Latest / Reformed Thinking / The Rationale for Bible Translation

Transcript

The Rationale for Bible Translation · Reformed Thinking

0:00
Welcome to Reform Thinking. I am so glad you decided to join
0:03
us today. Thank you.
0:04
My goal, as always, is to take a stack of truly dense, absolutely
0:09
fascinating material and extract the absolute best Nuggets of
0:13
knowledge for you. Right, getting past the heavy
0:15
academic jargon. Yeah, bypassing all of that and
0:18
getting right to the core of what you need to know today, we
0:22
have a mission that feels incredibly significant.
0:24
It really is. We are looking at an excerpt
0:26
from a book called Biblical Missions, Principles, Priorities
0:29
and Practices. A.
0:30
Fantastic resource. And specifically, we are
0:33
investigating a chapter written by Aaron Shryock titled The
0:37
Rationale for Bible Translation. Which is such a massive topic.
0:40
It is we are going to investigate the five major
0:43
historical and theological reasons why the Church has been
0:46
doing the painstaking work of translating the Bible for well
0:50
over 2 millennia. 2000 years of history.
0:53
We will trace this timeline all the way from Jewish scholars
0:56
working in Alexandria, Egypt, around 250 BC, right up to
1:01
modern global efforts involving thousands of people today.
1:04
It is a massive scope. Joining me to make sense of all
1:07
this history and theology is my fantastic Co host who always
1:11
helps us connect the dots. Well, I am very much looking
1:14
forward to this discussion. It is wonderful to be here.
1:16
So glad to have. You.
1:17
But you know, before we jump right into the text, we should
1:20
probably establish the shared framework we bring to this
1:22
material. That is a good idea.
1:24
As adherence to Reformed theology and the Westminster
1:27
Confession, looking at these historical rationales is much
1:30
more than a simple academic exercise for us.
1:35
Right, it is not just facts and dates.
1:37
No, not at all. We are looking directly at how
1:39
God has providentially preserved His Word for His people across
1:43
centuries. Yes, when we look at these
1:45
translators, we are examining the literal mechanisms and the
1:48
convictions that God used to ensure that you, the listener,
1:52
have a Bible sitting on your desk today.
1:54
It changes how you see the book really.
1:56
It absolutely does, and the scope of what Aaron Shryock
2:00
covers in this chapter gives us a brilliant structure to see how
2:03
that theology has played out in real life across very different
2:07
areas of history. OK, let's unpack this.
2:10
Let's do it. The text organizes these
2:12
historical reasons into 5 distinct groups.
2:16
We're going to start with the first, which is also the oldest
2:19
rationale, and that is historical precedence.
2:22
Right, doing it because it has been done before.
2:24
Basically, yeah. You look at previous
2:25
generations, see what they did, and use that as the
2:28
justification for your own work. Is a really fascinating logical
2:33
starting point. It is a very natural human
2:35
starting point too, and. The chapter gives us an amazing
2:37
early example from a figure you might recognize from history
2:40
class, but maybe not in this context.
2:43
Right. The earliest example Shryock
2:45
cites in terms of English history is King Alfred of
2:47
Wessex. King Alfred.
2:49
Yes. During the later years of his
2:51
reign, specifically between AD 871 and 899, King Alfred
2:56
instituted a major program of religious reform.
2:58
And that involved a lot of translation, right?
3:00
It did. He began translating works into
3:02
Anglo-Saxon, which we generally know as Old English OK, and he
3:06
wrote a preface to his translation of Pope Gregory the
3:09
First's book Pastoral Care, where he laid out a very
3:12
specific logical progression. He had to defend what he was
3:15
doing. Precisely, he just his work by
3:19
pointing to the past. He recalled that the law was
3:22
first known in Hebrew. Makes sense?
3:24
Then when the Greeks learned it, they translated the whole thing
3:28
into their language. And then the Romans.
3:30
Yes, when the Romans learned it, they use learned interpreters to
3:33
put it into Latin. And he also noted that other
3:36
Christian nations of his time had translated parts of the
3:39
Scriptures into their own languages.
3:41
I love that progression. I will paraphrase Alfred's logic
3:44
for you guys listening Hebrew to Greek, Greek to Latin, Latin to
3:48
the other Christian nations. Therefore, he concluded, it
3:51
seems better for the Anglo Saxons to translate it to.
3:54
It is such a clean logical deduction.
3:56
You can almost picture King Alfred looking at the map of
4:00
history, seeing the Word of God moving sequentially from culture
4:03
to culture and deciding that his people were simply the next
4:07
logical link in that chain. He was looking at prior works
4:10
and declaring them appropriate, which gave him the green light
4:12
to initiate translation in his own Kingdom.
4:15
What strikes me is the humility in that approach.
4:18
Well, he is not claiming some new novel idea.
4:22
He is observing a historical pattern and saying we should
4:25
participate in this. That is a great observation, and
4:28
that historical pattern becomes a massive defense mechanism for
4:31
later translators who faced severe opposition.
4:34
Which brings us to Wycliffe. Yes, the text moves the timeline
4:39
forward several centuries to John Wycliffe, who lived roughly
4:42
from 1329 to 1384 A. Huge figure in church history.
