-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Christian Profanity
- Thread starter Greektim
- Start date
Alive in Christ
New Member
Makes it pretty clear, dosnt it?
Last edited by a moderator:
A combination of these verses as well as some Old Testament stuff combined with the concept of being mindful of weaker brethren makes it pretty clear that it's not something we ought to do.
Also culturally certain words are considered vulgar or inappropriate and the world recognizes that and expects us to be held up to a higher standard. I've talked to several unbelievers who talk about the hypocrisy displayed in modern Christianity and specifically mentioned Christians cussing.
No. It does not. It doesn't even ADDRESS the issue.
What you have to do is take these words which condemn gossip and filthy communication and apply them to, say, the d word.
What you are doing is assuming a rule that you grew up with MUST be what these verses are talking about.
You don't try to make the link because you ASSUME the link. But this is begging the question.
You need to demonstrate that these verses are saying it is wrong to ever say the "s" word.
You cannot do that because that is not at all what they are talking about.
Now, that said, I don't advocate the use of any of these words. Because our culture is what it is it is not wise for Christians to let themselves be heard using these words.
But it is a leap to say that the Bible condemns the use of them altogether.
It does not.
When the Bible talks about "cursing" do you think it is talking about any use of what we call cuss words?
Or do you think it is talking about speaking curses against people?
I think it is talking about speaking of wishing ill-will against people. That's not what I was talking about though
Which one is permossable for your children to say? Which is allowed in church? Which one does the world find vulgar?
The view expressed by several here that skubalon, translated "dung" in Phil 3:8 is analogous to the "s word" in English is linguistically lazy. Even some simple research done with elementary Bible software disproves the idea.
First of all, the word only occurs that once in the NT, but it also occurs in the Apocrypha in Sirach 27:4, where it is used to refer to what is left after something is sifted through a sieve--obviously not dung, and obviously not a taboo word! Indeed any Greek-English dictionary or lexicon, easily accessible by any of you, will give meanings for skubalon which have nothing to do with the English "s word", such as in Anlex (accessed through Bibloi software: "anything that is to be treated as worthless and thrown out, translated according to the context dung, rubbish, garbage, offscourings." This is clearly not the same as the English "s word."
Even Thayer's (being obsolete, not used by pros, but available through the free e-Sword) says, "1) any refuse, as the excrement of animals, offscourings, rubbish, dregs 1a) of things worthless and detestable"
Secondly, there is no evidence whatsoever that the Apostle Paul used words which are called "taboo" in linguistics, naughty words, swear words. His style of Greek was educated, formal and difficult. If he never used taboo words elsewhere, why in the world would he use one when talking about the "excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord," which is light years away from the circumstance in which Greektim says he would use the "s word"??? Skubalon in Phil. 3:8 is very clearly not a swear word, not a taboo word. Anyone who uses Paul in this verse to excuse using English taboo words is just looking for an excuse to be vulgar.
"Slang regularly transgresses other social norms, making free use of taboo expressions. The use of words like ... 's***' in public media has become a mark of liberation or a sign of revolt, depending on one's point of view" (Sociolinguistics, by Bernard Spolsky, 1998 p. 36).
Why avoid taboo words? To me they are a sign of weakness of expression. There is always a better, more effective way to communicate than using swear words, taboo words. "Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man" (Col. 4:6).
Edited in: the normal Koine Greek word for fecal matter was kopros, not skubalon, and Paul never used this word, though it appears 11 times im the LXX. The word skubalon had a much wider meaning than "dung," but taboo words usually have a narrow range of core meaning, though contemporary usage (the range of insult intended, for example) may be wide.
First of all, the word only occurs that once in the NT, but it also occurs in the Apocrypha in Sirach 27:4, where it is used to refer to what is left after something is sifted through a sieve--obviously not dung, and obviously not a taboo word! Indeed any Greek-English dictionary or lexicon, easily accessible by any of you, will give meanings for skubalon which have nothing to do with the English "s word", such as in Anlex (accessed through Bibloi software: "anything that is to be treated as worthless and thrown out, translated according to the context dung, rubbish, garbage, offscourings." This is clearly not the same as the English "s word."
