In Spanish they say, "¿Como se dice ...?" to ask "How do you say ...?" I find myself asking that ... a lot. Oh, in English, of course. You see, words are not "things" so much as symbols. They aren't realities, but a method of transmitting ideas, etc. from one person to another. Now, the trick of it is, we have to use the same symbols. Like that upside down question mark. What does that mean? Nothing to an English speaker. A meaningless symbol. But to a Spanish speaker, it's the prelude to a question. So we have things called "words" that are symbols for transmitting data and we need to understand what those symbols mean if we're to do it effectively. And ... we're not. That's because we take agreed-upon symbols and change them, but keep using them as if we're all in agreement. Here's an example. In the Ten Commandments, God demanded, "You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain" (Exo 20:7). And we're all clear. But ... not. You see, He didn't command anything about "the name of the LORD." That capitalized "LORD" is a symbol for a specific Hebrew term -- YHWH. So we shift YHWH to "LORD" and then we lose the concept of "LORD" and end up ... confused. We think He doesn't want us using the word "G-O-D" in vain. But the word itself is only a symbol. And "the name" is a symbol. Because "the name" refers to "Who I am." And in that light "the name" becomes sacred because it is Who He is. And here we are, mucking about in concerns about the proper use of the letters, "G-O-D." What He wants is for us not to use His character in vain. Jesus didn't institute the proper end of every prayer to be, "In Jesus name, Amen" when He said, "If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it" (Joh 14:14) like some magic incantation. He was telling us to ask with His character in mind (1 John 5:14). Words have meaning, and if we don't grasp their intent, we won't understand what is communicated.
Language is a fluid concept. Starting with the Tower of Babel, languages have been confounded. Since then they're morphed, merged, vanished, thrived. I'm told that if you take two groups of people who speak the same language and separate them geographically, in a hundred years neither group will understand the other, the language will have changed so much. Language is fluid. Ask any teenager. Oh, wait ... you probably won't understand. Because language is constantly changing. And I understand that. But I'm more concerned about the data being transmitted. Take one of Scripture's key concepts: love. Most languages have multiple terms for "love" because love itself has multiple meanings. "I love pizza" is not the same as "I love my dog" or "I love my mom" or "I love my wife." At least, it better not be. So we use a common term, "love," to express a plethora of ideas and expect to be understood. In the King James Bible, the word agape is translated in the 13th chapter of 1 Corinthians as "charity." Why? Because the translators understood that "love" as it's commonly used is not what is expressed in 1 Corinthians 13. That "love" is an entirely self-sacrificing, giving version. Charity -- back then -- expressed the notion of giving without getting, of benevolence and compassion. Not the "warm affection" we understand "love" to be today.
Here's the thing. Words change. I get it. But ideas, concepts, truth ... these don't. So if you're going to steal words, I'll need new ones to express their original intent. I'll need something new for "marriage" to express "a man and a woman united in body and soul for life" instead of the modern version ... "people who ... sort of commit ... at least for a while ... you know ... a step up from friendship." I need a word for "love" that expresses a self-sacrificing, heartfelt concern for the welfare of the loved one. I don't know ... I think I'm going to need new words for "male" and "female" and ... so many other words the world is changing to cover our eyes to the actual concepts and realities. ¿Como se dice "Christian"? Not like "someone who calls themself a Christian without regard to anything ... you know ... Christ-related," but "an actual follower of Christ who has a genuine relationship with Him." I'm going to need so many new words.
8 comments:
The most important language clarification for me personally is the last one you mentioned: “what is a true Christian?”--and the consideration goes way beyond semantics, of course. So much of our Christian journey depends upon following the right leaders, emulating the best mentors, and learning from the wisest teachers--all of whom must use language properly to dispense God’s unchanging truth, which is not subject to redefinition according to the sways of culture. May the Lord lead me to hear the right voices and close my ears to the others!
What I've noticed is that so many language shifts are occurring in the face of Christianity, such as "love," "marriage," and "Christian." It's almost as if Satan is trying to use language to try to deceive the world in general and even the elect. But, then, that's probably just a rightwing conspiracy theory.
I've recently been in an online debate with someone and they accused me of using too many words. But when I use a word, and then you use the word to mean something I never meant in the word, then I am forced to define that one word by multiple words. It is frustrating that even within the Christian community we use the same words to mean different things.
In my recent debates, the person said he's not a Calvinist, or any other -ist, he only wants to know Jesus. He seems to be missing the point that we use these terms as shorthand for our theological positions because simply stating, "I'm a Bible believing Christian", tells me nothing about what you actually believe because there are "Bible believing Christians" that deny hell, or the Trinity, or the Incarnation, or that Scripture is even the word of God. So we use these -isms to better define what we actually believe, because "I love Jesus" simply doesn't mean anything.
I think you are exactly right about Satan’s MO--that he would use language (which can be both objective and subjective, as you often point out) to attack the eternal Word and confuse His followers. (Distortions of “love,” “marriage,” and “Christian” are the ones for which I am on guard the most, too!) I can’t help but think that the tares in the Church will be the ones to accept the rewriting efforts of Satan and the world, while true believers will hold fast to that unchanging Word of God, out of a deep love for and trust in it. At least, may it be so!
Oops--make that “love,” “marriage,” “Christian,” and “truth”--that’s the big one, of course!
David, this is a great point. For JWs to LDS, to progressive christians, there is a tendency to pour meaning in to words that goes beyond the intended meaning. Controlling language is huge for many as it allows them to set the rules of the conversation in ways that benefit them.
Likewise, it is important to understand that some terms are shorthand for much more complicated concepts.
Yes, that is always a problem. All words are shorthand -- shortcuts -- but when they change meaning, we can't afford the shortcuts. Like when Scripture says, "Jonathan loved David" and the gays say, "See? They had sex" or when Jesus called Lazarus to "Come out!", obviously a nod to coming out fo the closet. No, no, no. We need more words.
Post a Comment