truth

Nida (1947, p. 230) says this about the translation of the concept of “truth”: “The words for ‘truth’ and ‘true’ are not always the most readily discovered in aboriginal languages. In some instances the only expression which corresponds to ‘true’ is something like ‘it happened.’ A falsehood is something that ‘did not happen.’ In a good many languages the meaning of ‘truth’ is expressed by the words signifying ‘straight’ and ‘direct.’ Untruth is accordingly ‘crookedness.’ An abstract noun such as English “truth” is quite difficult to find in some instances. Only an expression such as ‘true statement’ or ‘true word’ will be found to correspond to English ‘truth.’”

The Greek, Latin, Ge’ez, and Hebrew that is usually translated in English as “truth” is translated in Luchazi with vusunga: “the quality of being straight” (source: E. Pearson in The Bible Translator 1954, p. 160ff. ), in Obolo as atikọ or “good/correct talk” (source: Enene Enene), and in Ekari as maakodo bokouto or “enormous truth” (esp. in John 14:6 and 17; 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. ).

Helen Evans (in The Bible Translator 1954, p. 40ff. ) tells of the translation into Kui which usually is “true-thing.” In some instances however, such as in the second part of John 17:17 (“your word is truth” in English), the use of “true-thing” indicated that there might be other occasions when it’s not true, so here the translation was a a form of “pure, holy.”

The translation committee of the Malay “Good News Bible” (Alkitab Berita Baik, see here ) wrestled with the translation of “truth” in the Gospel of John:

“Our Malay Committee also concluded that ‘truth’ as used in the Gospel of John was used either of God himself, or of God’s revelation of himself, or in an extended sense as a reference to those who had responded to God’s self-disclosure. In John 8:32 the New Malay translation reads ‘You will know the truth about God, and the truth about God will make you free.’ In John 8:44 this meaning is brought out by translating, ‘He has never been on the side of God, because there is no truth in him.’ Accordingly Jesus ‘tells the truth about God’ in 8:45, 46 (see also 16:7 and 8:37a). Then, ‘I am the way, the truth, and the life’ (John 14:6) becomes ‘I am the one who leads men to God, the one who reveals who and what God is, and the one who gives men life.” At 3:21 the translation reads ” … whoever obeys the truth, that is God himself, comes to the light …’; 16:13a appears as ‘he will lead you into the full truth about God’; and in 18:37 Jesus affirms ‘I came into the world to reveal the truth about God, and whoever obeys God listens to me.’ On this basis also 1:14 was translated ‘we saw his glory, the glory which he had as the Father’s only Son. Through him God has completely revealed himself (truth) and his love for us (grace)’; and 1:17 appears as ‘God gave the law through Moses; but through Jesus Christ he has completely revealed himself (truth) and his love for us (grace).'” (Source: Barclay Newman in The Bible Translator 1974, p. 432ff. )

The German New Testament translation by Berger / Nord (publ. 1999) has followed a somewhat similar path to the Malay committee 50 years earlier in the gospel of John. In John 1 it translates “truth as “God’s nature,” in John 3 as “God’s will,” in John 8 as “God’s reality,” in John 14 as “encountering God,” and in John 16 as “God’s truth.”

complete verse (John 19:35)

Following are a number of back-translations of John 19:35:

  • Ojitlán Chinantec: “I am John. I saw this happen. This testimony I know is true. Therefore I speak in order that you too, might believe.”
  • Huehuetla Tepehua: “Well, I am the one who saw it and I am the one who says what happened. And what I say is the truth, I’m sure. In this way, you also can believe.” (Source for this and above: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)
  • Uma: “The person who saw that happening, he is the one who says what he saw, so that you also believe. His words are true, and he really knows the truth.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “(The person who saw that happen to Isa, has written about this so that you believe. The person who wrote this is trustworthy and his testimony is true.)” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “I who am writing this, I testify that this is true because I saw it. I know that this which I write is true, and the reason I write it is so that you also might believe.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “This that happened, it is thoroughly to-be-believed, because that’s what was confirmed/verified by the one who saw it. He for-sure knows that what he said is true, and his purpose in saying it is that you will also believe.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “The one who saw this is the one testifying so that you (pl.) will really believe. This which he is testifying is true. He really knows that this which he is telling is the truth.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “I who wrote this have put down what I saw. And it is true what I say. I know that what I saw is true so that you also will believe.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)

formal 2nd person plural pronoun (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 formal plural suffix to the second person pronoun (“you” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. In these verses, anata-gata (あなたがた) is used, combining the second person pronoun anata and the plural suffix -gata to create a formal plural pronoun (“you” [plural] in English).

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

believe, faith

Translations of the Greek and Ge’ez that are typically translated as “faith” in English (itself deriving from Latin “fides,” meaning “trust, faith, confidence, reliance, credence”) and “believe” (from Old English belyfan: “to have faith or confidence in a person”) cover a wide range of approaches.

Bratcher and Nida say this (1961, p. 38) (click or tap here to read more):

“Since belief or faith is so essentially an intimate psychological experience, it is not strange that so many terms denoting faith should be highly figurative and represent an almost unlimited range of emotional ‘centers’ and descriptions of relationships, e.g. ‘steadfast his heart’ (Chol), ‘to arrive on the inside’ (Chicahuaxtla Triqui), ‘to conform with the heart’ (Uab Meto), ‘to join the word to the body’ (Uduk), ‘to hear in the insides’ (or ‘to hear within one’s self and not let go’ — Nida 1952) (Laka), ‘to make the mind big for something’ (Sapo), ‘to make the heart straight about’ (Mitla Zapotec), ‘to cause a word to enter the insides’ (Lacandon), ‘to leave one’s heart with’ (Baniwa), ‘to catch in the mind’ (Ngäbere), ‘that which one leans on’ (Vai), ‘to be strong on’ (Shipibo-Conibo), ‘to have no doubts’ (San Blas Kuna), ‘to hear and take into the insides’ (Kare), ‘to accept’ (Pamona).”

Following is a list of (back-) translations from other languages (click or tap here to read more):

  • Western Kanjobal: “truth entering into one’s soul”
  • Highland Puebla Nahuatl: “following close after”
  • Huichol: “conform to the truth”
  • Loma: “lay one’s hand on it”
  • Mashco Piro: “obey-believe”
  • Mossi: “leaning on God” (this and all the above acc. to Nida 1952, p. 119ff.)
  • Tzeltal: “heart believe / heart obedience” (source: Marianna C. Slocum in The Bible Translator 1958, p. 49f. — see also wisdom (Proverbs))
  • Thai: “place one’s heart in” (source: Bratcher / Hatton 2000, p. 37)
  • Cameroon Pidgin: “to put one’s heart in God” (source: Jan Sterk)
  • Kafa: “decide for God only” (source Loren Bliese)
  • Martu Wangka: “sit true to God’s talk” (source: Carl Gross)
  • Muna: kataino lalo or “stickiness of heart” (for “faithfulness”) (source: René van den Berg)
  • Huehuetla Tepehua: “confidence” (source: Larson 1998, p. 279)
  • Limos Kalinga: manuttuwa. Wiens (2013) explains: “It goes back to the word for ‘truth’ which is ‘tuttuwa.’ When used as a verb this term is commonly used to mean ‘believe’ as well as ‘obey.'”
  • Ngiemboon: “turn one’s back on someone” (and trusting one won’t be taken advantage of) (source: Stephen Anderson in Holzhausen 1991, p. 42)
  • Mwera uses the same word for “hope” and “faith”: ngulupai (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
  • Kwang: “put one’s chest” (Source: Mark Vanderkooi right here )
  • Yala: ɔtū che or “place heart” (in John 5:24; 5:45; 6:35; 6:47; 12:36; 14:1); other translations include chɛ̄ or “to agree/accept” and chɛ̄ku or “to agree with/accept with/take side with” (source: Linus Otronyi)
  • Matumbi: niu’bi’lyali or “believe / trust / rely (on)” and imani or “religious faith” (from Arabic īmān [إيما]) (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific notes in Paratext)
  • Ebira: “place one’s liver on something” (source: Scholz /Scholz 2015, p. 60)
  • Mauwake: “hold Jesus’ talk” (source: Kwan Poh San in this article )
  • Barí: a word related to standing in a hammock. Bruce Olson (1972, p. 159f.) tells this story — click or tap here to read more)

    One evening, though, Bobby began to ask questions. We were sitting around a fire. The light flickered over him. His face was serious.

    ‘How can I walk on Jesus’ trail?’ he asked. ‘No Motilone [speakers of Barí] has ever done it. It’s a new thing. There is no other Motilone to tell how to do it.’

    I remembered the problems I had had as a boy, how it sometimes appeared impossible to keep on believing in Jesus when my family and friends were so opposed to my commitment. That was what Bobby was going through.

    ‘Bobby,’ I said, ‘do you remember my first Festival of the Arrows, the first time I had seen all the Motilones gathered to sing their song?’ The festival was the most important ceremony in the Motilone culture.

    He nodded. The fire flared up momentarily and I could see his eyes, staring intently at me.

    ‘Do you remember that I was afraid to climb in the high hammocks to sing, for fear that the rope would break? And I told you that I would sing only if I could have one foot in the hammock and one foot on the ground?’

    ‘Yes, Bruchko.’

    ‘And what did you say to me?’

    He laughed. ‘I told you you had to have both feet in the hammock. ‘You have to be suspended,’ I said.’

    ‘Yes,’ I said. ‘You have to be suspended. That is how it is when you follow Jesus, Bobby. No man can tell you how to walk His trail. Only Jesus can. But to find out you have to tie your hammock strings into Him, and be suspended in God.’

    Bobby said nothing. The fire danced in his eyes. Then he stood up and walked off into the darkness.

    The next day he came to me. ‘Bruchko,’ he said, ‘I want to tie my hammock strings into Jesus Christ. But how can I? I can’t see Him or touch Him.’

    ‘You have talked to spirits, haven’t you?’

    ‘Oh,’ he said. ‘I see now.’

    The next day he had a big grin on his face. ‘Bruchko, I’ve tied my hammock strings into Jesus. Now I speak a new language.’

    I didn’t understand what he meant. ‘Have you learned some of the Spanish I speak?’

    He laughed, a clean, sweet laugh. ‘No, Bruchko, I speak a new language.’

    Then I understood. To a Motilone, language is life. If Bobby had a new life, he had a new way of speaking. His speech would be Christ-oriented.

  • Awabakal: ngurruliko: “to know, to perceive by the ear” (as distinct from knowing by sight or by touch — source: Lake, p. 70) (click or tap here to read more)

    “[The missionary translator] Lancelot Threlkeld learned that Awabakal, like many Australian languages, made no distinction between knowing and believing. Of course the distinction only needs to be made where there are rival systems of knowing. The Awabakal language expressed a seamless world. But as the stress on ‘belief’ itself suggests, Christianity has always existed in pluralist settings. Conversion involves deep conviction, not just intellectual assent or understanding. (…) Translating such texts posed a great challenge in Australia. Threlkeld and [his indigenous colleague] Biraban debated the possibilities at length. In the end they opted not to introduce a new term for belief, but to use the Awabakal ngurruliko, meaning ‘to know, to perceive by the ear,’ as distinct from knowing by sight or by touch.”

  • Language in southern Nigeria: a word based on the idiom “lose feathers.” Randy Groff in Wycliffe Bible Translators 2016, p. 65 explains (click or tap here to read more):


    What does losing feathers have to do with faith? [The translator] explained that there is a species of bird in his area that, upon hatching its eggs, loses its feathers. During this molting phase, the mother bird is no longer able to fly away from the nest and look for food for her hungry hatchlings. She has to remain in the nest where she and her babies are completely dependent upon the male bird to bring them food. Without the diligent, dependable work of the male bird, the mother and babies would all die. This scenario was the basis for the word for faith in his language.

