Skip to main content

The Scripture Engagement Impact Chain

I was just in a presentation,* and the presenter shared a slide about the Scripture engagement (SE) impact chain, which I thought I'd pass onto you fine folks! Here it is:


The point is, to have community transformation, you need to have individual transformation. To have individual transformation you need eyes and ears either reading or listening to Scripture. To have eyes and ears reading and listening you need people being reached with those materials in print or audio format (or video, which combines both). To have those materials you need to develop them in the first place. That's the SE impact chain, in a nutshell!

Now, the clever amongst you will have spotted that you can't just produce materials, therefore. Neither can you just produce materials and distribute them, as that's only two steps along the SE impact chain. To have community transformation you need to make sure the whole chain is working as it should. As the picture of legs on the side shows, that means having relationships and a CBO** and so forth. As we say in Central Asia and the surrounding regions, you'll need to drink a lot of tea! (Green or black, with fermented mare's milk, or without).

I hope that helps you folk out there to understand why Bible translation and distribution on its own is not enough. We do need Scripture engagement too.

Our sponsors and supporters often ask, "What SE is and why do we need it?" Basically, SE is there to facilitate change. What change? Transformational change by the Holy Spirit as people and whole communities engage with God through the Scriptures in the most appropriate language(s) for them. The SE impact chain is a helpful way of visualising that change as it occurs from the beginning, when the materials are produced, to the end result, community transformation.

*The presentation was on Outcome Harvesting, which is another story I'll tell you next time

** CBO - Community Based Organisation. Often these are officially registered, and started as a language or translation committee.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

A Plea Regarding Footnotes in Bible Translation

Recently I was giving input to a team who had worked on Psalms. I noticed that in several places they had included footnotes referring to the New Testament use of those Psalms. One example was a footnote in Ps 34:20 'not one of [his bones] will be broken' that referred to John 19:32, 33, 36 where this prophecy is fulfilled. Now, obviously this is a useful link for readers, but it is better to put it in John's gospel referring back to Psalms. Why? Because the New Testament is (to some extent) a commentary on the Hebrew Bible, whereas the reverse is not true (the Hebrew Bible never refers to the New Testament). There are often two possible ways of reading a Psalm: In its original context, and  As interpreted by the New Testament writers. This is quite important, as the Hebrew Bible belongs to two faith communities, the Jews and the Christians. (Muslims too, to some extent, though they refer to the Torah and the Psalms only). If we translate the Bible in such a way that it onl...
Post a Comment
Read more

Integral Mission vs. Holistic Mission - What's the Difference?

 A lot of people are talking about integral mission these days, whereas the idea of holistic mission seems to have fallen by the wayside. What's the difference? Holistic mission is mission to the whole person, taking into account their physical as well as spiritual needs. Evangelism is combined with social action. Unfortunately, this term has been used for some years now, and much mission that was labelled 'holistic' was mainly social action. Integral mission has more focus on communities and their felt needs. What issues of poverty and (lack of) justice are there? How can a given community begin to address these issues? What input do they need from outsiders as they do so? How can they define kingdom goals that will bring them out of their physical and spiritual poverty? Lausanne defines it here . The fact is that the neediest communities are often ones that lack the Bible, and lack a clear orthography (alphabet corresponding to the phonemic system of the language, and tha...
Post a Comment
Read more