4:46
Absolutely. Wycliffe and his associates at
4:49
Oxford University produced the first complete English Bible,
4:52
translating from the Latin texts that were available to them.
4:55
But they did not do this in a vacuum.
4:56
No, they didn't. In the general prologue to that
4:59
translation, the anonymous writer actively defended the
5:02
project using this exact same historical precedent.
5:05
They leaned on the past. They did.
5:06
They referred back to the prior English works of BEAD, who lived
5:09
around 673 to 735, and they explicitly mentioned King
5:13
Alfred. So they are linking arms with
5:15
Alfred. And they also pointed to
5:17
contemporary languages, noting that there were French and Czech
5:20
translations. Their argument was heavily
5:23
logical. Given all these past and present
5:25
examples, there is absolutely no legitimate case for opposing an
5:29
English Bible but the. Reality of Weykliff's time was
5:32
much darker than a simple logical debate wasn't.
5:35
It much darker. Translating the Bible into
5:38
English in Weykliff's era was not just frowned upon, it was
5:41
actively called heresy. Yes.
5:44
People were facing incredibly serious charges, up to and
5:48
including death, for attempting to put the scriptures into the
5:52
language of the common person. Why was the pushback so fierce?
5:55
The religious authorities of the day held a tight monopoly on the
5:58
text, keeping it restricted to Latin.
6:01
Anyone attempting to break that monopoly was viewed as a
6:03
dangerous threat to the established Order A.
6:06
Threat to their control. Precisely.
6:08
The authorities argued that the common language was too vulgar
6:11
or imprecise to hold the holy words of God, and that giving
6:14
and the uneducated masses direct access to the text would lead to
6:18
wild misinterpretations and social upheaval.
6:21
Here's where it gets really interesting.
6:23
Let's hear it. The text brings up a pamphlet
6:26
that was published after the Wycliffe Bible, titled
6:29
Wycliffe's Wicket. A fascinating document.
6:32
It is. This pamphlet provides one of
6:34
the most brilliant theological defenses against those
6:36
detractors. The argument is essentially
6:39
this. If you say it is heresy to speak
6:41
of the Holy Scripture in English, then you are actively
6:44
condemning the Holy Ghost. That is a bold claim.
6:47
It is why? Because the Holy Ghost gave the
6:50
Word of God in tongues to the apostles at Pentecost, the
6:54
pamphlet argues that the Holy Spirit established the precedent
6:57
for preaching in all languages. I see the logic.
7:00
So by calling translation heresy, you are calling the Holy
7:03
Spirit a heretic. That is an incredibly forceful
7:06
argument. The pamphlet writer noted that
7:08
the Holy Spirit empowered the apostles and Gentile believers
7:11
to speak in various languages, establishing a permanent
7:14
precedent. It wasn't just a one time parlor
7:16
trick. Not at all.
7:17
Shereikak points out that Pentecost remains a major event
7:20
for modern translators as well. He cites Stephen and Zach, 3
7:24
Waters, who wrote about the theology and mission of
7:26
translation. What do they say about it?
7:28
They state that Pentecost set in motion a unique characteristic
7:32
of Christianity as a world religion, which is its penchant
7:36
for translation. A penchant for translation.
7:38
I like that. The Hebrew and Aramaic spoken by
7:41
Jesus was translated into Greek. Greek was then translated into
7:45
Syriac, Arabic, Coptic and Latin.
7:47
Right. Christianity is by its very
7:50
nature a translating religion, and the Holy Spirit initiated
7:54
that reality at Pentecost. Think about the contrast between
7:57
Islam and Christianity on this point.
7:59
In Islam, the Quran is considered truly the Quran only
8:03
in Arabic. Yes, translation is viewed more
8:06
as an interpretation or a commentary.
8:08
But Christianity operates on a completely different paradigm.
8:10
The Waters quote highlights that Christianity assumes
8:13
translatability from the very beginning.
8:15
The New Testament itself is largely written in Greek,
8:18
quoting Jesus, who likely spoke Aramaic.
8:20
The translation process is baked into the very fabric of our
8:23
earliest text. That is a crucial distinction,
8:25
and it goes even deeper than Pentecost.
8:27
The text brings in the historian Andrew Walls, who introduces a
8:31
concept that completely reframes his entire discussion.
8:34
This is where the theology gets really rich.
8:36
Walls calls it divine translation.
8:38
Divine Translation. Yes, he proposes that the
8:41
incarnation of Jesus Christ is the ultimate historical
8:44
precedent. Jesus is the Word made flesh, as
8:48
we see in John 1.14. The Word became flesh and dwelt
8:52
among us. Walls suggest that there is a
8:54
history of translating the Bible specifically because there was
8:57
first a translation of the Word into flesh.
9:00
Jesus Christ coming to earth, taking on human form is the
9:04
original act of translation. Taking at the divine and putting
9:07
it into a form humanity can understand and interact with.
9:10
I want to pause and just let that sink in for the listener
9:13
the idea of the incarnation as a translation.
9:16
We usually think of translation as taking Spanish and turning it
9:19
into English. A linguistic swap.
9:21
Right, but Andrew Walls is saying the greatest translation
9:23
in history was God taking the infinite, incomprehensible
9:26
divine reality and translating it into a 1st century Jewish
9:30
Carpenter. He translated himself into human
9:33
language, human culture, human flesh, so we could comprehend
9:36
him. It is a stunning thought.
9:37
If God was willing to translate himself into humanity, how could
9:41
we possibly argue that his written words shouldn't be
9:44
translated into everyday human languages?
9:46
You really can't. This raises A staggering
9:49
question about how we view the text itself.
9:52
The chapter quotes Carlo Buzzetti, who refers to Walley's
9:56
view as the incarnation model. What does Buzzetti say?
9:59
Buzzetti says that the incarnation model must continue
10:02
because it is the great model of the relationship between God and
10:05
the world, He states the Word always becomes Incarnate in the
10:10
human words of its receptors. To translate it is to enable it
10:13
to go forward embodied. To enable it to go forward
10:16
embodied. That carries massive theological
10:19
weight. It means translation is not just
10:21
a linguistic exercise. It is an extension of how God
10:24
interacts with humanity. That is a beautiful concept, but
10:28
as Shryock evaluates at the end of this section, we have to look
10:31
at this rationale critically. We do.
10:33
While historical precedence, Pentecost and the Incarnation
10:36
model are deeply fascinating and highly persuasive, Shryock
10:40
argues that historical precedent might be the weakest of the five
10:42
rationales on its own. Why is that?
10:45
It comes down to the nature of authority.
10:47
Historical precedent relies heavily on evaluating past
10:51
events. Just because King Alfred did
10:53
something, or even just because something happened in the early
10:56
Church, does not automatically equate to an explicit divine
11:00
command for all future generations.
11:02
It shows it is permissible, but maybe not mandatory.
11:05
It is a brilliant starting point, and it provides
11:07
incredible comfort and continuity, but it requires the
11:11
other rationales to carry the full weight of the work.
11:14
You need more than just we've always done it this way to
11:17
justify the immense effort and in many cases, the severe danger
11:21
associated with translating the Bible.
11:23
So if historical precedent isn't enough of a defense on its own,
11:27
where did the translators turn to actually justify their work?
11:30
They turn to the readers. This leads us into the second
11:32
rationale outlined in the text, the benefits for the readers of
11:36
Scripture. This shifts the focus from
11:39
looking backward at history to looking directly at the person
11:42
holding the translated text. A very pastoral motivation.
11:45
The motivation here is ensuring the reader can actually
11:47
understand and benefit from the words, and the text breaks this
11:51
down into two massive categories of benefit.
11:54
The 1st is the goal of salvation.
11:56
Right Translators were doing this incredibly difficult work
11:59
specifically because they wanted people to hear the gospel and
12:02
believe. The evangelical motivation is
12:04
central here. The chapter details several
12:07
historical figures who translated with conversion as
12:09
their primary aim. We see this right away in the
12:12
prologue to the Wycliffe Bible, where the writer states his
12:15
desire that everyone in the English realm be saved.
12:18
He viewed the English text as the direct vehicle for that
12:21
salvation. Moving forward in history, we
12:24
encountered the German missionary Bartholemaeus
12:26
Ziegenbaugh, who lived from 1682 to 1719.
12:30
Ziegenbaugh, Yes. He translated the New Testament
12:33
and portions of the Old Testament into Tamil.
12:35
That is in India, right? Correct.
12:37
In a letter to the King of Denmark in 1714, he wrote that
12:40
God's word in the mother tongue is the surest means of
12:44
converting non Christians and making them members of God's
12:47
Kingdom. Paid a picture of that for us.
12:49
Bartholemy is Ziegenbog in India in the early 1700s.
12:53
He isn't just sitting in a comfortable academic office in
12:56
Germany. He is out in the field.
12:58
Interacting with people daily and he realizes that all the
13:01
preaching in the world is limited if the people cannot
13:04
take the text home and read it in the language they dream in.
13:08
He recognized that the mother tongue is the key to the heart.
13:11
Yes, and that conviction was shared by later missionaries as
13:14
well. The text brings up William
13:16
Carey, who lived from 1761 to 1834.
13:20
A. Huge name in missions.
13:21
Carey is often called the father of modern Protestant missions.
13:25
In 18/19, he and his colleagues wrote something that carries an
13:28
astonishing amount of weight. What did they say?
13:30
They argued that unless people can obtain the oracles of God,
13:33
they will perish without knowing the way of salvation.
13:36
They concluded that the eternal destiny of unborn millions is
13:39
suspended on the translation of the Sacred Scriptures into their
13:43
languages. Hold on.
13:44
Let's look closely what Kerry is saying there.
13:46
He argues that the eternal destiny of unborn millions is
13:50
suspended on translation. Yes, suspended on it.
13:53
Isn't that an incredibly heavy, almost terrifying burden to
13:57
place on a linguist? How did these men and women
14:00
carry that weight? If I am a translator sitting at
14:03
a desk in the 1800s, believing that the salvation of people who
14:06
haven't even been born yet literally depends on my ability
14:10
to conjugate verbs and language I just learned, that seems
14:14
paralyzing. It is a staggering burden, and
14:17
it highlights the immense gravity with which they viewed
14:20
their task. They did not view translation as
14:23
a helpful accessory to ministry. They viewed it as the very
14:26
foundation of evangelism. Faith, comes my hearing.
14:29
And hearing by the Word of Christ, as Romans 10 says,
14:33
without the translated word, the mechanism for widespread,
14:36
enduring faith was missing. They carried that weight by
14:39
trusting in the Providence of God to assist their efforts, but
14:42
they certainly felt the urgency. It was a matter of spiritual
14:45
life and death. That urgency makes sense when
14:47
you look at the second category of reader benefits, which is the
14:50
goal of spiritual growth and comfort for the believer.
14:52
Getting saved is the starting line, but what happens next?
14:55
The believer needs to grow. And the text points out the
14:58
translation is vital for sanctification.
15:01
William Tyndale is a prime example here.
15:03
In 1526, he translated the New Testament into English.
15:07
A monumental achievement. And a few years later, in 1530,
15:10
he published a book where he explained his motivation.
15:13
He told his readers that he translated the Bible for their
15:16
spiritual edifying consolation and solace.
15:19
And we must call to mind the context of Tyndale's life.
15:22
He was not writing those words from a place of safety.
15:25
No, he was a wanted man. Tyndale was actively haunted by
15:28
the authorities for his translation work.
15:31
He spent years and hiding on the European continent, smuggling
15:34
his English New Testaments back into England, and bales of cloth
15:38
and barrels of grain tremble bravery.
15:40
He was eventually betrayed, imprisoned in a terrible
15:43
dungeon, strangled and burned at the stake.
15:45
Wow. When a man is willing to face
15:47
that level of persecution, and he says he is is doing it for
15:50
your edifying consolation and solace, it gives a massive
15:55
amount of weight to his words. He believed the English reader
15:58
spiritual health was worth his own physical life.
16:01
That is sobering, and it wasn't just in England.
16:04
The text mentions the reformer Juan Peres de Pineda, who worked
16:08
on the Spanish New Testament. What was his focus?
16:10
He highlighted the translation is necessary for truly
16:14
understanding Jesus Christ and for guarding believers from
16:17
error and false teaching. Protection against heresy.
16:20
Believers need the text in their own language to grow, to be
16:23
comforted, and to protect themselves from bad theology.
16:27
If you only hear the Bible read in a language you don't
16:29
understand, or if you only hear it filtered through a priest,
16:33
you have no way to verify if what you are being taught is
16:35
actually true. This is a perfect moment to lean
16:38
into our Reformed framework. The text explicitly highlights
16:42
the 1646 Westminster Confession of Faith, and this is where we
16:46
see these ideas codified into formal doctrine.
16:49
A vital document for us. The confession takes a very
16:52
strong stance on this, arguing that believers have a right unto
16:55
and an interest in the. Sculptures a right unto and an
16:58
interest in that phrasing is loaded with significance.
17:02
It really is. The confession frames the Bible
17:05
almost as a spiritual inheritance that believers have
17:08
a legitimate, God-given claim to possess in their own language.
17:11
I want to dig into that terminology.
17:14
We live in a culture that talks a lot about rights, human
17:17
rights, property rights. But the theologians at the
17:20
Westminster Assembly were arguing for a spiritual right.
17:23
They were saying you, the believer, have a divine right to
17:28
read the words of your creator. That is a radical democratic
17:31
shift in the history of religion.
17:33
Let us break down that specific phrasing from the confession.
17:36
The term interest in refers to the specific spiritual benefits
17:40
of having the Scripture. The confession outlines 2
17:43
distinct benefits. Oh, is the first one.
17:45
First, it states that believers are able to offer acceptable
17:48
worship because they have the Word of God dwelling plentifully
17:51
in them. Acceptable worship.
17:52
The logic here is that you cannot worship God acceptably if
17:56
you do not understand who he is or what he requires, and that
17:59
understanding comes from a comprehensible text.
18:02
If your mind is not engaged with the truth, your worship is
18:05
hollow. And the second benefit?
18:07
2nd The confession notes that believers have hope because of
18:11
the patience and comfort that come through the Scriptures.
18:13
Comfort and suffering. Life is full of suffering and
18:16
confusion. The primary mechanism God
18:19
provides for comfort and endurance is His written word.
18:22
The confession implies that the right to the Scriptures includes
18:26
personal ownership for reading and studying, allowing God's
18:29
people to receive the fullest spiritual benefit intended for
18:32
them. Think about how that relates to
18:34
your own life, to the listener tuning in right now.
18:37
Consider your daily reading habits.
18:39
When you sit down with your coffee and open your Bible, you
18:42
are exercising a right and claiming an interest that
18:45
theologians centuries ago fought fiercely to secure for you.
