Featured What if you were the one?

I heard somewhere that also Ruth is often translated first. think because it is a story also short book thus can be translated quicker. i think there were other reasons too but can't remember.

 

Two reasons. John is in the Greek New Testament and John 20:31, ". . . But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name."

I can understand why the Hebrew Genesis might be chosen first. Now there is the Greek LXX of Genesis. It has a few notable differences from the Hebrew text readings.

 

For an illiterate tribal group that has never heard of the Bible or the Gospel, translation sounds extremely premature. Laying some groundwork with preaching and interpretation would seem called for first.

And well before that, learning their language and culture, which should precede the work in any case, unless there is a lingua franca to work with. Still would want to know their culture, though.

Paul writes of preaching and hearing as God’s method, and is what he used.

11 As Scripture says, “Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame.” 12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

14 How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? 15 And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!” --- Romans 10:11-15

 

The people would be out of luck cause I can't translate anything. I know just enough Greek to be dangerous and absolutely no Hebrew.
I also don't know Rohingya.

 

Since all of those questions were rather obviously pre-answered in my post, that response seems to be aimed at something else. But what?

There seems to be a conflation of translation and interpretation going on in it somewhere.

Surely you are not saying that an illiterate person must have his language written down and he learn to read it before hearing the Gospel or being discipled, are you?

In any case, do we agree that both the target language and culture should be understood for either good interpretation or good translation?

As a final thought, this instruction by Paul to Timothy seems particularly apt here:

"And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable people who will also be qualified to teach others." —2 Timothy 2:2

 

Yes, I briefly looked at their case. Sounds like a nightmare for anyone born into that situation. On the one hand, seems no one wants them. On the other, there seems to be a competition to script their language. It all sounds rather political.

 

Yes, I thought we were in basic agreement. Because church leadership takes time to develop, and translation is a necessary part of that, the work takes extreme effort and thus commitment. Without Scriptures in their own language, the effort ultimately cannot be sustained.

God bless those who are called to go, go, and stick it out.

 

Slightly off topic of the translation subject, but...

Is it the Buddhist majority then who are the persecutors of the Rohingya, and is the hatred and persecution because of their religion, race, culture, or possibly some combination of all of these? Or something else?

 

Absolutely. Along with the rest of the people there, Christian missionaries in Myanmar are having a hard time with the chaos. Ross and Cathy Hodsdon spent a lot of time there translating scripture into several indigenous languages. With Ross in Glory, Cathy doesn't travel as much and we're glad she wasn't in Myanmar when the coup occurred.

 

Interesting to see the Rohingya as a subject of discussion. There has been a distinct difference between how Rohingya refugees have been received by our state over the last few years and the Chin/Zo refugees coming over because of the coup. The latter are of the same ethnicity and generally the same religion as the Christian majority here. The Rohingya, sadly, are not, and seem to be stranded in Bangladesh. So near yet so far from the gospel. This thread prompted me to find out more. I had no idea that they lack a complete Bible.

Rohingya Language | Joshua Project
An Open Letter from a Christian Rohingya Refugee - IMB

 

The word 'forget' and its kin is a far better word choice. According to Merriam Webster 'forget' has been used since before the 12th century. The word 'disremember' has been in use since 1805, and it's considered "provincial and archaic."

 

Ah, but a good translator can be both when he wants, especially a professor.