I worked for 10 years in the Air Force on avionics ... aircraft electronics--specifically navigation and communication devices. These specialized devices were designed to transmit ... something ... to a receiver that would analyze the transmission and understand what was intended. So, for instance, a carrier like a radio wave might be amplitude-modulated (AM) or frequency-modulated (FM) with information that is sent to a receiver that can detect the carrier wave frequency and then pick out the variations in amplitude or frequency that contain the information and feed it to the user. A radar (short for "RAdio Detection And Ranging") will send out a pulse that bounces off things and comes back at a known speed so it can be received and compared in intensity and time to paint a picture of what it was looking at. That sort of thing. It takes something that is intended to be sent to another place, puts that something into a transmittable format, and sends it. The other place must have the proper equipment to detect and translate that transmission and come to a proper understanding of its content. It is somewhat complicated, you see?
Humans do this constantly. You have an idea that you would like to share with someone else. Let's call them "B." An idea is not able to be sent, so you have to convert it into a transmittable format. We use verbal and nonverbal communication. You prepare that idea in this format and transmit it to B. B receives it, decodes it, and understands exactly what you were thinking ... in theory. As we all know, it doesn't always work that way. I write, for instance, that the parable of the sheep and the goats isn't about taking care of the disenfranchised, but about lives changed that produces action, and someone else reads it and translates it to mean I'm opposed to taking care of the disenfranchised. Not true. A mistranslation. I write about something Trump did or said without being condemning and they don't translate that as a discussion of an idea, but as a defense of Trump ... which I'm not intending. A mistranslation. I ask my wife, "Honey, why is this spoon on the counter?" I'm actually saying, "I'll put it away for you if you simply forgot it; I'm just making sure you want me to." She hears, "You're such a poor housekeeper and I'm tired of picking up after you." A mistranslation. Happens all the time for all of us.
Scripture says, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (John 1:1). That is, from the beginning, Jesus was the expression of God. Jesus was the living expression of God. In addition, Scripture is the expression of God. Jesus called God's word "truth" (John 17:17). Hebrews says, "The word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart" (Heb 4:12). Husbands are commanded to love their wives by cleansing them "by the washing of water with the word" (Eph 5:26). Scripture itself is God's self-expression and is fully sufficient (2 Tim 3:16-17). And we ... misinterpret it. We read it and hear it and run it through faulty internal circuits that twist it and pull it back out ... wrong. I read about a church that based itself on sex, of all things, based on 1 John 4:8 ... "God is love." "Well," they reasoned, "if God is love and love is sex, then sex is God and we're going to have ourselves a grand church." (As I recall, it was called "The Church of Light and Love.") So we take in a clearly transmitted signal ... from God ... twist it through our depraved hearts and minds, and spew out up to and including the exact opposite of what was intended. What we have here is failure to communicate. It is a receiver not properly tuned to the Transmitter, and we need to seek remedy for that.
9 comments:
I often hear the argument, "If the Bible is so clear and true why are there so many denominations with different beliefs?" And right here is the simple answer. It's not a fault of the Bible, the Transmitter is working perfectly. It is our hearts and minds that have been bent and twisted by our own wants and desires that twists the clear message in order to meet our bent desire. It may not always be a willful act, but we need to be aware that we are deformed receivers.
Are you saying that the presence of multiple denominations within the Christian Church is due to error in receiving the “clear message” transmitted through the Bible--i.e. due to “bent desire”--in every case? I’ve always understood most of those sectarian splits to be over nonessential issues of faith and practice and that the major orthodox groups share a traditional biblical interpretation (and the groups that don’t are considered to be nonorthodox and even cultic). I would not necessarily attribute the existence of so many Protestant sects to “bent and twisted” hearts and minds (certainly I would for some of them) but to conscientious differences of interpretation and emphases. I understand the essence of what you are saying, but I think your language makes a strong leap.
Your opening technical explanation was a helpful illustration. I can see that there could be issues in both the transmission and the reception--i.e. both in preparing the “transmittable format” you mentioned as well as processing the detection and translation of that transmission. The possibility and potential for error--"a mistranslation”--is there on both ends of the process. This would be true even in the case of the dissemination of God’s Word, where the message might be miscommunicated by human agents and/or misinterpreted by receivers. I think that some might not agree where you described the Bible text as “a clearly transmitted signal ... from God” and proceed to either restate that transmitted communication before or after reception or dismiss the clear message coming in and decipher it as they see fit. We know that a combination of these scenarios has been happening since the Garden of Eden! I am certain that Satan is at work in an attempt to both scramble the message from God and, when that fails, to encourage sinful men to “twist it” and “spew out” a distortion of it. “It is a receiver not properly tuned to the Transmitter, and we need to seek remedy for that.” That remedy is the Holy Spirit, as I see it.
