Dan ([info]poserorprophet) wrote,
@ 2007-12-07 16:50:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Why God (frequently) Doesn't Give a Fuck about Swearing
For [Christ's] sake I have suffered the loss of all things, and I regard them as shit, in order that I may gain Christ.
~ Phil 3.8

For all of us have become like one who is unclean,
And all our righteous deeds are like bloody menstrual rags.

~ Is 64.6

She [i.e. Jerusalem, who represents the Southern Kingdom of Israel] lusted after lovers who were hung like donkeys and ejaculated like horses.
~ Ez 23.20.

Generally, when the topic of swearing is addressed by Christians, an appeal is made to certain passages that talk about controlling the tongue, avoiding cursing, and speaking only 'wholesome' words. Here are three examples:

But no one can tame the tongue; it is a restless evil and full of deadly poison. With it we bless our Lord and Father; and with it we curse men, who have been made in the likeness of God; from the same mouth come both blessing and cursing, my brothers and sisters, these things ought not to be this way. (Ja 3.8-10).

Their [i.e. the unrighteous] throat is an open grave. With their tongues they keep deceiving, the poison of asps is under their lips; whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness (Ro 3.13-14).

Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, that it may give grace to those who hear (Eph 4.29).

From passages like these, the general conclusion that contemporary Christians draw is that all swearing, and all vulgar speech, should be thoroughly avoided and thoroughly condemned. Unfortunately, such a conclusion is drawn much too hastily and neglects the broader witness of Scripture (which is frequently watered-down by our modern English translations). When we read Scripture more carefully we notice that tensions arise because the biblical authors seem to be quite comfortable using 'swear words' and vulgar language to make their points at various times. Thus, Paul, who counsels against unwholesome language in Eph 4, isn't afraid to describe everything else as "shit" compared to what he gains in Christ in Phil 3. Furthermore, Isaiah isn't afraid to use language that was both vulgar and offensive, and Ezekiel, the most vulgar of all, is actually quoting the word of the Lord in the citation provided above. This means that even God uses rather foul language within Scripture! Indeed, Scripture as a witness to the word of God makes it clear that sometimes God doesn't hesitate to swear and to use vulgar and offensive language.

So how are we to negotiate this tension in Scripture?

First, we need to be clear about the sort of swearing and cursing that Scripture condemns. Scripturally, cursing was understood in three ways (1) as taking God's name in vain (e.g. "Jesus H. Christ!"); (2) as slandering others (e.g. "You're a piece of shit!"); and (3) as wishing evil on others (e.g. "go to hell!"). Christians should never engage in any swearing or vulgar language that falls within these three categories -- and it means that other words and other names that we use for people are just as wrong as our traditional 'swear words.'

Secondly, apart from that threefold understanding of cursing, Scripture also shows us that there are times when it is both okay and appropriate to curse or use vulgar language. Indeed, at times cursing can be the best way to speak a word that is "good for edification according to the need of the moment" (Eph 4). A well-known example of this would be Tony Campolo's famous talk about poverty statistics, wherein he concludes that the thing that troubles him the most is that "Christians just don't give a shit." Having personally heard him deliver that talk, I can confidently say that such a well placed 'swear word' did a fine job of both awakening and convicting his audience. I've also seen how a well placed 'swear word' can do a fine job of demonstrating empathy with those who are suffering. Sometimes, when people share their traumas with us, the most caring thing we can do is say, "Man, that's fucked up" instead of brushing them aside with some throw-away remark about God being in control or whatever.

Ultimately, the most troubling aspect of the swearing debate is that not-swearing has become such a central marker of what it means to live Christianly in the public realm. Such a watered-down Christian public presence is devastating to both the Church and the world. Christians should be revealed in the public realm by the tangible ways in which they care for one another and for the disadvantaged, and not by the observation that they say 'dang' instead of 'damn,' 'poo' instead of 'shit' and 'frig' instead of 'fuck.' Indeed, when Christians publicly define themselves in this way, they have simply capitulated to a bourgeois morality, and middle-class sensibilities. It is that morality and those sensibilities which arbitrarily determine which words are allowable in public discourse, and it disallows a good many words, in part, to take away the voice from those (like the lower classes) who often have not had the opportunity to learn another language. Isaiah's condemnation of the Jewish leaders, which is picked up and applied by Jesus to the religious leaders in his day, are just as applicable to us:

This people honours me with their lips, but their heart is far away from me. But in vain they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men (cf. Mt 15.1-9).

