Cain

The Hebrew and Greek that is transliterated as “Cain” in English is transliterated as Kaḭ in Ngambay. In a translatory coincidence Kaḭ is very similar to the Ngambay word kain or “to flee” which is what Cain does according to Genesis 4:14. (Source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)

In the Protestant tradition of Mandarin Chinese it is transliterated as Gāiyǐn (该隐) which can be understood as “should hide” or “should be hidden.” (Source: Zetzsche)

In Spanish Sign Language it is translated with a sign that signifies “bad.” (Source: Steve Parkhurst)


“Cain” in Spanish Sign Language, source: Sociedad Bíblica de España

For more information on translations of proper names with sign language see Sign Language Bible Translations Have Something to Say to Hearing Christians .

See also Abel and Cain rose up against his brother Abel and killed him (image).

Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Cain .

younger brother (Lama)

The Greek that is translated as “brother” in English in the referenced verses is translated in Lama as rɨtafal or “younger brother.” (Source: Neal Brinneman)

complete verse (1 John 3:12)

Following are a number of back-translations of 1 John 3:12:

  • Uma: “Don’t imitate the behavior of Kain long ago. That Kain, he was-a-child of the evil-one(s), with the result that he killed his younger-sibling. Why was it that he killed his younger-sibling? Because his behavior was evil [emphatic], yet the behavior of his younger-sibling was upright.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “Let us (incl.) not be like Kabil. Kabil deceased (ley) belonged to Satan/demon and his brother was killed by him. Why was he killed by him? He was killed by him because the doings of his brother were good but his doings were bad/evil.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “We must not be like Cain, for he was the subject of Satan, and he murdered his younger brother. The reason he murdered him is because his activities were evil, and the activities of his younger brother were righteous, by contrast.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “It should not be Cain’s behavior that you imitate, because as for Cain, he was a person of Satanas and he killed his younger-sibling Abel. What was the reason that he killed him? Because what he was doing was evil but by-contrast what his younger-sibling was doing was good.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “Let’s not be like that as-it-were child of Satanas who is Cain , he who killed his brother. Well, why did he kill him? Because his own doing was evil, but his brother’s doing was righteous in the sight of God. That’s why Cain hated/was-angry-with that brother of his.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “We must not do like Cain who walked with the devil, therefore he killed his brother. Why was it that he killed him? He was killed because Cain did evil and therefore he was jealous of his brother who did good.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
  • Yatzachi Zapotec: “We should not do like Cain did. He was a child of the deceiver (the devil) who is very evil, and he killed his brother. Why was it he killed him? He killed him because his brother walked straight whereas he walked with evil.”
  • Eastern Highland Otomi: “And we will not do as Cain did who took the nature of the devil, and killed his brother. And why did he kill him? Because his deeds were bad, and his brother did what was good.”
  • Tzotzil: “Therefore do not do like Cain did. Because Cain was in the hand of the devil therefore he killed his younger brother. Because it was straight what his younger brother did.” (Implied that Cain’s were not straight.) (Source for this and two above: John Beekman in Notes on Translation 12, November 1964, p. 1ff.)

righteous, righteousness

The Greek, Hebrew, Ge’ez, and Latin terms that are translated in English mostly as “righteous” or “righteousness” (see below for a discussion of the English translation) are most commonly expressed with concept of “straightness,” though this may be expressed in a number of ways. (Click or tap here to see the details)

Following is a list of (back-) translations of various languages:

