Assessing the Mode of Biblical Interpretation in the Light of African Biblical Hermeneutics: The Case of the Mother-Tongue Biblical Interpretation in Ghana

Abstract

In establishing the Christian faith on African soil, the first missionaries to Africa came along with the Bible. They were determined to share the word of God with the indigenous Africans. This was undertaken effectively; however, it came at a cost. In an attempt to produce translated versions of the Bible for the natives, they ended up producing translations, some of which did not reflect the thoughts of the indigenous people. This has called for an enterprise whereby these texts need to be retranslated and interpreted to reflect the thoughts of the indigenous people. Mother-tongue biblical hermeneutics in Ghana has been advantageous to this enterprise since it seeks to remedy the situation by examining the mother-tongue translations and making proposals for retranslations and interpretation. This has attracted some scholars to come up with a methodology and approaches that would be appropriate in this direction. This paper seeks to assess and evaluate the use of the mother-tongue interpretation, as well as its methodology and approaches in Ghana in the light of African biblical hermeneutics. Though this enterprise is recommendable to African exegetes, it is a special area of biblical studies in search of a standard methodological approach. The paper calls for much attention to how the mother-tongue interpretation could bring the meaning of the text closer to the culture of the Ghanaian reader—however, not at the expense of neglecting the cultural milieu of the original author in which the text was couched.

1. Introduction

The proclamation of the word of God throughout the world has been the mission of the Church. Jesus charged his apostles to proclaim his gospel to the whole world. From the apostolic era to our contemporary era, missionaries have gone out of their cultures and environments to share the word of God with others in response to Jesus’ great commission (See Matthew 28: 18–20). The apostles were to receive the Holy Spirit and bear witness to Jesus Christ in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and to the ends of the Earth (Acts 1:8). This implied the proclamation of the word of God to all nations and peoples through evangelization and its subsequent missionary activities (Sackey 2018, pp. 46–47). The scriptures have played a significant role in missionary activities, especially in Africa. The scriptures needed to be interpreted and translated into the local languages to make them more comprehensible and relevant to the people. This enterprise of interpretation and translations seemed to have been influenced by the culture of the foreign missionaries for various reasons. Later, African theologians and scholars sought to redeem the situation by unclothing the “foreignness” of the interpretation of the Bible by incorporating the African elements into the interpretation to make the scriptures feel more at home on African soil. This has contributed to the rise of African biblical hermeneutics (ABH) with its attendant approaches, one of which is the mother-tongue biblical hermeneutics (MTBH) in Ghana.

2. Essence and Trends of Biblical Hermeneutics

Hermeneutics is an art of interpretation. Scholars have defined it from different perspectives. Berkhof (1962), for instance, defines hermeneutics as “the science that teaches us the principles, the laws, and the methods of interpretation” (Berkhof 1962, p. 11). The key terms in his definition are “Principles”, “Laws” and “Methods”. In this regard, hermeneutics concerns the rules, beliefs and conduct of interpretation. More or less, it has to do with the parameters within which the interpretation takes place. Lategan (1992) goes beyond the way of doing interpretation to include the art of understanding (Lategan 1992, pp. 149–54). While he admits that it deals with the method and techniques of interpretation, as captured in similar words by Berkhof (1962), the main aim and objective of Hermeneutics for him is “understanding”. It is the lack of understanding in a text that calls for interpretation. In this context, any art or condition that aids in the understanding of a text is the concern of hermeneutics. Translation, which aids in understanding a text, can thus be considered an interpretation (Dada 2021, pp. 428–44).

Terry (1999), on the other hand, defines hermeneutics as “the science of Interpretation” (Terry 1999, p. 17). He further explains that it is meant “to remove the supposable differences between a writer and his readers, so that the meaning of the one may be truly and accurately apprehended by the others” (Tate 1999, p. 17). His use of “apprehended” is in the context of the reader grabbing what is intended in the author’s language. Like that of Lategan, this definition has an element of “understanding”. The definition locates the purpose of hermeneutics in the removal of the supposable differences between the writer or the producer of a text and the reader so that the reader may understand the text through which the writer communicates his/her message. This implies that there are differences between the writer and the reader that hinder understanding of a text.

A writer or an author aims to communicate a message through his/her text to the reader whose understanding of the text should correspond to what the writer or the author intends for him/her. Since the writer and the reader may have different conditions and traits, there is the likelihood that the intended message of the writer may not correspond exactly to how the reader perceives the text. They may have different perspectives, conditions and social contexts that may create a gap between them. Some of these conditions that create the difference between them are culture, environment, worldview, language, customs and traditions. Understanding is hindered when the writer and the reader have differences regarding the above-mentioned elements.

