Comments on: Contextualization and the Ethics of Translation

By: To Wycliffe, SIL, And Foundations: Is the Gospel an Offense, and Dare We Change It? | shepherds-heart-bible-study.com

Tue, 07 Feb 2012 06:37:40 +0000

[...] readings: Jay Smith’s Assessment of Insider Movements, C5 Missions Strategies Contextualization and the Ethics of Translation Towards a Faithful Witness (pdf) Share this:PrintFacebookEmail This entry was posted in State of [...]

By: Van Duitsman

Van Duitsman — Fri, 13 May 2011 14:58:38 +0000

Great Article! And if “all translation is interpretation”, then the translator has a huge responsibility to interpret accurately, especially since “no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own INTERPRETATION…men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” 2 Peter 1:20-21. The words of Scripture originate from God Himself and should not be twisted to suit anyone’s whims, comfort or convenience.

By: Douglas Pirkey

Douglas Pirkey — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 11:29:09 +0000

Ralph says, “What part of ‘All translation IS interpretation’ do you not understand?”

My interpretation of what you wrote is that you wish for yourself the latitude to have it your way whether it is in agreement with Scripture or not. Seems to me that when folks write like you have written they are contradicting themselves. Either there is a stable determinate of meaning or there is not. You seem to assume that there is, it can be conveyed, and that readers will understand what you have written and that that understanding of ours will be based on the standard use of the English language and a cultural understanding of keyboarding, that using all capital letters expresses emphasis. But, if that is your assumption then it begs a question: why don’t you apply the same assumption of a stable determinate of meaning to yourself when it comes to understanding Scripture?

By: Ralph Blair

Ralph Blair — Fri, 04 Feb 2011 21:30:38 +0000

What part of “All translation IS interpretation” do you not understand?

By: roger dixon

roger dixon — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 15:46:54 +0000

This article is about the major issue we face in missions today. In the case of translations in largely Muslim populated countries we are experiencing the propensity of many to use Muslim replacement theology in order to attract or appease the theological orientation of the readers. I believe that many of these western workers are unaware of the way they have been deceived into doing this. When one considers the way Muslim replacement theology has been accepted by a large segment of the Christian world over the centuries, it is difficult to determine how much true understanding these missionary so-called “bible translators” have. They are not the only educated and well trained people who have been deceived. The Muslims have done a superb job (from a marketer’s point of view) in convincing the world that they have the legitimate right to define the characters of Old Testament prophets and even the person and work of Jesus as well as many other designations of sacred places, events, etc. that do not coincide with biblical teaching. We need to wake up mission agencies.

By: Sterling

Sterling — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 22:51:36 +0000

I really appreciate the way you have addressed the bundle of issues that are tied up in the common Muslim missunderstanding, slander, and half-truth about Bible translation—that Christians do not honestly translate the Scriptures but instead make “versions” to suit their desires.

It galls me that when talking with Muslim friends, in midst of affirming God’s preservation of the Scriptures and in clarifying the role of historic, Christian translation practice, I have had to give a brief disclaimer about the recent rash of Bible translations that are not faithful to the Word of God.

Contextualization has limits. Thank you for writing about this!