Josh wrote: ↑Fri Feb 23, 2024 8:33 pm
Neto wrote: ↑Fri Feb 23, 2024 6:50 pm
I don't know who is quoted as saying that "Amish church leaders remain suspicious of the Pennsylvania Dutch Bible"
That would be a staff writer at WBT who wrote the press release.
, but as I know from talking with him, he worked with a translation committee made up of Amishmen, so I doubt if that is true of all, or even most, Amish Bishops and ministers. It is also true, however, that because of the nature of my business, I have very little contact with Dan church people, or Tobe Amish, and certainly not Swartzentrubers. (In the past, when I went to nearly every Mt Hope machinery auction, I often talked with Swartzentrubers, and would sometimes run into one of them later somewhere else, & they are always friendly. More like Okies that anyone else I ever meet in this area.)
But if he is correct in respect to the different nuances of these similar words in the two languages, and if some Amish think that salvation comes by simply following this list, then no, they do not understand salvation. I do not personally know any Amish who would specifically point to that passage. Those few that I know who I would suspect of not understanding salvation think it's just about following the church rules. I really doubt if Hank would have said this as though it is true of all Amish.
But the problem here is that Hank indeed did say that, and was willing to be quoted in a press release as saying that. He is literally saying that many Amish have the "wrong" doctrine of salvation because of the translation of 1 word.
And he also literally said one of his goals is to put out a translation that persuades Amish people to a different view of salvation; in effect, a more forceful promotion of Luther's
sola fide. It seems very suspect to me to protest that Luther's own translation doesn't forcefully promote Luther's view on salvation enough.
As far as where they attend church, I do not know. I haven't seen them anywhere recently, and they may both be in a home someplace as far as I know. (I do not know how old he is, I think several years older than Ruth, but can't put a number to it.) But no, it's not a Plain congregation, because Ruth doesn't have uncut hair, or wear a covering. (She is not from Amish or Mennonite heritage.)
That also adds to my suspicion, because it really does sound to me like a non-Anabaptist is trying to use various avenues to try to change the doctrine of Anabaptists to... something else.
We were interviewed by a journalist from area newspaper before, and we were misquoted. The story contained all sorts of errors. (The author had promised that she would let us proof read it before it was published, but she didn't do that.)
When we were starting the airstrip project in the Banawa, a WBT staff writer took parts of a report I wrote about the first phase, and completely turned it around, making it say exactly the opposite of what I actually wrote. Then they wrote an entire "letter" in the first person, as though I had written it, and published it in the WBT news paper. In this 'letter' "I" claimed full responsibility for everything the group had accomplished. I wasn't even the project supervisor, just one of the workers. This caused a lot of hard feelings, and some of those people may have never believed that I actually hadn't written that. After I saw it (they didn't ask me to look it over before publication) I wrote a thank you letter for publication in the next (monthly) issue, clarifying and correcting all of the false information that had been in the first project article. They never published any part of it.
What I'm saying is that unless I actually heard Hank say those exact words, I will not assume that he did. WBT DOES have an 'Evangelical" twist to it - I do not dispute that. I might have mentioned this here before, but we had the reputation in WBT Brazil of being 'legalists', perhaps mostly because my wife always wore a veiling. During the first translation checking workshop I participated in, one of the translation consultants mentioned a simple language commentary on I Corinthians that was being written for use in the English-speaking South American country, over on the east coast. (I forget the name.) During the break after that meeting, I asked how chapter 11 was handled. The woman who had given that talk had, unbeknownst to me, grown up in some conservative Protestant group that required that the women not cut their hair. At some time before we arrived on the field, she had cancer, and lost all of her hair. After it grew back she never let it grow long again. So when I asked that question, she came unglued. She & her husband had been the consultants who were working with me (this was on the very first translated passages I had done), and then she asked me if I could still work with them. All of the "explosion" was right in front of all of the workshop participants, and another translator actually defended me, even though he didn't agree with our position on that Scripture, either. I had no idea my question would stir up something like that. I just wanted to know if the author had presented both interpretations openly, and then just give the pros & cons for each one. That is how a translation aid should be written - as an exegetical commentary, not as a devotional commentary.
Years later the head of the translation department told me that I could only translate either Romans or Hebrews for the next book I would do. (I had already started on I Corinthians at that point.) No other translator was ever told anything like that - the choice of order of translation was always up to the translation team. And I hadn't actually chosen to do it next because of chapter 11 - I was doing the different books in the order in which most scholars believe they were originally written. (That is, after I had first done Luke and Acts, as a historical framework for the rest of the NT.)
I always end up saying much more than I intend to write. There was one other thing I came back on here to say. That is that, from my friendships and fellowship with Amish men, I would suggest that just because a person doesn't say it out loud - that they "have assurance of salvation", doesn't mean that they do not actually have that assurance or confidence. But it is a confidence in God, not in self. And they won't say it out loud; FEELING that assurance is not necessarily the issue, it is the saying it. There are quiet ways of encouraging one another toward that 'rest', and in my conversations with these men their peace with God comes across clearly to me.
Congregation: Gospel Haven Mennonite Fellowship, Benton, Ohio (Holmes Co.) a split from Beachy-Amish Mennonite.
Personal heritage & general theological viewpoint: conservative Mennonite Brethren.