From the above scholarly definitions, hermeneutics can be viewed as the art of interpreting a text with the help of diverse laid-down principles to arrive at a good understanding of the text. Hermeneutics, applied to the Bible, concerns the interpretation of a biblical text in order to unravel its meaning, which will be as close as possible to what the original author intended for his audience, resorting to some of the techniques and the principles of general hermeneutics.1

No literary text could be well interpreted without a good analysis of the interaction among the three basic elements: the author, the text and the reader. It is always necessary for the reader to get as close as possible to the world of the original author, which is very distant from him/her, to comprehend his/her social milieu so as to understand the text. Tate (2008) affirms, “Hermeneutics in the broad sense is bipolar: exegesis and interpretation” (Tate 2008, p. 1). Exegesis draws out the meaning intended for the first readers and the interpretation focuses on the meaning drawn from the understanding of the text for contemporary readers and hearers. Thus, exegesis is the tool that the interpreter uses to extract the meaning of the text, and the interpretation is the application of some principles to the meaning of the text to the comprehension of the current audience (Terry 1999, pp. 19–20). Hence, the essence of biblical hermeneutics is the understanding of a biblical text by the recipient of the interpretation.

Interpretation of sacred scriptures has a long history, dating from the time of Ezra the priest-scribe (See Nehemiah 8: 5–8), the rabbinic schools when the rabbis sought to interpret the word of God for their communities (Visotzky 1992, pp. 154–55), the time of Jesus through the history of the Church to our contemporary era. Various methods and approaches have been used in the interpretation of biblical texts from the apostolic era to the contemporary period (Pontifical Biblical Commission 2003, pp. 19–21). Each period used a method that was coterminous with the social context at the time. More or less, the situations at various times determined the method and approach used. It can be observed that the mode of interpretation of sacred scriptures has been fluid in the sense that the mode of interpretation changes with time, situation and audience.

During the time of Jesus Christ, supposedly, there were three forms of interpretation of scriptures in Judaism: the Alexandrian, Palestinian and the Qumran (Lienhard 1995, pp. 12, 14). In the Alexandrian Judaism, the Jewish scriptures, especially the Torah, became the source of philosophical teachings as witnessed in the LXX (Septuagint) and the writings of Philo. Difficult passages needed to be explained allegorically. The rabbis of the Palestinian Judaism focused their interpretation on the Torah as well. Nonetheless, they interpreted the scriptures to accord to the changing circumstances (Lienhard 1995, pp. 12–24; Magonet 2010, pp. 754–74), and texts that seemed contradictory had to be interpreted. In the Qumran Jewish community, however, interpretation was focused on the prophets since they believed that the prophecies would be fulfilled in their time. They interpreted the scriptures highlighting the end time.

The apostles adopted the rabbinic form of interpretation, whereby the existing sacred scriptures, the Old Testament (OT), were interpreted with the help of some Jewish traditions and customs (Terry 1999, pp. 34–35) in the “oral Torah” as preserved in the Mishnah and the Talmud (Magonet 2010, pp. 756–59). For the apostles, the life and teachings of Jesus became the sources and basis of their traditions (Pontifical Biblical Commission 2003, pp. 38–39). Consequently, they supported their interpretation of the OT with the life and teachings of Jesus Christ (Longenecker 1999, pp. 69–87). Evidence can be seen in some New Testament (NT) texts such as Matthew 8:17 on the suffering servant prophecy in Isaiah and in 1 Corinthians 15:22–45 on Adam-Christ typology, whereby the OT texts were given new meaning in the light of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ (Antwi 2020, pp. 20–42; Terry 1999, pp. 33–35). At the time of the Church fathers, the idea of the inspiration of scripture had already been conceived as reflected in the NT in 2 Timothy 3:16 and 1 Peter 1:20–21. The Holy Spirit guided the Church fathers in interpreting the Bible to formulate doctrines for the Church (Pontifical Biblical Commission 2003, pp. 69–71). There were two catechetical centers at Alexandria and Antioch. They adopted allegorical and typological methods of interpretation (Terry 1999, pp. 35–48).

During the medieval period, the Church used two methods, resorting to the Hebrew text when it encountered a problem relating to Jewish thought and using the Vulgate when it had to do with the Christian faith. The medieval period witnessed the contribution of St. Thomas Aquinas who introduced a symbolic interpretation whereby some difficult texts had to be given symbolic interpretation. The medieval period gave way to the Reformation era whereby the reformers used the Bible as the measure of their teachings and critique (Baba 2013, p. 83). This period, together with the effects of the Renaissance, the invention of printing by Gutenberg and philosophical rationalism, boosted the use of critical methods as many questions were raised about the Bible. This eventually gave rise to a new form of critical study of the Bible: the historical-critical method,2 which has aided in giving birth to many approaches to biblical interpretation.

In modern times, a lot of knowledge from other scientific fields of academic disciplines such as philosophy, literature, sociology and anthropology have been adopted and applied in biblical hermeneutics (See Chukwuka 2022, pp. 1–2). Consequently, a lot of methods and approaches have been developed in this regard as tools to interpreting and understanding a biblical text. The various approaches to biblical interpretation could be grouped under three main categories: text-centered, author-centered and reader-centered (Tate 2008, pp. 2–5). The text-centered approaches focus on the world within the text, the author-centered approaches focus on the world behind the text, with much emphasis on the world of the author, and the reader-centered approaches focus on the world in front of the text, which is the reader’s world” (Tate 2008, p. 2).

The reader-centered approaches take into consideration the situation and context of the real reader of the text. The approaches in this area prioritize the context of the readers (Ellington 2021, pp. 111–31). Tate (2008) analyzed these three categories of approaches with their mutual exclusivity and observed “that reader-centered approaches generally find meaning in the interaction between the worlds of the text and the reader” (Tate 2008, p. 5). To derive a meaning from a text, he proposes “a conversation between the world of the text and the world of the reader, a conversation informed by the world of the author”. This amounts to an amalgamation of the three worlds to bring out the meaning of the text for the real reader.

3. Impact of Colonialism and Christian Evangelization on Biblical Interpretation

The period of the 14th to 18th centuries witnessed the advent of Christian missionaries in Africa (Sackey 2018, pp. 45–59; Debrunner 1967, p. 17). This was made possible by the need of Europe to colonize Africa. The colonizers came along with their chaplains who found it necessary to evangelize the indigenes. In order to effectively introduce the scriptures to the indigenous Africans, the missionaries found it necessary to translate the Bible into the local languages (Wandusim 2023, pp. 17–35) to help in the interpretation and understanding of the Bible. Nevertheless, the Bible was suspected to be an agent of imperialism, colonization,3 suppression and westernization of the Africans (Aryeh 2017, pp. 182–210), and as such, their interpretation was influenced by their Western culture (Mburu 2019, p. 152).

The missionaries introduced formal education among other things to help the newly-evangelized Christians to be able to read the sacred scriptures. They eventually started seminaries in order to help form and educate pastors and church leaders to help with the evangelization of the indigenous peoples. The past colonial theology developed a sense of prejudice against the African indigenous religion to such an extent that it received hostile and derogatory names (Adamo 2011, pp. 1–10). The use of the culture in the interpretation of the Church doctrines and scriptures was met with a challenge, since in most cases the missionaries classified some aspects of the African culture as fetish (Williamson 1974, p. 56). The Christian values came into conflict with the traditional African beliefs and practices since the African traditional religions were so connected to the cultural elements of the Africans and were looked down upon as heathen. This brought about some conflicts regarding the involvement of the new converts in their native cultural practices.

The missionaries’ way of life influenced their interpretation of the scriptures, and they developed certain attitudes and aversions toward the traditional culture and religion (Sarbah 2014, pp. 7–26). Removing one from his/her social context makes him/her alien to his/her culture, and that poses a challenge to African Christianity (Busia 1955, p. 23). The African culture was looked down upon and some aspects of the culture were condemned in the light of the Judeo-Christian scriptures (Nukunya 2003, pp. 39–45; Asamoa 1955, p. 44). In becoming a Christian, one adopted Christian values clothed in the culture and manners of the missionaries (See Williamson 1974, p. 54). The African culture was thus not understood in the light of the Christian values, and this made the African converts abandon their culture in favor of that of the missionaries since they became convinced that their religion was inferior to that of the colonial masters (Adamo 2011, pp. 2, 6).

The impact of colonialism and its consequent product of enslavement made the Africans, both at home and in the diaspora, assume new identities that continue to influence their lives in the post-colonial period (Ramantswana 2023, pp. 235–64). The African Christian could not dissociate himself/herself entirely from his/her religious worldview. The African was thus clothed in a westernized garment, which seemed incompatible with his/her skin. His/her environment was defined in Western terms. Some African Christians continue to hold on to the indigenous religious beliefs contrary to the Christian faith. In some situations, they turn to the traditional African religion when the new form of religion of the colonial master does not meet their needs (Mburu 2019, pp. 29–30). Adamo (2011) describes “the missionary version of Christianity accepted by Africans” as hypocritical since many Christians patronize the African indigenous religion in times of problems (Adamo 2011, p. 1).

There is a paradigm shift at the moment since, through studies, certain African religious practices have been well understood and put in a positive picture. Consequently, African practices have become a means of evangelization through inculturation (Baëta 1955, pp. 51–61). African philosophers and theologians have engaged in academic discourse on the “Africanness” of their theology in their lived experiences. Nonetheless, the impact of colonialism and evangelization on the African culture is so deep that much needs to be undertaken. There is still the need to intensify evangelization that will be more relevant and correspond well to the culture of the Africans. Adamo (2011) proposes the need for a dialogue between Christianity and the African indigenous religion (Adamo 2011, p. 1).

Kaunda (2015) sees the urgent need for “the role of theological education in decolonizing the African mind” (Kaunda 2015, pp. 73–92) in our present day. He is of the view that as long as the African mind “is bound in the fetters of colonialism” there will be no way for knowledge decolonization and thus no social transformation, and the decolonization process in the curriculum will be meaningless as long as “the ‘mind’ remains corrupted”. He admits that “the decolonization of the mind should be a top priority on the agenda of theological education in Africa” that will contribute to social transformation in Africa. The Bible cannot be done away with in this process of decolonization since it forms the basis, source and foundation of Christian theology (McGrath 2011, pp. 104, 105).

