Why Legalism?

[A. believer]

The problem is I have yet to find a standard we should be following biblical when it pertains to words, not intentions.

We are still making that jump from "corrupt words" to "the words momma said not to say".

Words convey much more than their denotative meaning. For you to argue otherwise seems incredibly naive. If words are really "just words," then there's no reason that we should react any differently to poetry than to "sailor talk." But just as good poetry brings rapture to the soul, gutter talk does just the opposite. And I think you really know that deep down inside.

 

[versastyle]

Words convey much more than their denotative meaning. For you to argue otherwise seems incredibly naive. If words are really "just words," then there's no reason that we should react any differently to poetry than to "sailor talk." But just as good poetry brings rapture to the soul, gutter talk does just the opposite. And I think you really know that deep down inside.

No but words are interchangeable. I can say Jimmy and cherry and hat and not have any bad intentions in them. What matters is the intentions of what is said. I used to think I had it "If I just avoid these words I'll be a better Christian." Well that was wrong. What I was truly doing is putting one set of languages above another, both idolizing "my good speech" and demonizing "those who cuss". I see no reason to say the words unless in the presence of those who don't care. Even Jesus himself said Raca, some consider one of the most offensive words in the bible, but he had good intentions for it and reason. If there are good intentions in what one says, there should be no offense taken. Those who are offended seem to be the ones with the problem, not the talker.

I seriously doubt God has a list of words in heaven that are sinful and good for every society on Earth. Does not anyone else see how ignorant that sounds?

The bible makes a reference to something being like DUNG. DUNG. That is a reference to excrement. Dung. In the bible. It wasn't talking about dung. It was saying something is LIKE DUNG.

KJV!!!!

[font=verdana,arial,helvetica]2Ki 9:37[/font][font=verdana,arial,helvetica]And the carcase of Jezebel shall be as dung upon the face of the field in the portion of Jezreel; so that they shall not say, This is Jezebel[/font]

[font=verdana,arial,helvetica]Isa 36:12[/font][font=verdana,arial,helvetica]But Rabshakeh said, Hath my master sent me to thy master and to thee to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men that sit upon the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own p*ss with you?[/font]

(btw: I can't believe this website actually sensors its own bible, reason for the * made above in p*ss)

 

[all2elohim]

Obviously, God didn't create cuss words and designate them as bad. Human culture has designated them as bad. I think Romans 15 sums up what we should do as Christians as far language is concerned. No one will convince me that saying BS or suck is a sin, but for the sake of those weaker in the faith I should watch my language around them. It is not legalism to refrain from cursing around those weaker in the faith out of love for them and their spiritual walk.

On the other hand when I'm around non Christians that are using colorful language I shouldn't cringe when they drop a few "bad" words. Most verses about the tongue are about making sure what I speak is not putting down someone or gossiping. I have no problem controlling my tongue, and I make sure I know the person before allowing myself to cuss around them (usually in a humourus situation or in a quote of someone else). What God hasn't designated as a sin should not be done so by man. But keep Romans 14 in mind too though.

 

[versastyle]

Obviously, God didn't create cuss words and designate them as bad. Human culture has designated them as bad. I think Romans 15 sums up what we should do as Christians as far language is concerned. No one will convince me that saying BS or suck is a sin, but for the sake of those weaker in the faith I should watch my language around them. It is not legalism to refrain from cursing around those weaker in the faith out of love for them and their spiritual walk.

On the other hand when I'm around non Christians that are using colorful language I shouldn't cringe when they drop a few "bad" words. Most verses about the tongue are about making sure what I speak is not putting down someone or gossiping. I have no problem controlling my tongue, and I make sure I know the person before allowing myself to cuss around them (usually in a humourus situation or in a quote of someone else). What God hasn't designated as a sin should not be done so by man. But keep Romans 14 in mind too though.

Great post! Thank you!

 

[A. believer]

Obviously, God didn't create cuss words and designate them as bad. Human culture has designated them as bad.

