sin

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. )
  • Kaingang: “break God’s word”
  • 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)
  • Mauwake: “heavy” (compare forgiveness as “take away one’s heaviness”) (source: Kwan Poh San in this article )

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.”

In Warao it is translated as “bad obojona.” Obojona is a term that “includes the concepts of consciousness, will, attitude, attention and a few other miscellaneous notions.” (Source: Henry Osborn in The Bible Translator 1969, p. 74ff. ). See other occurrences of Obojona in the Warao New Testament.

Martin Ehrensvärd, one of the translators for the Danish Bibelen 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. )

See also sinner.

complete verse (Hebrews 10:17)

Following are a number of back-translations of Hebrews 10:17:

  • Uma: “‘Their sins and their wrongs I will deliberately forget.'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “Then he also said, ‘I will really no longer remember their sins and their evil doings.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And He said again, He said, ‘As for their sins and their evil behavior, I will forget them and I will never think about them again.'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “Then he goes-on to say, ‘I will not again remember their sins and even whatever evil that they have done.'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “And what he said in addition was like this, ‘I really will no longer remember their sins and evil.'” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “Again he says: ‘Then I will not any longer continue to remember the sins the people have committed,’ he says.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)

1st person pronoun referring to God (Japanese)

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 first person singular and plural pronoun (“I” and “we” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. The most commonly used watashi/watakushi (私) is typically used when the speaker is humble and asking for help. In these verses, where God / Jesus is referring to himself, watashi is also used but instead of the kanji writing system (私) the syllabary hiragana (わたし) is used to distinguish God from others.

(Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )

See also pronoun for “God”.

Honorary "are" construct denoting God ("say")

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 usage of an honorific construction where the morpheme are (され) is affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, iw-are-ru (言われる) or “say” is used.

(Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )

Translation commentary on Hebrews 10:15 – 10:17

Throughout these verses, it is important to make clear in translation to whom the verbs of speaking refer. These verbs are:
(a) gives us his witness, literally “witnesses,” verse 15;
(b) he says, literally “to have said,” verse 15;
(c) says the Lord, verse 16.

With these should be considered:
(d) And then he says, verse 17, though there is no verb in the Greek, which is literally “and.”

Verbs (a) and (c) present no problems. (a) The person who “witnesses” is the Holy Spirit. (c) The one who says is the Lord, which here almost certainly means God, not Christ. The tense of verb (b), says, and also the context, suggest that the subject is probably the Holy Spirit, but the translation “it says,” meaning “Scripture says,” is also possible. It is unlikely that the author made a sharp distinction between the two, and it is simpler in translation to keep the Holy Spirit as the subject of (b) as well as (a).

Verb (d) is practically meaningless if translated literally, since the sentence has no main verb to follow verb (b), “after saying” (Revised Standard Version). Even some of the scribes copying manuscripts of Hebrews added in verse 17 expressions such as Revised Standard Version‘s “then he adds.” This is not what the writer of Hebrews wrote, but it is almost certainly the way in which he intended the last line of the quotation to be understood. Good News Translation and Revised Standard Version are therefore right not to include verb (d), “and” or its equivalent, as part of the quotation, even though this word occurs at this point in the Greek translation of Jeremiah. If some such expanded translation as then he says or “then he adds” is chosen, the implied subject of the verb must be the same as the subject of verb (b), says, probably the Holy Spirit. It may be necessary to make this explicit.

On the Holy Spirit, see comments on 2.4; he is mentioned as the author of an Old Testament quotation in 3.7. Hebrews 7.8, 17; 10.15; 11.2, 4 also speak of what God “witnesses” or “testifies” in Scripture. Us includes the writer and his readers. The Holy Spirit also gives us his witness may be rendered as “the Holy Spirit also speaks to us about this.”

This is the covenant: the covenant has been discussed in 9.1-22, and it is grammatically possible for This to refer back to this passage. But it is much more probable that This looks forward to the particular kind of covenant which is mentioned in the second part of verse 16, “a covenant which is put into the hearts and written on the minds of the people.”

In the days to come may be rendered as “in the future” or “later.”

As in 8.8, the repetition he says … says the Lord may be misunderstood, for one might think that there are two persons speaking, one the Holy Spirit and the other the Lord. It may be more satisfactory to introduce the direct quotation in the following way: “first the Holy Spirit says that the following is what the Lord has said, ‘This is the covenant that I will make….’ ”

For a discussion of some of the problems involved in rendering I will put my laws in their hearts and write them on their minds, see the discussion under 8.10.

The quotation is from Jeremiah 31.33-34, which was first quoted in 8.10, 12.

As in 2.13 (Isa 8.17, 18), the writer emphasizes the point by dividing a quotation into two parts. The effect is to underline the second part of the quotation: “Not only does the new covenant involve a law written on people’s hearts; it also brings the forgiveness of sin.” The author of Hebrews quotes Jeremiah more freely than in 8.10-12: (a) with them in verse 16a summarizes with the people of Israel in 8.10; (b) hearts and minds in verse 16b are mentioned in the opposite order from 8.10; (c) and evil deeds in verse 17 is added to Jeremiah 31.34.

For a discussion of some of the problems involved in rendering I will not remember their sins and evil deeds any longer, see the suggestions made under 8.12.

As in 8.10-12, there are many differences of detail between the text quoted here and the text of Jeremiah in the Hebrew and even in the Greek Septuagint. The translator’s task is to translate the Greek text of Hebrews. He should not be influenced by the Old Testament wording.

Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Letter of the Hebrews. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .