Report 2012, October 1 to 17, San, Namibia

• San storying foundations workshops (Khwedam in Bagani, !Kung in Mangetti Dune, Ju/’hoansi in Tsumkwe)

October 1:

• Travel to Windhoek from Cape Town.

October 2:

• Plan with Schalk Botha of Bible Society of Namibia and Schalk agrees to make contacts for Himba follow through on survey to be done from October 18 to 22.
• Drive to Grootfontein
• Start meetings with Hendrik van Zyl (who is joined by Pastor Dirk de Vos of the Nederduits Gereformeerde Kerk (NGK) in Grootfontein and Elliot Meijer, my son).  I share the concepts of the storying foundations workshop and in order to experience and engage in the concepts everybody will prepare to tell the story from Luke 15:11-24.

October 3:

• We experience and evaluate storying process and discuss the goals of the San storying foundations workshops.  Our goal for the attendees is:
  
  •  to understand what it takes to communicate a story with great Biblical accuracy and cultural clarity in context of the world view of the attendees
  • to be able to tell and process at least one story
  • to start owning the concept
  • to start a plan to follow through localizing the concept
  • to start a plan developing relevant stories in the most relevant communication art forms
• We prepare for departure to Bagani

October 4:

• Early morning departure for 470 kilometer drive to Bagani, arriving mid-day
• Contact attendees and start first workshop session with four Khwedam attendees (Abram, Alfred, Bertie, and Josef, elders of the NGK ) in the afternoon as follows:
  
  • All but Josef spoke Afrikaans fairly well, Josef struggled
  • Introductions, prayers, and formalities
  • Hendrik asks if they heard the story of five San men that were burned in August (2012) to save an Australian woman.  He then shares the story and next they discuss the story, relate it to similar stories in their own experience.  This forms a good foundation on how the attendees engage in a story of interest.  Many facts are repeated and processed in their own words and they express their feelings on what happened in the story very clearly, especially in regards to how they would have handled the situation if they would have been the five San men that ended up being burned.  They also ask questions for clarification and draw on the ground to help them understand how the situation might have looked like.  Bertie, as a father, expressed strongly and clearly that his children need to know about this and how to deal with such fires. Throughout the workshop it was helpful to refer back to this story and the processing of this story.
  • Next we ask if one of them can share a story of how they would teach their sons how to hunt a boar and Bertie responded by sharing a story in detail, including drawing on the ground positions of hunter and boar etc.
  • After that we share the concept of storying in context of the two samples we experienced already.
  • I then model a short story from Numbers 15:32-36, emphasize to know and as needed tell the scripture reference, say in the story where I start and end with the Bible, have them retell it, and asked questions about it.  Retelling it accurately seems a real challenge, but in the end in they did it.  This story is provoking the attendees to go to other scripture, but I keep them in the story in order to allow their questions to remain unanswered for the time, so that they can be answered through successive stories by the Bible self.  The aim was to teach them to understand that stories can relate to each other or build on each other.  It generated lots of interest and they really want to hear the next story on the following day.
  • Next I ask them to find a story to practice before next day’s session in Khwe (with another person translating in Afrikaans) for themselves.  Since their capacity to find stories is largely limited by the stories they are familiar with, they choose accordingly.   Alfred chooses Genesis 22:1-13 about Abraham and Isaac, Bertie chooses Daniel 6 about Daniel and King Darius (and the lions), and Abram chooses Genesis 6:9 to 8:19 about Noah.  Josef wanted to talk about Adam and Eve and their sin, but he couldn’t come the next day and he never followed through.  At that time they didn’t realize the length of the complete stories, but I did ask them to consider the length and dividing the story.

October 5:

• All day workshop sessions:
  
  • I modeled Luke 6:1-11 as a follow through story on Numbers 15:32-36, helping them understand  the opportunity to develop a story set that can:
    • address a particular issue (like about the Sabbath, baptism, discipleship)
    • describe the life of a person (like Abraham, David, Daniel, Jesus)
    • make longer story manageable by dividing it into smaller stories allowing focus on more things that can be learned (like the account of the flood with Noah and his family)
    • serve as a chronological history (like fall to redemption)
  • I notice that there are two childrens Bible that are being used as the basis of their stories. As we check the one written by an American lady out in the group, we notice how inaccurate it is. It takes a premise or teaching from an unrelated and sometimes inappropriately used scripture reference (often a part of a verse) and connects it to the story, so that the story reflects the inaccurate teaching.  The true meaning of the story is often completely lost.  It even causes confusion as to where in the Bible the story is found.  Consequently, the accompanying questions are also very misleading.  The second one, authored by Desmond Tutu, is much better, but still has some of the same challenges.  These kind of books need to be used with caution, especially as a reference and they certainly should not be used as a source text for doing Bible storying.  Both of them go from a specific teaching to mating it with a story that is acceptable by the author.  The reason for depending on these resources by the attendees is the limited understanding of Afrikaans by the attendees and no materials being available in Khwe. 
  • Bertie’s rendering of his story was heavily influenced by the first childrens Bible and was a disaster. It was inaccurate, incomplete, full of teaching, and misleading. Bertie says afterwards that they should bury the first childrens Bible, so it can’t be used, even with the children.
  • We didn’t allow Abram to use the childrens Bible foundation, but it still was heavily influenced by it and his rendering of the story was very abbreviated because of the length of the original passage and him not dividing it in to a sequence of stories.  It also missed crucial content, like only talking about why Noah was chosen, but not telling about the wickedness of the rest of the people, so it looks like the whole story happens because of Noah’s obedience to God.  The details that confirm the scope of the flood, etc. we also missing, just like in the childrens Bible.
  • Afred’s rendering of the story about Abraham was very good for a first effort.  Through questions we helped them discover that it will be good to be part of a longer series of stories, otherwise God’s request for Abraham to sacrifice Isaac etc. will lack much of the potential impact it can have.
  • The attendees together choose a story about the flood from Genesis 6:9-22.  Each of them will put to memory as accurately as possible and the first round of practice sharing it in Khwe happens in the afternoon, during which we help them to correct and complete the story, add the proper scripture references and process the questions we ask about the story to help the audience enter the story, learn from it and apply what it taught.  They finish the afternoon with further practicing and honing the story.

October 6:

• Hendrik has church board meetings from 7 to almost noon with the elders
• Afternoon workshop session:
  
  • I model another version of the story told the day before, this time from Mark 2:23 to 3:6, addressing the issue that there sometimes more than one version of the same story and the choice we have which to use.
  • Josef and James (another elder) have joined and the Genesis 6:9-22 story is told by all three attendees to them in Khwe.  We address further issues of accuracy, relevant details to be included, and practice using the questions for the audience, while keeping them from teaching on the story.  Their homework is to prepare it so that it can be used in the church service the next morning.

October 7:

• Morning church sessions (two separate congregations of about 20 to 25 people each):
  
  • Bertie (Hendrik observing) and Abram (Durk observing) led the storying sessions in Khwe including involving the congregation using questions.
  • In the short debrief after the services we learned that they were growing to grasp the storing concept, while all of them were still wrestling with the change from their normal approach of teaching. For more than 25 years they have been using a teaching concept starting with a premise and supporting it with scripture verses.  The storying concept goes from internalizing scripture stories that reveal through questions truths that can be applied to our lives.
  • With Bertie’s group Hendrik has to lead with the questions and he doesn’t get a back translation at all (which Josef and James had agreed to do).  With Abram’s group people respond some and then Abram tells the story a second time.  He talks a lot between people answering their questions, but we didn’t get the chance to ask him if he was clarifying the story or preaching about it.
  • I model Exodus 20:8-11 as a follow through to understand more about the Sabbath and Hendrik challenges them to look in Acts about information about when people were meeting together and how it applies to what the church is doing.
  • I propose that a good next step will be to record some Bible stories in order to get some relevant stories as accurately as possible in Khwe as a foundation to be motivated by and to grow from.  It also will be the first Bible portions in Khwe, since currently there is no Scripture in their language at all.  My challenge to them is to prepare 50 stories (10 for each of the five men).  We would need to help them think through relevant stories, including some relating to community issues in context of a holistic ministry approach.  We leave them to evaluate the proposal and move forward on it.  If they move forward on it, we would look for funding and a person to help process and record the stories and make it possible to be shared on mobile phones and MP3 players (maybe some Megavoice devices, since they are already familiar with these units).  Starting January 2013 Lucas van Vuuren, a South African man, is scheduled to serve the Bagani area for two years.  Currently he is living in Agulhas and I could contact him and see if he is willing to be mentored to help in the process.  If so, I could visit and train him (Agulhas is only about 3.5 hours from Cape Town)
• In the afternoon we return to Grootfontein and pack for an early morning departure to Mangetti Dune.

October 8:

• Travel to Mangetti Dune, arriving mid morning after which Hendrik has to pick up workshop attendees in three separate locations, returning mid afternoon.
• First workshop session for the !Kung, but only the !Kung elders (Benjamin and Costa from Mangetti Dune, Josef and Petrus from M’akata, Mattias from Omatako, and Shotty from Kano Vlei) are able to attend:
  
  • All except Mattias and Costa speak Afrikaans fairly well, while Shotty and Josef spoke it very well.  Josef also spoke English fairly well.
  • Introductions, prayers, and formalities
  • The issue of the day for the !Kung is a land dispute in Bushmen territory where outsiders end up owning land and oppressing the Bushmen.  As they process this story, we use it as an introduction to the storying concept and how we can use it helping people internalize Bible stories and engage in the stories.
  • I model Luke 6:1-11 and then tell the story from Mark 2:23 to 3:6 with one key error.  I ask them if they notice the difference in the stories and if they can find the error.  This is difficult for them as they never considered the issues of accuracy and detail like this.  I then share about that this is where false teaching and syncretism can creep in (don’t worry, I didn’t use big words with them).
  • Next we encourage them to pick a manageable sized story. Shotty chooses the Matthew 22:2-14 parable. Costa chooses Matthew 22:15-22, Petrus chooses Matthew 18:2-9, and Josef was not able to join us the next day.  Benjamin and Mattias didn’t choose one.

October 9:

• All day workshop sessions:
  
  • I model Exodus 20:8-11 as a follow through to understand more about the Sabbath and ask questions to engage the attendees and to model the questions and the process.
  • Costa tells a combination of rendering unto Ceasar what is Ceasar’s with the baptism by John, which gives us the opportunity to address that it important to keep to one story at a time. Another person gives a lot of teaching with the story and we help them to remember to stick to the story only.
  • We discuss how their audience needs to be able to relate to the story and that some parables, like the Matthew 22:2-14 parable, need a cultural understanding of the original setting. 
  • They initially agree to all practice learning Matthew 22:15-22 for the afternoon session, but as they practice telling the story, it seems a hard because of grasping the meaning of pictures of these Ceasar on coins (which we explain using their paper money bills), who Ceasar or ‘the emperor’ is, who the Pharisees are, and they are missing the broader context as none of them pay taxes (except those included in store items bought). 
  • They then discuss which story to tell in their churches the next Sunday and in the midst of the discussion Shotty tells a good version of Luke 15:11-32.  They like this story because it can stand on its own, it is clear, and it interests them.  They commit to putting this story all to memory for the next day.

October 10:

• All day workshop sessions:
  
  • Following through on the Sabbath issue, I start with telling them the story of the burial of Jesus and His resurrection, separating the Sabbath as seventh day, from the resurrection being on the first day of the week.  I also share that there are no stories about when the church is to meet and what the church service should look like, but there are many places where it mentions when people meet and also what kinds of things the early believers were doing.  As we go through them, they realize that initially it talks about people meeting every day of the week, that they went to the synagogues and temple, and that there is a mentioning of a meeting that went through the night of the first day of the week (Acts 20).  We share also from the Pauline writings about freedom of celebrating feasts and days, but that there are no laws to keeping specials feasts or days holy, and the danger of making things like that laws.  They discussed it and then understood the difference between Sabbath and the first day of the week, that we have normally church service on Sunday, the first day of the week, and not Saturday, the Sabbath. They also understood that this is a choice and any or every day would be as good as Sunday.  We agree to meet on Sunday in context of honoring Jesus resurrection and as such it is a commitment we make, not an order God gives.  Likewise it is the choice of the Seventh Day Adventists to meet on Saturday and that is okay too. A day of rest is a good principle brought to us by the Old Testament law, but it is not a law issue anymore.  (I address this since I find that many ‘habits’ of the church have become ‘law like’ teachings that misrepresent what the Bible really says and since people don’t know its stories, they just believe teachings like it is the Word of God)
  • Next two people story Luke 15:11-32 with the group correcting (which is needed minimally). Josef is back and after hearing the story once in !Kung, he translates the story almost without error back into Afrikaans. Later Joao, another church member, joins us and after he listens to the story, we ask him to tell it back.  He also does so almost without error.
  • In the afternoon we address the issue of practicing so the story becomes theirs so they can tell it with ease. This helps them and their audience to enter the story.  Everybody in the group ends up telling it and we do various ways of checking the story for accuracy (group interaction after completing the story, correcting the story as the person tells it, back translation phrase by phrase and after the complete story, asking questions about the story to verify usage of right wording).
  • From the beginning on both groups (Khwedam and !Kung) seem to struggle with the questions, so we explained again that the purpose is for the audience to engage in the story and that the questions needed to be geared that way.  They try some questions and will test them in the final workshop session.
  • Costa brings out an old Kangale hymnal that has the story as a song.  They realize that most don’t understand it (even though they use the song book in church)… so proper language is a key issue.  They also note that this song repeats a piece of the story in every verse, but that it is an inaccurate rendering of what really happens in the story.  Accuracy is stressed again.  That a song tells an abbreviated story is no problem as long as it doesn’t change the story and is accompanied by a complete version of the story in another communication art form.  In our case they decide not to use the song.
  • In closing I address the issue to remember to tell the scripture reference, say in the story where I start and end with the Bible, and to add a proper introduction.
  • That evening they are asked to practice the story again

