βλέπω δὲ ἕτερον νόμον ἐν τοῖς μέλεσίν μου ἀντιστρατευόμενον τῷ νόμῳ τοῦ νοός μου καὶ αἰχμαλωτίζοντά με ἐν τῷ νόμῳ τῆς ἁμαρτίας τῷ ὄντι ἐν τοῖς μέλεσίν μου.
23but I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind, making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members.
The Greek that is typically translated as “mind” in English is translated in Warao as obojona, 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. )
In Elhomwe it is often translated as “heart,” “because all thoughts come from heart in Elhomwe thought.” (Source: project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
See other occurrences of Obojona in the Warao New Testament.
The Hebrew 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.”
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.
Following are a number of back-translations of Romans 7:23:
The Greek that is translated in English as “Law” or “law” is translated in Mairasi as oro nasinggiei or “prohibited things” (source: Enggavoter 2004) and in Noongar with a capitalized form of the term for “words” (Warrinya) (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).
In Yucateco the phrase that is used for “law” is “ordered-word” (for “commandment,” it is “spoken-word”) (source: Nida 1947, p. 198) and in Central Tarahumara it is “writing-command.” (wsource: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.)
It should be noticed that Paul does not speak in this verse of his body as being evil, but rather of a law at work in his body which controls it and so subjects it to sin. He is not attempting to use psychological terminology, nor is he setting the body over against the mind as though one were evil and the other innately good. Rather, he is reflecting on his own experience and the experience of mankind in general, and is trying to point out that even though he approves of what is right, he is unable to do what is right in his own strength. Although he does not look upon the body as being sinful in itself, he does realize that the body is the battlefield where the struggle against desire, sin, and death is fought. And he realizes that he, like all other men, has become a prisoner to the law of sin which is at work in his body.
The use of law in verse 23 parallels its use in verse 21, namely, as “principle.” If a translator can retain “law” in this type of context, it is useful to do so, since this may provide a key to other uses of “law,” especially in the first two sections of this same chapter.
In my body may be best translated in some languages as “inside of me.” Otherwise body might be understood only in the physical sense. In order to contrast this with the law that my mind approves of, it may be useful to translate the first sentence of verse 23 as follows: “But I see a different law operating in me—a law which is against the law that I approve of in my mind.”
The law of sin may be rendered as “the law concerning sin” or even “the law which results in sin.”
The final clause, which is at work in my body, must refer to the law and not to sin. In some languages one may say “it is this law which is in me.”
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 .
No comments yet.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.