Is Bible Translation Moving Too Fast?

A model (T) of efficiency

Henry Ford had a goal. Known as an inventor, his real genius was in revolutionizing the assembly line. He was a master of efficiency, reducing the time it took to build a car from 12 hours to 93 minutes. He controlled every part of the Ford Motor Company supply chain, except for one thing: rubber. 

So with his unparalleled vision, he went beyond simply planting rubber trees–he decided to build a city on the banks of a river in Brazil’s Amazon jungle. It was a grand “sociological project,” almost like a mission–albeit an imperial one. One newspaper reported that Ford “wanted to do more than cultivate rubber-he wanted to cultivate workers and human beings.” 1  

But Ford didn’t trust experts, so he didn’t consult any. Nor did he consult the local people, who had knowledge of “the most complex ecological system in the world” that could’ve helped Ford build a true garden-city. In fact, although he poured $20 million (over $400 million by today’s standards) into his city-planting efforts, he never even visited it himself. 

As a result of his ignorance of the Amazon climate, his rigorous labor demands on the locals, and his efficiency-driven method of planting trees too close together, disaster ensued. Workers rioted or left. Americans and locals languished with rampant diseases. Leaf blight spread through the trees uncontrolled, much as the forest-clearing wildfires had raged through the jungle several years before. Increased heat and erosion from the rubber monoculture slowly ruined the soil. And in the end, Fordlandia became a massive failure–not a drop of latex from Ford’s dream city ever made it into a Ford car.

The need for speed in Bible translation

In the Bible translation world there has been a massive push in the last decade toward speed and efficiency–and rightly so! “Vision 2025” hoped to see new levels of collaboration that would facilitate the beginning of a Bible translation in all languages by the end of this year. One of the major funders of BT work has revised their goal, but still predicts the eradication of “Bible poverty” by 2033. 2 

The trends do look promising. By God’s grace, in 100 years the average time for completion of a New Testament (NT) went from 37.66 years to 10.75 years. 3 Not only so, but the rate of new translations started and finished has skyrocketed! The charts show a true “hockey-stick” rise in Bible translation that could lead us to believe that the goal of every language group having access to a Bible is attainable–maybe even within our lifetime. The massive efficiency boost that computers gave translators 30 years ago may be happening again with AI technology.

From a statistical perspective, it appears we’re getting it done. We’re maximizing efficiency! Maybe the work of Bible translation will be finished soon! With statistics like these, should you even consider giving your life for Bible translation? 

Negative side-effects

On the ground though, we see a quite different perspective. We live in a closed country, where translation work is not allowed. Still, multiple organizations say they’ve begun translation work among the least-reached peoples here. But what do those projects look like? 

Foregoing training and discipleship

In some of these projects, an uneducated new believer is simply given a computer and told to deliver a draft of, for example, the book of Luke in a month. The mother-tongue-translators (MTT’s) are not given any training on Bible interpretation or translation principles. In fact, the organization that takes this approach has monopolized the Bible translation work in this country, largely because of all the funding they’ve received because they promise fast results. However, translation–especially of the inspired, infallible word of God–is a science and an art, and bringing its meaning across languages is a skill that takes years of training. Many American Christians (myself included) are uncomfortable with the Message paraphrase (or worse, “The Passion Translation”) because they were done by individual pastors, rather than by committees. Of what quality will a translation be if it’s done by an infant in Christ with almost zero knowledge of the Bible (or the Biblical languages, or principles of translation)? Would you accept such a translation in English?

As another example, the group that started a translation project with the Isala (the people with whom we hope to work) didn’t bother to help them with an orthography; the translators were forced to make up a way to write their own language. Unsurprisingly, the translators weren’t able to read one another’s work, to say nothing of the broader Isala community.

The purpose of a Bible translation project is often framed in terms of the product. Most people agree on the importance of a faithful translation. But what is the purpose of the Scriptures themselves? The Scriptures are God’s means, or his instrument, for the transformation of his people. The Bible is “breathed out by God,” 4 for the purpose of “reviving the soul” and “making wise the simple,” 5 so that believers might be “sanctified in the truth,” 6 and for “training in righteousness.” 7 Proper training isn’t just about the quality of the translation, it is about discipling the new believers in “desiring the pure milk of the word.” 8 It’s about equipping mother-tongue-translators to feed themselves–and in turn, other believers and then subsequent generations–on the word of God. A faithful translation project will prioritize the discipleship of God’s people, because that’s what the Bible is for in the first place. 

The death of the trained Translation Facilitator

This need for speed, perhaps accompanied by a philosophical shift, says, “Sending an American missionary is not worth the cost in time and money. We need to empower the local church to do Bible translation themselves.” I’ve sat in a restaurant and been told that the time of the American missionary is over–weeks before we moved to Asia! 

This statement contains a questionable assumption: that in the remaining unreached people groups (UPG’s), there is a local church with sufficient maturity, resources, and skills to produce a quality translation. The problem is, such “easy” translations have in large part already been done! It’s the difficult ones–groups with few-to-no believers, or in closed countries, or isolated areas–that remain.

In our context, the assumption that such a high-resource church exists could hardly be further from the truth. For example, among the Isala there are only scattered recent converts (all former animists) in different villages. They don’t know how to sing or pray corporately and they don’t have anyone to lead a meeting. Some of them can’t read the Bible in the language of wider communication; the ones who can don’t understand some of its high, lofty language. What does “empowering” or “equipping” such a church mean, short of learning their language, teaching them to understand the Scriptures, and discipling them in the Biblical background knowledge they need to create a quality translation for their people? The problem is, this takes time–probably decades. 

Plenty of organizations claim to be reaching the people groups around us here. Yet none of them have anyone willing to do this kind of work in-country–much less in the rural provinces where the Isala live. 

Oral Bible Translation (OBT) over literacy

Oral Bible Translation is a method of Bible translation that avoids using any Bible text entirely: translators listen to the Bible in a shared language, internalize it, and then make an audio recording of their verbal translation. It is often faster than text translation, and more natural–the Spoken English Version is an excellent example of an English OBT. I listened to it recently and was delighted! This method is often more effective in communicating the Scriptures to people groups who are not literate (many of whom have smartphones and engage with audio/visual content rather than print media). However, OBT has at times been claimed by orgs who emphasize speed to the neglect of quality. One expat working in OBT in this country told me, “It’s not worth the time to teach these people to read!” I bit my tongue. 

Is it “worth it” to teach illiterate people to read and write their own language, to give them access to resources in languages of wider communication, to unlock for them the kinds of Bible study tools and teaching that we’ve benefited from–to give them the ability to create their own? And should we choose a method just because it’s more efficient? 

Of course, I’m not saying that every language group needs a literacy program. The question is, who is making the decision–whose voice is being heard? The local community, or funders and foreign organizations? 

“Gospel urgency” or pressure for a product?

“People are dying.” The reality of souls being lost eternally has been on my mind since my wife and I started our training eight years ago. While the Lord has opened doors we could not have expected, the road often feels long and the pace slow. I understand the urgency that can push well-meaning funders, organizational leadership, and expat workers to “get the job done.” Lives are at stake–souls are at stake! 

But Proverbs 19:2 (ESV) says, “Desire without knowledge is not good, and whoever makes haste with his feet misses his way.” And the truth is that haste has real-world implications here on the ground. Families have been pulled apart to work on different translation projects (both for their own language) by different organizations in different countries. MTT’s have produced incomprehensibly wooden translations due to inadequate training and feedback. MTT’s have quit projects due to relentless pressure to perform. Consultants who care about quality have been forced to resign when their voices weren’t heard. Project leaders who insisted on having five translators now limp along with two, unwilling to look for more because onboarding new members would delay the publishing date. Teams who have worked on translation for years–or decades–have been forced to stop or have lost members to other orgs starting their own translation project. 

Of course, I’m painting a bleak picture. Though all these are real things I’ve seen in the past few years, I also see positives in these projects and teams. I see national believers who have a heart for church planting among their neighboring people groups. I see MTT’s with passion and excitement about the Lord, and about their own language. And I see expats creating innovative new ways to get Scripture in the hands of least-reached peoples. Their urgency and hard work exemplifies Paul’s statement, “for the love of Christ compels us!” 9 Still, plenty of veteran missionaries who I know personally, who have served here faithfully (and fruitfully) for decades, are alarmed at some of the trends I’ve described above. 

Conclusion

All of these things make those of us in this context look at the statistics with a grain of salt. Many works have begun, but how many of them will be finished? And even if they are, how many will be of sufficient quality to bless the believers who need them? If we look at the remaining needs among the least-reached peoples in the world, we see nearly insurmountable obstacles and almost infinite needs. If we view the end goal as Bible translation and church planting, and not just a Bible translation “product,” that will affect our approach from the beginning. 

The thriving city in Ford’s imagination failed because he focused so much on efficiency that he failed to understand the context of the local people. He did not consult experts on the local ecology, but insisted on his own ideals. His plantings failed to produce a harvest because of his ignorance, hubris, and haste. 

My hope is that we will place people above products, and faithfulness above fast starts. And my prayer is that the Lord will establish the work of our hands. 

— ZB, Isala team

---