[We’re discussing a couple of sayings this week. One is from a Facebook group:
“I SHOULD NOT HAVE TO PRESS 1 TO HEAR A MESSAGE IN ENGLISH… WE ARE IN AMERICA, LEARN THE LANGUAGE.”
The other is something I wrote in response:
“Everyone who complains about immigrants not knowing English should have to use Bibles printed in Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew.”]
In order to pretend not to be bigoted, some will claim to merely be looking out for the good of immigrants. It will be in their best interest to learn English. This is true, of course. Just as all of us would benefit from learning another language. We can hide behind the fact that English is the dominant language in the U.S., but the fact is, most people in the world speak multiple languages and it would benefit each of us to be multilingual.
The case can also be made that it would be of benefit to all Christians to learn biblical Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic. There is always something lost in translation, so being able to study the Bible in the original languages would be good for all of us.
We don’t take the time, nor go to the trouble to do so. One reason for that is the fact that we have the Bible available to us in our native tongue, so we don’t see the need to learn other languages. If depriving immigrants of language aids will help motivate them to learn English, maybe taking away our translations will do the same for us with the Bible.
What do you think?
There is no reason to feel superior being an American speaking English. Mastering languages is a sign of intelligence. I flunked French and Spanish in high school and college..what little college I have. Either I’m not applying myself or I have a learning disability.
It would be grand to be able to speak the languages of the Bible. On the other hand, on the day of Pentecost everyone heard the Gospel in their own language. There was no waiting for a translation from Peter’s sermon.
This comment may apply more to the past two posts, but I’ll share it here anyway.
As a foreigner myself, I very strongly believe that if you go to another country to live or study, or even as a tourist, you are the one responsible for learning the language that the people speak in that country. You can’t demand a whole nation to learn your language so that everybody else can adapt to you.
There are immigrants, though, who come to this country under circumstances that we can’t even begin to comprehend, much less identify with. They come here fleeing desperate situations back home and hoping to find a place where they can feel safer and can make a better living for themselves and their families.
As Tim has mentioned before, most immigrants really are aware of their need to learn the language and make great efforts to do so. In the meantime, while they are learning, our Christian attitude should be one that shows compassion, understanding, sensitivity, patience and encouragement. Learning to communicate in a foreign language takes time, it’s not done from one day to the next. It’s a process that is very stressful when so many aspects of your life depend on it. People trying to do this don’t need more stress coming from those around them, much less from those who claim to be Christians.
Loving encouragement (nothing like “Learn the language! This is America, we speak English here!”) and support (providing opportunities to learn) is what I believe to be our Christians role in these situations.
Praise God for people like our brother Phil Palmer in our church, who work tirelessly to provide opportunities to foreigners to learn English and adapt to this culture in a loving and accepting Christian environment.
I strongly believe we wait too long in American schools to teach foreign languages. This needs to be a k-5 class, not a late middle/high school class. The language-learning window is SO much more open in those early years!
Pingback: Tweets that mention Why it’s all Greek to me | TimothyArcher.com/Kitchen -- Topsy.com
Need always drives the learning desires with more steam than compulsion. The ugly fact is that as long as most Americans don’t have to learn another language (myself included) we won’t. The sadder fact is that the need is rising (more every year) for us to learn Spanish (at least) and we’re insulted that we are needing to change. After all, (here comes another quote for you, Tim) “we were here first!” Now, I need to get back to my Rosetta Stone…. :-)
In some ways, the history of Texas may be part of what fuels the immigration debate, on both sides. On the one hand, illegal immigrants into what was then Mexico played a big part in Texas becoming an independent nation. On the other hand, it was the Mexican government’s denial of rights to those immigrants that fueled the desire for independence.
(This in response to the “we were here first” remark. Obviously both Barry and I live in areas where the Spanish speakers were here first.)
Although I am bilingual (English/Portuguese) and strongly believe in the value of consistent, quality foreign language instruction in public schools, I also take a pragmatic approach to language-learning: learn it if it’s useful.
When I was in grade school one of my brothers took Spanish in high school. He had a really great teacher. A few years later she resigned, and instead of hire a new Spanish teacher the school threw out all the Spanish books, bought French books and hired a French teacher. That’s inconsistent. Kids learning Spanish were suddenly thrown into French. A few years later, when I was in high school, the French teacher resigned. Instead of hire a new one, the school used a satellite link to French and Spanish classes out of Chicago. Rather than hire new language teachers, the district put teachers from other subjects in simply as monitors. The students watched the classes on TV and once a week could call in to the “real” teachers to ask questions. That’s shabby. Schools should have qualified teachers who are able to really teach the language, and the language(s) offered should remain consistent over time.
As camp missionary I once overheard a counselor trying to convince a camper that he should learn a second language, even if he’d never use it. The camper in question, a high school student, was from rural south-central Missouri. He had no intention of leaving the area and didn’t know any speakers of other languages. I interjected, saying that I began learning Portuguese at 20 because I had been to Brazil. Since I intended to use the language, it had value to me. When I was in Brazil I made every effort to depend on Portuguese and not try to make people speak English with me. That’s simple respect.
So, while I see value in exposing young people to consistent, quality foreign language instruction from the earliest grades, I don’t think anyone should feel obligated unless they really intend to use it. Then, when they need it, they should really learn it and not rely on English.
One last thought: it doesn’t always make sense for the foreign language offered by the local public schools to be that which is spoken by a large minority in the community. For example, the local grade school here teaches French, though I doubt there are many French speakers in the neighborhood. There are MANY Spanish speakers, though, and their kids would have an unfair advantage over the non-hispanic kids in Spanish classes. Since the school is apparently only able to offer one language, it makes sense (at least to me) that it offers a worthwhile third language instead.
With all due respect, this series of blog posts is nonsense.
The NT was written in the “everyman’s language,” in the international language. The Gospel was “translated” by people speaking in tongues. The Gospel was intended to be carried into all the nations and peoples of the world.
I have studied the Bible languages to some degree (very little in Hebrew), and I have often wondered if it would be worthwhile to become fluent in Hebrew and Greek. However, this has to be weighed against what would be gained versus what it would cost. Is it ultimately worthwhile for me to spend the time and effort to do so? Probably not.
But when speaking of a country, if you want to weaken and divide a country, have people speak different languages. If you don’t believe me, just look at the tower of Babel.
I have tremendous respect for those trying to learn another language. But the truth is, there ARE people who: #1. disrespect the laws of this country, #2. disrespect the boundaries of this country, #3. have no desire to learn the language, and #4. think this land belongs to them anyway.
How many other countries do you know that lets people break into their country, and then openly protest in the streets, waving their nation’s flag (rather than the American flag), and demand that we accommodate them?! This is outrageous!
This is not rendering to Caesar the things that are Caesars.
Wow, Steve, I’m glad you decided to be respectful about it. :-)
This comment would have gone great with the first post in the series, as I guess (?) you are providing rationale as to why it is offensive to have to press a button to hear a phone menu in English. For you, apparently, this is an immigration issue. Your statements on immigration show a real lack of understanding of the issue. It’s hard to know where to begin. But the people who are the most vehement are usually the ones who understand the issue the least.
And whether or not businesses have phone menues in other languages or not is NOT an immigration issue. To assert that is merely a sign of xenophobia, fear of all things foreign.
I’m guessing that, for you, rendering to Caesar has to do with obeying laws. Is that the meaning of the last statement? Just trying to understand the rant.
As for the need for Bible translations, I’m not really against them. I’m just saying that the idea of not providing people with translations doesn’t always spur them to learn a language. And it unnecessarily punishes those who are in the process of learning.
While the story of the city of Babel (which happened to have a tower) shows us what can happen when God steps in to oppose human pride, Acts 6 shows us the power of the church working together to meet the needs of members that speak different languages.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
@steve
“But the truth is, there ARE people who: #1. disrespect the laws of this country, #2. disrespect the boundaries of this country, #3. have no desire to learn the language, and #4. think this land belongs to them anyway.”
yeah, I agree. those Europeans 300 years ago were rude, disrespectful, and un-Christ-like
Yes, it is truly ridiculous that the “freest country on earth” should allow such things to occur. Ree-donk-u-lus.