  • Bambara, Southern Bobo Madaré, Chokwe (ululi), Amganad Ifugao, Chol, Eastern Maninkakan, Toraja-Sa’dan, Pamona, Batak Toba, Bilua, Tiv: “be straight”
  • Laka: “follow the straight way” or “to straight-straight” (a reduplicated form for emphasis)
  • Sayula Popoluca: “walk straight”
  • Highland Puebla Nahuatl, Kekchí, Muna: “have a straight heart”
  • Kipsigis: “do the truth”
  • Mezquital Otomi: “do according to the truth”
  • Huautla Mazatec: “have truth”
  • Yine: “fulfill what one should do”
  • Indonesian: “be true”
  • Navajo (Dinė): “do just so”
  • Anuak: “do as it should be”
  • Mossi: “have a white stomach” (see also happiness / joy)
  • Paasaal: “white heart” (source: Fabian N. Dapila in The Bible Translator 2024, p. 415ff.)
  • (San Mateo del Mar Huave: “completely good” (the translation does not imply sinless perfection)
  • Nuer: “way of right” (“there is a complex concept of “right” vs. ‘left’ in Nuer where ‘right’ indicates that which is masculine, strong, good, and moral, and ‘left’ denotes what is feminine, weak, and sinful (a strictly masculine viewpoint!) The ‘way of right’ is therefore righteousness, but of course women may also attain this way, for the opposition is more classificatory than descriptive.”) (This and all above from Bratcher / Nida except for Bilua: Carl Gross; Tiv: Rob Koops; Muna: René van den Berg)
  • Central Subanen: “wise-good” (source: Robert Brichoux in OPTAT 1988/2, p. 80ff. )
  • Xicotepec De Juárez Totonac: “live well”
  • Mezquital Otomi: “goodness before the face of God” (source for this and one above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
  • Eastern Huasteca Nahuatl: “the result of heart-straightening” (source: Nida 1947, p. 224)
  • Eastern Highland Otomi: “entirely good” (when referred to God), “do good” or “not be a debtor as God sees one” (when referred to people)
  • Carib: “level”
  • Tzotzil: “straight-hearted”
  • Ojitlán Chinantec: “right and straight”
  • Yatzachi Zapotec: “walk straight” (source for this and four previous: John Beekman in Notes on Translation November 1964, p. 1-22)
  • Makonde: “doing what God wants” (in a context of us doing) and “be good in God’s eyes” (in the context of being made righteous by God) (note that justify / justification is translated as “to be made good in the eyes of God.” (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific notes in Paratext)
  • Aari: The Pauline word for “righteous” is generally rendered by “makes one without sin” in the Aari, sometimes “before God” is added for clarity. (Source: Loren Bliese)
  • North Alaskan Inupiatun: “having sin taken away” (Source: Nida 1952, p. 144)
  • Nyamwezi: wa lole: “just” or “someone who follows the law of God” (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
  • Venda: “nothing wrong, OK” (Source: J.A. van Roy in The Bible Translator 1972, p. 418ff. )
  • Ekari: maakodo bokouto or “enormous truth” (the same word that is also used for “truth“; bokouto — “enormous” — is being used as an attribute for abstract nouns to denote that they are of God [see also here]; source: Marion Doble in The Bible Translator 1963, p. 37ff. ).
  • Guhu-Samane: pobi or “right” (also: “right (side),” “(legal) right,” “straightness,” “correction,” “south,” “possession,” “pertinence,” “kingdom,” “fame,” “information,” or “speech” — “According to [Guhu-Samane] thinking there is a common core of meaning among all these glosses. Even from an English point of view the first five can be seen to be closely related, simply because of their similarity in English. However, from that point the nuances of meaning are not so apparent. They relate in some such a fashion as this: As one faces the morning sun, south lies to the right hand (as north lies to the left); then at one’s right hand are his possessions and whatever pertains to him; thus, a rich man’s many possessions and scope of power and influence is his kingdom; so, the rich and other important people encounter fame; and all of this spreads as information and forms most of the framework of the people’s speech.”) (Source: Ernest Richert in Notes on Translation 1964, p. 11ff.)
  • Haroti (Hadauti): “blameless in God’s eyes” (source: Vikram Mukka in Christianity Today )
  • German New Testament translation by Berger / Nord (publ. 1999): Gerechtheit, a neologism to differentiate it from the commonly-used Gerechtigkeit which can mean “righteousness” but is more often used in modern German as “fairness” (Berger / Nord especially use Gerechtheit in Letter to the Romans) or Gerechtestun, also a neologism, meaning “righteous deeds” (especially in Letter to the Ephesians)
  • “did what he should” (Eastern Highland Otomi)
  • “a clear man, good [man]” (Mairasi) (source: Enggavoter 2004)

The English translation of righteousness, especially in the New Testament is questioned by Nicholas Wolterstorff (2008, p. 110ff.) (Click or tap here to see the details)

Those who approach the New Testament solely through English translations face a serious linguistic obstacle to apprehending what these writings say about justice. In most English translations, the word “justice” occurs relatively infrequently. It is no surprise, then, that most English-speaking people think the New Testament does not say much about justice; the Bibles they read do not say much about justice. English translations are in this way different from translations into Latin, French, Spanish, German, Dutch — and for all I know, most languages.

The basic issue is well known among translators and commentators. Plato’s Republic, as we all know, is about justice. The Greek noun in Plato’s text that is standardly translated as “justice” is dikaiosunē (δικαιοσύνη); the adjective standardly translated as “just” is dikaios (δίκαιος). This same dik-stem occurs around three hundred times in the New Testament, in a wide variety of grammatical variants.

To the person who comes to English translations of the New Testament fresh from reading and translating classical Greek, it comes as a surprise to discover that though some of those occurrences are translated with grammatical variants on our word “just,” the great bulk of dik-stem words are translated with grammatical variants on our word “right.” The noun, for example, is usually translated as “righteousness,” not as “justice.” In English we have the word “just” and its grammatical variants coming horn the Latin iustitia, and the word “right” and its grammatical variants coining from the Old English recht. Almost all our translators have decided to translate the great bulk of dik-stem words in the New Testament with grammatical variants on the latter — just the opposite of the decision made by most translators of classical Greek.

I will give just two examples of the point. The fourth of the beatitudes of Jesus, as recorded in the fifth chapter of Matthew, reads, in the New Revised Standard Version, “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.” The word translated as “righteousness” is dikaiosunē. And the eighth beatitude, in the same translation, reads “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” The Greek word translated as “righteousness” is dikaiosunē. Apparently, the translators were not struck by the oddity of someone being persecuted because he is righteous. My own reading of human affairs is that righteous people are either admired or ignored, not persecuted; people who pursue justice are the ones who get in trouble.

It goes almost without saying that the meaning and connotations of “righteousness” are very different in present-day idiomatic English from those of “justice.” “Righteousness” names primarily if not exclusively a certain trait of personal character. (…) The word in present-day idiomatic English carries a negative connotation. In everyday speech one seldom any more describes someone as righteous; if one does, the suggestion is that he is self-righteous. “Justice,” by contrast, refers to an interpersonal situation; justice is present when persons are related to each other in a certain way. There is, indeed, a long tradition of philosophical and theological discussion on the virtue of justice. But that use of the term has almost dropped out of idiomatic English; we do not often speak any more of a person as just. And in any case, the concept of the virtue of justice presupposes the concept of those social relationships that are just.

So when the New Testament writers speak of dikaiosunē, are they speaking of righteousness or of justice? Is Jesus blessing those who hunger and thirst for righteousness or those who hunger and thirst for justice?

A thought that comes to mind is that the word changed meaning between Plato and the New Testament. Had Jesus’ words been uttered in Plato’s time and place, they would have been understood as blessing those who hunger and thirst for the social condition of justice. In Jesus’ time and place, they would have been understood as blessing (hose who hunger and thirst for righteousness — that is, for personal moral rectitude.

Between the Hebrew Bible and the Greek New Testament there came the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek. (…) One of the challenges facing the Septuagint translators was how to catch, in the Greek of their day, the combination of mishpat (מִשְׁפָּט) with tsedeq (צֶ֫דֶק). Tsedeq that we find so often in the Old Testament, standardly translated into English as justice and righteousness. The solution they settled on was to translate tsedeq as dikaiosunē, and to use a term whose home use was in legal situations, namely, krisis (κρίσις), to translate mishpat. Mishpat and tsedeq became krisis and dikaiosunē. For the most part, this is also how they translated the Hebrew words even when they were not explicitly paired with each other: mishpat (justice) becomes krisis, tsedeq (righteousness) becomes dikaiosunē. The pattern is not entirely consistent, however; every now and then, when mishpat is not paired off with tsedeq, it is translated with dikaiosunē or some other dik-stem word (e.g., 1 Kings 3:28, Proverbs 17:23, Isaiah 61:8).

I think the conclusion that those of us who are not specialists in Hellenistic Greek should draw from this somewhat bewildering array of data is that, in the linguistic circles of the New Testament writers, dikaiosunē did not refer definitively either to the character trait of righteousness (shorn of its negative connotations) or to the social condition of justice, but was ambiguous as between those two. If dikaiosunē had referred decisively in Hellenistic Greek to righteousness rather than to justice, why would the Septuagint translators sometimes use it to translate mishpat, why would Catholic translators [into the 1980s] usually translate it as “justice,” and why would all English translators sometimes translate it as “justice”? (All earlier Latin-based Catholic translations, the New American Bible and the Jerusalem Bible, both of which appeared in the early 1970s have most occurrences of dik-stem words translated with variants on “just.” In subsequent revisions of the New American Bible, and in the New Jerusalem Bible, these translations have been altered to translations along the lines of righteousness. Other translations that use a form of justice or “doing right / rightness” include the British New English Bible [1970] and Revised English Bible [1989] and some newer translations such as by Hart [2017], Ruden [2021] or McKnight [2023]).

Conversely, if it referred decisively to justice, why would the Septuagint translators usually not use it to translate mishpat, and why would almost all translators sometimes translate it as “righteousness”? Context will have to determine whether, in a given case, it is best translated as “justice” or as “righteousness” — or as something else instead; and if context does not determine, then it would be best, if possible, to preserve the ambiguity and use some such ambiguous expression as “what is right” or “the right thing.”

