“Usually, Thai men spend their free time with other men. Women only enter to serve them food, but here a woman has entered into the male social space in a counter-cultural way Not only is she female, she is a lowly prostitute. Although a Thai woman may sometimes wash her husband’s feet, she will never use her hair to dry them The men observing her are shocked at it all.”
Chicahuaxtla Triqui: “cover over” (a figure of speech which is also employed in Hebrew, but which in many languages is not acceptable, because it implies “hiding” or “concealment”)
Warao: “not being concerned with him clean your obonja.” Obonja 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.)
Martu Wangka: “throw out badness” (source: Carl Gross)
Kyaka: “burn the jaw bones” — This goes back to the pre-Christian custom of hanging the jaw bones of murdered relatives on ones door frame until the time of revenge. Christians symbolically burned those bones to show forgiveness which in turn became the word for “forgiveness” (source: Eugene Nida, according to this blog )
Koonzime: “remove the bad deed-counters” (“The Koonzime lay out the deeds symbolically — usually strips of banana leaf — and rehearse their grievances with the person addressed.”) (Source: Keith and Mary Beavon in Notes on Translation 3/1996, p. 16)
Ngbaka: ele: “forgive and forget” (Margaret Hill [in Holzhausen & Ridere 2010, p. 8f.] recalls that originally there were two different words used in Ngbaka, one for God (ɛlɛ) and one for people (mbɔkɔ — excuse something) since it was felt that people might well forgive but, unlike God, can’t forget. See also this lectionary in The Christian Century.
Amahuaca: “erase” / “smooth over” (“It was an expression the people used for smoothing over dirt when marks or drawings had been made in it. It meant wiping off dust in which marks had been made, or wiping off writing on the blackboard. To wipe off the slate, to erase, to take completely away — it has a very wide meaning and applies very well to God’s wiping away sins, removing them from the record, taking them away.”) (Source: Robert Russel, quoted in Walls / Bennett 1959, p. 193)
Gonja / Dangme: “lend / loan” (in the words of one Dangme scholar: “When you sin and you are forgiven, you forget that you have been forgiven, and continue to sin. But when you see the forgiveness as a debt/loan which you will pay for, you do not continue to sin, else you have more debts to pay” — quoted in Jonathan E.T. Kuwornu-Adjaottor in Ibadan Journal of Religious Studies 17/2 2010, p. 67ff. )
Kwere: kulekelela, meaning literally “to allow for.” Derived from the root leka which means “to leave.” In other words, forgiveness is leaving behind the offense in relationship to the person. It is also used in contexts of setting someone free. (Source: Megan Barton)
Merina Malagasy: mamela or “leave / let go (of sin / mistakes)” (source: Brigitte Rabarijaona)
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. )
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)
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.”
Martin Ehrensvärd, one of the translators for the DanishBibelen 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. )
Following are a number of back-translations of Luke 7:49:
Noongar: “The other people sitting eating and drinking, they began talking together, ‘Who is this? He can forgive sins, can he?'” (Source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
Uma: “Hearing that, the people who were-eating-together-with-them spoke-among-themselves, they said: ‘Who is that man, that the dares to forgive sins?'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “The companions of Isa who were sitting with him at the table asked in their livers, ‘What person is this, forgiving sins?'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And the people there who ate with Jesus, they thought, ‘Who is this person, who even forgives sins?'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Whereupon the others who were eating-with, they said to themselves (lit. in their minds), ‘What kind-of-person perhaps is this that even sins, he forgives them?'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “When the others heard who were his companions there eating, they said in their minds, ‘Who is this fellow who even forgives sins like this?'” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
en heautois ‘in themselves,’ or ‘among themselves,’ preferably the former, cf. 3.8.
tis houtos estin hos kai hamartias aphiēsin? ‘who is this man who even forgives sins?’ For this type of clause cf. on 5.21. Here the clause has a note of marvel.
Translation:
Those who were at table with him, see on 5.29; or, “his fellow-guests” (The Four Gospels – a New Translation).
To say among themselves, preferably ‘in themselves,’ hence, “to ask themselves” (New English Bible), and see on 3.8.
Who is this, who even forgives sins?, or, ‘who (or, what kind of person) is this (man)? He even…’ (cf. Balinese), ‘who is this, that he even…’ (Bahasa Indonesia RC); and see on 5.21.
Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.
But: This verse begins with a Greek conjunction that is often translated as “and.” Many English versions do not use a conjunction here. Other versions use various conjunctions to connect the verses: “And” (King James Version), “Then” (Revised Standard Version), and “But” (New Revised Standard Version). This verse tells the reaction of the guests to the statement in 7:48. It comes between two things that Jesus said to the woman in 7:48 and 7:50. Connect these verses in a way that is natural in your language.
those at the table began to say to themselves: This clause introduces the question in 7:49b. There are two ways to interpret the Greek phrase that the Berean Standard Bible translates as say to themselves here:
(1) It refers to thoughts. The guests thought about the question in 7:49b without speaking out loud. For example:
say to themselves (Good News Translation)
(Berean Standard Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, Good News Translation, New American Standard Bible, King James Version, Revised English Bible, Phillips’ New Testament in Modern English, God’s Word)
(2) It refers to spoken words. The guests spoke to each another about the question in 7:49b. For example:
saying to one another (Contemporary English Version)
(Revised Standard Version, New International Version, NET Bible, New Living Translation (2004), Contemporary English Version, New Century Version)
It is recommended that you follow interpretation (1). This view is favored by the majority of Bible scholars. The same Greek expression is used in 7:39a, where it is clear that the thought was not spoken aloud. Some other ways to translate this are:
asked themselves -or-
thought (God’s Word)
those at the table: The Greek word that the Berean Standard Bible translates as those at the table is literally “the ones who were reclining with (him).” This refers to the other men who were guests at the feast. Refer to them in a way that in natural in your language.
7:49b
Who is this who even forgives sins?: This is a rhetorical question. It does not imply that the people did not know who Jesus was. It expresses their surprise and disapproval that Jesus declared that the woman’s sins were forgiven. They believed that only God had the authority to forgive sins. There are two ways to translate this:
• As a rhetorical question that implies surprise or disapproval. For example:
Who does this man think he is, going around forgiving sins? (New Living Translation (1996)) -or-
Who is this who dares to forgive sins? (Contemporary English Version)
• As an exclamation that implies surprise or disapproval. For example:
This man dares to say that he forgives sins! ⌊That is shocking!⌋ -or-
I cannot understand why/how this man says that he forgives sins!
The people who said this did not believe that Jesus had authority to forgive sins. You may need to make this explicit in your translation by saying something like:
Who is this man who claims the authority ⌊that only God has⌋ to forgive sins? -or-
I am amazed/shocked that this man believes that he can even forgive sins! -or-
This man does not have authority to forgive sins! ⌊Only God does.⌋
even: The word even emphasizes the greatness of the authority that Jesus was claiming. He claimed to have authority even to forgive sins. The people thought that only God had that authority, and to claim the authority to forgive sins was like claiming to be God. Since they did not believe that Jesus was God, they were offended. Some other ways to say this could be:
Who is this man who claims such ⌊divine⌋ authority as to forgive sins? -or-
Who is this man who goes so far as to forgive sins?
Living Water is produced for the Bible translation movement in association with Lutheran Bible Translators. Lyrics derived from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®).
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.