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 (John 15:22)

Following are a number of back-translations of John 15:22:

  • Uma: “If I had not come to speak to them, they would not have been wrong. But, because I did come to speak to them, that is why their wrong cannot be hidden.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “If I had not come to teach them, their sin would not be clear. But now they cannot excuse their sin.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “If I had not come here to the world and if I had not preached to them, they could not be blamed because of their sin. However now they have no excuse.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “If-contrary-to-fact I had not come to go talk-with them, their not believing wouldn’t be their sin. But now, they have nothing to give-as-an-excuse-for their sin.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “If it wasn’t that I came here and taught them, they would have nothing to answer for about their rejection of me. But now, they will not be able to make any excuses about this sin of theirs.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “If I hadn’t come and spoken to them, then they wouldn’t be sentenced. But now they will be sentenced because they don’t believe in me.” (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”.

Translation commentary on John 15:22

Good News Translation inverts the first two clauses of this sentence, which literally reads “If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin.” But it is more natural in English to reorder as Good News Translation does, and the phrase “to have sin” (note Revised Standard Version) means “to be guilty of sin,” as most modern translations make explicit. Again, as in verse 18, the condition of the “if” clause is contrary to fact. If I had not come and spoken to them means “I did come, and I did speak to them.” The verbs come and spoken are in the aorist tense, and point to the specific event of Jesus’ coming into the world and speaking his message.

Though in English it may be more appropriate in this type of context to place the condition after the main clause, in some languages it is almost obligatory to place a condition first, for example, “If I had not come and spoken to them, then they would not be guilty of sin.”

It is particularly important to introduce the concept of “guilt,” as well as that of “sin,” since the omission of a reference to guilt would imply that the people had not sinned. What is important is that the people’s rejection of the message of Jesus made them guilty, since in this way they had rejected his proclamation of the truth.

It may not be easy in some languages to speak of being guilty of sin. Often the meaning is conveyed by figurative language, for example, “to carry the burden of one’s sin” or “to have one’s sin marked up against one” or “to bear the remembrance of sin” or “to have one’s sins cling to one.” The phrase guilty of sin suggests the impending punishment which comes as the result of having sinned. It is not a reference to the act of sin itself.

As it is (Moffatt, Jerusalem Bible, Goodspeed “but as it is”) is literally “but now” (Revised Standard Version), but the Greek expression used here (nun de) does not have true temporal significance. The meaning may be best expressed by rendering “but now in fact.”

They no longer have is literally “they do not have.” But the intimation is that they could have claimed an excuse had Jesus not come into the world. Since he did come, they no longer have any excuse.

The Greek word translated excuse (prophasis) is used only here in John; elsewhere in the New Testament it occurs in Mark 12.40; Luke 20.47; Acts 27.30; Philippians 1.18; and 1 Thessalonians 2.5. In the present context most translations render it with the meaning excuse, though it may also mean “motive” or “reason.”

They no longer have any excuse for their sin may be rendered in some languages “they now cannot say, ‘We did not know that what we did was sin’ ” or “… ‘we did not know our deeds were bad.’ ”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

SIL Translator’s Notes on John 15:22

Paragraph 15:22–25

Jesus spoke about those who hated and rejected him. He said that their hate fulfilled a text in the Old Testament.

15:22a

If I had not come and spoken to them: In this clause, the word If introduces a situation that was not true. Jesus did come and speak to them. This clause imagines what would have happened if a false situation was true. Consider how it is natural in your language to suggest a possibility that is known to not have happened. For example:

Suppose I had never come and spoken to them

In some languages it is more natural to use a true statement. For example:

Because I came and spoke to them they are guilty of sin

them: This word refers to the Jews of Jesus’ day who refused to believe in him.

15:22b

they would not be guilty of sin: This clause indicates that these people would not be responsible or deserve blame for their sin if Jesus had not come. They would not have known the truth and so would not deserve punishment for not believing and obeying it.

This clause refers to something that was not the situation. If the condition in 15:22a had been fulfilled, then this would have been true. But the condition was not fulfilled, and so this clause is not true either. Christ did come and tell the people God’s message. The people heard the truth and refused it. They were now responsible for their choice to do wrong and became guilty of sin. Here are other ways to translate this clause:

they would not be responsible for their sin
-or-

⌊God⌋ would not have ⌊considered⌋ them to be responsible for their sin.

In some languages it may be natural to translate this as a positive statement. If this is so in your language, you should avoid indicating that these people would have been sinless. They would not have been innocent, but because they did not know, they would not deserve blame or punishment. For example:

they would have been blameless (New Jerusalem Bible)

General Comment on 15:22 a, b

In some languages it may be natural to reverse the order of 15:22a, b. For example:

22b They would not have been guilty of sin 22a if I had not come and spoken to them (Good News Translation)

15:22c

Now, however, they have no excuse for their sin: The people could not excuse their sin by saying that they did not know the truth. Jesus had brought them the truth and they had rejected it. In some languages it may be natural to start a new sentence here. For example:

But now they have no excuse for their sin. (Contemporary English Version)
-or-
But they no longer have any excuse for their sin. (NET Bible)
-or-
But now they are fully responsible for the wrong they did.

Now, however: This phrase is short for “but now, because I have come and spoken to them.” The word however indicates a contrast with a situation in which Jesus did not come and speak to them. Yet at that time (Now), he had come and spoken, so the other situation no longer existed. Here are other ways to indicate this contrast and change of situation:

but the way things are, they no longer have any excuse for their sin
-or-
However, because I did come and speak to them

they have no excuse for their sin: In this context an excuse is a reason that is given for a sin to avoid punishment. If Jesus had not spoken to them, they would have had an excuse because they did not know his teaching about sin. But because Jesus spoke to them, they did not have any excuse. For example:

Now they cannot say, “We did not know that what we did was sin” (see TH)

© 2020 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.