Let me make one final observation about translation. When one takes in hand a list of all the occurrences of dik-stem words in the Greek New Testament, and then opens up almost any English translation of the New Testament and reads in one sitting all the translations of these words, a certain pattern emerges: unless the notion of legal judgment is so prominent in the context as virtually to force a translation in terms of justice, the translators will prefer to speak of righteousness.

See also respectable, righteous, righteous (person), devout, and She is more in the right(eous) than I.

Translation commentary on 1 John 3:12

And not be like Cain does not have a verb in the Greek. The phrase expresses a negative obligation, contrasting to the preceding positive one. In English and several other languages, this is best brought out by rendering the phrase as a new sentence, adding a verb form; for example, “we must not be like Cain” (Good News Translation), ‘we should not do the same as Cain did,’ ‘do not do like Cain did.’ Such a verb should parallel the one used in verse 11b. This reference to Cain is the only explicit reference to an Old Testament person in John’s Letters.

Who was (literally “he was”) of the evil one and murdered his brother: the Greek does not have the relative pronoun. This use of a separate sentence is to express better the unexpected horror of the case. This is brought out, for example, by ‘that devil’s-child which murdered his own brother’ (Bijbel in Gewone Taal).

For “to be of the evil one,” see comments on “to be of the devil” in 1 John 3.8. For the evil one see comments on 2.13.

The Greek verb rendered murdered here is a rather strong one. It was used of butchering or slaughtering a sacrificial animal, then of killing a human being by knife or sword, or more generically, of any form of murdering a man. Its use here is to express violent passion. In languages where terms for killing must specify the instrument, one should not use a term associated with knife or sword, but one referring to killing by hand, stone, or club.

His brother: the reference of the pronoun his is ambiguous, on the surface at least. The translation should make clear that the reference is to Cain, the subject of the sentence, not to the evil one. One version excluded this ambiguity, for example, by adding the proper name, ‘Abel, his-younger-brother.’

In contrast to its other occurrences the noun is used here in the sense of “bodily brother,” but verse 15 shows that the application is wider, namely, to man’s relationship with his brother in the metaphorical sense of the word. In some languages it has to be made explicit that the brother was younger than Cain, or that they had the same parents.

Why did he murder him, or ‘what was the reason that he murdered him,’ ‘what caused/led him to do so.’

His own deeds were evil and his brother’s righteous, or ‘all he did was evil and all his brother did was righteous,’ which is agrees with the fact that the persons concerned were “of the evil one” and “of God,” respectively. Thus Cain is the typical example of the children of the devil, who act according to the will of the devil, just as Abel is the typical example of the children of God, who act according to the will of God (compare Matt 23.35; Heb 11.4). And is preferably “but,” since it marks the contrast between the two parts of the clause.

For righteous see comments on “just” in 1.9. The word is used here with reference to deeds, not to persons, as is the case in the other occurrences in this Letter. This may make necessary some adjustments in the renderings commonly used.

Quoted with permission from Haas, C., de Jonge, M. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on The First Letter of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

SIL Translator's Notes on 1 John 3:12

3:12 (Logical Relationship)

John illustrates the command to love one’s brother by using Cain as a contrasting example (from Genesis 4). Cain did not love his brother and his deeds were evil. Read Genesis 4:1–16 before translating this verse.

3:12a

Cain: (New Participant) Cain has not been mentioned previously in this letter, so you may need to be careful how you refer to him in your translation. He was someone who lived a very long time before John and his readers, but they all knew about him.

3:12b

belonged to the evil one: (Meaning) See the note on 3:8a “is of the devil.” The meaning is the same here.

the evil one: (Meaning) As in 2:13e, this refers to Satan. See the note on 2:13e.

3:12c

brother: (Lexical Problem) This refers to Abel, who was Cain’s younger brother.

3:12d

And why did Cain slay him?: (Rhetorical Question) This is a rhetorical question used to emphasize the fact that the reason Cain committed murder was because he continually did evil. This showed that he belonged to Satan. If rhetorical questions are not used in this way in your language it will be necessary to use an emphatic statement. See The Jerusalem Bible.

3:12e

his own deeds: (Meaning) This probably refers to Cain’s whole way of life, not just the fact that he made an offering of grain to God instead of an animal sacrifice.

© 2000 by SIL International®

Made available under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License (CC BY-SA) creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0

All Scripture quotations in this publication, unless otherwise indicated, are from The Holy Bible, Berean Standard Bible. BSB is produced in cooperation with Bible Hub, Discovery Bible, OpenBible.com, and the Berean Bible Translation Committee.