An Argument: Why change our learning methods if we have learned this way all along and everyone is doing it like this in seminaries and universities? I do not want to change, and I desire to teach others in the way that I was trained up.
A Response: I understand that it is easy to continue to do something that we were taught. For instance, if we discard old methods we must by necessity add new methods. And it is obvious that learning a new method is tough and time-consuming. Therefore, desiring to stay with what is comfortable is completely understandable. However, this is generally said by those who have great grit and passion for the languages. Perhaps teachers or others who have an unusual ability to learn languages. On the other hand, I know many who, on account of the difficulty, quit and never returned to the languages. The difficulty of the method for some is so extreme that they stress out every semester they learn the languages and give up in the end. I do not only desire to see exceptionally gifted Christians excel, but also see Christians, who do not think they have any special language giftings, excel. Any method that can help the weak language learner enjoy the language more, is the method that I would desire to use in teaching. My appeal, here, is that we help all people learn the languages, not just the academics and the exceptionally gifted. A good language-learning method could go a long way in helping all people desiring to study the Scriptures.
An Argument: Listening to and speaking the language does not help you focus on grammar and the beautiful order of the God-inspired language. We want to know grammar because we are supposed to exegete the Scripture and draw forth the meaning from authorial intent.
An Answer: I once taught Latin to students in a Classical Christian school. The founder, well-known in the world of classical, Christian education, argued that to speak Latin was the epitome of progressive educational values and the abandonment of the virtues inherent in classical education. She argued that the “natural method” (i.e. learning languages like a child by the four-fold method of speaking, listening, writing, reading) is a failure.
The natural method was introduced in the 1960s, about the same time as all of the other modern educational experiments, like “new math,” “discovery learning,” etc. None of them worked then, and they don’t work now. I know. I was taught by the old methods and began teaching under all of the new methods. And I survived to tell the story.
-The Wrong Way to Teach Latin, Cheryl Lowe, Memoriapress.com
Because of her pervasive influence in classical, Christian education, it saddens me that she was truly misinformed when writing this article. First, this “natural method” is actually older than the grammar translation method. Remember that I mentioned in part 1 that Luther, Calvin, and others would have learned Latin through the “natural method”. They lived hundreds of years before the 1960s when these so-called “new methods” arose. I do however agree with her that grammar is important to learn in any language, whether Latin, English, or Greek and Hebrew. So, how should we respond to this diatribe against the “natural method” of language learning. It seems that the opposite of what she said is actually true. When you are comfortable enough reading the language with ease and without translation, you can invest more energy into understanding grammar. Many English speakers can understand Greek grammar but still not read the Greek New Testament with ease. Most ex-Latin students I have met still cannot read Cicero, Virgil, Augustine, or Calvin in Latin, but can tell me what a genitive absolute or a deponent verb is. However, they have no ability to read the language, even after years of use. However, when one learns according to the “natural method”, they will begin to comprehend actual texts and understand real stories. That will then open the door for them to devote more of their energy to comprehending the more difficult grammatical points of a language.
Conclusion
A while back, I emailed a beloved and deeply knowledgeable biblical language professor at a prominent seminary and corresponded with him concerning some of these matters. He relayed to me that he has encountered arrogant educators who use this “natural method”. That grieved my heart and disappointed me. However, just because there are uncharitable people who make foolish rants in public or on online chatrooms about how their method is "far superior" to others' does not mean that this method is inherently useless. Our goal as Christians is to know the Scriptures rightly, for in so doing we will know God. God has revealed to us the glory of his beloved Son, Jesus, through the Greek and Hebrew Scriptures. This method caters strongly to the needs of those who fear they can never learn the Biblical languages. It is a help and is deeply encouraging. For these reasons, I think that to implement some form of the “natural method” would be greatly beneficial for all believers desiring to learn Greek and Hebrew and would be a highly productive use of study time.
Comments