  • Teribe: mär: “pick one thing and one thing only” (source: Andy Keener)
  • Tiv: na jighjigh: “give trust” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
  • Luba-Katanga: Twi tabilo: “echo” (click or tap here to read more)

    “Luba-Katanga word for ‘Faith’ in its New Testament connotation is Twi tabilo. This word means ‘echo,’ and the way in which it came to be adapted to the New Testament meaning gives a very good idea of the way in which the translator goes to work. One day a missionary was on a journey through wild and mountainous country. At midday he called his African porters to halt, and as they lay resting in the shade from the merciless heat of the sun. an African picked up a stone and sent it ricocheting down the mountain-side into the ravine below. After some seconds the hollow silence was broken by a plunging, splashing sound from the depths of the dark river-bed. As the echo died away the African said in a wondering whisper ‘Twi tabilo, listen to it.’ So was a precious word captured for the service of the Gospel in its Luba Christian form. Twi tabilo — ‘faith which is the echo of God’s voice in the depths of human sinful hearts, awakened by God Himself, the answer to his own importunate call.’ The faith that is called into being by the divine initiative, God’s own gift to the responsive heart! (Source: Wilfred Bradnock in The Bible Translator 1953, p. 49ff. )

J.A. van Roy (in The Bible Translator 1972, p. 418ff. ) discusses how a translation of “faith” in a an earlier translation into Venda created difficult perceptions of the concept of faith (click or tap here):

The Venda term u tenda, lutendo. This term corresponds to the terms ho dumela (Southern Sotho), and ku pfumela (Tsonga) that have been used in these translations of the Bible, and means “to assent,” “to agree to a suggestion.” It is important to understand this term in the context of the character of the people who use it.

The way in which the Venda use this term reveals much about the priority of interpersonal relationships among them. They place a much higher priority on responding in the way they think they are expected to respond than on telling the truth. Smooth interpersonal relationships, especially with a dominant individual or group, take precedence over everything else.

It is therefore regarded as bad form to refuse directly when asked for something one does not in fact intend to give. The correct way is to agree, u tenda, and then forget about it or find some excuse for not keeping to the agreement. Thus u tenda does not necessarily convey the information that one means what one says. One can tenda verbally while heartily disagreeing with the statement made or having no intention whatsoever to carry out what one has just promised to do. This is not regarded as dishonesty, but is a matter of politeness.

The term u sokou tenda, “to consent reluctantly,” is often used for expressing the fatalistic attitude of the Venda in the face of misfortune or force which he is unable to resist.

The form lutendo was introduced by missionaries to express “faith.”

According to the rules of derivations and their meanings in the lu-class, it should mean “the habit of readily consenting to everything.” But since it is a coined word which does not have a clearly defined set of meanings in everyday speech, it has acquired in church language a meaning of “steadfastness in the Christian life.” Una lutendo means something like “he is steadfast in the face of persecution.” It is quite clear that the term u tenda has no element of “trust” in it. (…)

In “The Christian Minister” of July 1969 we find the following statement about faith by Albert N. Martin: “We must never forget that one of the great issues which the Reformers brought into focus was that faith was something more than an ‘assensus,’ a mere nodding of the head to the body of truth presented by the church as ‘the faith.’ The Reformers set forth the biblical concept that faith was ‘fiducia.’ They made plain that saving faith involved trust, commitment, a trust and commitment involving the whole man with the truth which was believed and with the Christ who was the focus of that truth. The time has come when we need to spell this out clearly in categorical statements so that people will realize that a mere nodding of assent to the doctrines that they are exposed to is not the essence of saving faith. They need to be brought to the understanding that saving faith involves the commitment of the whole man to the whole Christ, as Prophet, Priest and King as he is set forth in the gospel.”