You're right that God didn't designate certain words as bad. Words, themselves, are meaningless, except for the meaning we ascribe to them. The words that are offensive are the words that are deliberately meant to be offensive. People don't just suddenly up and decide that this word or that word is "bad" and all good Christians better not say these words anymore. Rather, in our depravity, we think up words and phrases and ways of expressing ourselves that are deliberately coarse and offensive. And the problem is not that our culture is so "prudish" that we've taken perfectly neutral words and decided to call them bad. The problem is just the opposite. Our culture has become so hardened and cynical that we've taken words and expressions that were designed to cause shock and offense and become blase about them.

And if we've become so hardened that we cannot recognize that which is ugly and corrupt, then sadly, we're equally unable to recognize that which is beautiful and God-honoring.

 

[versastyle]

A - Did you read the verses taken from the KJ bible I posted above? You seem to be making a lot of non-biblical assumptions.

Do I really have to care about the history of a word to use it? I don't see any biblical logic there. I've never studied a bad words original intention, nor am I wasting my time trying to do so. I'm concerned about my own intentions, which is also biblical.

One of those intentions is for me not to follow a dualistic and idolistic based religion where I put one societal standard above another and think I'm doing better work for the Lord by degrading another's societal upbringing.

I don't cuss, you cuss. I am moral, you are not.

Thats what recognizing cuss words does to human pride.

Here is the question: We as Christians are to be offended by a Christian who lacks biblical and Godly morality. So....are you more moral then the Christian man who uses words on your "cuss list"?

If no. There should be no offense taken if the words are used in a healthy/uplifting manner.

If yes. Then we are following a form of hypocrisy and false judgement, placing a non-biblical moral standard above someone else's.

There is nothing one can say that proves society has a say-so in the Godliness of language.

 

[A. believer]

A - Did you read the verses taken from the KJ bible I posted above? You seem to be making a lot of non-biblical assumptions.

Yes, I read them.

Do I really have to care about the history of a word to use it? I don't see any biblical logic there. I've never studied a words original intention, nor am I wasting my time trying to do so. I'm concerned about my own intentions, which is also biblical.

I'm not talking about studying the etymology of every word we use. In fact, words often do eventually lose their denotative meaning over time and, in that case, words that were once offensive are no longer deemed so. That may well be becoming the case with your #3 example. I'm inclined to think that some of the people I know who use it (generally I'm thinking of non-natives) have no idea what it refers to and would be embarrassed if I told them. But because I do have that association in my mind, I still find the term jarring to the ears and utterly inappropriate. Actually, twenty years ago or so, before I became a Christian, I used words like that and worse, and I know the effect I meant for them to have, and it wasn't God-honoring or even "neutral." So it's impossible for me to hear them now without having an instinctive visceral reaction to hearing them. Perhaps in another generation or so, there won't be any more people like me who have that reaction and the words will have lost their sting. But that day hasn't arrived yet, and just as I said I try not to be judgmental about those who use them, I think you'd do well to stop being so judgmental about those who are offended by them.

 

[versastyle]

We are to judge Christians if they do that which is unbiblical. Right now I see taking offense to words, not intentions, as being something that should be corrected, with necessary edification. (In fact I'm having a hard time finding anything that says we should be offended [taking things personally] at all.)

I dont see Jesus walking down the street and cringing at someone saying: "Thats some dope -insert societal explicitive-".

That gives off a "holier then tho" vibe and is unhealthy to ones ego.

Fact by experience. If a nonChristian cusses and they see it in your face that you've been offended, they lose total respect in you because of your judgementalism.

 

[A. believer]

We are to judge Christians if they do that which is unbiblical. Right now I see taking offense to words, not intentions, as being something that should be corrected, with necessary edification. (In fact I'm having a hard time finding anything that says we should be offended [taking things personally] at all.)

I dont see Jesus walking down the street and cringing at someone saying: "Thats some dope -insert societal explicitive-".

That gives off a "holier then tho" vibe and is unhealthy to ones ego.

Fact by experience. If a nonChristian cusses and they see it in your face that you've been offended, they lose total respect in you because of your judgementalism.

