Following are a number of back-translations of Romans 1:6:
Uma: “So also you Kristen people there in the village of Roma. God called you as well to become the portion of Yesus Kristus.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “You (pl.) the ones who are there in the place Roma are also included. You were chosen by God so that you belong to Isa Almasi.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And as for you there in the town of Rome, you’re included also in these people, for God has made a way so that you might believe and you might become the subjects of Jesus Christ.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Even you also there in Roma, you are included-with the people whom God has called/invited to be joined to Jesu Cristo.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “Of these people whom God called to believe in Jesus Christ, you also were called by God to believe in Jesus Christ now.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Tzeltal: “As, for example, you whom Jesus Christ has called to himself.”
Highland Totonac: “And of these also were some of you who have been chosen in order that you will belong to Christ.”
Sayula Popoluca: “And you likewise I tell you that God called you so that Jesus Christ could make you his own.”
Isthmus Zapotec: “And among those people (I’ve just mentioned), you (pl.) are included because God has spoken to you that you should become Jesus Christ’s people (or followers).” (Source for this and three above: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.)
Following are a number of back-translations of Romans 3:18:
Uma: “‘They do not know at all how to submit to God.'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “They have no fear of God.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And they also do not think that they should be afraid to sin against God.’ This is what the written word of God says.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “and neither do they know how to fear God.'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “Neither does there come into their hearts that they respect God.'” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Tzeltal: “Not the slightest do they lower their eyes from fear of God, it says.” (Source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.)
Following are a number of back-translations of Romans 3:23:
Uma: “For we have all sinned, and we are not fit/worth to get/obtain a share in God’s glory [lit. God’s bigness of life].” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “All have equally sinned, there is not even one of them praised by God.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “All mankind have sinned and they do not count even as much as one fingernail toward the very high rank of God.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Because all of us have sinned, and we cannot attain/reach God’s goodness.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “For all people have sin. No one comes out doing that good God wants that people do.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Tzeltal: “We all have sin. Equally we have not been able to equal the goodness of God.”
Huehuetla Tepehua: “All men have sinned. There is no one really straight like God has measured it.”
Isthmus Zapotec: “We have all of us sinned and now not one of us is worth anything in God’s sight.”
Chicahuaxtla Triqui: “And all of them have committed sin and God can’t say a good word about any of them because all of them fail to become good.” (Source for this and three above: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.)
Noongar: koort-kwabba-djil or “heart very good” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
Chicahuaxtla Triqui: “refreshed heart” (source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.).
HausaCommon Language Bible: farin ciki or “white stomach.” Other languages that use the same expression include Southern Birifor (pʋpɛl), Dera (popolok awo), Reshe (ɾipo ɾipuhã). (Source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
Following are a number of back-translations of Romans 3:26:
Uma: “With the death of Yesus, it became evident/knowable that God is upright punishing sin, and he can also say that sinners who believe in Yesus are upright.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “But just the same God punishes if/when someone sins. Therefore he punished Isa as a substitute for us (incl.) even though he had not sinned. Because of this there is now his proof, that he is truly straight and that he considers straight everyone who trusts Isa Almasi.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “However, it is necessary that there be punishment for the sins of mankind, therefore he punished Jesus. Because of that, we (incl.) know that the judgment of God is just. And because of this, it can be that He will consider righteous anybody who believes in Jesus.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “but now, he has shown that he didn’t just forget those sins but rather he included them in the sins that Jesus bore (lit. carried-on-his-shoulder) on the cross. Thus it can-be-seen that God is thoroughly righteous while-simultaneously it is also he who counts as righteous all people who believe in Jesus.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “But now that Christ has died it is seen that all the sins of the people are paid. Now we are assured that God rightly judges, clearing the sins of all who believe in Jesus Christ.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Central Mazahua: “When Jesus Christ died, God showed us that he judges us well. He didn’t just allow the sins we do. But God will say he doesn’t any longer owe sin, the one who will plant Jesus Christ in his heart, because Jesus Christ paid for our sins.”
