church

Click here to view graphically

The Greek that is often translated as “church” in English is translated into Avaric as imanl’urazul ahlu: “the community of believers” or “the believing people.”

Magomed-Kamil Gimbatov and Yakov Testelets (in The Bible Translator 1996, p. 434ff. ) talk about the genesis of this term (click or tap here to read more):

“The word ‘Church’ presents particular difficulties, as we might expect when we think that even many Christians do not understand it correctly. When people today say ‘church,’ they often mean a particular building, or an organization consisting chiefly of clergy (priests and monks). It is even harder to find a word or combination of words which adequately translates the meaning for people unfamiliar with Christianity. Surprisingly, the Greek word ekklesia, indicating in the classical language ‘an assembly of the people,’ ‘a gathering of citizens,’ has come into Avar and other Dagestani languages in the form kilisa. This, like the word qanch (‘cross’), is an ancient borrowing, presumably from the time before the arrival of Islam, when Dagestan came under the influence of neighboring Christian states. In modern usage, however, this word indicates a place of Christian worship. Thus it is completely inappropriate as a translation of its New Testament ancestor ekklesia.

“We were obliged to look at various words which are closer to the meaning of the Greek. Some of these words are dandel’i (‘meeting’), danderussin (‘assembly’), the Arabic-derived mazhlis (‘meeting, conference’), zhama’at (‘society, community’), ahlu (‘race, people, family, group of people united by a common goal or interest’, as in the Arabic phrase ahlu-l-kitab ‘people of the Book’ or ‘people of the Scriptures’), which describes both Jews and Christians, and ummat (‘people, tribe’). In Islamic theology the phrase ‘Mohammed’s ummat’ means the universal community of Muslims, the Muslim world, in the same way as the Christian world is known as ‘Isa’s ummat.’ None of these descriptions on their own, without explanation, can be used to translate the word ‘Church’ in the New Testament. Thus, after long consideration, we adopted the phrase imanl’urazul ahlu, meaning ‘the community of believers,’ ‘the believing people,’ This translation corresponds closely to New Testament teaching about the Church.

“It is interesting that the same word ahlu with the meaning ‘tribe, community’ has been used by translators for different reasons in the introduction to the Gospel of Luke in order to translate the expression in the original Greek pepleroforemenon en hemin pragmaton (πεπληροφορημένων ἐν ἡμῖν πραγμάτων), which the Russian Synodal translation renders ‘about the events well-known amongst us’ (Luke 1:1). The expression ‘amongst us’ cannot be translated literally into Avar, but has to be rendered ‘among our people’; and here the same term was used as for the word ‘church’, literally ‘among our tribe, community (ahlu).'”

In Kamo “church” is fang-balla (“owners of writing-people”) when referring to the church community and “house of writing-people” when referring to a church building. David Frank explains: “In Kamo culture, Christianity was associated with writing, so Christianity is called balla, which they say means ‘people who write.’ Christianity is balla, and Christians are called fang-balla, which means ‘owners of Christianity.’ That is the term that is used for the church, in the sense of people, rather than a building. In Philemon 1:1b-2a, Paul says he is writing ‘To our friend and fellow worker Philemon, and to the church (fang-balla ‘owners of Christianity) that meet in your house.’ The word fang “owner’ is very productive in the Kamo language. A disciple is an ‘owner of learning,’ an apostle is an ‘owner of sending,’ a believer is an ‘owner of truth,’ a hypocrite is an ‘owner of seeing eyes.’ The expression ‘house of writing-people’ is used in Matthew 16:18, which reads in Kamo, ‘And so I tell you Peter, you are a rock, and on top of this rock foundation I will build my house of writing-people, and never even death will not be able to overcome it.” (See also Peter – rock)

In Bacama there also is a differentiation between the building (vɨnə hiutə: “house of prayer”) and the community (ji-kottə: “followers”) (source: David Frank in this blog post ).

In 16th-century Classical Nahuatl, a transliteration from Spanish (Santa Yglesia or Santa Iglesia) is typically used rather than a translation, making the concept take on a personified meaning. Ottman (p. 169) explains: “The church building, or more precisely the church complex with its associated patio, has a Nahuatl name in common usage — generally teopan, something like ‘god-place,’ in contradistinction to teocalli, ‘god-house,’ applied to a prehispanic temple — but the abstract sense is always Santa Iglesia, a Spanish proper name like ‘Dios’ or ‘Santa María’, and like ‘Santa María’ often called ‘our mother.’ As a personified ‘mother,’ in the European tradition as well as in Nahuatl, She instructs Her children or chastises them; as Bride of Christ, She both longs for Her heavenly rest and bears witness to it, in the ‘always-already’ of eschatological time; as successor to the Synagogue, the blindfolded, broken-sceptred elder sister who accompanies Her in painting and sculpture, She represents the triumphant rule of truth. ‘The Church’ can mean the clerical hierarchy; it can also, or simultaneously, mean the assembly of the faithful. It dispenses grace to its members, living and dead, yet it is also enriched by them, living and dead, existing not only on earth but in purgatory and in heaven.”

In Lisu the building (“church”) is called “house of prayer” (source: Arrington 2020, p. 196) whereas in Highland Totonac the community is referred as “those who gather together” (source: Hermann Aschmann in The Bible Translator 1950, p. 171ff. ), in Huehuetla Tepehua as “those who gather together who have confidence in Christ” (source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.), in Uma as “Christian people” (source: Uma Back Translation), in Kankanaey as “the congregation of God’s people” (source: Kankanaey Back Translation), and in Tagbanwa as “you whom God separated-out as his people because of your being-united/tied-together with Jesus Christ” (source: Tagbanwa Back Translation).