When I read your posts, I get the distinct impression that there's an element of talking past each other, but I'm not sure how to correct it. And frankly, I also get the impression that you're a little too convinced of the unassailability of your position to want to get past it (especially once I saw that you had another long discussion on this same topic on another forum), so I think I'll leave this one alone now.

On second thought, I want to ask you one question that might clarify your position on this matter in my own mind. Are you in any way attempting to justify the use of expletives, or are you only trying to convince Christians not to make manifest to unbelievers our own discomfort when we hear them?

 

[versastyle]

you only trying to convince Christians not to make manifest to unbelievers our own discomfort when we hear them.

Thats part of it.

The other part is the running in fear in general, whether you hear it in music, on the radio, or in the general public.

How would you respond if I said this to your friend while at church:

Basic English Ezekiel 16:25 You put up your high places at the top of every street, and made the grace of your form a disgusting thing, opening your feet to everyone who went by, increasing your loose ways.

KJV Ezekiel 16:25 Thou hast built thy high place at every head of the way, and hast made thy beauty to be abhorred, and hast opened thy feet to every one that passed by, and multiplied thy whoredoms.

Would you ever think to say this to your daughter, or sister?

The focus tends to be on the fact that we see someone has been called a "sl*t", instead of focusing on the content of what is being said.

 

[A. believer]

Thats part of it.

The other part is the running in fear in general, whether you hear it in music, on the radio, or in the general public.

You made a lot of references to running away, covering the ears, etc., that seem to me to be straw men. I know of no one who behaves in such a manner in the presence of profanity.

How would you respond if I said this to your friend while at church:

Basic English Ezekiel 16:25 You put up your high places at the top of every street, and made the grace of your form a disgusting thing, opening your feet to everyone who went by, increasing your loose ways.

KJV Ezekiel 16:25 Thou hast built thy high place at every head of the way, and hast made thy beauty to be abhorred, and hast opened thy feet to every one that passed by, and multiplied thy whoredoms.


The focus tends to be on the fact that we see someone has been called a "sl*t", instead of focusing on the content of what is being said.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Are you asking how I'd respond to you quoting Scripture or how I'd respond to you actually accusing my friend of idolatry?

 

[versastyle]

You made a lot of references to running away, covering the ears, etc., that seem to me to be straw men. I know of no one who behaves in such a manner in the presence of profanity.

Its not a strawman if that is what you would want to do, or what you would have done knowing it would have happened. If it is not you, then it nots directed to you. Is that you would want to do?

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Are you asking how I'd respond to you quoting Scripture or how I'd respond to you actually accusing my friend of idolatry?

No how would you respond to someone blatantly calling someone else a harlot, or sl*t? Our own bible does exactly that.

 

[versastyle]

The problem is people believe we can't see intentions, we can't know someone's heart, so we object to words because that is easy, and it makes us look like "better Christians." And that is ultimately Pharisaism...

 

[A. believer]

[/font]

Its not a strawman if that is what you would want to do, or what you would have done knowing it would have happened. If it is not you, then it nots directed to you. Is that you would want to do?

I do avoid deliberately exposing myself and my children to profanity by seeking out entertainment that exploits it, and I'm firmly convinced that's a biblically justified thing to do. I don't, on the other hand, avoid relationships with people because of their speech habits. But your image of someone running away and covering their ears as if they're too pure to hear such filth is what I'm calling a straw man.

No how would you respond to someone blatantly calling someone else a harlot, or sl*t? Our own bible does exactly that.

Those verses refer to spiritual whoredom, not literal. But if someone is either a literal or a spiritual harlot, then I can't think of any reason, offhand, to refrain from acknowleding that reality. But that's quite unrelated to the idea of coloring one's speech with gratuitous expletives.

 

[versastyle]

I do avoid deliberately exposing myself and my children to profanity by seeking out entertainment that exploits it, and I'm firmly convinced that's a biblically justified thing to do. I don't, on the other hand, avoid relationships with people because of their speech habits. But your image of someone running away and covering their ears as if they're too pure to hear such filth is what I'm calling a straw man.

