I think it's time we question our bibles.

I head this post with a photo of a coffee mug and a Bible at a Christian retreat because I want to talk about what we take for granted. Not just our Instagram photos, though. I want to talk about the Bible.

I know, I just broke like every rule. Have I heard 2 Timothy 3:16? "All scripture is God-breathed and useful for teaching, correcting, training, rebuking. etc... in righteousness." I know. I actually wood-burned/sharpied that verse into the back of the duct-tape cover on my study Bible. (Don't ask how that process worked.)

I stand my ground though. I think we need to question our Bibles a little more. I'm not saying our Bibles aren't from God. I think they are. I'm not even saying they haven't been translated close to 100% accuracy. I've had too many NT/OT and Apologetics courses to even try to play ignorance on that one. They're pretty stinking close to the original texts.

It's just that I still think we've missed one KEY thing.

We've overlooked the way that communication works. I'm half-way through my bachelor's in communication at this point, and I don't in any way claim to know it all, but I've learned enough about communication these past two semesters to start drawing some conclusions. Alongside that, I've sat under enough pastors and mentors, taken enough theology classes, and participated in enough cross-cultural mission trips to have some sort of cultural analysis of the different ways people communicate with God. In fact, in these experiences, I'm finding that I am just now beginning to place words behind a few gut-feelings I've had growing for a long time. So, let me start by explaining some key communication concepts. 

First, communication is irreversible. We can usually add to what we communicate, but my last blog article was all about how we can never "uncommunicate." Once something is said, we can add to it in an attempt to "dilute" its strength, but we can never take it back. I'm sure those of us in serious relationships know this rule. We've all had things we wish we could have shoved back in our mouths. For this reason, I'm glad that 2 Timothy 3:16 guarantees for us that God was in high-key intentionality mode when His Spirit guided the authors of the Bible. Intentionality is what I'm eventually aiming at with this post.Intentionality is important because communication, as a practice, is complicated.

For starters, communication is based on symbols. Communication is always engaged in connecting symbols, things, and ideas. Think about the task of communicating like you would giving someone a kiss. I know that's an abstract concept, but just bear with me. If it's your first kiss and you want it to be a romantic one, you might bat your eyelashes, hold eye contact longer, or stand closer than the norm in order to symbolize your intentions. Even without words, you've used symbols to communicate.

Other times we do, of course, use words. If we want to tell someone to close a car door, we say "shut the door!" If the person we are talking to is standing just outside the car, they will know that "the door" in that sentence is a symbol representing the door of the car, not the house door. Expectantly, they would then close the car's door. Effective communication. 

The problem is that they only knew to close the car door because you both had shared assumptions and codes in that given situation. It was obvious to them that you meant the car door, not the house door because you'd both just gotten out of the car and were standing next to it. That's the point, though. You didn't have to mention the car in order to communicate effectively. Had you just entered the house and they had left both the house door and the car door open and you said, "close the door!" They may have only shut the house door.

Had they done this, you would have had a missocmmunication, which is when a sender sends one message or symbol, and the receiver interprets it as something other than what the sender intended.

What am I angling at?

If communication is symbolic, there is room for error.

Am I saying there are errors in the Bible?

Well, I'm saying every word in the Bible is a symbol representing something that each author (and God) originally intended. This is why reading verses in context is so important. We can't read Jeremiah 29:11 when God says he "knows the plans he has for us, plans to prosper us and not to forsake us," and gather that he's going to give us a new goldfish farm next week. Why? God was referring to the car door. Not the house door. Israel was in battle, and God was attempting to tell Joshua that He was going to deliver the enemy into his hands when he went into his next battle.

See, the Bible was written one time with one message. It can be interpreted correctly or incorrectly. I think most of us know this, and we try to pay attention to context to guard against wrong interpretation. What most of us aren't as aware of, however, is that the symbols (or words) of the Bible aren't the same as they used to be.

The Bible was written in Hebrew, Greek, and in some parts Aramaic. Today, we read it in English. That means we are using thee's and thou's for the's in translations like the King James Version (KJV). This is important because these words, or symbols, aren't the original words that God inspired. God inspired the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. We're reading Latin, Spanish, English, and many other languages.

Now, I'm not saying God isn't big enough to help guide today's translators in conveying the same meanings of the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic symbols. In fact, I think we have many translations like the English Standard Version (ESV), Hollman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB), and North American Standard Bible (NASB) that highly accurately convey the original symbols word-by-word. I'm not saying to throw our Bibles away. But, this entire conversation on symbols is meant to lay the foreground for a conversation on perception.

When we change our symbols, we change our message and what those receiving our message perceive. At times we can even use the same symbols in a different context, like "the door" and unintentionally send a wrong message. In the case of the Bible, I don't think our translators have failed in conveying the same symbols. I already mentioned that I've taken too many classes on Bible translation etc. for that. We did good. (Let's pause and pat ourselves on the back.)

Here is the key that we are missing:

Different symbols have different meanings, and different meanings lead to different perceptions. Different perceptions mean different beliefs, and if there is one thing Christianity is really about its belief. Spending some time talking about what influences our beliefs, especially from our belief's key source, is important. So, yes, the symbols of each Bible translation are accurate. But, we have hundreds of translations. 

When it comes to the Bible, I think a lot of us have been on autopilot. We don't consider the effects of the words in front of us. One Bible is NOT necessarily the same as another.  

If we are reading The Message Version (MSG), we are experiencing a casual conversational style with God. 

Have a look:

"This is how much God loved the world: He gave his Son, his one and only Son. And this is why: so that no one need be destroyed; by believing in him, anyone can have a whole and lasting life. God didn’t go to all the trouble of sending his Son merely to point an accusing finger, telling the world how bad it was. He came to help, to put the world right again. Anyone who trusts in him is acquitted; anyone who refuses to trust him has long since been under the death sentence without knowing it. And why? Because of that person’s failure to believe in the one-of-a-kind Son of God when introduced to him (John 3:16-18 MSG)."

If we are reading the ESV or KJV or even New King James Version (NKJV) we are experiencing a little more formality and word-for-word accuracy. (You know the thee's and thou's of the KJV; it's like talking to a King.)

Here's another look:

"For God so loved the world,[a] that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. (John 3:16-18 ESV)."

So what am I saying after looking at the MSG? God isn't conversational? No. He certainly spoke with David in the Psalms. Sometimes it was a more one-sided conversation, but a conversation nonetheless.

After looking at the ESV, am I saying God is not a King? No. The gospels clearly depict Jesus as King. Maybe not the King the Jews were looking for, but a King nonetheless. 

I'm saying this. 

The words we choose matter. Communication—especially written communication, which tends to be more tedious than verbal—determines perception and belief.

If we grow up only reading one Bible translation and holding it as a holy grail above others, we may miss a more diverse message that God may be trying to show us. 

I've certainly felt as if I were seeing the effects of these narrow-minded perceptions of God before. I have attended both churches that treated God like a professor and churches that treated him like a roommate. 

When we talk about various Bibles, we're talking about various perceptions of God and varying beliefs in our hearts. The God I know is a dynamic God. No matter what the translation is, let's read about him in a dynamic way.