October 11:

• Hendrik has church board meetings from 8 to 10 with the elders
• Last workshop session in morning 10:30 to 13:00:
  
  • We address that we cannot translate or story with 100% accuracy due to limitations to languages, spoken and written… we want to make sure that we communicate as clearly and accurately as we can.
  • Attendees model storying Luke 15:11-32, with the final time role playing it in a church setting.  The storying goes well, but their questions don’t work and they confirm that our questions do communicate, but that is a new way of thinking.  The last session is a real success, with people really responding properly to the questions for the first time.
  • Hendrik encourages all the men strongly to story Luke 15:11-32 the next Sunday. 
  • He also asks them each to prepare three stories for their meetings in Grootfontein in November 2012, so they can help each other check them there and them hone them until their next meetings in February 2013, so they can have 19 !Kung Bible stories as a start of their own Bible and for recording and distributing them among the over 4000 !Kung that, at this point, have no Scripture at all in their own language.
• In the afternoon the attendees are returned to their homes.

October 12:

• In the morning we travel from Mangetti Dune to Tsumkwe, after dropping off donated food aid packages in Nhoma (for the widows and their children of the three men that died after having been burned) and picking one workshop attendee up in Aasvoëlnes.
• First workshop session for the Ju/’hoansi in Tsumkwe with three elders (Maarten (N!aici) from Aasvoëlnes [he serves a 30 kilometer radius including Nhoma], and Leviet and Gerrie from Tsumkwe):
  
  • These elders have been working for 10 years with Hendrik and received a lot of mentoring and teaching.  All three of them know Afrikaans fairly well and two of them know English (Gerrie very well).
  • Introduction and formalities
  • I first explained the principles of storying and then I inquired about their understanding of the Sabbath and their church gatherings being on Sundays.  They understood well, so I modeled only the story from Mark 2:23 to 3:6, after which we did practicing retelling the story and went through the questions, explaining specific storying issues as they came up.
  • Next Hendrik explains that he would like to do a storying session for the church service on Sunday.  We pray and then we discuss the issues relating to choosing a relevant and appropriate story.
  • After a break they come with two options: Luke 15:11-32 or Genesis 4:1-16.  They choose the latter and we discuss the concepts shared from verse 13 onwards.  Would they communicate clearly and can or should the first part stand on its own.  They decide them that they will take the story through verse 12.
  • The story is told twice with translations phrase by phrase and we make corrections each time, then I help them to understand why sharing the details is important.  Still, when a detail is confusing for the audience and can be left out or generalized without altering the story, the story teller should know what he left out or generalized and why.  By no means should anything be added, except for clarifying remarks (for example if ‘flock’ doesn’t have meaning, then one can say ‘(like as in) a group of sheep’.
  • We make sure that they think through an audience relevant introduction, mentioning the scripture references (especially in church), and book-ending the story in regard to where the story from the Bible starts and ends.

