An Idiot’s Guide to Hope

An Idiot’s Guide to Hope – Part 1

What Did the Hebrews Hope For?

Abraham hoped for a son. And for many descendants. And for the land. Did he ever see the land he hoped for? Only one field of it, with a cave to bury his wife in (and for him to be buried in, when that time came). His hope was a future hope.

The Israelites hope for a king like David to come. Kings were chosen by anointing them with oil. A mashiyakh was an anointed, or chosen person. A king who would act as a just servant (Isa 42:1-9) and yet be the one in the apocalyptic vision Daniel had about the son of man (Dan 7:9-28).

The Jews in exile hoped for restoration – not just to be able to return to Jerusalem and Judah, but restoration of the covenant, that they would once again be able to live in peace as God’s chosen people, who were called to be a kingdom of priests, and light to the nations.

What Did Jesus’ Followers Hope For?

The deliverance and restoration of the kingdom of Israel (Luk 24:21; Act 1:6).

Comments

Asset Based Bible Translation (ABBT)

Many of you will have heard of asset-based community development (ABCD). How can Bible translation programmes be asset based, rather than deficit based? The best way to look at this is a comparison table: Deficit based Asset based Driven by outsiders Driven by the community Outside funding Community funded Done to meet a need Done to help the community grow Quality control done by a consultant Community checked and approved Control from outside-in Lead by stepping back Products not accepted? Products are accepted Little engagement Engagement with products Scientific Organic Not sustainable Sustainable Of course many translation programmes these days are neither one nor t'other, they are somewhere between these two extremes. Nevertheless, this illustrates a point, and shows that the current

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 it is the idea that seed was scatted by throwing it from a bag carried round the farmer's shoulder. This could be explained in the para-

Asking the Right Questions in Bible Translation and Scripture Engagement Planning

If you want to get useful answers you have to ask the right questions. Do you agree? Yes, of course you do. In the Bible translation world we often ask a very narrow question when planning for the next stage of work: 'What would you like to see translated next?' Now, if you simply want to translate, and that's it, that question is fine, but what if you want to see some kind of result from your translation work? What if, for instance, you want to see transformation occur? Then a more powerful question to ask the community and positive stakeholders in the project would be: 'What kingdom goals would you like to see reached?' These kingdom goals should meet felt needs of the community - they should solve problems that are apparent to most or all in the community. See below on how those can be met. If that's too abstract, then try, 'What kinds of things, in your extended family, do you tend to worry about?' This will help establish some felt needs, from which

Scripture Engagement

Search This Blog