One of the funniest doctrines in terms of names is "the perspicuity of Scripture." It's funniest because "perspicuity" is a little known word ... meaning "clarity," making "perspicuity" rather unclear. The principle, though, is that Scripture is sufficiently clear for people to attain to sufficient understanding of it. The fact that people have MISunderstood it doesn't negate the concept. It doesn't require that everyone always understands it clearly (a problem with the receiver), but that God made it clear enough for everyone (a quality of the transmitter). And, yes, it IS the Holy Spirit that does that for us.
We can all agree the Bible is clear and the Author is true. So the fact that there are so many denominations must indicate that the problem is either in the Transmitter or the receiver. Are you saying that there are some good intentioned believers that aren't corrupted by a deceitful heart or a sin-sick mind? If someone takes offense that they are mistaken in their understanding of Scripture is due to their bent and twisted minds, I argue they don't really believe what the Bible says about humanity. I don't believe the spread of denominations is mainly due to maliciousness (though I'm sure some of it is), but good intention doesn't make up for a deceitful heart that even we can't fully comprehend in ourselves. I'm sure I have twisted understandings of Scripture even though I strive to know Scripture without my preconceptions. My main point was that the reason there are so many different denominations was because of a faulty receiver, not a faulty Transmitter (which those that denounce Christianity on the basis of denominationalism are arguing that it is the fault of God that we can't agree because He wasn't clear enough).
I have frequently heard the argument you mention in your final sentence--almost always as a charge by the Catholics against Protestants, as they insist that they are the One True Unified [RC is not truly unified, in fact] Church, while “the Protestant church is thousands upon thousands of disorganized, disharmonious factions and therefore can’t possibly be the true Church, all split up and confused as it is.” The response has always been that Protestants have separated into subgroups based primarily on secondary issues but are united with other mainline Protestant denominations on the essential beliefs of the faith; at the core, there is basic unity. Yes, we are all “faulty receivers,” as you say, which will color our Bible interpretation endeavors to one degree or another; however, under the Holy Spirit’s ministry, “good intentioned believers” can and do interpret God’s Word differently on some points not made explicitly clear in Scripture (and they will find enough like-minded Bible students to form an organized subset). I don’t see the existence of “so many denominations” necessarily as a “problem” but rather as a necessity and perhaps even a convenience.
Roger, that. :-) (As it happens, I am familiar with the doctrine of “the perspicuity of Scripture”--many years of working with a detailed “Theology” library classification outline introduced me to many new terms.) I mentioned possible transmission error by human agents--and not meaning error by God, of course--where I was thinking of clerical/copying errors, misprints in certain older Bible versions, faulty translation of original texts (i.e. the New World Translation of John 1:1 as “ … the Word was a god,” as one example), etc. I am sure there has been human error in both transmission and reception of Scripture--both deliberate and unintentional on either end--since while God’s Word is clear, it is not always and equally easily understood. Fortunately, “the preservation of Scripture” is another trusted doctrine.
My point isn't about our intentions. You have to admit, none of us are coming to the Bible with an untainted mind and heart. I imagine even the people that deny the deity of Jesus, or the wrath of God, or the propitiation of Christ are doing so with "good intentions". The point I'm making is that the reason there are so many denominations is not because of the difficulty of Scripture, but because of our sin-addled brains. It's probable that all denominations are wrong on some point. It is foolhardy to say, "I'm crystal clear on all Scripture and am not wrong about any of it." But as Stan points out, that is not the fault of Scripture, so we must ask, if the Bible has one Author who clearly communicated what He wanted communicated, why are there so many different opinions about Scripture? I agree with Stan that the problem is not the Transmitter, but the receiver. Good intentioned or not, we are going to get things wrong about the Bible because we have a pre-existing condition. And because we have that condition, it is good that there are different denominations that we believe align more correctly with how we understand Scripture. I'm glad to not be forced to be taught about Scripture by the authority of a Pope or Bishop. But I can admit that denominationalism is not the ideal. But the only place we will see the ideal is when Jesus Christ returns.
With this clarification, I can better understand your original comment. I think you are saying that there would be perfect consensus in Christian faith and practice across the board were it not for our sinful natures interfering with the proper understanding and interpretation (i.e. receipt) of God’s clear message to mankind. In fact, the very large number of divergent groups proves how prevalent and wide-spread our proclivity towards error is. (If I got that right, I fully concur!)
I bet you are thinking, “that is what I said to begin with,” but for some reason I read it differently--probably because I am currently reading about church history, the Reformation, and the formation of the Protestant denominations, which very much seems to have been done through very “good intentions” by men seeking to understand and obey God’s Word. In any event, thanks for clarifying.
Post a Comment