October 13:

• All day workshop sessions:
  
  • After we prayed, I continued with my storying approach from Exodus 20:8-11, followed by Exodus 35:1-3 and Numbers 15:32-36, asking questions for them respond to and bringing out the story set concept.
  •  Everybody (including Elliot, Hendrik and Durk) tells the Genesis 4:1-12 story, which is interpreted phrase by phrase, checking them afterwards one by one for accuracy, dealing with issue like completeness, detail issues in context of relevance and what can be generalized, how to clarify things during the story, how a word can have different meanings depending on context and/or original language word having one or more meanings versus receptor language (of our audience).  We must know what we leave out or add and why we do it, knowing that it doesn’t change the meaning and not add any teaching from part that the audience has not yet been exposed to.
  • The group struggles with responding to the questions, so we ask then to think over lunch how it would be done best in their culture and language.
  • In the afternoon the three men told the stories to each other without interruption in their own language to each other, correcting only after each completing the story.  They do much better with each other only using their language.  Afterwards they share personally each which corrections they had to make.
  • Next we discuss if they have different questions from the ones I used to ask about the stories, but they have none.
  • They do ask what to do if we don’t understand a story or an aspect of a story and one of them responds immediately with “ask God in prayer.”  This prompts us to look at this further and we end up with a short list to help them (this version is the amplified version for my reference):
    • Ask God in prayer
    • Go back to the Bible (read it or listen to it again, look at it in a larger context, does it build on something discussed earlier in the Biblical history, refer to other versions of the same story or subject if available)
    • If available and if you have the opportunity use other translations, source texts, cross-references, concordance, Bible dictionaries, reliable history books that address the subject in its original time setting and cultural context, etc.
    • Go to your trusted teachers that are willing to be open to look with you in the Bible and other resources without trying to press a predetermined theological stance
    • If we can’t understand and there is seemingly no explanation, then accept it simply by faith without being able to explain it
  • We decide that a good way to bring order to their church storytelling session is as follows (again this is my amplified version):
    • Tell story with proper introduction and scripture reference
    • Ask if the audience understood the story (optional)
    • Ask people as a group what the story says (in essence they tell the story back), correcting them as they go along
    • Tell the story once more (optional, but encouraged)
    • Ask the people what they like/don’t like and/or what is good/bad in the story
    • About who is the story and which persons are in the story
    • What does it say about God (if He is part of the story)
    • What does it say about all the other persons in the story, addressing at least the important persons individually
    • What does it say about us/me and/or what does that mean for me
    • What will I do about it or what changes will I make in my life as a result
    • Who will I tell the story to next
  • Next the share the story standing up in front of a ‘test’ audience (in our case an audience of one for each, and one tells it in English and the other two in Afrikaans) and go through the whole procedure.  They do very well.  The biggest challenge is to remember to tell one common thing in the story accurately and not as it often is told (‘God did accept Abel and his offering and He did not accept Cain and his offering’, but not  ‘God did accept Abel his offering and not Cain his offering’)
  • They next wrote down the questions, since remembering the questions was really hard for them.
  • They were assigned to tell the story at least once for their family or whoever before next days’ church service.

October 14:

• Morning church service and debrief of storytelling session:
  
  • The church service (about 43 Ju/’hoansi attending, with only eight men and for the rest women and children) is conducted completely in Ju/’hoansi with some songs (one in Afrikaans) and prayer. Next Leviet tells the story in Ju/’hoansi (on the side Gerrie translates for us in Afrikaans). Next Maarten asks if they understand the story and proceeds to ask them to review the story.  There is only one man responding and he says that maybe the people don’t understand the story and if it could be told once more.  Gerrie tells the story a second time.  Still the questions get little response until we start leading further them into the story with more specific question following through on their answers (for example one person answers that it is good that God gives Adam and Eve the garden to live in - which was mentioned in the introduction.  Gerrie confirms that this is right, but then asks if they are still living in the garden.  The same person responds with saying that they had been driven out because of their sin, so they are not in the garden anymore. Gerrie asks then what else God gave to Adam and Eve and a lady says that God gave her two sons, Cain and Abel.  Now we’re back in the story and on track with the next question being what Cain and Able did for work).
  • After we process the whole story with questions, we end up with the personal application of ‘who do I want to be?’ and ‘Who will I tell this story to?’  Hendrik encourages them to tell the story to others and bring those that listen to the story to church next week to listen to another story.
  • In our debrief it is mentioned that people are normally shy and that the drawback of the church setting (a larger group of about 43, sitting in rows, normally not interacting with the message/sermon) contributed to primarily only 3 people responding to the questions.  Hendrik shares that a small group where direct eye contact can be made would be a better setting, which also would encourage children to respond (who wouldn’t speak up in a church setting).
  • I share that one way is to approach it is to have the preacher prepare the story for himself using the questions to draw his teaching from for the church service (so, he’ll tell the story and teach the truths from the questions and then follows through in the week meeting in small groups where he tells the story again and asks the questions in the small groups letting them engage with the story.  Another way is to start telling the story in small groups (consider if both genders together would or wouldn’t work and if children should be included or be separate), do retelling and then ask the questions.  Then follow through with the same story in the next church service, teaching the truths from the questions and referring to people in general about them already having discovered those truths where applicable as an encouragement.  In either case, it would be good to repeat the story the next service to connect as appropriate to another story that could be part of a set.  This will help people also to see that the stories of God’s word belong together, that they are sometimes connected, that they can build on each other, that there is sometimes more part of a story, and that God repeats some stories, teachings, and concepts.
  • I share that, through Hendrik, they need to give met feedback to what will work best for them, so I can learn too and help them as well as others further.

