The Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “neighbor” in English is rendered into Babatana as “different man,” i.e. someone who is not one of your relatives. (Source: David Clark)
In North Alaskan Inupiatun, it is rendered as “a person outside of your building,” in Tzeltal as “your back and side” (implying position of the dwellings), in Indonesian and in Tae’ as “your fellow-man,” in Toraja-Sa’dan it is “your fellow earth-dweller,” in Shona (translation of 1966) as “another person like you,” in Kekchí “younger-brother-older-brother” (a compound which means all one’s neighbors in a community) (sources: Bratcher / Nida and Reiling / Swellengrebel), in Mairasi “your people” (source: Enggavoter 2004), in Mezquital Otomi as “fellow being,” in Tzeltal as “companion,” in Isthmus Zapotec as “another,” in Teutila Cuicatec as “all people” (source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.), and in most modern German translations as Mitmensch or “fellow human being” (lit. “with + human being”).
In Matt 19:19, Matt 22:39, Mark 12:31, Mark 12:33, Luke 10:27, Luke 10:29 it is translated into Ixcatlán Mazatec with a term that refers to a person who is socially/physically near. Ixcatlán Mazatec also has a another term for “neighbor” that means “fellow humans-outsiders” which was not chosen for these passages. (Source: Robert Bascom)
In Noongar it is translated as moorta-boordak or “people nearby” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).
Bura-Pabir: “sacrifice mound” (source: Andy Warrren-Rothlin)
Kalanga: “fireplace of sacrifice” (source: project-specific notes in Paratext)
Cherokee: “fire nurturing place” (source: Bender / Belt 2025, p. 26) (note that the Jewish priest is “fire feeder” in Cherokee)
The Ignaciano translators decided to translate the difficult term in that language according to the focus of each New Testament passage in which the word appears (click or tap here to see the rest of this insight
Willis Ott (in Notes on Translation 88/1982, p. 18ff.) explains:
Matt. 5:23,24: “When you take your offering to God, and arriving, you remember…, do not offer your gift yet. First go to your brother…Then it is fitting to return and offer your offering to God.” (The focus is on improving relationships with people before attempting to improve a relationship with God, so the means of offering, the altar, is not focal.)
Matt. 23:18 (19,20): “You also teach erroneously: ‘If someone makes a promise, swearing by the offering-place/table, he is not guilty if he should break the promise. But if he swears by the gift that he put on the offering-place/table, he will be guilty if he breaks the promise.'”
Luke 1:11: “…to the right side of the table where they burn incense.”
Luke 11.51. “…the one they killed in front of the temple (or the temple enclosure).” (The focus is on location, with overtones on: “their crime was all the more heinous for killing him there”.)
Rom. 11:3: “Lord, they have killed all my fellow prophets that spoke for you. They do not want anyone to give offerings to you in worship.” (The focus is on the people’s rejection of religion, with God as the object of worship.)
1Cor. 9:13 (10:18): “Remember that those that attend the temple have rights to eat the foods that people bring as offerings to God. They have rights to the meat that the people offer.” (The focus is on the right of priests to the offered food.)
Heb. 7:13: “This one of whom we are talking is from another clan. No one from that clan was ever a priest.” (The focus in on the legitimacy of this priest’s vocation.)
Jas. 2:21: “Remember our ancestor Abraham, when God tested him by asking him to give him his son by death. Abraham was to the point of stabbing/killing his son, thus proving his obedience.” (The focus is on the sacrifice as a demonstration of faith/obedience.)
Rev. 6:9 (8:3,5; 9:13; 14:18; 16:7): “I saw the souls of them that…They were under the table that holds God’s fire/coals.” (This keeps the concepts of: furniture, receptacle for keeping fire, and location near God.)
Rev. 11:1: “Go to the temple, Measure the building and the inside enclosure (the outside is contrasted in v. 2). Measure the burning place for offered animals. Then count the people who are worshiping there.” (This altar is probably the brazen altar in a temple on earth, since people are worshiping there and since outside this area conquerors are allowed to subjugate for a certain time.)
In the Hebraic English translation of Everett Fox it is translated as slaughter-site and likewise in the German translation by Buber / Rosenzweig as Schlachtstatt.
The Hebrew, Ge’ez, and Greek that is typically translated as “sin” in English has a wide variety of translations.
The Greek ἁμαρτάνω (hamartanō) carries the original verbatim meaning of “miss the mark” and likewise, many translations contain the “connotation of moral responsibility.”
