1. EPISTEMOLOGY, MODELS, AND CONTEMPORARY MISSION
R. Daniel Shaw

2. Guller Graduate School of Intercultural Studies
EPISTEMOLOGICAL VIEWPOINTS Ways of knowing (Based on Hiebert, 1985, 1999)
Idealism -Bernard calls “Rationalism”
Reality is based on empirical data—//Truth is what we are exposed to
Reality is what I describe (Phenomenology)
Naive Idealism (Reality is what I perceive) r
Critical Realism (REALITY)
(My reality is only part of the truth—Ultimate Truth is “out there”—
r R unknowable here)
Naive Realism (Reality is what is) R
Realism -Bernard calls “Positivism”
The world exists and is real— // Truth is timeless & culture free
experience is the foundation of knowledge (Ontology)
Context in focus
We need to understand the nature of REALITY!
True Idealism & Realism too EXTREME –Not many adherents
Naïve Idealism = Most Anthropologists -Relativism (context focus--inductive)
Naïve Realism = Most Missionaries -Judgmental (knowledge focus--deductive)
Feeds Anthropologist/Missionary debate --Miss research needs to adapt anthro. perspectives
Critical Realism a middle of the road approach that seeks the best of both –Not either/or but Both-And
Knowledge in focus
R.D. SHAW
Guller Graduate School of Intercultural Studies

3. Guller Graduate School of Intercultural Studies
Communication Models
Communication is a process of information transfer from a Sender to a Receiver
There are two basic ways to conceive of how thoughts can be communicated from one person/culture to another.
Through the use of strict coding and decoding, which makes explicit use of symbols, rules, and language (Descriptive—Positivism-based)
By enabling the receptor to make interpretive inferences about a communicator’s intent (Cognitive—Rationalism-based)
While it appears epistemologically contradictory the Code Model seeks to emphasize “truth” that is out there—but it fails to recognize the role of context and how it shapes the “rationale” mind which is what RT is all about!
CODE MODEL
RELEVANCE
MODEL
R.D. SHAW
Guller Graduate School of Intercultural Studies

4. SERIAL PROCESSING OF CODES
MESSAGE
Source
Encode
Decode
Receptor
Feedback Loop
Linkage—each link dependent on the one before it
Focus on Product/Result
R.D. SHAW
Guller Graduate School of Intercultural Studies

5. APPLIED TO TRANSLATION/COMMUNICATION
GOD
SOURCE FORMS
(surface)
RECEPTOR FORMS
(surface)
Restructure
Analysis
COMMON MEANINGS
(deep)
Focus on CODE (Forms & Meanings)
R.D. SHAW
Guller Graduate School of Intercultural Studies

6. PARALLEL DISTRIBUTIVE PROCESSING
COGNITIVE ENVIRONMENT
Schema
individual
collective
inference
CONNECTIONIST/NETWORK Approach
Ideas
Least effort for maximum understanding
Focus on Process of ideas
R.D. SHAW
Guller Graduate School of Intercultural Studies

7. APPLIED TO COMMUNICATION/TRANSLATION
GOD
(General Message for all People)
INTENT INFERENCE
(Author) (Audience)
Specific Message
for a particular
audience
Focus on Relevance increases transformation ==
Each new audience brings new understanding and appreciation of
God’s intent
R.D. SHAW
Guller Graduate School of Intercultural Studies

8. FAITHFUL COMMUNICATION
AN ALTERNATE VIEW: Shaw/Van Engen
Nida: Faithfulness is equal to the closest natural equivalence = DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCE
Focus on Accuracy, Clarity & Naturalness (Barnwell, Larson)
Communication = “What was said?” How did the source say it?
Keep as close as possible/Reproduce text
(Code is in focus)
Communication Context
(Cognitive Environment)
INFERENCE
SOURCE
Focus on Communication context/Cognitive environment
Translation/Communication = “If author had used ‘X’ language, how would the message have been presented?”
Ensure Relevance/Re-present text
(Intent/inference is in focus)

9. COMMUNICATING INTENDED MEANING –A Hermeneutical Process
MEANING is shaped by context (cognitive environment) as much as the ideas, words and structures which transfer semantic concepts
 Meaning is derived from the interaction of ideas and the contextual environment. Meaning is NOT contained in forms, but rather is shaped by the ideas shared by individuals in a particular time and place
Communicators must declair their intention to communicate a message AND Receptors must determine the intent of the message as it relates to them
This suggests that the communication is relevant when a receptor is able to infer a communicator’s intent
R.D. SHAW
Guller Graduate School of Intercultural Studies