Using W. E. B. du Bois’ concept of “double consciousness”, Ramantswana (2023) affirms that the double consciousness, which he also terms as “the two-ness”, “also permeates our study of sacred texts in the African context” (Ramantswana 2023, pp. 236–37). The experience of some Africans with the Hebrew Bible could be described in the two-ness; thus, the Hebrew Bible could be viewed as a sacred text and a colonizing text, and thus, there is the need to dissociate it from the European coloniality (Ramantswana 2023, pp. 236–37). This points to the decolonial reading of the texts whereby the African cultural elements such as knowledge systems and religious traditions are not ignored in the interpretation (Ramantswana 2023, p. 257).

4. The Rise of African Biblical Hermeneutics

ABH emerged as one of the forms of biblical interpretation in the course of time (Masoga 2022, pp. 1–8). It is known variously as Biblical inculturation hermeneutics, African contextual hermeneutics (Chukwuka 2022, p. 7), contextual Bible study, African contextual biblical hermeneutics (Ellington 2021, p. 113) and African cultural hermeneutics (Dada 2021, p. 429) by different scholars meaning slightly different things but with the same approach (Ellington 2021, p. 113). ABH falls within the reader-centered approach in which the text is interpreted from the reader’s perspective. In this case, the text is interpreted from the African perspective (Wandusim 2023, p. 18). Masoga (2022) affirms that ABH arose in response to the failure of the earlier forms of interpretation such as the historical-critical method to address the African situation (Masoga 2022, p. 59). The earlier forms of interpretation were not relevant in solving African problems, thus necessitating the new forms of interpretation that would be more relevant and applicable in the African context.

Most scholars in this area of interpretation have given definitions that reflect Masoga’s (2022) view. Adamo (2015), for instance, defines ABH as the methodology that uses the African social-cultural context as the subject of interpretation (Adamo 2015, pp. 31–51) geared toward the transformation in Africa for the well-being of the society (Adamo 2015, pp. 31–33; Chukwuka 2022, p. 8). Chukwuka (2022) finds African contextual hermeneutics as applying “biblical principles within the African contexts of culture, religion, tradition and language” (Chukwuka 2022, p. 9). Contextual Bible study, with its distinctive brand, emerged in South Africa in the 1980s and became the scholarly contribution to biblical liberation hermeneutics from South Africa (West 2014, pp. 1–2). “Contextual Bible Study” was given to this form of ABH due to the resistance of the South African apartheid state to liberation theology, which sought to detain those involved (West 2014, p. 2). This contextual Bible study is “dialogical” as it seeks to create the opportunity for the context to dialogue with the biblical text on one hand and a dialogue between the “ordinary” and “scholarly” readers on the other. In intercultural biblical hermeneutics, “the reading process is left open to each particular reading group, the life interests that are brought to the text are diverse” (West 2014, p. 6).

The ABH approach “places African readers at the centre of interpretation” (Ellington 2021, p. 113). It is a need-driven interpretation taking into consideration the needs of the ordinary Africans (Ellington 2021, p. 113; Ossom-Batsa 2007, pp. 92–93). ABH thus examines the biblical text within the African context to rid of the “foreignness” of previously held interpretations that estranged the culture of the African to make the word of God addressing the African situation more relevant to the African reader. In other words, the ABH interprets the Bible from the African context to allow the text to address the African directly in his/her social circumstances. Approaches in ABH, thus, evolved to be rid of the suspected Western tendencies for the African to the liberating dimension of the Bible in his/her environment. This seeks to promote African culture and identity (Adamo 2015, p. 47).

Dada (2021), assessing Adamo’s African cultural hermeneutics, presents the approach’s purpose as breaking “the hermeneutical hegemony and ideological stranglehold that Eurocentric biblical scholars have enjoyed” (Dada 2021, p. 429; Adamo 2015, p. 35). Due to the impact of colonization on Africans, most theological discourses and biblical interpretations are believed to have been molded in Western garments. The approach thus seeks to remove these Western garments in order to view the text from an Africentric perspective. He outlines four main motivation of Adamo’s engagement of the Yoruba traditions in his interpretations as follows: to decolonize biblical studies in the African context, lack of recognition of the African worldview in the methodology of the Western missionaries, creating avenues to address social and existential needs of the African and to offer a sense of belonging to the African (Dada 2021, pp. 432–33; See Kaunda 2015, pp. 73–92).

