I’ve been having fun engaging in rhetorical scuffles with my fellow lovers of Biblical languages. But I think both sides of the argument have talked past each other enough that I should qualify a few of my statements. So I want to make the following assertions on this topic. They might help us to zero in on what we’re actually disagreeing about.
- Studying languages is rewarding in itself.
- Every serious student of the Bible should endeavor to study the original languages.
- The medium for proclaiming the Gospel has always been translation.
- Any Bible translation is able to give the knowledge leading to salvation and be useful for personal study and public proclamation.
- Most Biblical language acquisition methodologies force students to learn a bunch of useless stuff.
On my posts dismissing the need to study Biblical languages several commenters said something along the line of “Yes, but seeing the complexity and beauty of another language is evidence of God’s creativity and is worthwhile in itself.” I agree with that. But it isn’t sufficient justification for making the average pew potato feel like they are missing out on the truth if they aren’t reading the original.
A couple other commenters have asked things like, “What might be the possible pay-off for going through the hard work of learning a Biblical language?” I’d like to hear a convincing answer to that. I’m attempting to answer it in my own round-about way with Grasshopper Greek.
Thanks to Iyov and John for sharpening my sloppy rhetoric on this subject. Jim also gets a nod despite mistaking me for a panda.
Good post. It seems that some folks miss that most of the Reformers simultaneously advocated that clerics learn the original languages and that the Bible be translated into the vernacular for the “pew potato.”
[...] instead I’ll agree to be more careful and you’ll agree to not take me too seriously. I tried to tone down my rhetoric and John’s response was “I liked the old Lingamish [...]