Even Thayer's (being obsolete, not used by pros, but available through the free e-Sword) says, "1) any refuse, as the excrement of animals, offscourings, rubbish, dregs 1a) of things worthless and detestable"
Secondly, there is no evidence whatsoever that the Apostle Paul used words which are called "taboo" in linguistics, naughty words, swear words. His style of Greek was educated, formal and difficult. If he never used taboo words elsewhere, why in the world would he use one when talking about the "excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord," which is light years away from the circumstance in which Greektim says he would use the "s word"??? Skubalon in Phil. 3:8 is very clearly not a swear word, not a taboo word. Anyone who uses Paul in this verse to excuse using English taboo words is just looking for an excuse to be vulgar.
"Slang regularly transgresses other social norms, making free use of taboo expressions. The use of words like ... 's***' in public media has become a mark of liberation or a sign of revolt, depending on one's point of view" (Sociolinguistics, by Bernard Spolsky, 1998 p. 36).
Why avoid taboo words? To me they are a sign of weakness of expression. There is always a better, more effective way to communicate than using swear words, taboo words. "Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man" (Col. 4:6).
Edited in: the normal Koine Greek word for fecal matter was kopros, not skubalon, and Paul never used this word, though it appears 11 times im the LXX. The word skubalon had a much wider meaning than "dung," but taboo words usually have a narrow range of core meaning, though contemporary usage (the range of insult intended, for example) may be wide.
Last edited by a moderator:
saturneptune
New Member
The use of profanity is the trademark of those with a feeble mind and unable to express themselves with any dignity.
What were you talking about then?
That's just not true. It is true of some people but the fact of the matter is that there are EXTREMELY erudite people who say cuss words.
There are Ivy League professors whose vocabulary is triple that of yours and mine together who say the d word.
What you are stating here is an oversimplification.
So you defend being rude, you defend being "buzzed" (drunk), and now you defend using foul language.
Really?
Why is what my children are allowed to do and not allowed to do relevant?
There are hundreds of things that my children can't do that are perfectly appropriate for me to do.
Like drive, for example. Or drink. Or go to war. Or stay up past 9:30 on a school night.
Is that even an ARGUMENT? Are you serious???
And which one is allowed in church???? SERIOUSLY???
Is that what you've got???
So, let me get this straight. Is it your argument here that you should never do anything in ANY context that you could not do in church?
HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I'm sorry. That's funny.
And then your final argument is LITERALLY what does the WORLD consider vulgar?
Once again- is THAT how you measure what you should do??
Because the WORLD consider JESUS vulgar. The cross was a death that a decent person could not be sentenced to. You had to be considered trash to be crucified.
And you want what the WORLD considers to be your guide?
Amazing.
I defend the Bible, Mitch. Against ANY tradition that would exalt itself to the same level of authority.
The Bible does not condemn these things but you do- you know why? Because you are guided more by your traditions than you are the Word of God. That's why.
Jesus said of folks like you, "You teach for doctrine the traditions of men."
That's what I defend- the authority of the Bible.
I repudiate any tradition that challenges the SOLE authority of Scripture. So yes I challenge, no doubt, MUCH of what you hold dear.
I am speechless......just wow!
All that and you didn't answer. You prove saturneptune's point. Ironic that the world which lacks morals finds certain phrases morally bankrupt to which you give the ole thumbs up. I wonder how often you have used that phrase in your sermons.
glazer1972
Member
I grew up in a beer joint. I heard vulgar language a lot. I talked that way for a long time. I've been a Christian for 18 years now. God's still working on me in that dept. I still let words slip occasionally that I shouldn't. I also know that using those words are wrong.
:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs: These are commands , not optional...good list of strong verses.