“The Hebrew Bible cannot be viewed as a single-voiced text but a plurivoiced text”, as affirmed by Ramantswana (2023, p. 251). Within the Judeo-Christian scriptures, one can identify different voices: the voice of oppression (West 2014, p. 6), as well as the voice of liberation, the voice of healing as well as the voice of sickness, the voice of life, as well as the voice of death, etc. Adamo observes, as cited by Ellington (2021), that when an approach of biblical interpretation “elevates a particular community and its needs and ways of thinking as the generating centre of the interpretive process and the main source for the meaning of scripture, the community risks hearing mainly its own voice” (Ellington 2021, p. 114). Consequently, the oppressive voice was to the advantage of the colonial powers, and the liberatory voice was to the advantage of the colonized. In that regard, it is clear that there is a tendency to use one voice against the other from the reader’s perspectives and biases. This explains the use of the Bible by the colonial masters to justify enslavement and apartheid, whereas the enslaved and the oppressed also used it to justify their call for liberation (Antwi 2018, pp. 1–19). In the case of the use of the Bible by the colonial masters and the colonized, the voice of the colonized Africanized was subservient to the Western colonizing voice (Speckman 2016, pp. 204–24). The liberatory (West 2014, p. 6) dimension, as witnessed in the exodus accounts, that seeks to liberate mankind from oppression, especially slavery, became of much significance to the colonized, enslaved and oppressed.

With the effects of colonization on the African continent with Christianity being implicated, people began to question the role of “Africa” in the Bible and Christianity (Sadler 2006, pp. 60–62). This gave rise to other African movements such as Rastafarianism and Ethiopianism (Duncan 2015, pp. 199–203). African scholars in the diaspora engaged in the study of the African identity in the light of the sacred scriptures and the African identity. “Majority of Africans remain mentally colonized” (Kaunda 2015, p. 77), and the colonized mind of the African scholar seemed to have affected his interpretation of the Bible as well (Adamo 2015, p. 34). ABH thus began to make the voice of the African in the text heard. Biblical studies, and for that matter the theological discourses conducted in Western garments, needed to be decolonized, and since the African mind had already been colonized, there was the need to first decolonize the African mind (Kaunda 2015, p. 78). ABH has the aim of helping the African reader realize these in his/her own context. No wonder the Bible became “a substantive resource for social transformation in South Africa” (West 2014, p. 7).

One element that created a gap between the African reader and the authors of the Judeo-Christian scriptures was culture. As Masoga (2022) affirms, “The Hebrew Bible emerged from an Israelite cultural context, which neither speaks to nor deliberates on issues concerning the African cultural contexts” (Masoga 2022, p. 1). Understanding the Judeo-Christian scriptures within the context of the Israelite culture from the African lens was likely to meet a challenge. Masoga (2022), thus, further explains that some scholars who contributed to this enterprise of ABH were accused of being biased “at the expense of ‘throwing the reader away’ from the immediate context of the biblical text itself”. The objectivity of the ABH is also questioned. Just like other biblical interpretations, it “does not claim one-hundred percent objectivity” (Adamo 2015, p. 33).

Masoga (2022), discussing the strengths and weaknesses of ABH among other things, highlighted that the fact that the contributors were able to publish their contributions after critical review and rigorous scrutiny implies that “it merits the attention of readership” (Masoga 2022, p. 5). He further admits that though “biased to some an extent” and hollow, ABH has highly qualified practitioners. It is another form of self-expression against earlier interpretations that refused to recognize African culture and practices. To trace the meaning of the text for the present reader, there is the need to consider the African context in the interpretive process as suggested by Chukwuka (2022, p. 2). The African context in the interpretive process is significant for deducing the meaning of the text for the African reader. In this context, the Christian theological discourse is grounded on African values and culture (Mojola 2022, pp. 1–8).

Texts are produced within contexts. Certain elements in the composition of the texts, such as the author, audience, time, environment and the situation or the social context, help determine their content. For instance, the author’s understanding of the readers’ worldview and perspectives help shape his thoughts and ideas. This is the clear case in the differences between deuteronomistic history and the chroniclers and the gospels of Matthew and Luke. Deuteronomistic history was influenced by the deuteronomistic theology, which indicated that disobedience brought disaster and punishment (Endres et al. 1998, pp. 11–16). The kings who did what was evil in the sight of God did not repent and suffered the consequences of their evil behavior, thus pointing to the fact that the consequence of disobedience to YHWH was punishment. The chroniclers, on the other hand, painted a picture of hope during the post-exilic period, and as such, the kings repented. In the NT, Matthew was influenced by Jewish particularism and addressed the Jewish Christians, whereas Luke was influenced by universalism and addressed gentile Christians (Brown 1997, pp. 169–271; Drane 2019, pp. 284–94).

Chukwuka (2022) is of the view that in OT hermeneutics, the reader should do away with cultural ties and focus on the relationship between God and humans that matters (Chukwuka 2022, p. 7). Some OT texts were produced in a polemical stance against some cultures and practices of the Ancient Near East (Anderson 1988, p. 163). Some examples are seen in the narratives of Cain and Abel and the binding of Isaac. In the case of the Cain—Abel narrative, the narrator uses the acceptance of Abel’s offering as against that of Cain in a polemical stance against the sedentary culture of the Canaanites (Anderson 1988, p. 182). The binding of Isaac narrative is also set against human sacrifice in the Ancient Near East (Anderson 1988, pp. 172–75). It is clear that the producers of the biblical texts were theologizing. They were writing a discourse on God and his relationship with humankind.

