More than a Word
Maana Mungu aliupenda ulimwengu hivi hata akamtoa Mwana wake wa pekee, ili kila amwaminiye asipotee, bali awe na uzima wa milele.
Unless you have quick access to an online translator, I’m not sure how the words above can have any impact without having some understanding of Kiswahili. Even if you have a grasp on the basic mechanics of the language, you could still miss the meaning of the words. Communication is more than mere words.
When God speaks, the world hears and understands. From Paul’s early conversation with the believers in Rome, he helps the believers understand that God’s communication with humanity is clear, precise, and accurate. But as a result of the fall and brokenness caused by universal sin, there lies a basic fissure in the communication of God’s attributes and Good News to His creation (Rom 1:18-32). His Word is perfect; we are broken.
As we consider the message of our mission, I want to consider the challenges associated with carrying the gospel to cultures whose people differ greatly from our own. In the time we share here, I would like to raise awareness of the components of communication affected by the fall.
In a common model of communication, at least six components make up the transaction of a message: information, communicator, encoding, message, decoding, and receptor. I will use these components as the framework for our consideration of the challenge of reaching oral cultures.
As evangelicals, we affirm together that God has revealed His Word perfectly and preserved it in the permanent record of the written Scriptures. The information we have received from God is perfect, without error.
Outside of the Word (information) as our source, the cosmic fall caused by sin affects every component subsequent to the Word of God. As we reach into other cultures through our mission efforts, let’s consider the distinctions between peoples. Beyond mere language differences, each receptor culture behaves, thinks, and reacts differently than the communicating culture. Worldview, beliefs, mores, and cultural activity distinguish cultures, making the message one speaks concerning the gospel more than words from a page in the Bible.
Assessing those differences and adjusting our mission may require a complex transition from our comfortable culture into the recipient context to connect the audience with the person and work of Christ. As servants of God, I would propose we consider what changes we could take in order to be welcomed as communicators of truth in the communities we seek to reach.
As we look beyond letters, look to the receptor culture and consider the social standards that validate trust in new information, which results in the natural transmission of truth. Understanding the structure of a society, its thought leaders, influencers, and standards of acceptability will yield a healthy guide to understanding better the way information is “decoded” from external source to internal trust.
Another consideration for the mission is the challenge of understanding the receptor culture’s method of transmission of information. Cultures and people groups distinguish themselves by setting conventional standards for how truth is communicated to other members of the community. For lettered cultures, we may identify books, articles, websites, emails, and Bibles as acceptable and common.
For the majority world, the standard for transmission is fixed on another plane. Where no books exist, the messenger could study the media used to transmit truth in the community. The difference in media significantly affects the way information may be delivered. This revelation directly affects the way our “message” is “encoded.”
In the end, transformation remains solely the work of God. Throughout the history of redemption, God has worked in many ways through His people and various media to reach the world (Hebrews 1:1). As we look out upon the vast expanse of cultures untouched by the gospel, let’s work together to develop effective communication models in light of the immense differences that distinguish these people groups.
As a result, we should face these challenges with a sense of trust in the sovereignty of the King who took the form of a servant, making himself known in terms creation could see, smell, and touch. He took himself from eternal Spirit to flesh that dies. The unchanging eternal One formed himself in the image of a man who became aging and breakable—all to communicate the timeless Truth that He is the only Answer to every question of the broken soul. Let us consider the degree to which He changed so we could see His glory and inherit salvation. He communicated differently so we could understand. He came to us. How should that change the way we go to the nations? How else will they know (think sentence one above) “For God so loved the world…”? Our message must embrace more than words in the correct language. They must take on flesh and dwell among a different people.