Loma: “leaving the road” (which “implies a definite standard, the transgression of which is sin”)
Navajo (Dinė): “that which is off to the side” (source for this and above: Bratcher / Nida)
Toraja-Sa’dan: kasalan, originally meaning “transgression of a religious or moral rule” and in the context of the Bible “transgression of God’s commandments” (source: H. van der Veen in The Bible Translator 1950, p. 21ff. )
Bariai: “bad behavior” (source: Bariai Back Translation)
Sandawe: “miss the mark” (like the original meaning of the Greek term) (source for this and above: Ursula Wiesemann in Holzhausen / Riderer 2010, p. 36ff., 43)
Nias: horö, originally a term primarily used for sexual sin. (Source: Hummel / Telaumbanua 2007, p. 256)
In Shipibo-Conibo the term is hocha. Nida (1952, p. 149) tells the story of its choosing: “In some instances a native expression for sin includes many connotations, and its full meaning must be completely understood before one ever attempts to use it. This was true, for example, of the term hocha first proposed by Shipibo-Conibo natives as an equivalent for ‘sin.’ The term seemed quite all right until one day the translator heard a girl say after having broken a little pottery jar that she was guilty of ‘hocha.’ Breaking such a little jar scarcely seemed to be sin. However, the Shipibos insisted that hocha was really sin, and they explained more fully the meaning of the word. It could be used of breaking a jar, but only if the jar belonged to someone else. Hocha was nothing more nor less than destroying the possessions of another, but the meaning did not stop with purely material possessions. In their belief God owns the world and all that is in it. Anyone who destroys the work and plan of God is guilty of hocha. Hence the murderer is of all men most guilty of hocha, for he has destroyed God’s most important possession in the world, namely, man. Any destructive and malevolent spirit is hocha, for it is antagonistic and harmful to God’s creation. Rather than being a feeble word for some accidental event, this word for sin turned out to be exceedingly rich in meaning and laid a foundation for the full presentation of the redemptive act of God.”
Martin Ehrensvärd, one of the translators for the DanishBibelen 2020, comments on the translation of this term: “We would explain terms, such that e.g. sin often became ‘doing what God does not want’ or ‘breaking God’s law’, ‘letting God down’, ‘disrespecting God’, ‘doing evil’, ‘acting stupidly’, ‘becoming guilty’. Now why couldn’t we just use the word sin? Well, sin in contemporary Danish, outside of the church, is mostly used about things such as delicious but unhealthy foods. Exquisite cakes and chocolates are what a sin is today.” (Source: Ehrensvärd in HIPHIL Novum 8/2023, p. 81ff. )
Translators of different languages have found different ways with what kind of formality God is addressed.
Like many languages (but unlike Greek or Hebrew or modern English), Tuvan uses a formal vs. informal 2nd person pronoun (a familiar vs. a respectful “you”). Unlike other languages that have this feature, however, the translators of the Tuvan Bible have attempted to be very consistent in using the different forms of address in every case a 2nd person pronoun has to be used in the translation of the biblical text.
As Voinov shows in Pronominal Theology in Translating the Gospels (in: The Bible Translator2002, p. 210ff. ), the choice to use either of the pronouns many times involved theological judgment. While the formal pronoun can signal personal distance or a social/power distance between the speaker and addressee, the informal pronoun can indicate familiarity or social/power equality between speaker and addressee.
In these verses, in which humans address God, the informal, familiar pronoun is used that communicates closeness.
Voinov notes that “in the Tuvan Bible, God is only addressed with the informal pronoun. No exceptions. An interesting thing about this is that I’ve heard new Tuvan believers praying with the formal form to God until they are corrected by other Christians who tell them that God is close to us so we should address him with the informal pronoun. As a result, the informal pronoun is the only one that is used in praying to God among the Tuvan church.”
In Gbaya, “a superior, whether father, uncle, or older brother, mother, aunt, or older sister, president, governor, or chief, is never addressed in the singular unless the speaker intends a deliberate insult. When addressing the superior face to face, the second person plural pronoun ɛ́nɛ́ or ‘you (pl.)’ is used, similar to the French usage of vous.
Accordingly, the translators of the current version of the Gbaya Bible chose to use the plural ɛ́nɛ́ to address God. There are a few exceptions. In Psalms 86:8, 97:9, and 138:1, God is addressed alongside other “gods,” and here the third person pronoun o is used to avoid confusion about who is being addressed. In several New Testament passages (Matthew 21:23, 26:68, 27:40, Mark 11:28, Luke 20:2, 23:37, as well as in Jesus’ interaction with Pilate and Jesus’ interaction with the Samaritan woman at the well) the less courteous form for Jesus is used to indicate ignorance of his position or mocking.” (Source Philip Noss)
In the most recent Manchu translation of 1835 (a revision of an earlier edition from 1822), God is never addressed with a pronoun but with “father” (ama /ᠠᠮᠠ) instead. Chengcheng Liu (in this post on the Cambridge Centre for Chinese Theology blog ) explains: “In Manchu tradition, as in Chinese etiquette, second-person pronouns could be considered disrespectful when speaking to superiors or spiritual beings. Manchu Shamanist prayers avoided si [‘you’] and sini [‘your’] for this very reason. To use them for God would be, in Lipovzoff’s [one of the two translators] words, ‘the most uncouth and indecent way to speak to the Almighty — as if He were a servant or slave.’ There was also a grammatical problem. In Manchu, si and sini could refer to both singular and plural subjects. For a faith that insisted on the singularity of God, this was potentially confusing. By contrast, repeating ama removed any ambiguity.”