The ABH approach has not been free of criticism, as has been pointed out earlier on. Some criticism has been leveled against it due to a lack of understanding of the method, the difficulty in arriving at a uniform or universal reading, its detachment from the community of faith and the impossibility of ignoring the contribution of the Western interpretive methods to the field of Christian theology (Dada 2021, pp. 438–40). Whilst looking for the framework in the interpretation of the text that is African, it must not compromise “the catholicity of the church” (Speckman 2016, p. 204). The African environment seems to be contaminated with the aftermath of colonialism, which makes it difficult or almost impossible to cut off entirely from the colonial heritage (Speckman 2016, p. 214). The ABH has a tendency of putting much emphasis on the culture of the African reader at the expense of the culture of the narrator, thus making the text mean what was not intended (Ossom-Batsa 2007, pp. 97–101).

Africa is made up of different nationalities and ethnic groups with diverse cultural worldviews, traditions and languages, and applying biblical principles to the African situation as a whole becomes a challenge (Chukwuka 2022, p. 8). There is no denying the fact that the Bible has played and still plays a role in the development of Africa due to its impact and influence on the life of a number of African Christians on the continent. This has thus necessitated approaches that would make the texts more meaningful to the African reader in his context due to the cultural gaps between the African reader and the authors of the sacred texts (Dada 2021, p. 428; Adamo 2005, pp. 49–48). Thus, ABH uses elements such as African traditions, songs and folklore in the interpretive process (Dada 2021, p. 429).

5. Mother-Tongue Biblical Interpretation in the Context of African Biblical Hermeneutics

In recent times, in Ghanaian biblical scholarship, much attention has been turned to MTBH. Though this enterprise is recommendable to African exegetes, it is a special area of biblical studies in search of a standard methodology. MTBH is a reader-centered approach, and it finds its context within ABH. It has a link to the ABH and shares some commonalities with it. The MTBH prioritizes the audience in its interpretation as it considers the context of the reader and studies the text in one’s mother tongue (Aryeh 2017, p. 186). Aryeh gives the goal of MTBH as “to allow the Bible speak to/with indigenous issues such as poverty, marriage, barrenness, politics, education, etc. in Africa, thereby establishing Christianity in indigenous African life and thought” (Aryeh 2017, p. 186). The approach of MTBH is thus geared toward addressing issues of interest on African soil, which also finds its context in the ABH. It seeks to resolve the translational problems in the indigenous mother-tongue bibles. The approach hence uses and studies the mother-tongue translations (Wandusim 2023, p. 20).

5.1. Birth of Mother-Tongue Biblical Interpretation in Ghana

The missionaries in their eagerness to share the word of God with the African Christian converts had translated the Bible into the mother-tongue languages. Engagement with mother-tongue bibles can thus be traced from the 18th and 19th centuries with the activities of the missionaries to have some portions of the Bible, as exemplified by Jacobus Capitein’s “Lord’s Prayer” in Mfantse (Ekem 2007, pp. 72–74), and the Bible translated into the mother tongues (Wandusim 2023, p. 17). This could be seen as the first phase of the engagement with the mother-tongue bibles in Ghana.

As noted earlier on, due to the strong connection of the African indigenous religion to the cultural practices of the Africans, some cultural elements were regarded as unchristian and deterred Christians from participating in such cultural practices (Williamson 1974, p. 56). This made the African Christian develop an aversion toward some of the cultural elements in his/her environment. After colonialism and independence of African states, “cultural imperialism” became the order of the day and continues beyond colonialism (Speckman 2016, p. 210). In the face of such a situation, other African theologians such as Mbiti, Nyamati, Bujo and Lamin Sanneh sought to see the link between Christianity and African culture (Mojola 2022, pp. 1–5; Wandusim 2023, p. 18). This enterprise brought the African culture into a good light in the face of Christian evangelization. They sought to interpret Christian concepts and theologies from African perspectives, looking at their interconnectedness, similarities and differences. This paved the way for the African elements to be used in the Christian theological discourse contributing to the next phase of MTBH.

The second phase of MTBH in Ghana could thus be seen in the call of African theologians and scholars to have the Bible translated into African mother tongues to help in African theological discourse. Ghanaian theologians such as Kwesi Dickson, Gilbert Ansre and Kwame Bediako, like their African colleagues, saw the need to have the Bible translated into the mother-tongue languages for relevant theological formation (Mojola 2022, p. 109). It was only through this that the word of God would have its dwelling among the Africans, particularly Ghanaians. Their initiatives were to be a springboard for other recent Ghanaian scholars of MTBH such as J. D. K. Ekem (Aryeh 2017, pp. 66–79) and J. E. T. Kuwornu-Adjaottor (Wandusim 2023, pp. 575–79), which I find to be the third phase of MTBH.

5.2. Methodology: J. D. K Ekem and J. E. T Kuwornu-Adjaottor

The MTBH “is still an emerging interpretive approach” (Wandusim 2023, p. 19) in search of a standard methodology. Like most other biblical approaches that began in the course of time and were developed by later users, the MTHB approach evolved in the course of time and has undergone development by later users. This is exemplified in the works of the users, especially Ekem and Kuwornu-Adjoattor.4 Aryeh (2017) reviewed some selected works of Ekem, examining his approaches and contribution to MTBH in Ghana (Aryeh 2017, pp. 182–210). Wandusim (2023) likewise assessed the history of the MTBH and outlined some of its key proponents, including Ekem and Kuwornu-Adjaottor and their methodology (Wandusim 2023, pp. 17–35).

Aryeh (2017) cited Ekem as having affirmed that due to the influence of African traditional views on Christianity, there is need for a dialogical exegesis to make traditional African worldviews dialogue with Judeo-Christian biblical thought—however, not at the expense of the original meaning of the text (Aryeh 2017, p. 200). In giving consideration to the worldview of the African reader, caution must hence be taken so as not to overshadow the original culture in which the text originally took shape. The narrators of the Bible wrote using the cultural elements and their worldview available to them at the time.

Ekem outlines eight objectives, and the prerequisites and guidelines, for the effective study of the MTBH as there must be the need for (Aryeh 2017, pp. 186, 200) 1, the intensive study of the ancient biblical languages, Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, 2, the use of commentaries and study bibles in the local languages, 3, the study of the Septuagint, 4, the study of the Targums, 5, academic study of the mother-tongue biblical texts, 6, dramatization of biblical passages in African context, 7, reflection on the societal issues using the mother tongues and 8, equipping local Christian communities to understand current theological issues confronting the Church. Ekem presents these as necessary in helping the study of the MTBH and making it more relevant in theological discourse.

I find the intensive study of the biblical languages, the Septuagint, the Targum as proposed by Ekem, as a means of helping the interpreter get acquainted with the original sources of the text. The essence of the study of the ancient biblical languages is meant to equip the student with the key to access the original text. This may indirectly imply getting closer to the world of the text. The other proposals concerning the use of commentary and study bibles in the mother tongues and the academic study of the mother-tongue bibles seek to aid the reader in the interpretation of the text in the mother tongue. Dramatization of biblical passages in the African context and the reflection of the mother tongues on societal issues perhaps are meant for educative purposes to make the text more relevant and meaningful to the African reader and to address his problems and needs. His last proposal focuses on helping the local church understand some current theological issues at stake. Deducing the theological import of a text is very significant for the reader since the narrators of the Bible sought to present a theological discourse about God and his relationship with humanity.

Though Ekem does not provide methodological steps in approaching the text with the MTBH approach, it is implied in the prerequisites and guidelines that he provides, which could be summed up as the following: three of the prerequisites touch on the study of the ancient texts, two on the study of the mother-tongue texts, and the other three on communicating the message of the text in an African way to address his/her societal and theological issues confronting him/her. Moreover, his publications and commentaries in the mother-tongue languages present an implicit methodology (Wandusim 2023, p. 30).

Kuwornu-Adjaottor (2012) presents a nine-step methodology to the study of MTBH (Kuwornu-Adjaottor 2012, p. 577), which is made up of: 1, identification of a biblical text in the mother-tongue Bible that has been wrongly translated; 2, discussion of the problems in the translation in the culture of the mother tongue; 3, stating the methodology and its proponent one would like to use in his study; 4, doing an exegetical study of the text with the help of dictionaries, commentaries, encyclopedia and study helps; 5, looking for the interpretation of other scholars on the text; 6, discussion of the concept in the mother tongue and its culture that involves interviewing the indigenous people; 7, comparison of the text to other Ghanaian mother-tongue bibles; 8, analysis of the mother-tongue translations and finding out how their meanings reflect the original Hebrew/Greek text; and 9, proposing a new translation that is appropriate to the culture of the mother tongue.

Kuwornu-Adjaottor’s (2012) methodological approach seeks to rectify problems in the translated texts in the mother-tongue bibles through the involvement of the indigenous people. The steps begin with an identification of a problematic text in the mother-tongue bibles. It does not neglect scholarly interpretation and an exegetical study of the text, which will definitely include the worlds of the text and the reader. In his methodology, we find the direct involvement of the mother-tongue bible readers and other mother-tongue bibles in contributing to resolving the problem in the text and its retranslation through interviews and comparison, respectively, to conform to the thought of the culture.

5.3. Critique, Usefulness and the Way Forward

The MTBH, just like ABH, seems to detach itself from the so-called Western biblical hermeneutics since the Western biblical interpretation is linked to Western ideologies that did not take into consideration the African worldview and, thus, was not so suitable to the African context (Aryeh 2017, pp. 91–104; Ossom-Batsa 2007, pp. 91–104). The ABH approaches must not be seen as detached from the mainstream of biblical interpretation (Adamo 2015, pp. 31–51). MTBH, like ABH, does not operate in a vacuum; it rather builds on the other existing approaches of hermeneutics. As can be seen in the prerequisites of Ekem and the methodology of Kuwornu-Adjaottor, exegetical study cannot be left out in the MTBH. The historical-critical method, the emphasis of which is on the worlds behind and within the text, is thus not neglected or left out in the MTBH (Aryeh 2017, p. 186), though it seems to be overshadowed by the world of the reader. Care must be taken in comparing a translation of one ethnic group to another as found in the methodology of Kuwornu-Adjaottor, since different ethnic groups may have varied interpretations and meanings of symbols and reality.

