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.

Translation commentary on Sirach 23:16

Two sorts of men multiply sins, and a third incurs wrath …: This section begins with a numerical proverb, a form often found in the wisdom books of the Bible. Compare Pro 30.7-33. Ben Sira will use the form again in 25.1-2, 7-11; 26.5-6, 28; and 50.25-26. In those passages we can count the items enumerated. That is not easily done in this section and those scholars who try, count them differently.

In one way of counting, the three sorts of men are (1) The soul heated (verse 16c), (2) a man who commits fornication with his near of kin (verse 16e), and (3) “a fornicator” (verse 17a). This is possible since the lines that follow in each case (verses 16d, 16f, and 17b) are very closely parallel in form. Contemporary English Version and Luís Alonso Schökel follow this interpretation. In this interpretation soul refers to a person who is consumed by the fire of sexual passion; for example, the third line of this verse could be rendered “Those who always burn with desire for sex.”

In another way of counting, the three sorts of men are (1) a man who commits fornication with his near of kin (verse 16e), (2) “a fornicator” (verse 17a), and (3) “A man who breaks his marriage vows” (verse 18a). This is possible because these three lines are very closely parallel in form. New American Bible follows this interpretation. In this interpretation soul refers to passion, not to a person.

In either of these approaches the problem is to distinguish the sins as three different sins. Part of the problem is the meaning of the line a man who commits fornication with his near of kin, which is literally “a man who commits fornication in the body of his flesh” (see the Revised Standard Version footnote). While many versions interpret this as incest (Revised Standard Version, Contemporary English Version), others take it as a description of “A man who lives for nothing but sexual enjoyment” (Good News Translation; similarly New English Bible, New American Bible). If this line does not refer to incest, and the Handbook believes it does not, then it is not intended as one of three items to be counted.

It may be better to approach this section in light of the numerical form used in Amos 1.3–2.6, where there is nothing to be counted. In Amos “For three transgressions … and for four…” is a way of saying “For crime after crime…” (New English Bible). This is the approach Good News Translation takes to this passage in Sirach. The only specific sexual sin the author is talking about is adultery. Good News Translation‘s translation of the first two lines of this verse is good: “There are any number of ways to sin and bring down the Lord’s anger, but…” there is one in particular. This is the force of the numerical form Two sorts of men … and a third …. Another possible model is “There are a number of ways to sin and cause the Lord to become angry, but….”

The soul heated like a burning fire will not be quenched until it is consumed: Good News Translation says “sexual passion is a hot, blazing fire that cannot be put out at will; it can only burn itself out” (similarly New American Bible). Good News Translation is on the right track, but there is a problem with passion burning itself out. What would this mean? Old age? Revised English Bible is better here with “Hot lust that blazes like a fire can never be suppressed till life itself is quenched.” This takes due account of the Greek word translated soul, which often means “life.” We could say, using Good News Translation as a partial model: “sexual passion is like a hot, blazing fire that only death can put out” or “… that will die out only when a person dies.” This is consistent with the last two lines of this verse and with verse 17.

A man who commits fornication with his near of kin will never cease until the fire burns him up: As discussed above, we believe with his near of kin (literally “in the body of his flesh”) is not talking about incest, but about “sins of the flesh” (New American Bible). Good News Translation expresses the meaning of these two lines well with “A man who lives for nothing but sexual enjoyment will keep on until that fire destroys him.”

An alternative model for this verse is:

• There are a number of ways to sin and cause the Lord to become angry, but sexual passion is like a hot, blazing fire that will die out only when a person dies. A man who lives for nothing but sexual enjoyment will keep on doing it until that fire destroys him.

Quoted with permission from Bullard, Roger A. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Sirach. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here.