by By Phares Barine
Towards the end of March 2025, I was asked to preach at my local congregation. I chose as my theme ‘Christian’s obedience to God’, and my subject was the relationship between the shepherd and his sheep.
I deliberately opened my sermon with the greeting: “How are you this morning, sheep?” A few people in the congregation laughed, uneasily; a larger number mumbled in consternation, glancing at one another. The majority just glared at me in disbelief. One member bravely put their communal protest in words: “We’re not sheep!”
I smiled apologetically and put the greeting in its proper context: “How are you, the Lord’s sheep?” I explained that we should all be happy to be called God’s sheep, because He is our good Shepherd. The congregation relaxed, somewhat.
The reaction I got did not surprise me. You see, in the Mũthambĩ- Mwĩmbĩ community, the sheep is a metaphor for dimwits, the dullards and the confused. If you were called “sheep” back in our day by your parent or teacher, that was enough chastisement to make you hang your head in shame for a whole week. The sheep is so despised in this community, it is never used as the “ndugũra mwari” in betrothals. “Ndugũra mwari” means “door opener” and is usually the lead item in dowry payment. The “ndugũra mwari” has to be a she-goat, which symbolizes fecundity and wealth. In fact, the only time sheep occurs in the dowry process is when a ntũrũme (ram) is slaughtered for the mother of the girl, so she can eat the fatty tail (kĩnyanya) and ostensibly recover from the rigours of nurturing the girl who is being married off. Even then, it is never called by its name “ntũrũme”. They give it a pseudonym- “ndenge ĩtĩ kĩreru”- a he-goat without a beard!
So how does one translate the sheep metaphors in the Bible (and they are numerous) to such a receptor community? Mathew 25:31-41 has such a metaphor: “vs31. When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. vs32. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. vs33 And he will place the sheep at his right hand, but the goats at the left. vs34. Then the King will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the worlds…’ vs41. Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels…’” (RSV.)
Should the translator change the metaphor, for instance substitute (or switch) the sheep for the goats? Lekolo, a teacher from the Samburu in Kenya confesses that his community too prefers goats to sheep, and that in translation he would sooner switch the goats with the sheep to avoid alienating his people from the Christian Message. Colleague translators from Uganda and Nigeria encountered this translation hurdle too. Francis from Uganda decided to abandon the metaphor the way the Good News Bible has done, translating the metaphor, “He will put the righteous people on his right and the others on his left.” He further points out that in their culture, they actually don’t separate the sheep from the goats but keep them together. “Sheep have a calming effect on the goats. The idea of calling people sheep and goats and then separating them can only cause confusion. The metaphor doesn’t make sense in this culture, so why use it?
Luka from Nigeria on the other hand says they translated the metaphor just the way it is in the Revised Standard Version Bible. He is categorical, “We must learn to accept the truth of God’s words, as well as the context of the Bible… understanding the Bible context is essential. Interchanging sheep for goats and goats for sheep will be highly unacceptable.
The Mũthambĩ-Mwĩmbĩ translation team has translated vs 33, “Akaiga ng’ondu njara yae ya ũrĩo, ĩndĩ mbũri ajiige njara ya ũmotho.” (He will place the sheep at His right hand, but the goats at the left), thus retaining the metaphor as it is translated in the RSV. This was done despite the prevailing cultural conflict as illustrated above, for several reasons.
First, metaphors embody a message deeper than the literal meaning of the words used. Sheep and goats (and separating them especially when they went in for the night) may have been a regular Palestinian herding practice. Yet when these animals are used in the Bible, they carry messages that transcend their physical attributes and cultural locale (Luka calls it “Bible context”). The writer Phillip Keller in ‘A Shepherd’s Look at PSALM 23’ puts it like this: “It is no accident that God has chosen to call us sheep… The behaviour of sheep and human beings is similar in many ways… Our mass mind (or mob instincts), our fears and timidity, our stubbornness and stupidity, our perverse habits are all parallels of profound importance.” (pg 21)
Secondly, it must be realized that the writer does not use this metaphor from the animals’ perspective, but from the Shepherd’s. The shepherd places the two animals according to His evaluation of their performance, not their attributes; by what they did, not who they were. The sheep are rewarded by being placed at the Master’s right hand, a position of favour, because they are obedient; they obeyed their Master’s voice and did what He required of them. As for the goats on the left, they failed to do what was required of them — they refused to obey their Master. So, they’d suffer the consequences; they’d roast in hell’s eternal fire.
Incidentally, whereas the sheep is favoured for being meek, humble, gentle and willing to listen to its shepherd’s voice (though most times helpless and directionless and needing assistance (see 1Chronicles 21: 17), the goat is seen as independent and disobedient. It is also presented as the symbol of Satan. In Leviticus 16:10 the goat was sacrificed to the demon called Azazel.
Furthermore, metaphors often carry cultural nuances that, if altered, may alter the intended message. One needs to consider the tone and cultural values intrinsic in the metaphorical statement. Look at the statement, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29). In the Hebrew world, the “Lamb” carried nuances of innocence, of purity, of sacrifice. “Lamb” evokes a picture that transcends mere wording and acquires the symbolism of sacrifice and salvation.
Nevertheless, as we translate, we have to consider altering some metaphorical statements to ensure the message that reaches the receptor audience is the intended one. Take for instance the metaphor in Acts 26:14: “It hurts you to kick against the goads.” In Palestinian times the goad was a stick with a sharpened point, which was used to prod and drive livestock such as cows and donkeys along. If the animal resisted the desired movement, it would hurt against the sharp point. Saul was resisting the spread of the Christian message and instead was fighting it, against God’s purpose. He was only hurting himself, a futile self-destruction. The whole idea of a “goad” is unknown to the Mũthambĩ-Mwĩmbĩ people, so we substituted it with a local metaphor, “Gwe nĩ kĩongo gĩaku ũkũriithia ĩiga” (You’re hitting your head against a rock.)
When translating metaphors, you also need to consider clarity and naturality. If the Mũthambĩ-Mwĩmbĩ translation team were to translate Ezekiel 29:21: literally it would be something ridiculous: “On that day I will cause a horn to spring forth to the house of Israel…” (Ntukũ ĩu ngatũma rũgoji rũmere nyomba ya Isiraeli…) To avoid this, the verse is translated using ordinary language: “I will make Israel grow strong again.” Here “horn” is a symbol of strength and power.
At times it becomes necessary to translate a metaphor using more than one approach, to make complex ideas clearer. In Psalm 132:17 the Psalmist says: “There I will make a horn to sprout for David (metaphor 1); I have prepared a lamp for my anointed” (metaphor 2). The translator uses two approaches to translate this mixed metaphor, to make it understandable.“Kũrĩ we ngekĩra mathaga kĩrĩ njiarwa jia Daudi, ũrĩa mbĩtũrĩrĩtie maguta athi mbere kũruta werũ ta taa.”(There is one of David’s descendants I will coronate, I intend that my anointed continue sshedding light like a lamp).Notice that the first metaphor is changed to a local metaphor of equivalent meaning while the second one is changed into a simile. This way more light is shed on the verse.
Evidently, translation of Biblical metaphor is tricky business. Bible translators must carefully consider the context in which a metaphor is used, primarily regarding the intended message, before they can decide how to translate it. Sometimes it may be wise to leave it to the preacher to unravel it for his audience, as at the beginning of this discourse. Ultimately however, translating the message accurately as originally intended is what should guide the translation of Biblical metaphors.