MTBH, like its mother, ABH, as a reader-centered approach, is seen to be subjective (Masoga 2022, p. 1). Nonetheless, the context of the reader is significant in the interpretive process (West 2014, p. 2), and as such, getting to know the context of the text and linking it to the context of the reader is very important. Every interpreter stands a chance of bringing in his subjective biases, which need to be controlled by the use of hermeneutics (Chukwuka 2022, p. 1). The biblical texts went through different phases, and certain terms would assume different meanings in the course of time for different audiences. In much the same way, the terms may assume different meanings for the actual reader in the course of time as his “assumptions, premises and theological biases may subjectively influence the meaning of an encountered text” (Chukwuka 2022, p. 2). This will necessitate the interpretation of the text in the context of the reader.

The challenges of the MTBH do not outweigh its usefulness. It helps the African reader in applying the biblical texts to his/her existential situations (Aryeh 2017, p. 182). It has been able to help resolve some translational problems in the indigenous bibles. There is no doubt that the effective means of communication take place in one’s mother tongue. Reading the Bible in one’s mother tongue will thus be the best means of interpretation, as the purpose and essence of interpretation is “understanding”. Without understanding, interpretation does not attain its purpose. In this regard, the MTBH stands a chance of aiding ABH achieve its goals.

The use of the mother-tongue bibles has contributed to the growth of Christianity in Ghana. The importance of the mother-tongue bibles in the indigenization of African Christianity and life is such that one cannot do away with them in Christian discourse and theology in Ghana. African Christian theology is and will be enriched by the MTBH. After all, the reader, who is the real reader of the text, cannot be ignored in the interpretation since “the interpretation of a text is always dependent on the mindset and concerns of its readers” (Pontifical Biblical Commission 2003, pp. 45, 54).

The methodology of MTBH must be viewed as moving a step further on the Western methodologies to bring out the meaning of the text to the Ghanaian reader. It must not be seen as imposing the African culture on the biblical culture, but rather, it must be seen as God, who chose to reveal himself in the biblical culture, also lives in the African culture, and the African reader could understand his message revealed in the Judeo-Christian culture in his/her cultural imageries and symbols and apply them to his/her daily life.

With globalization and migration, culture is more dynamic than it used to be. The objectivity of the text must be taken into consideration. The MTBH approach must not be outstretched to such an extent that the original meaning in the source language could be lost. Aryeh (2017), referring to the works of Ekem, affirms that one must be cautious in engaging that African context in translation and interpretation in such a way that contextualization does not overshadow and ignore the original meaning of the text (Aryeh 2017, pp. 197–98; Baba 2013, pp. 152–54). MTBH finds its context within contextualization of biblical literature in the social thought of the real reader and, thus, must begin from the text itself before it can be contextualized in the life situation of the real reader (Aryeh 2017, pp. 201–4). Much attention should be given to how the MTBH approach could be used in such a way as to bring the meaning of the text closer to the culture of the indigenous peoples.

The MTBH does not seek to create a new theology from the mainline Christian theology. In case the product of the MTBH is not in conformity with the existing body of biblical theology, then the enterprise must be reviewed. The MTBH is not an imposition of an African thought or culture on biblical interpretation. The MTBH should not cut itself off from the existing methodologies or approaches to the study of the Bible. The MTBH should, rather, have two dimensions. The African exegete should rather see himself as going a step ahead of the existing exegetical methodologies. The enterprise should rather be seen as continuing the work the African exegete deems unfinished. Another dimension in which the users of the approach see this enterprise is to see the whole exercise as trying to bring down the meaning of the text closer to the Ghanaian reader. A careful attention needs, therefore, to be paid to how the biblical concepts and motifs are well presented to the African readers in the concepts that they understand.

6. Conclusions

ABH has contributed to biblical interpretation in Africa, making the African reader better identify himself/herself with the situation of the biblical text. Its approaches in various forms being applied to biblical studies are welcome by African scholars, and they are gaining readership and are a focus of research in academia. Nonetheless, it is not free of challenges. MTBH, which stems from ABH, has gained space in the academic terrain in Ghana. Its methodology is fluid and continues to develop. Like ABH, it must seek to bring the meaning of the text closer to the African reader, devoid of the “foreignness” and the earlier colonial and imperial clothing of the word of God, which it assumed due to colonization. Caution must also be taken to avoid overemphasizing the African cultural elements and thoughts in the interpretation that could overshadow the meaning of the text intended by the author. MTBH must be seen as a step ahead of the already-existing critical methodologies in which the exegete seeks to find the intended meaning of the text and inculcate the life and thought of the African in his interpretation to bring home the meaning of the text closer to the African reader.