Tzeltal: “Not until now God has made to be seen how with a straight heart he has now settled the matter of sin, in order that thus it will be known that his heart is straight and he makes straight the heart also of as many as believe in Jesus.” (Source for this and above: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.)
Following are a number of back-translations of Romans 4:5:
Uma: “But our connection/relationship with God is not that. For it is not because of our behavior that God receives us. If we believe in God, even though we are wrong/guilty, he says we are straight in his sight just because of our faith in him.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “If/when a person does good so that, he says/thinks, God will forgive his sin and God will consider him straight, he is really wrong/mistaken. For it is not because of our (dual) good deeds but because of our (dual) trusting God, the one who forgives sins, that we (incl.) are forgiven and considered straight by God.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And God’s considering us (incl.) righteous is not like that because it’s just His favor to us. The reason God considers us (incl.) to be righteous is not because we carried out what He told us to do, but rather only because we believed in Him who is able to make transgressors righteous.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “But if a person doesn’t work-for his salvation but rather believes in God that he is the one who counts a sinner as righteous, his faith is the reason God counts him as righteous.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “But God does not tell us that we must do work in order to clear our sins. Because he gives us the favor of clearing our sins. It is just that we believe what God says will happen.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Tzeltal: “But the one who believes in the one who sets free from their sins those who are sinners, it is now through his belief of heart that he will have his heart made straight, not through his good work which he has done.”
Chicahuaxtla Triqui: “But we receive freely as a favor that which God does for us, and God is able to say that our hearts are straight when we still lack of becoming entirely good in our hearts. Well then, we believe in God, and on account of our belief, God reckons up that our hearts are straight.” (Source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.)
Chichewa (interconfessional translation, 1999): “But a person having believed, instead of depending on his/her works, God who views sinful people that they are not guilty, that person on believing [a syntactic, object front-shift], God views him/her that s/he is right[eous] in his eyes.” (Source: Wendland 1998, p. 112)
“beg” or “ask,” (full expression: “ask with one’s heart coming out,” which leaves out selfish praying, for asking with the heart out leaves no place for self to hide) (Tzotzil)
“raise up one’s words to God” (implying an element of worship, as well as communication) (Miskito, Lacandon) (source of this and all above: Bratcher / Nida)
“speak to God” (Shilluk) (source: Nida 1964, p. 237)
“talk together with Great Above One (=God)” (Mairasi) (source: Enggavoter, 2004)
“beg” (waan) (Ik). Terrill Schrock (in Wycliffe Bible Translators 2016, p. 93) explains (click or tap here to read more):
What do begging and praying have to do with each other? Do you beg when you pray? Do I?
“The Ik word for ‘visitor’ is waanam, which means ‘begging person.’ Do you beg when you go visiting? The Ik do. Maybe you don’t beg, but maybe when you visit someone, you are looking for something. Maybe it’s just a listening ear.
When the Ik hear that [my wife] Amber and I are planning trip to this or that place for a certain amount of time, the letters and lists start coming. As the days dwindle before our departure, the little stack of guests grows. ‘Please, sir, remember me for the allowing: shoes, jacket (rainproof), watch, box, trousers, pens, and money for the children. Thank you, sir, for your assistance.’
“A few people come by just to greet us or spend bit of time with us. Another precious few will occasionally confide in us about their problems without asking for anything more than a listening ear. I love that.
“The other day I was in our spare bedroom praying my list of requests to God — a nice list covering most areas of my life, certainly all the points of anxiety. Then it hit me: Does God want my list, or does he want my relationship?
“I decided to try something. Instead of reading off my list of requests to God, I just talk to him about my issues without any expectation of how he should respond. I make it more about our relationship than my list, because if our personhood is like God’s personhood, then maybe God prefers our confidence and time to our lists, letters, and enumerations.”
In Luang it is translated with different shades of meaning (click or tap here to read more):
For Acts 1:14, 20:36, 21:5: kola ttieru-yawur nehla — “hold the waist and hug the neck.” (“This is the more general term for prayer and often refers to worship in prayer as opposed to petition. The Luang people spend the majority of their prayers worshiping rather than petitioning, which explains why this term often is used generically for prayer.”)
