Skip to main content

A History of Bible Translation: Chapter 4 - After the Reformation

There were other translations carried out during the Reformation period. The Bible was translated into Slovene during the 16th century, and into Turkish during the 17th century, albeit by a Polish convert to Islam who called himself Ali Bey after his conversion.[1]

The result of all this translation activity – and I haven’t covered all languages translated in the reformation period – was that as Christians started to spread around the world as the result of persecution or to trade they took Bibles with them, and began churches, albeit in their language. So, the gospel began to reach parts of the world outside Europe such as North America, where many Puritans, both Reformed and Anabaptist, planted churches. This paved the way for the modern missions movement, which has tended to focus on Bible distribution, for very important reasons. Church planters and bible translators are often either the same people, or very closely related to one another i.e. working in close partnership.

Because of this focus on printed books, the main book being the Bible,[2] there has also been a focus on literacy. Without teaching people to read and write how could they have access to the Bible? Indeed, those who become committed followers of Jesus and join churches are positively encouraged to read their Bibles (and pray every day, as the song goes). Mission during this era tended to be centripetal – drawing people into a Mission compound, where they would gain education, join a church, be given work to do, and be generally looked after. Though we now look back on such work as colonialist, it was a product of its age. When the gospel first reached Britain via both Celtic and Roman missionaries, many monasteries were built, and the gospel spread via the work of those monasteries, which had a surprisingly outward focus, at least to when they first started.[3] It’s no surprise, therefore, that reformation and early missions used a similar model.

The real leap forward in terms of both missions and Bible translation began in the 19th century, however, and we will look at that expansion in the next chapter.


[1] This was commissioned by the Sultan of Turkey himself.
[2] The Greek term for Bible is ho biblios ‘the book’.
[3] Or when they were rejuvenated, or new movements began.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Scripture Engagement for Translation Advisors

What do translation advisors need to know about Scripture engagement (SE), and why? Let's look at the 'why' first: Translation advisors (TAs) are often involved in day-to-day exegesis. They help mother-tongue translators (MTTs) prepare drafts. The MTTs they work with might not know Hebrew or Greek. The TAs then take part in the team check of that draft, which involves other MTTs in the project as well as the TA. Sometimes they are also involved in the coordination of the translation programme. They are very busy people. So why do they need to know about SE? Because: The translation is ultimately for an audience that has felt needs that are not being addressed by the translation programme. Analysing and meeting (or helping to meet) the felt needs of the audience should be the first priority of any mission worker, including TAs. Only about 30% of completed translations are well used. The initial set up of the programme needs to take SE into consideration (it's no good wai...
Post a Comment
Read more

One Person's Contextualisation is Another Person's Syncretism

I was in an interesting discussion full of anthropologists the other day. They were discussing syncretism. Most of them were of the view that outsiders cannot decide which practices are syncretistic and which are not. It has to be a decision made by local believers. This is because only local people can create indigenous theologies, that is, interpret Scripture according to the local worldview(s).  Not only that, some practices need to be tolerated in the short term, as we trust that new believers will gradually mature, and realise that those practices need to be weaned out of their lives. This can take time, perhaps years. Outsiders can, however, help local believers through the process of deciding for themselves which practices need to be rejected, which can be accepted, and which need to be modified according to (local formed) principles from Scripture. For example, ancestor practices, which my PhD thesis was on, are often continued by people after they have come to faith. They...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Problems and Pitfalls of Proof-Texting

Why is it wrong to proof-text when making an argument?  Proof-texting is when someone simply quotes a verse from the Bible, out of context, to make a point. This can be in a book, a conversation, an essay, or a sermon, to give some examples. I just did a quick read of some other blogs on this topic, and none of them wowed me, so I thought I'd write my own. Then I had an even better idea: why not get you to tell me why proof-texting is problematic? In other words, I want to crowd-source the problem, and get lots of input. Since it is my suggestion, and I already did some research, let me get the ball rolling. Proof-texting is problematic because: It ignores the original context of the verse. There are actually two types of context: The literary context of the verse, that is, the verse is situated in a passage (that might be making an entirely different point) of Scripture that has a certain genre. For instance, the book of Acts is narrative, which means it is descriptive of what hap...
3 comments
Read more