It's not just about getting people saved

Media products often end with the resurrection. Why? We just want to get people saved. This is the wrong strategy, imho. We are commanded to make disciples. People need the message of Acts. Some people need to be able to see the road ahead before completely committing themselves to Christ. Acts teaches us that:

God is at work!
The Holy Spirit who came after Jesus ascended to heaven, works through us
Where there are no churches planting new ones is needed
Those churches are missional in nature, i.e. self-reproducing
Local believers are the ones to lead those gatherings
We may encounter persecution
Some areas have people who are more open to the good news than others
Many Jewish leaders had misunderstood the Bible and what it taught about the coming chosen one
Nevertheless many Jewish background as well as Gentile background people believed, so churches were often made up of both, often causing some tension

It's about growing, discipleship, and moving forward as a body. Therefore, let's think about how we can include both halves of Luke's message to us in our presentations of the good news: Luke (Vol 1) and Acts (Vol 2).

Comments

A Flow Chart for Bible Translation (a Relevance Theory Approach)

One of the current theories behind modern translation work is Relevance Theory. [1] Here is a flow chart that explains the process often used to produce a draft when using such an approach: *Make sure your translation committee makes the decision as to what kind of translation they want. A domesticated translation is one that submits to dominant values in the target language [2] whereas a foreignized translation is one that is happy to import foreign terms and ideas from Hebrew, Greek, or the language of wider communication such as the Greek term baptizo . The chart looks something like this: Text Communicated Ideas Context A sower went out to sow A farmer went out to sow grain People scattered/threw seed etc. The text has very little information, but behind i...

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...

Asset Based Bible Translation (ABBT)

Many of you will have heard of asset-based community development (ABCD). How can Bible translation programmes be asset based, rather than deficit based? The best way to look at this is a comparison table: Deficit based Asset based Driven by outsiders Driven by the community Outside funding Community funded Done to meet a need Done to help the community grow Quality control done by a consultant Community checked and approved Control from outside-in Lead by stepping back Products not accepted? Products are accepted Little engagement Engagement with products Scientific Organic Not sustainable Sustainable Of course many translation programmes these days are neither one nor t'other, they are somewhere between these two extremes. Nevertheless, this illustrates a point, and shows that the current ...

Scripture Engagement

Search This Blog