Sep 10 2007
Very Interesting Article
…on the Logos Blog:
One of the easiest-to-spot trends over the past two decades has been the spiraling decline in original language requirements in seminaries and Bible schools. With two decades of momentum, this trend is now so well established it has migrated from the classroom to the pulpit. We now have pastors all over the world who lack the ability to consult or teach from original language texts common to prior generations. An unintended consequence of less rigorous study is the general lack of encouragement and emphasis on Bible study and Bible study methods courses for lay people. If a pastor does not demonstrate original language skills, there is little motivation for lay people to explore beyond the reach of their teacher.
Comments, insights, opinions?
There are lots of comments on the article, and they seem to be largely positive. I am not so sure. Using an interlinear is an easy crutch and highly prone to error or to confirming your already determined prejudice. Technology is no substitute for motivation to learn and discipline in study. Technology will not help you critique your motives or prejudgments either. I find other languages difficult and I use interlinear tools - but I also check translations against a variety of literal and non-literal resources. The truest comment on the site is that learning another language teaches you your own mother tongue. Incidentally, I have learned Hebrew because of the ignorance and inertia of the pastoral oversight I have experienced.
An unintended consequence of less rigorous study is the general lack of encouragement and emphasis on Bible study and Bible study methods courses for lay people.
I don’t get the logic of this. The Bible is understandable is translation, so a surprising degree. Why should lack of interest in original languages automatically lead to lack of interest in the Bible? I know plenty of Christians who haven’t much of a clue about original languages, but who study the Bible inside out. I know plenty of scholars who do know the original languages, but have little interest in the Bible (preffering the history behind the text over what the text actually says).
For most of church history an lack of the knowledge of Hebrew,though perhaps dampening the quality of their exegesis, certainly didn’t dampen the intensity of their love of scripture, understood to be the living word of God.
Why would anyone pass himself or herself off as a trustworthy public interpreter of a book (s)he couldn’t read? It’s never been easier or more convenient for would-be pastors and preachers to learn the languages of Scripture. So why don’t they?