For Acts 28:9: sumbiani — “pray.” (“This term is also used generically for ‘prayer’. When praying is referred to several times in close proximity, it serves as a variation for kola ttieru-yawur nehla, in keeping with Luang discourse style. It is also used when a prayer is made up of many requests.”)
For Acts 8:15, 12:5: polu-waka — “call-ask.” (“This is a term for petition that is used especially when the need is very intense.”)
Source: Kathy Taber in Notes on Translation 1/1999, p. 9-16.
About the translation of the Greek (and Ge’ez) term that is usually transliterated with the terms “baptism” or “baptize” in English (for other English translations see below), Bratcher / Nida (1961) say this (click or tap for details):
“[It] has given rise not only to an immense amount of discussion in terms of its meaning within the Judaeo-Christia historical context, but also continues to introduce serious problems for translators today. In many instances the recommendation has been to transliterate, i.e. employing some indigenous equivalent of the sounds of the word in some more prestigious language spoken in the region, e.g. English, French, Spanish, or Portuguese. Though this solution tends to remove some theological controversies, it does not completely satisfy everyone, for not only does it avoid the problem of the mode of baptism, but it leaves the Scriptures with a zero word. Unfortunately, many of the controversies over the indigenous equivalent of baptism arise because of a false evaluation of a word’s so-called etymology. For example, in Yucateco the word for baptism means literally ‘to enter the water’, but this term is used freely by both Presbyterians and Roman Catholics, even though it might appear to be strictly ‘Baptist nomenclature.’ Similarly, in Kekchí, an even ‘stronger’ term ‘to put under the water’ is employed by Nazarenes and Roman Catholics. Obviously the meanings of these Yucateco and Kekchí words are not derivable from their literal significance but from the fact that they now designate a particular kind of Christian rite. To insist on changing such a well-established usage (and one to which immersionists could certainly not object) would seem quite unwarranted. The situation may, on the other hand, be reversed. There are instances in which immersionists are quite happy to use a term which though it means literally ‘to put water on the head’ [see below for the translations in Northern Emberá and Ewe] has actually lost this etymological value and refers simply to the rite itself, regardless of the way in which it is performed. A translator should not, however, employ an already existing expression or construct a new phrase which will in its evident meaning rule out any major Christian constituency.
“There are, of course, a number of instances in which traditional terms for ‘baptism’ need modification. In some situations the word may mean only ‘to give a new name to’ (one aspect of christening) or ‘to be one who lights’ (referring to a custom in some traditions of lighting a candle at the time of baptism). However, in order to reproduce the core of significant meaning of the original Biblical term, it is important to explore the entire range of indigenous usage in order that whatever term is chosen may have at least some measure of cultural relevance. In Navajo (Dinė), for example, there were four principal possibilities of choice: (1) borrowing some transliterated form of the English word, (2) constructing a phrase meaning ‘to touch with water’ (an expression which would have been acceptable with some groups in the field, but not with others), (3) using a phrase meaning ‘ceremonial washing’ (but this expression seemed to be too closely related to indigenous practices in healing ceremonies), and (4) devising an expression meaning ‘to dedicate (or consecrate) by water’, without specifying the amount of water employed. This last alternative was chosen as the most meaningful and the best basis for metaphorical extension and teaching.
