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.” Likewise, many translations contain the “connotation of moral responsibility.” Loma has (for certain types of sin) “leaving the road” (which “implies a definite standard, the transgression of which is sin”) or Navajo uses “that which is off to the side.” (Source: Bratcher / Nida). In Toraja-Sa’dan the translation is kasalan, which originally meant “transgression of a religious or moral rule” and has shifted its meaning in the context of the Bible to “transgression of God’s commandments.” (Source: H. van der Veen in The Bible Translator 1950, p. 21ff. ).

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 Kaingang, the translation is “break God’s word” and in Sandawe the original meaning of the Greek term (see above) is perfectly reflected with “miss the mark.” (Source: Ursula Wiesemann in Holzhausen / Riderer 2010, p. 36ff., 43)

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 2 Kings 13:6

Nevertheless: The transition word here in Hebrew is an emphatic adverb, the same one as in 2 Kgs 12.13, where it is translated “But.” At the beginning of this verse it marks the contrast between the expected positive reaction from the Israelites to the deliverance by Yahweh and their actual response of still sinning like Jeroboam and his family did. Many versions use the common English conjunction “But” (New International Version, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible). In other languages a word like “however” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) will be more appropriate.

Instead of the words the house of Jeroboam, some Hebrew manuscripts and ancient versions have simply “Jeroboam.” The reading with “house” (meaning “family”) is recommended by Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, which gives an {A} rating to the Masoretic Text. However, Good News Translation and New Jerusalem Bible follow the other reading. The meaning is not greatly changed by the addition or deletion of “house,” but the focus would be more on Jeroboam’s whole family if the word is considered a part of the original text.

Walked in them: The implied subject of the verb walked in Revised Standard Version is “they,” that is, the people of Israel. But as indicated in the Revised Standard Version footnote, the Hebrew text has the singular verb “he walked,” which would refer to Jeroboam. Nevertheless, most modern English versions, including even New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh and Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, take the alternative text followed by Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament shows convincingly that a scribe omitted the final letter of this verb, which makes the verb plural. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament therefore recommends that the text be corrected to read “they walked,” and gives a {B} rating to the corrected text. The verb walked is to be understood in the figurative sense of regular or continual behavior (see the comments at 1 Kgs 3.3 and 2 Kgs 8.18) and should be translated in most languages as “continued” (New International Version, Revised English Bible), “persisted” (New American Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, New Jerusalem Bible), or “practiced/lived [habitually].”

The Asherah also remained in Samaria: For Asherah see the comments at 1 Kgs 11.5 and 14.15. Contemporary English Version again provides a possible model by translating “sacred poles.” Translators should also consider “Asherah pole” (New International Version, New Living Translation) or “Asherah idol” to retain the proper name. The Hebrew uses a definite article with Asherah, but that does not necessarily mean that the reference is to a specific Asherah pole mentioned earlier in the narrative. This could be a reference to the pole made by King Ahab in 1 Kgs 16.33, but just as likely the sense is “an Asherah pole (once again) stood in Samaria” (so Provan).

In certain languages it may not be natural to make the Asherah the subject of the verb remained as if the pole or idol had a will of its own. In such cases it will be possible to say “they [the people of Israel] kept the image of the goddess Asherah in Samaria” or “they caused the idol of Asherah to remain….”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .