6He brought the letter to the king of Israel, which read, “When this letter reaches you, know that I have sent to you my servant Naaman, that you may cure him of his skin disease.”
The following is a stained glass window from the Three choir windows in the Marienkirche, Frankfurt (Oder), Germany, of the 14th century, depicting the healing of Naaman:
Source: Der gläserne Schatz: Die Bilderbibel der St. Marienkirche in Frankfurt (Oder), Neuer Berlin Verlag, 2005, copyright for this image: Brandenburgisches Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologisches Landesmuseum
Stained glass is not just highly decorative, it’s a medium which has been used to express important religious messages for centuries. Literacy was not widespread in the medieval and Renaissance periods and the Church used stained glass and other artworks to teach the central beliefs of Christianity. In Gothic churches, the windows were filled with extensive narrative scenes in stained glass — like huge and colorful picture storybooks — in which worshipers could ‘read’ the stories of Christ and the saints and learn what was required for their religious salvation. (Source: Victoria and Albert Museum )
The Greek and Hebrew terms that are often translated as “leprosy (or: defiling/skin disease)” or “leprous (person)” in English is translated in Mairasi as “the bad sickness,” since “leprosy is very common in the Mairasi area” (source: Enggavoter 2004).
Usila Chinantec “sickness like mal de pinta” (a skin disease involving discoloration by loss of pigment) (source: B. Moore / G. Turner in Notes on Translation 1967, p. 1ff.)
Hiligaynon: “dangerous skin disease” (source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “fearful skin disease” (source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “terrible rotting” (source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Newari: “infectious skin disease” (source: Newari Back Translation)
Targumim (or: Targums) are translations of the Hebrew Bible into Aramaic. They were translated and used when Jewish congregations increasingly could not understand the biblical Hebrew anymore. Targum Onqelos (also: Onkelos) is the name of the Aramaic translation of the Torah (the first five books of the Hebrew Bible) probably composed in Israel/Palestine in the 1st or 2nd century CE and later edited in Babylon in the 4th or 5th century, making it reflect Jewish Babylonian Aramaic. It is the most famous Aramaic translation and was widely used throughout the Jewish communities. In Leviticus 13 and 14 it translates tzaraat as a “quarantining affliction” — focusing “on what occurs to individuals after they suffer the affliction; the person is isolated from the community.” (Source: Israel Drazin in this article ). Similarly, the English Jewish Orthodox ArtScroll Tanach translation (publ. 2011) transliterates it as tzaraat affliction.
In Malay, the pronoun beta for the royal “I” (or “my” or “me”) that is used by royals when speaking to people of lower rank, subordinates or commoners to refer to themselves in these verses. This reflects the “language of the court because the monarchy and sultanate in Malaysia are still alive and well. All oral and printed literature (including newspapers and magazines) preserve and glorify the language of the court. Considering that the language of the court is part of the Malaysian language, court language is used sparingly where appropriate, specifically with texts relating to palace life.” (Source: Daud Soesilo in The Bible Translator 2025, p. 263ff.)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of 2 Kings 5:6:
Kupsabiny: “That man brought the letter to the king of Israel. The words which were in the letter were these: ‘When you receive this letter, know that I have sent my servant Naaman who has leprosy so that you can heal him.’” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “The letter that he took to the King of Israel was written like this, "I have sent my servant Naaman to you with this letter. Please, you cure his Infectious Skin Diseases."” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “This is the message of the letter which he brought to the king: ‘I am-sending my servant Naaman there so-that you can-cure him of his disease on the skin.’” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “The king said to him, ‘Okay, go and see the prophet. I will write a letter for you to take to the king of Israel, saying that I sent you.’ The king wrote in the letter, ‘I am sending this letter with my army commander Naaman, who serves me faithfully. I want you to heal him of his disease.’ So Naaman, assuming/thinking that the king of Israel was the prophet, took the letter and 750 pounds of silver, 150 pounds of gold, and ten sets of clothing, to give to the king of Israel, and he went to Samaria, taking along several servants.” (Source: Translation for Translators)
