The Greek in Romans 6:2 that is translated as “die to sin” in English is translated in Kala Lagaw Ya as “become blind to sin.” In Kala Lagaw Ya, extended meanings of “die” include being “intoxicated” or “lax” and “irresponsible” which made this expression difficult to understand if translated with that concept. (Source: Rod Kennedy in Notes on Translation, 1997, pp. 37ff.)
God forbid
inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Rom. 6:2)
Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)
The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).
For this verse, translators typically select the inclusive form (including the writer of the letter and the readers).
Source: Velma Pickett and Florence Cowan in Notes on Translation January 1962, p. 1ff.
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 (Romans 6:2)
Following are a number of back-translations of Romans 6:2:
- Uma: “Don’t, relatives! It is not appropriate [lit., it does not hit the way] if we keep on sinning, because we can say that we have died together with Kristus in order that our connection with sin be severed.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
- Yakan: “Really no! This is the truth about sinning, when we (incl.) already trust Isa Almasi it is if we (incl.) were dead people no longer able to sin. Therefore we (incl.) no longer want to sin.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
- Western Bukidnon Manobo: “Now that cannot be because it’s not possible that we continue doing evil, because evil behavior has nothing more to do with us. For we are like a dead person whose former way of life has gone from him.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
- Kankanaey: “It absolutely is not possible! Because as concerns sin, we have already died, so we cannot continue to sin.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
- Tenango Otomi: “As to that, we cannot so continue. Rather we have finished with the sin we did. Who is it that can say that we continue to commit sin then?” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
- Chicahuaxtla Triqui: “Let’s not sin any more because like as a corpse who has died can’t sin any more, so it is with us. So let’s not keep right on sinning any more.”
- Tabasco Chontal: “When we accepted Christ, we were left as you might say a dead person, where sin is done. Because a dead person is not able to keep on doing sin. We also, there is no reason why we should keep on doing sin.” (Source for this and above: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.)
Translation commentary on Romans 6:2
Paul’s answer to the question he has raised is in the form of a very strong negative: Certainly not (see also 3.4, 6 where the same reply is given).
Died (an aorist tense in Greek) points to a definite time in the past, and on the basis of the following verse Paul evidently has the moment of baptism in mind. As a general rule, the Greek simple future does not describe action in progress, and so Paul adds a particle to the verb tense here in order to describe the continuation of the action: how then can we go on living in it? (see An American Translation* and New English Bible “how can we live in it any longer?”)
We have died to sin may be rendered as “we have died as far as sinning is concerned,” “if it is a matter of sinning, then we are dead,” or “we have seemingly died; sin cannot move us.” It may be necessary to introduce some such expression as “seemingly” in order to indicate clearly that the “dying” is to be understood metaphorically. In some languages, however, died to sin must be rendered as “dead from sin,” that is to say, “dead, and in this way separated from the power of sin.”
The final question, how then can we go on living in it?, may be rendered as either a question, “how can we go on sinning in our lives?,” or as a statement, “we must not go on living and continuing to sin.”
Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.