flesh (human nature)

Click here to view graphically

The Greek that is often translated as “flesh” in English (when referring to the lower human nature) can, according to Nida (1947, p. 153) “very rarely be literally translated into another language. ‘My meat’ or ‘my muscle’ does not make sense in most languages.” He then gives a catalog of almost 30 questions to determine a correct translation for that term.

Accordingly, the translations are very varied:

The Toraja-Sa’dan translation uses a variety of terms for the translation of the same Greek term (click or tap here to see the rest of this insight)

  • A form of kale tolinona or “corporeal” is for instance used in Romans 9:5 or Colossians 1:22 (and also in Genesis 6:3 and Exodus 30:32)
  • A form of mentolinona or “the human” is for instance used in Matthew 16:17 or John 1:14
  • Phrases that include pa’kalean or “bodiliness” (also: “human shape”) are for instance used in Romans 6:6 or 1 Peter 2:11 (as well as in Isa 52:14, Isa 53:2, and Lamentations 4:7

(Source: H. van der Veen in The Bible Translator 1952, p. 207ff. )

See also spirit / flesh, old self, and flesh (John 1:14).

inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Rom. 7:5)

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 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”
  • 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)

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 7:5)

Following are a number of back-translations of Romans 7:5:

  • Uma: “Formerly, before we believed in Yesus, there was a desire of our hearts to do evil. What was forbidden to us in the Lord’s Law, that is just what we wanted to do. That’s why in our former lives we used our bodies to do sin, with the result that we were fit to be punished with death and separated from God.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “Formerly at the time when that was what we (incl.) followed/obeyed our (incl.) inborn sinning/old nature (coined phrase in Yakan disalite bi magdusehin), after we (dual) heard the law we (dual) did the (things) that are evil just the same and our (dual) desire to sin increased/became more yet. Therefore we (incl.) did evil and this results in our (incl.) dying and going to hell.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “For long ago when we were still obeying our own desire, there were some activities that the Law forbade; and because these things were forbidden, it turned out that these were the very things that we (incl.) wanted to do. And since we did things like that, the only thing that we could look forward to long ago, was death without end.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “Because previously when we were obeying what our human (connotes limited, sinful humanity) minds desired, our evil desires increased more-and-more because of our coming-to-know the law, and we were doing what would have led to our death and our separation from God to be punished.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “In the days gone past, all the evil we walked in. Upon knowing what was said in God’s law, then all the more there arose in our hearts to do sin. But the payment for sin is death.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)

law

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.)

See also teaching / law (of God) (Japanese honorifics).

Translation commentary on Romans 7:5

It is important to notice the parallels between verses 5 and 6, and at the same time their relation to what follows. Verse 5 describes the pre-Christian experience, and has its parallel in 7.7-25; verse 6 describes the present life of faith under the leadership of God’s Spirit, and has its parallel in 8.1-11.

For when we lived according to our human nature is literally “for when we were in the flesh.” A number of translations render this clause literally, though others try to make some meaning of it: “when we were unspiritual” (Moffatt); “while we lived on the level of our lower nature” (New English Bible); “for when we were living mere physical lives” (An American Translation*). In the present passage “life in the flesh” is life lived apart from the control of God’s Spirit (see v. 6); it describes life lived according to one’s own human nature, and which is under the law, sin, and death. In 8.9 (see also Galatians 5.24) Paul uses this phrase with the same meaning; while in a passage such as Galatians 2.20 the phrase has no sinful overtones, but merely describes human existence in general.

In many languages there is simply no general expression such as human nature. Accordingly, the first clause in verse 5 must be rather drastically modified as far as its form is concerned, but not in terms of its content—for example, “when we live just as we ourselves want to,” “when we live just as people generally like to live,” or “when we live just as most people desire to live.” In this manner one can describe the attitudes of most people and thus signify what human nature is.

The sinful desires translates a genitive expression in Greek (literally “the desires of sin”) and may mean either “desires which lead to sin” or sinful desires; most translations seem to take this in the same sense that the Good News Translation does. The most common equivalent is, of course, “desire to sin,” and in the larger context “the Law causes us to desire to sin.”

Were at work in our bodies may be expressed as “the desires which are in our bodies” or “the desires which our bodies have” or “what we desire in our bodies.”

We were useful in the service of death may be translated simply as “all we did ended in death.” However, the underlying Greek expression may be understood also in the sense of “caused us to die”; that is to say, “the desires … at work in our bodies killed us” or “because we had these desires … in our bodies, we died.” This death must be clearly distinguished from “dying to the law” (v. 4). For this reason in some translations the future tense is preferred—for example, “all we do will end in death” or “these desires … will cause us to die.”

Stirred up by the Law is the meaning of the phrase that Paul uses here; to change this into a negative expression (Jerusalem Bible “quite unsubdued by the Law”) is to miss the impact of what Paul is saying. He is not trying to indicate that the Law failed to control one’s sinful desires, but rather that the Law encouraged one’s sinful desires (see 7.8). An equivalent of stirred up by the Law may be in some languages “because there was the Law, our desires to sin came to life” or “… became strong.”

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 .