October 15:

• Hendrik has meeting with church project community in morning
• Afternoon workshop session:
  
  • I start with sharing on how to develop story sets and that if they want to do the Luke 15:11-32 story next, how this could become part of a set dealing with children, fathers/God, sin, forgiveness in context of sharing the gospel.  I emphasize the issue to repeat previous stories as appropriate to build on and help people remember them well.  These stories then can also be referred to in order to gain more understanding of other stories, issues, history, etc.  In order to story well it is important for the story teller to internalize the story and it’s meaning (initially primary through the foundational questions) before he/she shares it with others.
  • I talk about the different kinds of communication art forms and how they can complement each other.  One just needs to make sure that they all (even if a song addresses only a part of a story) stay as accurately as possible in context of what the Bible really says.
  • I read the story from Luke 15:11-32 in Afrikaans and over lunch break everybody will start preparing to tell it for the afternoon session.
  • After lunch break I follow through on Sabbath and the law issue from Matthew 5:17-20  and Mark 12:28-34 as a teaser to encourage them to find more of the stories as I refer to other passages as well.
  • The men then practice telling Luke 15:11-32 in their own language, correcting each other after telling the story.  Then they report back to us in Afrikaans and they did really well.  The first person telling it made it all the way through with only a few errors.
  • I emphasize the opportunity for them to start an audio story Bible in their language, which can help people remember and go over the stories better after they have been told to them and that it will help keep the story as accurate as possible.
  • Hendrik asks them each to prepare three additional stories for their meetings in Grootfontein in November 2012, so they can help each other check them there.
  • Hendrik closes our time with praying for them.
• Meet with Theo Kwaks of San Rise at Tsumkwe Lodge about N/a'an ku sê Foundation looking for an investor and partner to secure a future for the Tsumkwe Lodge in context of training, mentoring, and employing San/Bushmen.  San Rise is already looking to invest in a broader vocational training center/program near Tsumkwe together with COSDEC (a community skills development center) in coordination with Namibian government support.  They did some research in the area and the results are attached as a separate document.

October 16:

• Via Aasvoëlnes, travel back from Tsumkwe to Grootfontein.
• We stop near Amatako to visit with Ovidiu and Cornelia Pater (and their two children Lidia and Daniel) from Romania who are 7^th Day Adventist and have started a ministry called ‘Kalahari New Hope’ among the San in that area.  Since 2008 they operate a farm with a growing infrastructure (a meeting room, ablution blocks, dorms, a garden, a church building).  They have set up a first and second grade school and are still looking for teachers that speak the language of the children as well as that they want to expand to higher grades.  They also look at gardening and other opportunities to minister in a holistic context, as well as that they realize the need for God’s Word to be available in their language.  Currently there is a heavy emphasis on baptizing people and from Hendrik’s checking with some of the baptized San people, they don’t really understand what is going on.  They have expressed the need for the scriptures to Wycliffe Bible translators of Romania and Oui now has the contact information for Sebastian Floor.  He learned that the workshops are part starting to get scriptures in the San languages in an oral format and that I work with Sebastian through Wycliffe RTS.

October 17:

• Debrief workshops with Hendrik and planning for possible dates to record first stories in February, March, or April 2013.
• Go with Hendrik van Zyl over the TSC Project Proposal and make suggestions in light of what we learned, his knowledge, and the DRCN involvement.

Note: Vasakela according to the !Kung is only used by the Caprivian people to indicate the reddish or pink skin color of a person, which is typical for most Bushmen, as well as their own infants.  It is not synonymous with !Kung or any San people group.

Send us your comments or questions