Skip to main content

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 drive to 'finish' Bible translation for all people groups in the world 'that need a translation' (their deficit is the Bible) is misguided. Instead the focus should be on the community reaching out to unbelievers and discipleship of believers within that community using whatever means (and products) are available, or can be developed. In an ideal scenario, a passage from Scripture is translated during the week, and used on Sunday (and perhaps midweek in a life group). The idea that we can somehow speed up the coming of our Lord Jesus the Messiah by finishing all overseas mission work (and therefore reach out to every people group) is very 20th century, and also very bad theology. With asset-based Bible translation the focus is on kingdom growth rather than completing a task. Outsiders will often be needed to help with training, and to act as catalysts to help the process get moving in the first place. Once the community is working on producing products to help the community develop (and this is understood holistically i.e. we believe in integral mission), then Scripture translation will be carried out as and when necessary to help with that development. The old model of translating the Scriptures first and then encouraging Scripture engagement will be a thing of the past (not that SE people ever thought it was a good idea).

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

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