People would like to do this. I can see it in their faces and intentions. Besides the mutli-translated verses in the bible you use to justify the demonization (condemnation) of specific words, can you give me any REAL events that suggested that any disciple or that Jesus said that someone should not have said a specific word, or that we should be offended by that word? If not, I can't see any justification for the belief that certain words are sinful by nature.

I've made a new word. Its crunking. Its the act of having sex with someone without love, and doing it just out of lust and a total lack of Godliness. Are you offended by my new word?

Those verses refer to spiritual whoredom, not literal. But if someone is either a literal or a spiritual harlot, then I can't think of any reason, offhand, to refrain from acknowleding that reality. But that's quite unrelated to the idea of coloring one's speech with gratuitous expletives.

The problem is our own God called someone a harlot, literal or not. But if a father was to call his daughter a harlot, for opening her legs to every passer-by, that father is seen from a Christian as both immoral and verbally abusive, whether he was justified or not.

The point is harlot is considered offensive language to some people. Why is it not to you? Because it is not our your list.

Is the American Christian less sinful, verbally, then the Irish one, because we have a higher standard of verbal usage? Of course not. So I seriously hope you aren't offended by an Irish mans common language, in which their society doesn't demonize the same words that our society likes to.

 

[Wilfred of Ivanhoe]

The problem is our own God called someone a harlot, literal or not. But if a father was to call his daughter a harlot, for opening her legs to every passer-by, that father is seen from a Christian as both immoral and verbally abusive, whether he was justified or not.

That father would be considered immoral from a Christian perspective? I would think the exact opposite. Please explain.

 

[A. believer]

[/font]

People would like to do this. I can see it in their faces and intentions. Besides the mutli-translated verses in the bible you use to justify the demonization (condemnation) of specific words, can you give me any REAL events that suggested that any disciple or that Jesus said that someone should not have said a specific word, or that we should be offended by that word? If not, I can't see any justification for the belief that certain words are sinful by nature.

I've made a new word. Its crunking. Its the act of having sex with someone without love, and doing it just out of lust and a total lack of Godliness. Are you offended by my new word?

The problem is our own God called someone a harlot, literal or not. But if a father was to call his daughter a harlot, for opening her legs to every passer-by, that father is seen from a Christian as both immoral and verbally abusive, whether he was justified or not.

The point is harlot is considered offensive language to some people. Why is it not to you? Because it is not our your list.

Is the American Christian less sinful, verbally, then the Irish one, because we have a higher standard of verbal usage? Of course not. So I seriously hope you aren't offended by an Irish mans common language, in which their society doesn't demonize the same words that our society likes to.

Your posts display a severe lack of understanding in regard to how people communicate. Let me ask you another question? Do you believe that it's sinful to use certain gestures?

 

[versastyle]

Your posts display a severe lack of understanding in regard to how people communicate. Let me ask you another question? Do you believe that it's sinful to use certain gestures?

I'd like you to respond to what I said first.

To use certain gestures intentionally means to do others harm intentionally. You can speak words and not intentionally do harm to others.

 

[versastyle]

btw I now have these words: Crunk, lipper, and drudge.

They are all are words used to replace currently deplorable language.

Crunk replaces the deplorable word that means to have sex in a lustful, uncommitted, unGodly manner.

Lipper replaces the deplorable word that is part of the female anatomy.

Drudge replaces the deplorable word that comes out of your buttocks while on the toilet.

Now are you offended by my new words? Or are you offended by what they mean? Or are you offended only if they are coming from people who are being intentionally derogatory?

 

[A. believer]

btw I now have these words: Crunk, lipper, and drudge.

They are all are words used to replace currently deplorable language.

Crunk replaces the deplorable word that means to have sex in a lustful, uncommitted, unGodly manner.

Lipper replaces the deplorable word that is part of the female anatomy.

Drudge replaces the deplorable word that comes out of your buttocks while on the toilet.

Now are you offended by me new words? Or are you offended by what they mean?

Your new words for which you've given a denotative definition don't convey any connotative meaning until and unless they're adopted into common usage. Therefore, I consider them neutral. Now will you answer my question?