complete verse (Hebrews 2:6)

Following are a number of back-translations of Hebrews 2:6:

  • Uma: “That authority God will give to mankind. In the Holy Book there are words that make this clear, they sound like this: ‘O Lord God, what are men/mankind that you even consider them? What is the child of mankind that you notice him?” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “But that is whom he chose – mankind. It is written hep in the holy-book, it says, ‘O God, why do you think about mankind? Why do you care for them and (what’s more) they are just mankind?” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “but rather, He chose people. For there is a written word of God which we can find in the writings long ago, which says, ‘As for You, God, why is it that You don’t forget about humanity? He’s just a human, so why do You take good care of him?” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “Because that’s the message (lit. what-it’s-talking-about) of what God caused-to-be-written which says, ‘Oh God, what indeed is the status of people so that you (sing.) think-about and show-mercy/favor to them?” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “Really not, because this has already been testified about in one of the writings of the past which says, ‘Whatever are people here in this world that you (sing.) consider/are-concerned-for them, God? They are just people yet you are always looking after them.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “This word which is written in the Holy Book tells who it is that God determined to rule the new world. The word which is written says: ‘Listen, my God, how come it is that you think about people. Why is it that you overflowingly put them on your heart?” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)

addressing God

Translators of different languages have found different ways with what kind of formality God is addressed. The first example is from a language where God is always addressed distinctly formal whereas the second is one where the opposite choice was made.

Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight

Like many languages (but unlike Greek or Hebrew or English), Tuvan uses a formal vs. informal 2nd person pronoun (a familiar vs. a respectful “you”). Unlike other languages that have this feature, however, the translators of the Tuvan Bible have attempted to be very consistent in using the different forms of address in every case a 2nd person pronoun has to be used in the translation of the biblical text.

As Voinov shows in Pronominal Theology in Translating the Gospels (in: The Bible Translator 2002, p. 210ff.), the choice to use either of the pronouns many times involved theological judgment. While the formal pronoun can signal personal distance or a social/power distance between the speaker and addressee, the informal pronoun can indicate familiarity or social/power equality between speaker and addressee.

In these verses, in which humans address God, the informal, familiar pronoun is used that communicates closeness.

Voinov notes that “in the Tuvan Bible, God is only addressed with the informal pronoun. No exceptions. An interesting thing about this is that I’ve heard new Tuvan believers praying with the formal form to God until they are corrected by other Christians who tell them that God is close to us so we should address him with the informal pronoun. As a result, the informal pronoun is the only one that is used in praying to God among the Tuvan church.”

In Gbaya, “a superior, whether father, uncle, or older brother, mother, aunt, or older sister, president, governor, or chief, is never addressed in the singular unless the speaker intends a deliberate insult. When addressing the superior face to face, the second person plural pronoun ɛ́nɛ́ or ‘you (pl.)’ is used, similar to the French usage of vous.

Accordingly, the translators of the current version of the Gbaya Bible chose to use the plural ɛ́nɛ́ to address God. There are a few exceptions. In Psalms 86:8, 97:9, and 138:1, God is addressed alongside other “gods,” and here the third person pronoun o is used to avoid confusion about who is being addressed. In several New Testament passages (Matthew 21:23, 26:68, 27:40, Mark 11:28, Luke 20:2, 23:37, as well as in Jesus’ interaction with Pilate and Jesus’ interaction with the Samaritan woman at the well) the less courteous form for Jesus is used to indicate ignorance of his position or mocking (source Philip Noss).

In Dutch and Western Frisian translations, however, God is always addressed with the formal pronoun.

See also female second person singular pronoun in Psalms.

Translation commentary on Hebrews 2:6

Instead (literally “but”) strongly marks the contrast with verse 5.

As it is said somewhere in the Scriptures is literally “affirms somewhere someone saying.” This clause is a curiously vague way of introducing a psalm attributed to David. In the Scriptures is clearly implied. “Affirms” is related to the Greek word translated as added his witness in verse 4. The writer is continuing to pile up evidence for the supremacy of Christ.

As it is said somewhere in the Scriptures must be rendered in some languages as “as it is written somewhere in the Scriptures,” since “saying” can only be related directly to speech, and anything involved in writing must be mentioned as such. However, the passive expression it is said must often be made active; for example, “as someone has written somewhere in the holy writings.”

It is rare that one can use for Scriptures merely an expression “writings,” for the reference is unlikely to be clear. For that reason the expression “holy writings” is often necessary.

The first two lines of the quotation are in close parallel (see discussion on 1.7). Man and mere man (literally “son of man”) mean the same, and the Greek expressions for think of (literally “remember”) and care for are closer to each other than are their English equivalents. In biblical thought, when God “remembered” or thought of someone, something happened to that person; that is, God’s thought always resulted in action. The problem for the translator is to make it clear that the two lines mean the same, but to do so without using monotonous repetition. Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch chooses the radical solution, adopted in many places in the Good News Translation Old Testament, of combining the two lines: “What is man, that you ask about him?” In any language which does not use poetic parallelism, translators should consider whether the two lines can be combined without loss of meaning.

In the psalm, as in Ezekiel 2.1, “man” and “son of man” mean the same thing. However, in the Gospels Jesus often uses the phrase “Son of man” as an indirect way of speaking of himself. Hebrews does not use “son of man” except in this quotation. The question as to whether the author understands “son of man” in the quotation to refer to Christ is dealt with in the discussion of “to him” in verses 8-9 (see below).

In a number of languages it is impossible to introduce the expression O God in the position which it has in Good News Translation, namely, What is man, O God, that you should think of him. A direct vocative such as O God must generally occur first in a sentence, or occur next to the word for you; for example, “God, what is man that you should think of him?” or “What is man that you, God, should think of him?”

In this context man refers to human beings in general—certainly not to any particular male—and therefore it may be far more satisfactory in many languages to translate “What are people that you, God, should think of them?” or “… pay attention to them?” or “… be concerned with them?”

It may be even necessary to indicate something of the significance of the question by amplifying the implication of the interrogative pronoun What; for example, “How important are people that you, God, should be concerned with them?”

It may be important in some languages to make clear the nature of this rhetorical question. This may be done by employing the phrase mere man as a kind of response to the double question; for example, “What are people that you, God, should be concerned with them or should take care of them? They are nothing more than people.”

Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Letter of the Hebrews. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .