Language, by its nature, can be very powerful, and very weak. It can be complicated, and simple. Language can be figurative in nature, or literal. We paint mental pictures with words (allegories), and tell stories, to convey deep thoughts, ideas, and truths. We need to understand what kind of language we are speaking, and what kind of language we are hearing or reading. Figurative (Symbolic) language is not meant to be taken literally, it is meant to paint a word picture (mental image) to convey a larger truth. The flip side to that is that factual language should not be stretched to form hidden metaphors and allegories when it is not intended to do so.
Some language, because of the purpose for which it is being used, must be factual in nature, and correspond to reality. If language is used supposedly for factual purposes, rather than symbolic, and it does not correspond to reality, it is basically meaningless, and serves no good purpose. For words to serve any meaningful purpose, they cannot be arbitrary. Words are always spoken and understood within a context. We cannot just make up arbitrary meanings for words as we use them. If a word means one thing for you, and most of those within the social context within which you communicate, and I say that to me it means something else entirely, then we have no basis for any meaningful communication. If I say one animal is a dog, and you say it is a cat, we have no basis for communicating. Our definitions must agree, or our communication makes no sense, or at the least is misunderstood. For example, if I say, “Do you believe in God?”, your definition of God may not be the same as mine, so to answer that question, either positively or negatively might mean something different to both of us. That is not to say that all definitions of God are equally valid, because, as I have stated extensively in another writing, I do not hold that to be true. Two contradictory definitions cannot both be true. Either one of them is true, thus making the other false, or both must be false, and the true definition must lie elsewhere. To say that two contradictory definitions can both be true defies reality. If you describe one object as being a square, and I describe the exact same object as a ball, our definitions do not agree. If one of them corresponds to reality, by default, the other description cannot be true. It is either a square, or a ball, or something else entirely. It cannot be both a square and a ball, or our definitions of reality make no sense, and we have no basis for rational communication.
Words must be spoken in truth to have any real meaning. That does not mean that words spoken in truth cannot be inaccurate, and because of the inaccuracies, be, technically, untrue. So, something spoken with a truthful intent can be untrue. I know that sounds a little confusing, but hear me out. A person can say something that they think is true because they are misinformed. They may have received bad information. They are not intentionally speaking for the purpose of deception. They are just wrong. For example, a scientist in 1015 AD might have said, “The sun and the other celestial bodies revolve around the earth.” At the time, the scientist would have thought that was true, based on their paradigm, but we know now that statement is not true. But the scientist did not say it for the purpose of deceiving anyone. I often take issue with those who state things of a theoretical or speculative nature as if they are fact. There are a lot of theories currently about things in outer space we have observed, and don’t really understand, black holes for example. I have no problem with an astrophysicist expounding their theories and speculations about black holes as long as their statements are presented as theories, and not stated in such a dogmatic manner as to demand that their theories be accepted as fact, if they cannot be proven.
On the other hand, a person can state something that is technically true, but frame the information in such a manner as to have the hearer, or reader draw the wrong conclusion. This is done for the purpose of deception. For example, suppose I said, “Hitler believed that the only good Jew is a dead Jew.” Someone hears me, and says, “Daniel Bryant said, “the only good Jew is a dead Jew.” While it is technically true that those words did come out of my mouth, when you divorce them from their context, they mean an entirely different thing from what my original meaning was. The statement, while technically true, is used to promote a lie, and it makes unfounded accusations against my character.
For my current purpose, I will use the word “lie” to refer to something that is communicated for the intent purpose of deception, and not for something that is technically untrue.
A lie distorts our perception of reality. It does not distort or change reality in any way, it simply distorts our perception or understanding of reality. It creates a false reality in a person’s mind. This is what is known as delusion, or fantasy. This is a dangerous place. When what we believe in our minds does not line up with reality, this is the road to insanity.
The challenge for the effective liar is the same as the challenge for the effective salesman. For someone to be an effective salesman, they first must sell the product to themselves. If I am going to convince others that they cannot live without my product, I must first convince myself that I cannot live without it. I must lie to myself first, and convince myself of my own lie. This is how multi-level marketing works. If I am going to convince all my friends that my super-duper soap or mystery oil will solve all their problems, and make them wealthy if they will only start selling it too, I first must convince myself of that. Multi-level marketing has proven to be one of, if not the most effective and profitable methods of marketing ever invented. There is one little caveat. The profit is being made by the people on the top who are manufacturing the product, and convincing everyone on the bottom to sell the product for them, and convince others to do the same thing while they are doing it. The problem is, that unless the people doing the selling and recruiting of new salespeople, are selling an astronomical amount of the product, and convincing an astronomical number of people under them to also get swept up in the scheme, they are basically working for the company for free, or making little to no money themselves, all the while selling the product and making money for the company. The majority of people who get involved in these schemes will eventually give up and quit. In the meantime, they have made a lot of money for the company, basically working for free.