We quote at length from this article because what Martin says of the current concept of faith in the Church is even to a greater extent true of the Venda Church, and because the terms used for communicating that concept in the Venda Bible cannot be expected to communicate anything more than “a mere nodding of assent”. I have during many years of evangelistic work hardly ever come across a Venda who, when confronted with the gospel, would not say, Ndi khou tenda, “I admit the truth of what you say.” What they really mean when saying this amounts to, “I believe that God exists, and I have no objection to the fact that he exists. I suppose that the rest of what you are talking about is also true.” They would often add, Ndi sa tendi hani-hani? “Just imagine my not believing such an obvious fact!” To the experienced evangelist this is a clear indication that his message is rejected in so far as it has been understood at all! To get a negative answer, one would have to press on for a promise that the “convert” will attend the baptism class and come to church on Sundays, and even then he will most probably just tenda in order to get rid of the evangelist, whether he intends to come or not. Isn’t that what u tenda means? So when an inexperienced and gullible white man ventures out on an evangelistic campaign with great enthusiasm, and with great rejoicing returns with a list of hundreds of names of persons who “believed”, he should not afterwards blame the Venda when only one tenth of those who were supposed to be converts actually turn up for baptismal instruction.

Moreover, it is not surprising at all that one often comes across church members of many years’ standing who do not have any assurance of their salvation or even realise that it is possible to have that assurance. They are vhatendi, “consenters.” They have consented to a new way of life, to abandoning (some of) the old customs. Lutendo means to them at most some steadfastness in that new way of life.

The concept of faith in religion is strange to Africa. It is an essential part of a religion of revelation such as Christianity or Islam, but not of a naturalistic religion such as Venda religion, in which not faith and belief are important, but ritual, and not so much the content of the word as the power of it.

The terms employed in the Venda Bible for this vital Christian concept have done nothing to effect a change in the approach of the Venda to religion.

It is a pity that not only in the Venda translation has this been the case, but in all the other Southern Bantu languages. In the Nguni languages the term ukukholwa, “to believe a fact,” has been used for pisteuo, and ukholo, the deverbative of ukukholwa, for pistis. In some of the older Protestant translations in Zulu, but not in the new translation, the term ithemba, “trust”, has been used.

Some languages, including Santali, have two terms — like English (see above) — to differentiate a noun from a verb form. Biswạs is used for “faith,” whereas pạtiạu for “believe.” R.M. Macphail (in The Bible Translator 1961, p. 36ff. ) explains this choice: “While there is little difference between the meaning and use of the two in everyday Santali, in which any word may be used as a verb, we felt that in this way we enriched the translation while making a useful distinction, roughly corresponding to that between ‘faith’ and ‘to believe’ in English.”

Likewise, in Noongar, koort-karni or “heart truth” is used for the noun (“faith”) and djinang-karni or “see true” for the verb (“believe”) (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).

See also this devotion on YouVersion .

Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Faith (Word Study) .

Translation commentary on John 19:35

The one who saw this happen has spoken of it is best interpreted in the light of 21.24: He is the disciple who spoke of these things. The question which disciple is meant seems answered by the fact that, apart from Jesus’ mother, only the disciple he loved (19.36) is said to have been present at the crucifixion. As far as translation is concerned, a third person reference should be maintained. There is no exegetical basis for the Living Bible’s “I saw all this myself and have given an accurate report so that you also can believe.”

Has spoken of it is literally “has testified” or “has witnessed.” What he said translates the noun “testimony” or “witness.” (See comments at 1.7.)

Good News Translation‘s restructuring makes clear that so that you also may believe expresses the purpose of the eyewitness’ testimony (The one who saw this happen has spoken of it) and not simply of his telling the truth. In the Greek sentence structure he speaks the truth immediately precedes the purpose clause.

It is better not to supply an object for believe, as Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch does (“therefore you also may believe it”), since here the verb means not simply accepting the truth of what the eyewitness has said but coming to faith in a theological sense. Compare Goodspeed “to lead you also to believe.”