Some languages do not have a concept of kingship and therefore no immediate equivalent for the Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Latin that is translated as “king” in English. Here are some (back-) translations:
Ninia Yali: “big brother with the uplifted name” (source: Daud Soesilio in Noss 2007, p. 175)
Nyamwezi: mutemi: generic word for ruler, by specifying the city or nation it becomes clear what kind of ruler (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
Ghomála’: Fo (“The word Fo refers to the paramount ruler in the kingdoms of West Cameroon. He holds administrative, political, and religious power over his own people, who are divided into two categories: princes (descendants of royalty) and servants (everyone else).” (Source: Michel Kenmogne in Theologizing in Context: An Example from the Study of a Ghomala’ Christian Hymn))
Faye Edgerton retells how the term in Navajo (Dinė) was determined:
“[This term was] easily expressed in the language of Biblical culture, which had kings and noblemen with their brilliant trappings and their position of honor and praise. But leadership among the Navajos is not accompanied by any such titles or distinctions of dress. Those most respected, especially in earlier days, were their headmen, who were the leaders in raids, and the shaman, who was able to serve the people by appealing for them to the gods, or by exorcising evil spirits. Neither of these made any outward show. Neither held his position by political intrigue or heredity. If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior. If the shaman failed many times in his healing ceremonies, it was considered that he was making mistakes in the chants, or had lost favor with the gods, and another was sought. The term Navajos use for headman is derived from a verb meaning ‘to move the head from side to side as in making an oration.’ The headman must be a good orator, able to move the people to go to war, or to follow him in any important decision. This word is naat’áanii which now means ‘one who rules or bosses.’ It is employed now for a foreman or boss of any kind of labor, as well as for the chairman of the tribal council. So in order to show that the king is not just a common boss but the highest ruler, the word ‘aláahgo, which expresses the superlative degree, was put before naat’áanii, and so ‘aláahgo naat’áanii ‘anyone-more-than-being around-he-moves-his-head-the-one-who’ means ‘the highest ruler.’ Naat’áanii was used for governor as the context usually shows that the person was a ruler of a country or associated with kings.”
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between. One way Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the choice of a benefactive construction as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017.
Here, naoshite (治して) or “cure” is used in combination with kudasaru (くださる), a respectful form of the benefactive kureru (くれる). A benefactive reflects the good will of the giver or the gratitude of a recipient of the favor. To convey this connotation, English translation needs to employ a phrase such as “for me (my sake)” or “for you (your sake).” (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
And: The context may require a more dynamic rendering of the common Hebrew conjunction here. It is quite clear that considerable time would have passed between the events described at the end of verse 5 and the beginning of this verse. So Hobbs is perhaps justified in beginning this verse with the word “Eventually.”
He brought the letter to the king of Israel, which read …: The structure of this verse is complex. Instead of continuing with the relative clause that begins with which read, many translators may prefer to begin a new sentence with something like “It said…,” “This is what it said…,” or “The letter said….”
When this letter reaches you …: This letter, which Naaman delivered, introduces him in a form that may be rather awkward if translated literally. It may be broken down into two or three separate sentences. One possible model reads “I am sending you this letter in the hands of Naaman, my officer. He is sick with leprosy and I would like for you to cure him of this disease.”
Know that I have sent to you Naaman my servant: In Hebrew Know that renders the focusing particle, which King James Version translates “behold.” Most translations do not translate this particle here, but if such a rhetorical device exists in the receptor language, it should be used here.
For you may cure him of his leprosy, see the comments on verse 3. The specific name of the disease, leprosy, is avoided by Good News Translation, but it is unlikely that this should be done in other translations. While the disease is specifically mentioned in verses 1 and 3, the message of the king of Syria would almost certainly have repeated it.
Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.