18:49
It is a profound privilege. You are accessing the comfort
18:52
and the ability to worship that Tyndale gave his life to
18:55
provide. It is so easy to let a Bible
18:57
gather dust on a shelf, but when you realize the blood and ink
19:01
spill, to put it in your language, it changes your entire
19:04
perspective. It absolutely does, and while
19:06
the benefits to the reader are massive, Shryock's text shows
19:10
that the reformers eventually realized they needed an even
19:12
stronger foundation. They needed more than just It
19:15
helps people. They needed an explicit command.
19:18
This logically brings us to the third rationale, Christ's
19:22
command to proclaim the Gospel. This is a direct appeal to the
19:25
Great Commission in Matthew 28. Go therefore, and make disciples
19:29
of all nations. What is really striking here is
19:32
how the text describes a shift during the Reformation.
19:36
Before the Reformation, the arguments were heavily focused
19:38
on historical precedent or reader benefits.
19:41
Like we just discussed, but. During the Reformation, the
19:44
justification turned sharply toward direct obedience to the
19:47
commands of Jesus. That shift is critical.
19:50
They stopped saying translation is a good idea because it helps
19:53
people and started saying translation is a mandatory act
19:56
of obedience because Jesus. Ordered it.
19:58
Shryock introduces us to Jacques Lefebv de Tapla, a French
20:02
humanist who translated the Bible into French in 1524.
20:06
Before we go further, it is worth clarifying a term there.
20:09
When we refer to Lefebvre as a French humanist in 1524, we need
20:13
to be clear about what that means.
20:14
I'm glad you brought that up. Wait, when we say French
20:17
humanist in 1524, we are definitely not talking about the
20:20
modern secular humanist who rejects religion, right?
20:24
What did that label actually mean back then?
20:26
Great clarification. In the 16th century, a humanist
20:30
was someone devoted to the humanities and the classical cry
20:34
of ad fontes, which translates to back to the sources.
20:38
Back to the sources. Christian humanists in the
20:40
Renaissance era believe that the best way to reform the church
20:43
and society was to go back to the original ancient texts,
20:47
particularly the Greek New Testament and the Hebrew Old
20:49
Testament, rather than relying solely on the medieval Latin
20:53
Vulgate. So they were scholars.
20:54
There were deeply religious scholars who use linguistic
20:57
tools to uncover the original meaning of scripture.
20:59
So Lefevre de Tap is one of these scholars.
21:02
He translates the Bible into French, and he immediately faces
21:06
intense criticism. Naturally.
21:07
The text points out his response in his preface, and his logic is
21:11
razor sharp. He pointed to the commands of
21:13
Christ, specifically noting Jesus's instruction in the Great
21:17
Commission to go and preach the gospel to all creatures and to
21:20
teach them to keep all his commandments.
21:22
He connected translation directly to the Great
21:25
Commission. Lefevre asked a highly potent
21:27
question. How can people be taught to keep
21:30
Christ's commandments if they are not allowed to see and read
21:33
the Gospel of God in their own language?
21:35
It is a devastatingly simple question.
21:38
It highlights a logical impossibility.
21:41
You cannot demand obedience to a task that people are forbidden
21:45
from reading. It is like giving a test on a
21:47
book you hid from the students. If the church's mission is to
21:50
teach the nations to obey Jesus, the nations must know what Jesus
21:55
said. Lefevre recognized that verbal
21:58
preaching alone was insufficient.
22:00
The people needed the written word to verify and internalize
22:03
those commandments. John Calvin takes that logic and
22:06
runs with it. The text discusses Calvin's
22:08
writings from 1535, where he defends translation using a very
22:12
tight logical sequence. Calvin's logic is always tight.
22:15
He starts by noting that Jesus sent his apostles to preach to
22:18
every creature in every language.
22:21
From that Calvin draws the implication that Christians
22:23
should preach the gospel to every ethnicity makes sense, but
22:27
he takes it one step further. If every ethnicity is supposed
22:30
to hear the gospel, then they must also be able to read and
22:33
study the Scriptures to grow in their faith.
22:35
Calvin did not frame translation as a nice option for the church.
22:40
He framed it as a direct, unavoidable command from Jesus
22:43
Christ Himself. That framing elevates the work
22:45
entirely. It is not just a good idea, it
22:48
is an act of submission to the Lord of the Church.
22:51
If you accept Matthew 28 as binding upon the church, you
22:55
must accept Bible translation as binding upon the church.
22:58
The chapter connects this Reformation thought directly to
23:01
modern missiology, showing a clear continuity over the
23:04
centuries. Before we unpack those modern
23:07
quotes, you use the term missiology for someone listening
23:10
while driving or making dinner who might not have a seminary
23:12
degree. What is the practical definition
23:14
of that? Simply put, missiology is the
23:17
study of religious missions. It looks the theology, the
23:20
history, and the practical strategies of how the Church
23:22
fulfills the Great Commission. It asks the question, how do we
23:26
effectively take the gospel across cultural and linguistic
23:29
boundaries? Perfect.
23:31
So, connecting Calvin's logic to modern messiology, Shryock
23:34
quotes George Cowan from his book The Word That Kindles.
