Category Archives: Church

Fluent Reading Makes Powerful Bibles

As we have thought through our messaging lately, one thing we saw friends do was develop a personal ministry hashtag. This is not just to try to be trendy (though hashtags are integral to communication these days), but to communicate a particular repetitive theme in a terse manner.

I think this was a good exercise, because it forced us to think about how we would summarize our Wycliffe Ministry in a few words, even if it was in the format #MyHashtagIsLongerThanYourHashtag…

So we came up with #FluentReadingMakesPowerfulBibles, and I’d like to take this post to explain why. First of all, as a full sentence, I hope that it doesn’t require much explanation. 🙂

But to explain our thinking in any case, #FluentReadingMakesPowerfulBibles makes a connection that I often find myself communicating face to face. That is, what do I do as a missionary linguist, and how does that connect to the larger Bible translation movement?

Thinking about #PowerfulBibles, something that has plagued some Bible translation projects is the question of whether the Bible will be used once produced. I think we all agree that a Bible on a shelf is not the point; we want Bibles in use, powerfully sustaining, encouraging and growing the church for the people who speak the language of that translation.

There are certainly many reasons why a Bible translation might get less usage, but the one that impacts my work the most directly deals with the fluency with which people can read the translation (#FluentReading). If people stumble over words they’re not sure how to pronounce (e.g., because a given spelling could be pronounced multiple ways), or if they have to read a sentence to understand it before they can pronounce all the words (therefore reading parts multiple times to pronounce the words correctly), then we should not expect reading or listening to be very enjoyable.

Such a lack of ability to clearly and fluently communicate meaning translates almost directly into a lack of power. If your mom calls you to the table, but stumbles over the words, would that mean the same to you? Or again, if your father corrects you, but stumbles over his words, would that mean the same? When we hear God say

Come, everyone who thirsts,
come to the waters;
and he who has no money,
come, buy and eat!
Come, buy wine and milk
without money and without price.
(Isaiah 55:1 ESV)

This should sound as a mother calling children to the table, with power to provide, and pleasure on the other side for all who respond. And when we hear God say

let the wicked forsake his way,
and the unrighteous man his thoughts;
let him return to the Lord, that he may have compassion on him,
and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.
(Isaiah 55:7 ESV)

That should sound like a father disciplining a son, with power and fear for the rebellious, and compassion and pardon for the repentant.

We are, of course, not denying the power of the Holy Spirit to communicate in spite of a bad writing system. But He typically chooses to communicate through the written word, that written word is contained in one writing system or another. And that written word is turned into the spoken word by people more or less able to do so well.

The goal of my work developing writing systems is to remove as many barriers as possible to fluent reading, that the path of communication between God’s word and peoples’ hearts would be as clear and direct as possible. And this is why I’m going to keep talking about how #FluentReadingMakesPowerfulBibles.

Changes to our Communication

We have been communicating about our Wycliffe ministry for almost two decades, and during that time we have tried to communicate well in both content and form. Our first newsletter was very plain, with a small picture and lots of text:
Header from the first newsletter we sent

By our next newsletter, we had a title, header, tagline, the Wycliffe logo, and those cool marble bars that came standard with Publisher:
Header from our first Philologos newsletter

Later on, we went minimalist, removing some of the busyness to focus more on verbal and pictorial content, with more white space:
revamped philologos header

Even later, we used pictures as header backgrounds, allowing more visual appeal, but also another place to put a picture, without crowding the rest of the newsletter:

Header for Philologos XIII number 3

In all these reworkings of our newsletter, one thing we had not really re-evaluated is the quarterly two page production itself. Since we joined Wycliffe 17 years ago, we have seen blogs, Facebook, Twitter, and other media platforms come (and go). Today our friends and family are more connected by social media than by Email. Similarly, people are more connected by phone than by computer.

Given these changes, it seems that we’ve been writing too much and too little. A two page newsletter is longer than most people seem to read in a single sitting. At the same time, hearing from us each quarter means that an eternity (in social networking time) passes between each newsletter. So, with your permission, we are going to try putting out shorter updates more often.  Don’t worry, those of you who fear missing out on my wordiness will find links to longer articles (like this one) here on our blog. 🙂

I say “with your permission” in all seriousness, because we want to help you be a real part of our work. The last thing we want is to spam anyone, or stuff your inbox with more mail than you asked for. This is one of the reasons we now use Mailchimp, because they don’t allow spam, and because they have a simple unsubscribe function in each footer. But we would love to hear from you if you have any questions or concerns about this change —or about just about anything else. :-)

Our Email address is on each of our Emailed newsletters; if you don’t have one handy, you can also send us a message through our Wycliffe ministry page, through the “Finances/Write Us” link above right (or below on mobile devices), which goes here.

We welcome your feedback! Tell us what you think, and we’ll see what we can do.
Our goal, after all, is to communicate well.

I thank my God in all my remembrance of you, always
in every prayer of mine for you all making my prayer with joy,
because of your partnership in the gospel from the first day until now.
—Philippians 1:3-5 (ESV)

Africa Night!

Have you ever wondered how people make their first alphabet?

Starting this summer, we are giving people a taste of Bible Translation work in Africa, through small group meetings designed to be interactive and engaging. We introduce people to the language work we do with Wycliffe Bible Translators, in three parts (total 90 minutes):

  1. An interactive exercise for anyone who can read short English words. See what it’s like to discover your vowels for the first time!
  2. African foods typical to many of the places we have worked
  3. Testimonies, videos, slides and information from Wycliffe Bible Translators and our own experience. Q&A as time allows.

We have worked so far with groups of 6-25 people; we’d like to keep them small enough to allow everyone to participate. If you have a small group or Sunday school class that would be interested, or if you would like to join or host a group, please let us know, and we’ll get you on our calendar.

That said, if you have any questions about Africa, Wycliffe Bible Translators or our work, please don’t be shy; we’d love to discuss it over coffee, too. 😉 🙂

What is the use of the Law?

Going through Romans 7, I find a lot of our discussions could use more background than we have. When talking about “the Law”, there are two questions I have found very helpful in finding my way through Biblical texts, as well as conversations about them with others. The first I talked about here, under the polysemy of the phrase “(the) law”. In short, this phrase can refer to different things, so the question I like to ask is What does “(the) law” mean here? That is, if you assume it refers to the mosaic law (as it often does), you will get mixed up if a particular use actually refers to natural (i.e., not codified) law, explicit laws given to others (before or after Moses), or to a general principles without any particular moral value —all of which I have found in scripture.

The second question that I find helps clarify texts on the law is What is/are the purpose(s) of the law? I was in a conversation lately where someone talked about an unintended consequence of the law, which sounded like God intended one thing, then had to go to plan B later. This problem is particularly relevant if you think that in the Old testament the purpose of the law was to make people righteous. Given that we know this is clearly not the case in Christ, it would seem to be a change, something of a Plan B for God. But does God have plan B’s? I don’t think so. So I think it helps to ask if it ever was the purpose of the law to make us righteous. Or to declare us righteous. Or to completely remove our sin, even after the fact. Rather, the scriptures tell us

For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins? But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins..…And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. (Heb 10:1-4,11 ESV)

There are other passages, many in the epistle to the Hebrews, which deal with this question of the purpose or value of the law and sacrificial system it contains. But rather that try to summarize it all myself, I’ll include here a couple paragraphs from the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646), in the Modern English Study Version (1993). I think it provides a great starting point to think about the purpose(s) of the law, whatever you think about what this confession says elsewhere. I got the text here, and the prooftexts here (plus a few of my own). This is the sixth and seventh paragraphs of Chapter 19, “The Law of God”:

6. Although true believers are not under the law as a covenant of works by which they are justified or condemned (Romans 6:14; 7:4; Galatians 2:16; 3:13; 4:4-5; Acts 13:38-39; Romans 8:1, 33; Heb 7:19,10:1-4,11), nevertheless the law is of great use to them as well as to others. By informing them —as a rule of life— both of the will of God and of their duty, it directs and binds them to walk accordingly (Romans 7:12, 22, 25; Psalm 119:1-6; 1 Corinthians 7:19; Galatians 5:14-23). It also reveals to them the sinful pollutions of their nature, hearts, and lives (Romans 7:7, 13; 3:20). Therefore, when they examine themselves in the light of the law, they may come to further conviction of, humiliation for, and hatred of their sin (James 1:23-25; Romans 7:9, 14, 24), together with a clearer view of their need of Christ and the perfection of his obedience (Galatians 3:24; Romans 7:24-25; 8:3-4). The law is also useful to the regenerate because, by forbidding sin, it restrains their corruptions (James 2:11-12; Psalm 119:101, 104, 128). By its threats it shows them what their sins deserve, and, although they are free from the curse threatened in the law, it shows the afflictions that they may expect because of them in this life (Ezra 9:13-14; Psalm 89:30-34; Galatians 3:13). The promises of the law likewise show to the regenerate God’s approval of obedience and the blessings they may expect as they obey the law (Exodus 19:5-6; Deuteronomy 5:33; Leviticus 18:5; Matthew 19:17; Leviticus 26:1-13; 2 Corinthians 6:16; Ephesians 6:2-3; Psalm 19:11; 37:11; Matthew 5:5), although these blessings are not due to them by the law as a covenant of works (Galatians 2:16; Luke 17:10). Therefore, the fact that a man does good rather than evil because the law encourages good and discourages evil is no evidence that the man is under the law rather than under grace (Romans 6:12-15; 1 Peter 3:8-12 with Psalm 34:12-16; Hebrews 12:28-29).