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of 2 Chronicles 6:22:
Kupsabiny: “If any person has done wrong to another, and (he) is brought to come in front of the altar in this house of yours and he swears that he is innocent,” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “If anyone commits and offence in conflict with his neighbors, and if he is caused to take an oath, [and] if he took an oath before your altar in this temple, ” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “‘If a man was-accused that he sinned-against his fellowman, and he was-caused-to-go to your altar in this temple to swear that he is innocent,” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “‘If someone is accused of doing something wrong to another person, and they bring him to testify in front of your altar outside this holy temple, and if he says, ‘I did not do that; may God punish me if I am not telling the truth,’” (Source: Translation for Translators)
It will be important to begin a new paragraph at the beginning of this verse since it begins a new thought by introducing a hypothetical problem. The situation about which Solomon speaks in verses 22-23 is one in which someone accuses another person of doing something wrong but there are no witnesses and no evidence. The case is resolved by having the two parties swear an oath before the altar in which the accused person calls down a curse from God upon himself or herself if he or she is guilty. Exo 22.7-12 and Num 5.11-31 are examples of such a practice.
If a man sins against his neighbor: Verses 22-23 are one sentence in Hebrew. In order to avoid a sentence that is too long and complex, some translators may prefer to begin this verse by saying “Suppose that a person….” As elsewhere in this prayer, the word man refers to “people” (Good News Translation) in general and is not limited to male human beings. Several modern versions use the word “someone” (New Revised Standard Version, New Living Translation, New Century Version, La Bible du Semeur) or “anyone” (God’s Word, Revised English Bible).
The verb sins in this context implies that the sin is discovered by others and that someone brings an accusation against the person. The idea of accusation is made explicit in Good News Translation, which renders this clause as “When people are accused of wronging others” (similarly Contemporary English Version). Good News Translation may serve as a model in other languages where the implied information will not be immediately understood.
The Hebrew word rendered neighbor comes from a root meaning “associate with” and is not to be taken in the sense of a person living in the same area as the offending person although it may include that meaning. Here his neighbor refers to any “fellow member of the community” (Complete Jewish Bible). New Revised Standard Version has “another,” implying “another person” (New Living Translation, New Century Version, God’s Word).
And is made to take an oath: The Masoretic Text is difficult to establish here since the manuscripts do not all agree. There is uncertainty whether the Hebrew text here is “he pronounces a curse on him” or “he makes him take an oath.” Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {B} rating to the second reading. The Hebrew verb rendered made to take often means “to lend,” but in this context it means “to oblige someone.” Good News Translation provides a clear model for expressing this meaning. The variant reading seems to be the basis for the NET Bible rendering, which begins this verse with “When someone is accused of sinning against his neighbor and the latter pronounces a curse on the alleged offender….”
The oath involved in this case is an “oath of innocence” (New Living Translation) or an “oath that he is not guilty” (New Century Version). This may have to be made explicit in other languages where it will not be understood automatically. The passive expression is made to take an oath may be transformed into an active one by making the community in general the agent requiring the oath. According to Exo 22.11, an innocent person who is accused of wrongdoing is required by God’s law to take such an oath, but it is the community that enforces this requirement. So it would be acceptable to begin this verse with “If people think that a person has done wrong to another [and he protests his innocence], they may require him to swear that he did not do it….” The oath included swearing a curse against oneself if the person did not tell the truth.
And comes and swears his oath before thy altar in this house is literally “and an oath comes before your altar in this house.” The reading in Revised Standard Version is necessary to make sense of this part of the verse. The person required to make the oath of innocence makes it in front of the Temple’s altar for burning offerings. This house refers to the Temple.
Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
“Someone may do something wrong to his neighbor. -or-
“When someone is accused of doing wrong to another person,
6:22b and is required to take an oath,
Then they might require him to swear ⌊to speak the truth⌋. -or-
he may have to swear an oath ⌊about it⌋.
6:22c and he comes to take an oath before Your altar in this temple,
He will come to swear an oath here before your altar in this temple. -or-
Then he will come to this house and swear the oath in front of your sacrifice platform.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.