23:37
What is Cowan Point? Cowan points out that Christ's
23:41
command to make disciples included teaching them to obey
23:44
everything he commanded. Since the Bible alone preserves
23:46
what Christ commanded, the availability of the text is
23:49
assumed in the Great Commission itself.
23:51
You can't obey a command you don't have access to.
23:54
Therefore, Cowan concludes, translation of the Bible is a
23:57
necessary part of our obedience to Christ's command.
24:01
Translation is not a luxury upgrade to the Great Commission.
24:04
It is the basic operating system required to run it.
24:07
Spot on. The chapter also includes a
24:09
point from William Barrick, who really drives this home.
24:12
Barrick argues that evangelization actively
24:15
necessitates translating the Bible into the common language
24:17
of common people. He says the Scriptures
24:19
themselves carry the message of Christ best.
24:22
Because of this truth, he concludes that churches
24:25
absolutely must place a priority on the mystery of Bible
24:29
translation for the world's mission fields.
24:31
If you want to fulfill the Great Commission, you have to give
24:35
people the words of Christ in a language they can comprehend.
24:39
It is that straightforward. It is brilliant logic.
24:42
You cannot obey the command to teach all nations unless the
24:46
nations have the textbook. But the Reformers took it even
24:49
one step further. It wasn't just about the
24:50
church's command to preach, it was about the individual
24:54
believers command to read. That brings us to the 4th
24:57
rationale detailed in the chapter, The Scriptural Commands
25:00
for Believers to Read the Bible. This is a vital distinction.
25:04
It is one thing for the church leadership to have a mandate to
25:07
disseminate the text, but the text points out that the Bible
25:10
explicitly commands God's people to read and search the
25:13
Scriptures themselves. To understand why this rationale
25:16
was so explosive, we have to look at the historical stage.
25:19
During the Protestant Reformation.
25:21
There was a sharp contrast between the Roman Catholic
25:23
position of the time and the views of the Protestant
25:26
reformers. Very sharp.
25:28
The prevailing Roman Catholic position restricted the reading
25:31
of scripture to the clergy or those who could read Latin.
25:34
The Protestant reformers fundamentally opposed this,
25:37
believing in the priesthood of all believers, which meant
25:40
everyone must have direct access to the text.
25:43
The text mentions the French reformer Theodore Beza, who
25:46
lives from 1519 to 16 O 5. Beza was incredibly vocal about
25:51
this. What did he argue?
25:52
He wrote that the unlearned and unskillful need the Bible
25:56
translated into their mother tongue so they can bear fruit.
26:00
He explicitly condemned the Papists who refused to allow
26:03
such translations. Let us unpack that context a
26:06
bit. B as A using the term papists is
26:08
highly charged. Use a very aggressive term.
26:10
He was reacting to the official stance of the Roman Catholic
26:13
Church centered around the Pope, which actively restricted
26:16
vernacular translations. The Council of Trent, which
26:19
occurred around this time, reaffirmed the Latin Vulgate as
26:23
the official authoritative text. So they were doubling down on
26:26
Latin. The Catholic Church feared that
26:28
ordinary uneducated people would misinterpret the Bible and fall
26:31
into heresy without the guiding hand of the Church's teaching
26:35
authority. And Visa saw this differently.
26:37
Visa and the reformers saw this as a tragedy.
26:40
They believe that restricting the text was effectively
26:43
starving the flock. Visa was essentially saying You
26:46
are actively preventing God's people from obeying God's direct
26:50
command to read His Word. That leads us right to William
26:53
Whitaker, a Cambridge theologian who lived from 1548 to 1595.
26:58
The text mentions his work Disputations on Holy Scripture,
27:01
which became a massive defense of the Reformed doctrine of
27:04
Scripture. Whitaker is a fantastic figure.
27:06
Whitaker didn't just argue from emotion or history.
27:09
He argued straight from the biblical.
27:11
Text Whittaker's defense was deeply rooted in the commands
27:15
found within the Bible itself. He argued that the Scriptures
27:18
must be set before all Christians in their vernacular
27:20
tongues so that every individual can read them.
27:23
Where do you look in the text for that?
27:24
He cited passages from Deuteronomy, specifically
27:27
chapter 617 and 31. These are passages where God
27:31
commands the Israelites to keep His words in their hearts, to
27:34
teach them to their children, and even commands the king to
27:37
write a copy of the Law for himself.
27:39
So God intended for the text to be engaged with daily.
27:42
Whitaker's point was that God revealed the Scriptures to His
27:45
people precisely for them to read, interact with, and obey on
27:49
a daily basis. Moving to the New Testament,
27:53
Whitaker focused heavily on Jesus's words in John 5.39,
27:57
where Jesus says to the religious leaders search the
28:00
scriptures. Search the scriptures.
28:02
Whitaker interpreted this not as a command restricted to scholars
28:05
or the elite, but as a broad invitation to both the educated
28:09
and the uneducated alike to search the Scriptures, to dig
28:13
into them and find the testimony of Christ.
28:15
You must have them in a language you can understand.
28:17
You cannot search a locked room. That is a great analogy, and a
28:20
book written in a dead language is a locked room for the average
28:23
person. I appreciate how Francis
28:25
Turretin approached this. Turretin was an Italian Swiss
28:28
theologian who lived from 1623 to 1687.