7. These uses of the law do not conflict with the grace of the gospel, but are in complete harmony with it (Romans 3:31; Galatians 3:21; Titus 2:11-14); for it is the Spirit of Christ who subdues and enables the will of man to do freely and cheerfully those things which the will of God, revealed in the law, requires (Ezekiel 36:27; Hebrews 8:10 with Jeremiah 31:33; Psalm 119:35, 47; Romans 7:22).

The most important point, for me, is that there are a number of legitimate uses of the law, none of which is to make us right legally (i.e., justification) or in fact (i.e., sanctification). We can therefore conclude that legalism (attempting to accomplish either justification or sanctification through the law) is and has always been an abuse of the law.

Romans 3:1-8

Here is my mindmap of this passage:

Rom 3:1-8 mindmap

Here are the scrolls.

Here are some more questions:

1. What question opens this chapter? How is it rephrased?
2. What is the answer to the question(s)?
3. What other answers could be expected?
4. How does Paul connect advantage/profit with belief in an unexpected way?
5. Whose fault is it when someone doesn’t believe? Why?
6. What does our unrighteousness do (v5)?
7. Why might God be called unjust (v5)?
8. Why is God NOT unjust?
9. How does ‘my lie’ affect God/my judgment?
10. How does Paul connect good and evil?
11. What do others say Paul says about good and evil? How does he respond?

Romans 2:17-29

Here is my mind map of this passage:
Romans 2:17-29 mind map
The scrolls is here.
And here are a few questions of my own:

How does Paul describe what a Jew does?
How does he describe who a Jew is?
How does he describe their teaching?
What good deeds does Paul explicitly mention for the Jews?
Which of their hypocrisies does Paul explicitly mention?
What laws do they both teach and break?
What is the consequence of this hypocrisy?
When is circumcision profitable?
When is uncircumcision profitable?
How does one see inward circumcision?
Who will ultimately reward the truly circumcised? What implications does that have for us?
How will circumcision relate to obedience in judgement?
How does Paul compare two definitions of being a Jew?
What are the implications of inward/outward circumcision?

Romans 2:1-16 thoughts

This passage begins with something of a break in subject matter, though with a lot of continuity. If Romans 1:18-23 is really best summarized as “they are without excuse” (v20), then this passage can be seen as building on and extending that point with a different audience in focus: “you have no excuse” (2:1). That is, the break is that Paul is addressing a different kind of sin, and a different kind of sinner, but the main point is the same. Just as the immoral pagans had no excuse, the people addressed here also have no excuse.

Also in the opening verse, I find the passing judgment argument interesting, in as much as one’s passing judgment really does imply that one knows the law that one isn’t keeping oneself, making any excuse invalid. This echoes what is said elsewhere is scripture:

Do not speak evil against one another, brothers. The one who speaks against a brother or judges his brother, speaks evil against the law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge. There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor? (James 4:11-12 ESV)

So when we put ourselves in the place of a judge over another, we put ourselves in the place of God. But furthermore, as we judge the law, we remove ourselves from being doers –and this is a critical point for Paul in Romans 2:1, too, I think, that judges are not obeying the law themselves.

Furthermore, verse 4 tells us of the kindness of God in holding back his wrath, which is meant to lead us to repentance. This reminds me again of a biblical principle:

The sins of some people are conspicuous, going before them to judgment,
but the sins of others appear later.
(1Tim 5:24 ESV)

There is also another Chiasm in these verses, as pointed out in the scrolls, from v6-11:

  • A: 6He will render to each one according to his works:
    • B: 7to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life;
      • C: 8but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury.
      • C: 9There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek,
    • B: 10but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek.
  • A: 11For God shows no partiality.

As I find true in other kinds of parallelism in scripture, seeing this structure opens up other ways of understanding. For instance, I would not normally see a parallelism between verses six and eleven, though the parallelism between 8-9 is clear, and between 7-10 is also clear (to the point of using “glory” and “honor” in both). Assuming this is right, which looks correct to me, then we must ask in what sense are six and eleven parallel? That is, in what sense does “He will render to each one according to his works” mean something like “For God shows no partiality”?

The answer to this question answers another question, which I’ve seen come up a number of times this week, which is, how do we deal with the fact that Paul seems to be teaching works righteousness here? Is God really saying “do the law and be justified”, as v13b seems to be saying? Some say that this is a hypothetical possibility that never happens. I don’t think Paul is being hypothetical here; rather, he is either talking about an increase of righteousness which comes by pursuing the law by faith (as claimed by John Piper), or else he is talking about a righteousness which is complete an accomplished by Christ and no one else (though those who are in Christ will share in it, as we will continue to see).

But if vv6&11 are equivalents, then we have another possibility. We generally think badly of “works” because we see them as a way to seek justification, apart from “faith”. But that is not the opposition in view here, by Paul. He is not opposing works with faith, but rather with partiality, or favoritism.  That is, while Paul elsewhere says you are not justified by your works, but rather by faith, here he is saying you are not justified by favoritism, but rather by your works. He is not making the argument that we can be acquitted by our works, but rather that when we meet our judge, he won’t just let us off because we have the right lineage. God is not partial. Rather, he will look at our works, and judge us justly.  Now as I see it, there is no conflict there with justification by faith alone, because anyone who honestly looks at his works, when told that they will be the basis of his judgement, should fall on the floor and cry “mercy!”.

So it is “the doers of the law who will be justified” (v13b),  but anyone with a clear view of himself will know that doesn’t apply to him. I am not a doer of the law, but a judge of it (2:1, James 4:11-12). I like to apply the law to others, rather than do it myself. And even where I want to do it myself, I fail. So any honest take on myself should tell me that either I trust the only one who really has done the law, and receive his mercy, or else there is no hope to be justified for me.

Fortunately, this is precisely what Jesus offers us. He has accomplished the law for us, and offers to pay for our sins, and provide us a righteousness which is not tied to our works, but which does nonetheless impact our works, and bring us slowly by slowly more in line with his own obedience.

But we won’t do that, so long as we hold on to the vain hope that our decency, or our lineage, or our club or church memberships, or anything else, will give us an in with the judge. If we think we can bribe the judge to provoke favoritism toward us, why would we ever give up on our works and trust Christ?

Finally, I think it is interesting that there is little in this text to state the ethnic group Paul is addressing here. I have long thought this passage was addressing Jews, but I was challenged this weekend to reconsider, and I think it is better to look at this section as being toward moral, or decent, people, of whatever ethnic group. Maybe they are Jews, maybe they are Gentile pagans. Whatever their ethnicity, they keep their lawns well manicured, and don’t get drunk or sleep around. But while they are not the hedonistic pagans described in 1:18-32, nor clearly the Law depending Jews of 2:17ff, these decent people also need Christ, and cannot count on their decency  to save them, whether that decency is derived from Abraham or Greek or Roman civics. We all need Jesus; there is no excuse for any of us.

 

 

Romans 2:1-16 (Moral Sinners)

Here is my mind map for this section:

Romans 2:1-16 mindmap
You can get a copy of the scrolls for this section here.

And here are a few questions of my own:

Who is Paul addressing now?
How does the reader condemning himself?
What is God’s judgment based on?
What is the purpose of the questions in v3-4 ?
What is the source of this person’s treasure/store of wrath?
How does Paul describe ‘the day’?
What will the judgment be based on? What is it not based on? Describe each group.
What will each group get? How is there “no partiality”?
Who gets ‘tribulation and anguish’?
Who gets ‘glory, honor, and peace’?
What does ‘partiality’ mean here?
What happens to people who sin without the law? And ​ with ​ the law?
Who will be justified by the law?
Who was the Law given to? Who will be judged by it?
How can those without the law be justified by it?
What role does the conscience play?
What will God judge? (v 16)
What role does the conscience play in all this?

Romans 1:24-32

Here is my mind map of Romans 1:24-32:
Rom 1:24-32 mind map

You can find the scrolls for this next week here.

And here are some more questions to get you thinking:

  • How did God respond to the suppression of his truth?
  • What does the repetition of “God gave them up” three times mean?
  • What is the consequence of sin in this passage?
  • How does Paul describe them in the end?
  • How should these people have responded to God’s judgment?
  • How should you respond to God’s judgment?