10. HOW CAN CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATORS GET THE MESSAGE ACROSS?
Focus on COMMUNICATING God’s intent
For whom?
From what perspective?
Focus on RE-PRESENTING the message in a way that the new Audience can understand/infer what God intends for them
Effective context-sensitive communication of what God INTENDED (unsaid) based on what God SAID, brings understanding that encourages TRANSFORMATION
Emphasize the Process not the Product
Encourage two-way inter-relationship for all involved
HOW DO WE GET THERE?
WHAT DO YOU NEED TO KNOW TO ENABLE PEOPLE TO RECEIVE THE GOSPEL???
Inside (emic/particular)
Outside (etic/general)
R.D. SHAW
Guller Graduate School of Intercultural Studies

11. MUTUAL COGNITIVE ENVIRONMENT
The Experiential Context
Comunicator’s Cognitive Environment
(intent)
Receptor’s Cognitive Environment
(inference)
The Mutual Cognitive Environment
(Expand as much as possible)
R.D. SHAW
Guller Graduate School of Intercultural Studies

12. COMMUNICATING THE GOSPEL IN A CONTEMPORARY COGNITIVE ENVIRONMENT
Move beyond contextualization in order to encourage a process whereby people bring God into their midst – allow incarnation
The Process Includes. . .
Interpretation of Meaning (which meaning?)
Connect a new message with the people’s pre-existing assumptions/worldview—there must be interaction between the biblical content and the contemporary context to create relevancy of God’s intent for a particular audience
Analyze original/biblical & contemporary contexts for same/different circumstances –where in the Bible do you find similar particularity? Start there!
Recognize the present audience is not the intended audience. Enable people to relate to God in their time & space in ways that reflect
God’s intentions for them
Manifestations that are relevant for the context without invalidating biblical intent

13. RESEARCH NECESSARY TO ENSURE RELEVANT COMMUNICATION
(Re-present Ideas)
(process ideas)
R.D. SHAW
Guller Graduate School of Intercultural Studies

14. DOING MISSION IN A CONTEMPORARY WORLD
CODE
--Old Paradigm--
(From doing)
MISSION
COGNITIVE
--New Paradigm--
(To being)
Transformational mission based on relationships
Increasingly Group oriented (teamwork)
Dynamic and largely internal (enabling)
Beyond Contextualization (knowledge transforms—Christians in context focus on knowing God)
Biblical Theology in context
Interactive hermeneutical community (Discipleship— Emerging Church)
Great Commission Mission—GO (McGavran)
Largely Individual
Static & largely external (telling)
Contextualization (make Christianity like culture)
Local theology
Church Growth  numbers
SHIFT FROM OLD PRODUCT ORIENTED (CODE) PARAGIGM TO A NEW PARADIGM BASED ON COGNITIVE THEORY

15. NEED MORE RESEARCH: DEVELOPING BIBLICAL THEOLOGIES IN CONTEXT
What did God intend by what God said? (Translation critical)
What does that demonstrate about God’s communication for a particular context? (Inference/relevance—Gospel makes sense)
How will people think about God as a result? (Theologize)
A biblical theology in context will be different than a contextualized theology!
Not a reflection of other theologies in a new environment
Theology must begin with reflection on God’s Word within the particularity of time and place (cognitive environment relates to hermeneutical spiral—knowing God in context)
God’s Word will impact people’s perceptions of themselves (Rom. 2: –it will change their conscience)
A biblical theology in context will draw people to communicate their understanding to others; it will be missional
R.D. SHAW
Guller Graduate School of Intercultural Studies

16. APPLYING THE NEW PARAGIDM TO CONTEMPORARY MISSION
Relevant communication of previous revelation (God’s truth) for new audiences (different contexts) who will be illuminated by new understanding of God in the midst of God’s people (incarnation) and avoid miss-communication (hocus pocus)
Evangelism ensures that the communicator, in relationship with a new audience, will be changed by a new realization of God’s truth and thereby encourage a new measure of understanding not previously possible
Each cognitive environment is different and therefore interaction with each new context shapes human understanding of God in a vital and dynamic way—neither the communicator nor the receptor is left unchanged (Rev. 7:9)