It is not always the case that a person must convince themselves of their own lie. That is just an example. A person can tell a lie, knowing full well that it is a lie. Once a lie is told, in order for the lie to continue, more lies have to be made up to cover the original lie, and it becomes a big, tangled up mess. Since a lie does not correspond to reality, it must be continuously spun in the effort to prevent reality from exposing it, which, reality will always inevitably do.
Words can be framed in such a manner that the hearers or readers will be expected to draw a certain conclusion, or conclusions. Two different people can say the same thing, or report the same event, but each do so in such a manner that the hearers or readers will be expected to draw different conclusions, so the outcome of the communication produces different results in the minds of the hearers or readers. This goes on a lot in the news media of our time. This is slanted news, done to promote some particular ideology or agenda. This is mind control of the masses. It is very insidious and powerful. We are all vulnerable to its influence, because we all have certain biases and prejudices that shape our personality. The fact that we have biases and prejudices is not necessarily a malevolent thing, but it can be. It is simply a fact from which we cannot escape or deny. Those who control the media cater to these biases and prejudices to suit their own agenda. As I said, it is a form of mind control. The promotion of many political agendas is not done to convey the truthfulness of how things are to be done, it is more for the purpose of getting people to think a certain way, so they will vote a certain way. In this sense, it is mind control. Language that sounds factual is used to convey ideas that really aren’t.
The figurative or symbolic use of language to paint mental pictures to convey truth that is deeper than the actual imagery can be used in a powerful way, but will, by its nature be flawed, especially if greater effort is made to dissect the imagery than is made to get at the image’s greater meaning. Let me give you an example of what I mean by that. The 23rs Palm reads as follows:
The LORD is my shepherd, I lack nothing. He makes me lie down in green pastures, he leads me beside quiet waters, he refreshes my soul. He guides me along the right paths for his name’s sake Even though I walk through the darkest valley, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me. You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies. You anoint my head with oil; my cup overflows. Surely your goodness and love will follow me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in the house of the LORD forever. (NIV)
As a shepherd, the Lord watches over those under His care. He provides everything they need, and He protects them. He gives them peace of mind. This is where the imagery of the shepherd stops, and has served its intended purpose. To go beyond that and over-analyze the imagery would be to defeat the purpose. To do so would be to ask questions like, “Why does a shepherd keep sheep?” Well, the literal answer to that question would be to fleece them and make a profit from their wool, or eat them. That is why I say all imagery is flawed. It must be recognized as such, because not to do so is to strip symbolic language of its power. When we read the Bible, we must understand that it is comprised of many different kinds of literature. Some of it is literal, some of it is a combination of literal and figurative. Some of it is figurative or symbolic. To not understand this is to lead to a lot of misunderstandings.
I believe that it is very significant that the Biblical account of Creation is portrayed to us as through God speaking. God spoke, and it was done. Rather than simply saying, “God made light”, it says, “And God said, let there be light, and there was light.” As He spoke, it was done. This shows us the power of the spoken word. I have no doubt that God could have done anything He did without ever speaking a word, but He chose to, signifying to us the power of language.
This principle is magnified when God, after making the first man (Adam), immediately begins speaking to him. He did not have to teach the man how to speak. The man was made to know and understand language the moment God breathed life into him. This is astonishing, and flies in the face of what we understand of cognitive learning and the evolution of language and thought.
It is also significant that God uses the power of the spoken word to bring forth His message of forgiveness and redemption to the world. Many of us would probably prefer that God just cut out the middleman, and speak directly to us. That is because, in our fallen nature, we don’t like to listen. With that being said, even if God were to speak directly to us, we probably still wouldn’t listen. As a matter of fact, this has already happened. God came in the flesh, in the person of Jesus Christ, to the people that were expecting Him. He spoke directly to them, and most of them still refused to listen.
Hear these words from the Apostle Paul, in the first chapter of the first book of Corinthians:
For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written:
“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.”
Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.
We tend to be very careless with our speaking, and with our listening. Jesus had much to say about our saying, and made one provocative statement:
“But I tell you that everyone will have to give account on the day of judgment for every empty (idle) word they have spoken. For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned.” (Matthew 12:367-37 NIV)
I know that during the course of my own life I have spoken a LOT of empty words. I have spoken in anger. I have spoken in jest. I have spoken in pride. I have spoken in presumption. The list could go on and on. It probably could for you as well. I know that, through the blood of Jesus, I am forgiven, but I do not want to take that for granted and not learn the lessons from my past and continue to use my words in any way other than that which brings life, hope, and truth.
Words have the power of life and death. Words have the power of hope and despair. Words have the power of encouragement and hope, and words have the power of condemnation and defeat. Words matter. Language is indeed a paradox.
Danny's Stump 