“On the other hand, it would be wrong to think that the meaning of ‘washing’ must be rejected in all languages. For example, it is quite appropriate in Kpelle culture, since it ties in with male puberty rites, and in the San Blas Kuna society, since washing is a very important aspect of female puberty ceremonies, in some translations ‘water’ is introduced into the expression for baptism, but the quantity and means of administrating it are left quite ambiguous, e.g. ‘to get (take, receive) water’ (Tzeltal). Toraja-Sa’dan, Pamona and Batak Toba render the verb ‘to pour water over, give a bath’.” (Source: Bratcher / Nida)
Other examples of translation include:
Javanese, Indonesian and many others: transliterated forms of the Greek “baptizo”
Balinese: ngelukat (a Balinese initiation ceremony in which persons were sprinkled with consecrated water) (source for this and above: Biblical Terms in The Bible Translator 1952, p. 225ff. )
Yagaria: “gospel water” (bono’ nina) for “baptism” and “wash (or: rub) with gospel water” (bono’ ni’ folo-) for “baptize” (source for this and two above: Renck 1990, p. 84; 115)
Halh Mongolian: argon ochial (“holy washing”) (“The people in Mongolia are strictly religious and understand the meaning very well. They are familiar with the idea of water being used as a symbol of a new life and having received ‘holy washing’ means to have entered into a new sphere of life.”) (Source: A. Marthinson in The Bible Translator 1954, p. 74ff. ) (Note: In more recent Mongolian translations a transliteration of baptizo is used instead)
Yatzachi Zapotec: (Spanish loan word and transliteration of the Greek term) bautizar (click or tap for details):
“The Yatzachi Zapotec know the practice of baptism and have a word to express it. There would thus seem to be no problem involved. Unfortunately, however, the word for ‘baptize’ is a compound, one part being a word nowhere else used and the other part being the word for ‘water.’ Perhaps ‘water-baptize’ is the closest equivalent in English. For most contexts this presents no problem, but if the word is used in Mark 1:8, it would say, ‘He will water-baptize you with the Holy Ghost.’ In Zapotec the idea is unintelligible. To meet the problem, the Spanish word ‘bautizar’ was introduced at this point though the Zapotec word is ordinarily used. The disadvantages of this substitution are obvious, but no better solution was found.” (Source: Otis M. Leal in The Bible Translator 1951, p. 164ff.
Uab Meto: antam oe (“to enter into the water”) (click or tap for details):
“Formerly in Uab Meto the word used for ’baptism’ was ‘nasrami’ which actually came by way of Arabic from ‘Nazarene.’ Its meaning was ‘to make a Christian’ and the idea was that the one who baptized actually made Christians. Such an expression was obviously inadequate. We have used for ‘baptize’ the phrase in ‘antam oe’ which means ‘to enter into the water.’ This phrase can be used for sprinkling, for water is used as a symbol of the new life, and being baptized means for the Uab Meto to enter into a new sphere of life. Baptism is so frequently spoken of in connection with the giving of the Holy Spirit that the proper associations have arisen in the thinking of the people.” (Source: P. Middelkoop in The Bible Translator 1952 p. 165ff. )
Mandarin Chinese: Catholic: 洗 xǐ (“washing”); non-Baptist Protestant 聖洗 shèngxǐ (“holy washing”); Baptist: 浸洗 jìnxǐ (“immerse and wash”) (In the history of Chinese Bible translation the translation of the Greek baptizo was a point of great contention, so much so that in the 19th Century Baptists had a completely different set of Bible translations and even today are using different editions with the different term of the same versions that other Protestants use.) (Source: Zetzsche 2008)
The Germandas Buch translation by Roland Werner (publ. 2009-2022) uses a variety of translations, including “immersed (in water)” (eintauchen or untertauchen) but also the traditional German term for “baptism (Taufe)” or in the combination “immersed in baptism”
The disagreement about whether the translation of the Greek baptizo needed to include “immersion” not only caused conflict in China, it also led to splits — and different translations — in English-speaking countries: “The influential British and Foreign Bible Society had been a major supporter of the [Baptist] Serampore mission, but it finally severed its support in 1836 because of the Baptist interpretation of the Bible translations produced there. This led to the formation of the separate Baptist Bible Translation Society in Great Britain in 1840. Almost concurrently, in 1837, the American and Foreign Bible Society was founded in the United States as an offspring of the American Bible Society, over a controversy about a Baptist Bengali Bible translation. The American and Foreign Bible Society itself experienced another split in 1850, when a sub-group rejected the transliteration of baptizo in the English Bible and formed the American Bible Union, which published its own English New Testament in 1862/63 that used the term immerse instead of “baptize” (see here ). (Source: Zetzsche 2008)
