the windows were filled with extensive narrative scenes in stained glass — like huge and colorful picture storybooks — in which worshipers could ‘read’ the stories of Christ and the saints and learn what was required for their religious salvation. (Source: Victoria and Albert Museum )
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-koe (御声) or “voice (of God)” in the referenced verses. This is used specifically to refer to the “voice” of God or used in a reference of God saying something.
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 usage of an honorific construction where the morpheme are (され) is affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, iw-are-ru (言われる) or “say” is used.
So then links the quotation in a general way with what has gone before: “You are God’s people, if you keep up your courage. So then, listen when God (or Christ) speaks to you in this psalm.” It is grammatically possible to link So then with particular verbs, either (a) do not be stubborn in verse 8, or even (b) be careful in verse 12. Choice (b) would in effect put the entire quotation in parentheses and is very artificial. Good News Translation‘s general So then, indicating a new step in the argument, is probably best. An equivalent of So then may be a phrase meaning “Therefore,” “In view of all this,” or even “As a result of what has been said.”
Mention of the Holy Spirit would lead the original readers of Hebrews to expect a quotation from Scripture; ancient Jewish teachers often introduced quotations from the Old Testament in this way. However, modern readers may need to be told more clearly that a quotation is about to begin (Biblia Dios Habla Hoy “as the Holy Spirit says in Scripture”), or even that the Holy Spirit is God’s Spirit (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch first edition “God says through his Spirit”).
Is the correct translation If or “when” (Moffatt, Revised Standard Version)? The Greek word usually means If, but sometimes, as in John 12.32; 14.3; and 1 John 2.28, it is virtually equal to “when.” Here the question is not whether people will hear God’s voice (since God is speaking or is about to speak in this very passage), but whether, when people have heard his voice, they will obey it. New American Bible‘s “if you should hear his voice” is too indefinite, and “when” is more likely in this context. Some translations (Barclay, Translator’s New Testament; compare Jerusalem Bible) omit both “if” and “when,” and translate hear as “listen to.” Hear can mean “listen to,” as it usually does in commands. Here Barclay has “Today I plead with you, listen to his voice.” Good News Translation‘s construction is better, since it throws weight onto the first main verb of the quotation, do not be stubborn.
To speak about “hearing someone’s voice” may be heavy or repetitive in some languages. Jerusalem Bible has simply “listen to him.” Another possibility is “when you hear me speaking (to you).”
A literal rendering of If you hear God’s voice today could mean merely hearing the voice of God but not hearing the message that is actually said. It may be better, therefore, to translate the conditional clause as “When you hear what God is saying today.”
Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Letter of the Hebrews. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
In the earlier sections of Hebrews the author showed that Jesus was greater than both the angels and Moses. In 2:1–4 he gave a first warning not to refuse the message which Jesus brought. Here in 3:7–19 he gave a second warning not to refuse Jesus’ message, especially the “rest” that God offers through Jesus. The author quoted from Psalm 95, which says that God wanted to give the people of Israel a land where they could have rest from their enemies. When they were slaves in Egypt, he sent Moses to lead them to that land, but they rebelled against God in the wilderness. Then God did not allow them to enter the land of rest.
It is often difficult to decide how to translate “rest” in this section and in chapter 4. Psalm 95 and Hebrews do refer to the time when Moses was alive and God promised to give the people of Israel land. However, King David was already in that land when he wrote the psalm, so the “rest” could not refer to the land. It refers to a different type of “rest.” That rest is a way of trusting God and depending on him for everything. We especially trust him to save us from our sins and give us eternal life. Because of the rest that God gives, we can have peace even when we suffer.
Be careful not to imply that the rest that God promises his people today is a certain place or land. Some scholars believe that the rest refers to heaven. It is true that we will have perfect rest in heaven, but Hebrews indicates that the rest that God provides for us begins on earth when we trust in Jesus.
Some other headings for this section are:
Rest for God’s People -or-
Warning Against Unbelief (New International Version) -or-
We Must Continue to Follow/Obey God
Scholars differ about where to end this warning section. Some scholars end the warning at 3:19. Others make the warning section continue to 4:13. In these notes, 3:19 is the end of this second warning section, and the following section is 4:1–13.
Paragraph 3:7–11
This paragraph contains a long quotation. You should use the format which you usually use for such quotations. This quotation from Psalm 95:7b–11 refers to the years when the people of Israel were traveling through the desert to the land of Canaan. God did many miracles for them, but they often complained against him.