28:31
His works became standard textbooks for Reformed theology
28:34
for generations. He was incredibly influential.
28:37
When Turretin listed his reasons for why Bible translation was
28:39
necessary, he plays this specific obligation to read as
28:43
his absolute #1 rationale. He placed it above the Great
28:46
Commission and above historical precedent.
28:49
That is fascinating. Why did he rank it so highly?
28:51
For Turretin, the explicit command from God for believers
28:55
to read the text was the highest justification because it
28:59
addresses the end user directly. Oh, I see.
29:01
The Great Commission addresses the preacher or the missionary,
29:05
telling them to go and teach. But the command to search the
29:09
Scriptures addresses every single believer from the farmer
29:12
to the king. It establishes a universal duty.
29:16
If God commands every believer to read, then the church has an
29:19
absolute, non negotiable obligation to provide the text
29:23
in a readable format. And this rationale made its way
29:26
right into the Westminster Confession, which incorporated
29:28
Whitaker's arguments and a firm translation based heavily on
29:31
that command to read and search the Scriptures.
29:34
So what does this all mean? We have looked at historical
29:36
precedent, the unbroken chain from Hebrew to Greek to Latin to
29:40
English. We've looked at reader benefits,
29:42
the desperate need for salvation and spiritual growth.
29:45
We've looked at the Great Commission, the command to
29:47
preach and teach the nations. And we've looked at the command
29:50
to read the universal duty of every believer to search the
29:53
Scriptures. That is 4 massive pillars.
29:56
If you stack all of those up, you have a massive fortress of
29:59
logic. But Shryock doesn't stop there.
30:02
He brings us to the 5th and final rationale, which acts as
30:06
the ultimate capstone, God's will for Scripture in all ages.
30:10
This final rationale elevates the discussion from human
30:14
obedience to divine sovereignty. It focuses entirely on God's
30:18
sovereign will, His divine authorship, and His active
30:21
preservation of the text. It zooms way out.
30:24
From this viewpoint, translation is not simply a prerequisite for
30:27
a task like preaching. It is an act of direct
30:30
participation in God's eternal plan.
30:32
God actively wills that His revelation be preserved and
30:35
transmitted to every generation and every language group.
30:38
The text brings John Kevin back in here, specifically his 1535
30:42
preface to the French New Testament.
30:44
Calvin stated that Bible translation was simply God's
30:47
will. Straight to the point.
30:48
He believed it was God's will for His truth to reign over all
30:52
humanity by the work of the Holy Spirit through the comprehension
30:56
of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Let's trace Calvin's logic.
31:00
If God desires His truth to reign over humanity, and
31:04
humanity was scattered A Babble into thousands of different
31:06
language groups, then translation is the direct
31:09
fulfillment of God's desire to reunite humanity under His
31:13
truth. Reversing the purse of Babel.
31:15
Reversing the Curse of Babel through the hard work of
31:17
translation. That is a stunning theological
31:21
connection. The text connects this thought
31:23
straight to the very first chapter and first article of the
31:26
Westminster Confession. That article explains that while
31:29
the light of nature shows there is a God, it is not enough to
31:32
give the knowledge of God necessary for salvation.
31:35
Creation shows us God exists, but it doesn't give us the
31:38
gospel. Therefore, it pleased the Lord
31:40
to reveal Himself and declare His will unto His Church.
31:43
Furthermore, to preserve and propagate that truth, God
31:46
committed holy unto writing, making the Holy Scripture most
31:49
necessary. So the confession is saying that
31:51
God didn't just speak, he willed for his speech to be written
31:56
down specifically so it would survive the test of time and the
32:00
corruption of human memory. It was God's will to reveal
32:03
himself in writing. Therefore, propagating that
32:06
written word in every language is the execution of God's will.
32:10
We are taking what God decreed necessary and making it
32:13
accessible. This provides a beautiful way to
32:15
view the history of the Church. We are not looking at merely
32:18
human effort, we are looking at divine Providence utilizing
32:22
human vessels. Shryock shares the perspective
32:26
of a modern Haitian Creole translator named Hans Bernard.
32:30
What does Bernard say? Bernard provides a fantastic
32:32
quote that grounds this massive theological concept in modern
32:36
reality. He states that God has been
32:37
providentially using men from millennia in order to transmit
32:41
His word in the form of translations.
32:43
Passing the baton. He points out that because of
32:45
this providential work, we can use translations today for
32:47
personal devotions, teaching or preaching.
32:49
I love that Bernard views his work not in isolation but it's
32:53
part of the millennia long relay race.
32:56
He is carrying the same baton that Wycliffe and Tyndale and
32:59
Ziegebald carried. He highlights the corporate
33:02
responsibility of the Church across time.
33:04
We all play a part. Individual believers and the
33:07
church as a whole have a responsibility to take part in
33:10
God's preserving work. Translating the text is how the
33:14
Church propagates God's will for mankind.
33:17
When a linguist sits down to figure out how to translate the
33:19
concept of grace into a tribal language that has no word for
33:23
it, they are actively participating in the sovereign
33:26
will of God to make himself known.