There is a textual problem connected with you … may believe. Some manuscripts have the Greek verb in the present tense, implying the meaning “that you may keep on believing.” Other manuscripts have the aorist tense, which, strictly interpreted, means “that you may come to believe.” If the present tense is accepted, the intimation is that the Gospel was written to believers, to strengthen their faith. The aorist tense would imply that it was written for non-Christians, to call them to believe. No final decision is possible, and the UBS Committee on the Greek text has left the choice open. (See at 21.3, where the same problem exists.)

He knows that he speaks the truth may be rendered “he knows that what he has said is true” or “he knows that what he has said actually happened.”

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 19:35

19:35a–d

The one who saw it has testified to this, and his testimony is true. He knows that he is telling the truth, so that you also may believe: This verse is a comment by the author. It is background information, not part of the main story. Some English versions therefore placed it in parentheses. You should indicate that this is background information in a way that is natural in your language.

19:35a

The one who saw it has testified to this: The author indicated that what he just wrote (probably in 19:32–34) came from someone who saw it happen. Here are other ways to translate this clause:

The man who saw it has given testimony (New International Version)
-or-
This is the evidence of one who saw it (New Jerusalem Bible)
-or-
The one who saw this happen has spoken of it (Good News Translation)

This person who saw the crucifixion testified (told what he saw) about what was written in the previous verses. It is important that your readers understand that the author is confirming the truth of what he just wrote. For example:

This report is from a witness.
-or-

This testimony is written by someone who saw these things happen.

The one who saw it: This clause probably refers to the disciple whom Jesus loved, John himself. It means that he was a witness, someone who had personally seen these things happen. Because John did not identify himself here, you should not either. But you may want to indicate in a footnote that the author was probably referring to himself.

has testified: This phrase refers to what the author wrote in the previous verses. There the author testified about the things that he had seen. See how you translated the verb testified in 1:7, 15.

19:35b

and his testimony is true: The author John assured that his account was accurate. The report or testimony (what he testified) that he wrote in the previous verses was true, faithfully telling the facts. Here are other ways to translate this clause:

What he says/writes is true
-or-

This⌋ testimony ⌊that he is writing⌋ is true/accurate.
-or-
He is testifying truly/faithfully.
-or-
This report is from an eyewitness giving an accurate account. (New Living Translation (2004))

19:35c

He knows that he is telling the truth: The author John probably refers to himself. This clause says that he knows that what he has written is the truth. He knows that because he wrote about what he saw. He declares that what he wrote about Jesus’ death is true, reliable, and faithfully telling the facts. In some languages it may be natural to indicate that he was writing the truth, rather than speaking it. For example:

he knows that he is writing what really happened
-or-
he knows that what he writes is true

19:35d

so that you also may believe: This clause tells the witness’s purpose in testifying. John indicated that he was testifying about what he saw so that his readers would believe.

you: This pronoun is plural and refers to the readers of the book. Here are some other ways to translate this clause:

I know I am telling you (plur.) the truth. I am telling you this so that you will believe ⌊in Christ⌋ .

may believe: This phrase includes the idea of believing the facts about who Jesus was and what he did. But it also includes the idea of trusting Jesus instead of trusting oneself or someone else. Both ideas are very closely related. If someone believes the facts about Jesus, it should result in trusting him. See how you translated the word believe in 1:7, 4:48, and 6:36. Here are other ways to translate this idea:

Now you can have faith too. (Contemporary English Version)
-or-
that you might become believers

General Comment on 19:35a–d

In the Greek text 19:35b is at the end of the verse, separated from 19:35a by 19:35b–c. However, the thought of 19:35b is closely connected to 19:35a. Some translations keep the Greek order and indicate that 19:35b–c are parenthetical. For example:

35a He who saw it has borne witness—35c his testimony is true, 35d and he knows that he is telling the truth—35b that you also may believe. (English Standard Version)
-or-

35a And the person who saw it has testified 35c (and his testimony is true, 35d and he knows that he is telling the truth), 35b so that you also may believe. (NET Bible)

© 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.