Guest Blogger: Jason Helopoulos

The PCA erected a study committee to examine the Insider Movement in foreign missions and Bible translation. This movement has sought to use language that is less offensive and more culturally sensitive to particular people groups (particularly Muslim) when translating the Scriptures. The key issue has been the translation of words related to Christ’s Sonship. The PCA study committee reported the first half of their report at this year’s General Assembly. This is from the conclusion of the report:

“Indeed, to change or substitute non-familial or social familial terms with the common biological terms in Scripture is to move in a direction contrary to Scriptural intent. Therefore, if a translator seeks to find a more “culturally responsible” or “culturally sensitive” form because the word in the target language arguably contains primary or secondary nuances that differ from the original language (Greek), this aim does not warrant the translator’s selecting a less than explicit term for the Son of God. The biological sonship term may need to be explained, but it cannot be substituted without compromising the revelation of Christ’s person. Translation decisions that violate these parameters functionally eclipse the perspicuous verbal authority of Scripture regarding the Son of God. By truncating the identity of Christ in the minds of the reader, replacement terms can even distort the gospel.

No matter our motivation, there is no pure Gospel apart from the ontological and incarnational sonship of Jesus Christ. Some will protest:sonship and messiah-ship are functionally interchangeable. To be sure, the redemptive-historical theme of Scripture interweaves Christ’s kingly and messianic functions with his sonship status. But the Christological fabric becomes unraveled when we rip the messianic warp from the filial woof. We cannot speak of Christ as Messiah apart from understanding that regal and redemptive functioning in light of him being the Son of God. We also cannot speak of his exalted Sonship apart from his reign as King. Sonship and regal redemptive reign are mutually informative and indivisible; but though the ideas share referentiality, their meanings are not identical.So when the biblical authors employ language laden with such distinct qualities, we have no interpretive right to regard that language as negotiable.

And it is because Jesus is Son of God that we must speak of Christians as adopted sons and daughters of God. We must express Gospel truth in a way that honors the true familial expressions of Scripture, and avoids compromise by unintentional truncation or even well intended yet obstructive contextualization. We cannot speak of the true Gospel apart from the filial character of our union with Christ, for we are united to the Son of God and no one else. The filial and familial language of the Gospel then is not contextually optional; it is transcendently central. Paul’s warnings in Galatians 1 ought give us terrifying pause. Removing familial language eclipses the Christ of the Gospel and it distorts the Gospel of Christ. Ultimately an incognito Christ is a misrepresented Christ. A misrepresented Christ is a false gospel. A false gospel is the turf of the sons of darkness. . . . Some may be mercifully rescued; others will die in their sins. The stakes are that high.”

Print Friendly

Comments:


7 thoughts on “Insider Movement Report”

  1. Bruce Lindeman says:

    Hello Pastor Deyoung, my wife and I are very encouraged to read this article. As we prepare for ministry abroad we have had to confront this issue. This work articulates very well how we have come to feel God directing us.

    As a further thought along these lines, we have been increasingly alarmed that even among “conservative fundamentalists” an American contextualization continues. To me the most glaring example is the reducing of salvation to a “decision”, rather than a “surrendering”

    We have lost the word surrender in our day. Eric Liddell knew what it meant but many of us today have not been taught it’s meaning in relation to Christ.

    One person runs up to you and says I am so excited! I made a decision to follow Christ. Another person comes to you broken and shares how he just surrendered his life to Christ.

    We definitely think differently about each testimony. Don’t we? Why? it is the verbiage of what “I” did. “I decided” or “I surrendered” When we reduce total surrender to Christ to a “decision” we truncate the miracle of new birth to a mental deal making. This is contextualization in one of it’s worst forms.

    Thank you for this article
    Best regards in Christ
    Bruce

  2. David Harriman says:

    Thank you, Kevin (and Jason), for this report. The tragic reality is that this approach to translation, championed in Turkey by Frontiers and Wycliffe, has placed the indigenous Turkish Church in an exceptionally difficult position. See this letter from the Alliance of Protestant Churches (TeK) to TeK member churches:

    http://biblicalmissiology.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Matthew-TR-Translation-TeK-Ltr-Eng.pdf

  3. Mark LaChonce says:

    Thanks, Kevin and Jason. This was helpful. Another issue we deal with regarding “insider movements” is that of identity. We are concerned about Protestant missionaries with ambiguous and confusing identities and what they communicate to people around them. In general, there seems to be a growing reluctance to any kind of association with the visible, national church.

  4. David Harriman says:

    Dear Mark (LaChonce) — I am not surprised that you have seen a growing reluctance to associate with the visible, national church. The following article by a prominent IM promoter, Becky Lewis, makes the startling claim that the Apostle Paul “forbid” New Testament believers from “changing the religious expressions of their faith”:

    http://www.ijfm.org/PDFs_IJFM/27_1_PDFs/27_1_Lewis.pdf

    Moreover, the following article in Mission Frontiers (US Center for World Mission), written by a key Wycliffe promoter of Muslim-idiom translations, describes Wycliffe’s translation strategy for “Jesus movements” (insider movements) which intentionally bypass the national church:

    http://www.missionfrontiers.org/issue/article/historical-debates-on-translation-issues

    (see “Transformational Translations”)

    This may explain why WBT has been involved in new Muslim-idiom translations in both Arabic and Turkish, widely-spoken languages in which the scriptures have previously been translated.

    In other words: many Protestant missionaries are involved in evangelism, “church planting,” and translation strategies which intentionally bypass the national church.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Kevin DeYoung


Kevin DeYoung is senior pastor of University Reformed Church (RCA) in East Lansing, Michigan, near Michigan State University. He and his wife Trisha have six young children. You can follow him on Twitter.

Kevin DeYoung's Books