33:28
We have now covered all 5 rationales detailed in the
33:31
chapter. Now, as Aaron Tryock does at the
33:34
end of his work, we need to evaluate them and synthesize
33:37
their collective weight, right? We have looked at these distinct
33:39
historical and theological arguments, but how do they stack
33:43
up against each other and how do they work together to form a
33:46
cohesive defense? Let's run through Shryock's
33:48
evaluation. It is very helpful for
33:50
categorizing these ideas and seeing which arguments carry the
33:53
most weight. Shryock notes that historical
33:56
precedent, while interesting and prevalent throughout church
33:59
history, lacks innate authority. Just because something was done
34:04
in the past, even by someone as notable as King Alfred or the
34:06
early Church Fathers, does not make it a binding divine command
34:10
for today. It is illustrative but not
34:13
authoritative. Right.
34:14
And then we look at reader benefits like salvation and
34:17
spiritual growth. Those are wonderful,
34:19
compassionate, and necessary motivations.
34:22
You want people to be saved and comforted.
34:24
But, Schwark points out they must be tied to the Holy
34:27
Spirit's work. You need the Spirit for
34:29
comprehension. Anyone can read a self help book
34:32
and find some practical benefit that the translator of scripture
34:35
is relying on the Holy Spirit to work specifically through the
34:38
comprehension of biblical truth to bring about eternal life.
34:41
The benefit is dependent on divine action.
34:44
This brings us to the Reformation rationales, which
34:46
focus on obedience to the Great Commission and the biblical
34:49
command to read the Scriptures. Shryock argues that these carry
34:52
massive weight. Why?
34:54
Because they rely on explicit biblical authority.
34:57
They're not based on history or human desire.
35:00
They are based on the direct commands of Jesus and the
35:03
apostles. Furthermore, they align with the
35:06
primary way the Holy Spirit works, which is through the
35:09
human comprehension of truth. You cannot obey the command to
35:12
preach or the command to read without a translated text.
35:16
And finally, the capstone rationale regarding God's will.
35:20
This elevates the entire process from a human task to a divine
35:24
prerogative. The act of translation is a task
35:27
that actively glorifies the Triune God by fulfilling his
35:30
eternal desire to make himself known to the nation's.
35:34
When you take the collective weight of all 5 rationales, the
35:37
conclusion is striking. Translation is an act of
35:40
obedience to Christ, accomplishing the will of God
35:42
the Father by the power of the Holy Spirit.
35:45
It involves all three persons of the Trinity working in concert
35:48
through the agency of the Church.
35:49
I want to repeat that because it is such a tight, brilliant
35:52
summary. Translation is an act of
35:54
obedience to Christ, accomplishing the will of God
35:56
the Father by the work of the Holy Spirit.
35:58
It is a fully Trinitarian endeavor.
36:00
A beautiful summary. The text briefly touches upon
36:03
the closing doxology from Romans 16.26 to 27, which is a fitting
36:09
end to this discussion. Before we read that, we should
36:11
define doxology for our listeners.
36:13
Good catch. What is the doxology,
36:15
practically speaking? A doxology is simply a short
36:18
hymn or expression of praise to God, usually found at the end of
36:20
epistles in the New Testament or sung at the end of a church
36:23
service. It comes from the Greek words
36:25
doxa meaning glory and loggia meaning saying.
36:29
So it is a saying of glory. Perfect.
36:31
So Paul ends his letter to the Romans with this saying of
36:34
glory. He writes that the mystery of
36:36
the gospel has now been disclosed, and through the
36:38
prophetic writings has been made known to all nations according
36:42
to the command of the eternal God to bring about the obedience
36:45
of faith. He concludes to the only wise
36:48
God be glory forevermore through Jesus Christ.
36:51
Amen. The prophetic writings, the
36:53
Scriptures, are the mechanism for the revelation of the
36:55
mystery to all nations, and you cannot make it known to all
36:58
nations without translation. That is a wonderful summary of
37:02
the chapters intent. The history of translation is
37:05
the history of God ensuring his people have access to His voice.
37:09
From King Alfred looking at the sequence of languages in the 9th
37:12
century, to the fierce theological defenses during the
37:15
Reformation, to the modern translators working in remote
37:18
villages today, it is all a cohesive, providential movement
37:22
of obedience. We have covered a lot of ground
37:25
today, spanning hundreds of years and digging into some
37:28
hefty theological concepts. But I want to bring this all the
37:31
way down to your living room. Consider this.
37:34
If the Holy Spirit's primary method of working in human lives
37:37
is through the comprehension of biblical truth in a mother
37:39
tongue, how should that alter the way you view the physical
37:43
Bible sitting on your desk right now?
37:45
Are you taking for granted what translators centuries ago risk
37:49
charges of heresy, imprisonment, and even the stake to give you?
37:52
It is something worth thinking about.
37:53
The next time you open those pages, you are holding a miracle
37:56
of Providence and a record of centuries of faithful obedience.
38:00
Thank you for joining us for this deep dive into the source
38:02
material.