In 3:8a–9a the quotation from Psalm 95 probably refers to a specific time when the people of Israel complained. It may refer to Exodus 17:1–7, when they did not find water to drink where they camped. However, it is more likely that it refers to Numbers 14, where they refused to enter the land that the Lord wanted to give them. That interpretation fits well with the theme of “rest” in Hebrews 4.
In 3:9b–11 the author referred to what the people of Israel did during the whole forty year period when they wandered through the desert. In 3:7–8a he indicates that followers of Jesus must not stubbornly reject what God tells them to do, as the people of Israel did in the desert.
3:7–8
The Greek text of 3:7 refers to God’s voice as “his voice,” and in 3:8 the author does not need to refer to him explicitly. However, in 3:9–11, the author uses pronouns like “I,” “me” and “my” to refer to God. English versions differ in the way they refer to God in 3:7–8. Refer to him in those verses in a way that is clear in your language.
Some ways to translate 3:7–8 are:
As the Holy Spirit says, “If you hear God speak today, don’t be stubborn. Don’t be stubborn like those who rebelled and tested me in the desert. (God’s Word) -or-
So then, as the Holy Spirit says, “If you hear God’s voice today, do not be stubborn, as your ancestors were when they rebelled against God, as they were that day in the desert when they put him to the test. (Good News Translation)
3:7a
Therefore: The conjunction Therefore introduces a conclusion from 3:1–6. We are God’s house (family), so we must listen to him and do what he says. Some ways to translate the conjunction are:
Because of that -or-
Now, therefore -or-
So
as the Holy Spirit says: This phrase introduces a quotation from Scripture. It implies that the Holy Spirit is the one who spoke those words and inspired a person to write them. The phrase is another way to refer to what Scripture says. This is the first time that the author introduced a quotation from the Old Testament in this way.
Here the author quoted what King David wrote in Psalm 95:7b–11. In some languages it may be helpful to refer to King David by name here, as the author does in 4:7, when he quotes from Psalm 95 again. Be sure to indicate or imply that the author referred to Scripture. It is often helpful to use the normal way that you refer to Scripture in your language. For example:
As the Holy Spirit said ⌊and King David wrote in God’s book⌋ -or-
The Holy Spirit spoke ⌊through King David⌋ ⌊and it was written⌋ saying
It is also helpful in some languages to include part of the meaning of the quotation in the introduction, so that it sounds more natural. Notice the implied words in the following example:
Therefore ⌊you must do⌋ as the Holy Spirit said,
Holy Spirit: The Greek phrase that the Berean Standard Bible translates as Holy Spirit refers to the Spirit of God. The Holy Spirit is God, together with God the Father and God the Son. The Holy Spirit is “spirit” in the sense that he is a living being who does not have a physical body. He is “holy” in the sense that he is God and unique from every other being. He is perfect in every way and is completely pure and sinless.
Some ways to translate Holy Spirit are:
Spirit/Breath of God -or-
Holy/Sacred Spirit
Do not imply that the Holy Spirit is like the ghost of a dead person or that God has died. The term Holy Spirit also occurred in 2:4c. See how you translated it there.
3:7b
Here the author began to quote from Psalm 95.
Today: In this context the word Today refers to the present moment or time. Some ways to translate Today in the context are:
right now -or-
now at this time -or-
on this very day
Here the word Today comes first in the sentence to emphasize it. It implies that when a person hears God voice, he should respond immediately. He should not delay.
if you hear His voice: There are several ways to interpret the if clause here:
(1) It means that you should listen to what God says. (It is a command or exhortation.) For example:
you must listen to his voice (New Living Translation (1996)) -or-
Oh, that today you would listen…! (NET Bible)
(NET Bible, New Living Translation (1996), New Century Version)
(2) It means when you hear what God says. For example:
when you hear his voice (NLT04)
(NLT04, Revised Standard Version)
(3) It means if you hear what God says. (It is a condition.) For example:
If you hear God speak (God’s Word)
It is recommended that you follow interpretation (1), along with many Bible scholars. Although more English versions have if, it may imply a wrong meaning here. In this context, the if clause does not imply that the listeners may not hear God’s voice. The author is about to tell them what God says.
you: The pronoun you is plural and refers to all the people who hear (or read) what God said.
hear His voice: The phrase hear His voice refers here to listening to what God says. It implies listening in order to obey. For example:
listen to him! -or-
hear what he says ⌊and obey it⌋
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®).
.jpg){kind=link}
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.