In American Sign Language, “church” (as in the community of believers) is made up of the combination of the signs for “Jesus-into-heart” (signifying a believer), followed by the sign for “group.” (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)


“Church” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor

While British Sign Language also uses a sign that focuses on a group of people believing in Jesus (see here ), another sign that it uses combines the signs for “ringing the (church) bells” and a “group of people.” (Source: Anna Smith)


“Church” in British Sign Language (source: Christian BSL, used with permission)

Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Ekklesia .

complete verse (1 Corinthians 6:4)

Following are a number of back-translations of 1 Corinthians 6:4:

  • Uma: “If you do have quarrels, why bring-it-up-to [i.e., take it to court before] people who aren’t Kristen people, who do not [emphatic] have any authority lit., seat] in our fellowship?” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “Therefore if you have problems with your fellows (believers), why do you take it to be judged to people who don’t mix with us (incl.) the trusters in Isa Almasi?” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And when one of you has an accusation against his fellow believer, it’s not good for him to have it settled before a person who has no business dealing with us believers.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “If therefore you have cases like those, why do you have-them -judged by those who have no importance in the congregation of believers?” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “Therefore if you have a grievance in your mind/inner-being, will you still present-it -for-mediation to people whom you know/acknowledge as having a different mind/inner-being because they do not know/acknowledge God?” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “If it be that you do not know how to set right a matter that is troubling you, can you think that the people who are not believers should settle your affairs then?” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)

Translation commentary on 1 Corinthians 6:4

The first part of this verse, If then you have such cases, has the main function of linking this verse with verse 5. common language translations differ according to how much they condense this verse. ITCL begins a new paragraph and translates “When therefore you have to resolve questions of this kind….” Other ways to condense this verse are “Such questions should not be settled by people who have no standing in the church” or “… by people whom other Christians do not respect.”

The rest of the verse, from the clause why do you lay them before, raises four related problems. The first and least important is that of punctuation. The clause can be taken as a question, a command, an exclamation, or a statement (see the footnote on punctuation in the UBS Greek New Testament). This problem scarcely affects the meaning. For example, Bible de Jérusalem‘s “You are going to take for judges people whom the church despises!” means practically the same as Traduction œcuménique de la Bible‘s “you set up as judges people whom the church despises?” In some languages, however, it may be more natural to change this rhetorical question into a negative statement: “You really should not choose as judges people whom other Christians do not respect.”

The second problem is that of how to translate this clause if it is understood as a rhetorical question. The options are: “do you (take)…?” (New American Bible; compare also Translator’s New Testament, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible), “are you going to…?” (Good News Bible, An American Translation), “how can you…?” (New English Bible, Barclay), and “why do you…?” (Revised Standard Version, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, Phillips). There is little difference in meaning among all of these. “How can…?” probably brings out most clearly in English the fact that the question does not expect a real answer.

The third problem is that of deciding whether (1) Paul is talking about law cases in general, or (2) referring to a particular case. As often in his letters, Paul probably has one or more particular cases in mind, but draws general principles from them. Only Jerusalem Bible (not New Jerusalem Bible), among the translations consulted, clearly chooses (2). It shows this choice by using the past tense: “when you have had cases of that kind, the people you appointed to try them were not even respected in the Church.” The preceding words, If then you have certainly allow for (1) to be chosen by a translator. However, it seems clear from verses 1 and 6 that Paul is discussing a real situation, and thus (2) is a better choice.

The last and most difficult problem concerns the identity of the people who are least esteemed by the church. Are they the people who occupy “the very last place” within the church (4.9; contrast 12.28, where the same phrase “in the church” is used)? Or are they “outsiders” (5.12), the “heathen judges” of verse 1 (compare verse 6)? If they are these “heathen,” then the phrase who are least esteemed by the church would mean “from the point of view of the church (they) are of no account” (Moffatt; compare New Jerusalem Bible).

The translator must consider the following arguments before deciding whether or not Paul is referring to Christians.
(a) The verb translated lay … before (Good News Bible‘s “take … to be settled by”) is literally “set up” or “appoint as judges.” It is clear that Christians would have no power to appoint secular judges. However, Paul could be speaking loosely of Christians choosing to use the services of non-Christian courts.
(b) Barrett doubts whether Paul would have spoken of Christians as “people of no standing.” He comments: “Every Christian ‘counts for something’ in the church” (similarly Fee). But in fact, Paul several times uses the verb translated here “count for nothing” in speaking of Christians’ attitudes toward one another; see Rom 14.3, 10 (“despise”); 1 Cor 16.11 (“despise”); 2 Cor 10.10 (“of no account”); Gal 4.14 (“despise”); 1 Thes 5.20 (“despise”). These references, however, do not prove that Paul is speaking about Christians in this verse. They merely provide evidence that he did sometimes speak about Christians in this way.
(c) The context, especially “heathen judges” in verse 1, suggests that Paul is summing up the previous argument rather than making a contrast or changing a theme.
(d) It has been suggested that the Christian community in Corinth had appointed such unworthy church members to decide their disputes that people had turned in despair to non-Christian judges. If this situation were true, verse 4 would be a statement referring to these poorly qualified Christians who had been appointed as judges. Verse 5 would then go on to suggest that the church could find someone better. This would make a good connection with what follows, but we do not know enough about the situation in Corinth to be sure.

Most modern translators suggest that the people who are least esteemed by the church are non-Christians; Revised English Bible, for example, has “outsiders.” That means “people who have no standing to decide problems in the church because they are not members of it.” Given all the evidence that we have presented, “non-Christians” is probably the correct meaning here.

Lay them before is literally “set up as judges,” or less probably “submit to the judgment of.” The choice partly depends on how the translator resolves the problem that we have discussed in paragraphs (a) through (d).

Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians, 2nd edition. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1985/1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .