The presentation of the Translation Model was interesting. As he was presenting the material, I found myself questioning, “Can you really ever create a ‘naked gospel’ or a kernel of the gospel without the husk? How do you know what is the essential kernal and what is the husk? Also, isn’t there a problem with a propositional understanding of the gospel? Isn’t a narrative much more all- encompassing of Scripture?” These were interesting questions, because I soon found that Bevans’ critique of the Translation Model also focused on these issues. They are definite problems with the model presented, and are some of the questions I have found unanswered in this study of contextualized theology. So far.
Leave a Reply