This means a few things. First of all, it means that we should be lot more comfortable around swearing and so-called vulgar language. When that is the only language that some people have learned, we should be open and receptive to hearing what they have to say in that language. After all, this comfort is also reflected in Scripture. Scripture records events wherein vulgar language used in ways that it condemns, but it doesn't feel that it has to water things down in its presentation of those events (think, for example, of the advice given to king Rehoboam in 1 Ki 12.10 -- we might miss it in our translations but the young men advise the king to tell the people that his little finger is bigger than his father's penis!).

Secondly, that we can sometimes swear and use vulgar language does not simply mean that we are free to go around swearing like sailors, or engaging in any and every sort of vulgar talk. Our swearing and vulgar speech must be done in an edifying manner, just as the swearing and vulgar speech of the biblical authors (and of God!) is done in this way. Thus, for example, although I swear much more frequently around my 'street-involved' friends, I swear much less frequently around my 'church' friends. Sometimes it is worth picking your battles, and although God frequently doesn't give a fuck about swearing, he does want us to be sensitive to our 'weaker' brothers and sisters (here, I can't help but think that the advice Paul gives about eating food offered to idols is rather comparable to the issue of swearing [cf. Ro 14; 1 Cor 8]). Of course, even around our brothers and sisters, sometimes a well-placed swear word might be the best thing we have to offer.


(Post a new comment)


[info]http://claimid.com/susieq777
2007-12-08 01:17 am UTC (link)
I love this post so much. I feel free to swear, and do so muchly ... but too much. It's interesting you posted this actually because I feel like it's been a bit of a thing God is reminding me of this week - that I am free to do so, but not to use it as a stumbling block (which I think I do, sometimes).

Thanks Dan :)

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]poserorprophet
2007-12-10 08:17 pm UTC (link)
Thanks, Sue. Your comments are always encouraging... I wish everybody who read my blog felt the way that you do!

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]discombobula.blogspot.com
2007-12-08 01:23 am UTC (link)
Sorry, you're the guinea pig for my new openID workings-out :)

(Reply to this)

Re:
(Anonymous)
2007-12-08 02:36 am UTC (link)
I don't really have a problem with a well placed swear word when it is appropriate. What I don't care for is casual swearing and I don't really think it can be shown that scripture supports that type of swearing since the times swearing does show up in the Bible is for 'oomph' and emphasis.

Casual swearing robs curse words of their impact making them mean nothing. And I'll be honest I don't care to hear casual swearing especialy from Christians since that is how I talked before I came to the Lord, always cursing and using curse words even when I was just trying to think of the next word to say (like how we use "umm").

Also I have to wonder at what point does cursing become vulgar? There seem to be more instances than just the 3 situations you brought up. There are other words and phrases that can be said besides just the F word or S word and ways they can be used that are more vulgar than just speaking them in isolation. Is common crude language ok then? I'm talking about the kind of speech and topics that are common around guys (and even some girls).

What I'm most curious about though is that often those Christians who I've seen speaking loudest about making a positive case for cursing or who do it more casually seem to be those who were raised in more conservative Christian backgrounds where curse words were huge sins and now they seem (to me) to be reacting against that upbringing. I don't really see those who were raised completely in the world who came to Christ later in life trying to make a positive case for cursing. Often they are so ashamed of their past (which cursing was a big part of) that they want to avoid doing anything that makes them seem like they aren't a new creation. And I don't think you can just chalk it up to legalism. Of course by me sharing that observation I'm not meaning it to be a case against swearing I'm just wondering if there is a connection.

Anyway that's just my thoughts. Thanks for the interesting post. : )

Blessings,
Bryan L

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]poserorprophet
2007-12-10 08:29 pm UTC (link)
Hello, Bryan. Thanks for sharing some of your thoughts.

Part of my point about casual swearing is that saying something like 'fuck' or 'shit' as intermediate words is just as amoral as using words like 'um' or 'like' -- because when 'swear words' are used in that way, they really mean nothing more than 'um'. Consequently, speaking in that way may be poor elocution but I don't think that it is 'sinful', even if it offends our middle-class sensibilities. It is such sensibilities that we must learn to hold lightly as we grant others the freedom to speak different languages from different contexts (or to just speak honestly).

That said, I should have hedged my comments on vulgar language a bit more. There are times when 'fuck' and 'shit' can be used in a rather harmful manner (as one of my examples demonstrates) and hence such language is to be avoided. Furthermore, I don't think that we are to participate in 'common crude language' like the sorts of things that some guys like to talk about (indeed, having spent some years journeying alongside of women who had experienced sexual violence at the hands of men, I was shocked when I realised the sort of things that Christian men regularly said about women). Again, it should be love for one another that motivates what we do, and do not, say to each other. Thus, for example, it is largely my love for those who know no other language, apart from swearing, that motivates me to write this post (as well as my love for Scripture, which requires me to honestly struggle with these things).

Finally, I think your general observation about those who grew up Conservative versus those who became Christians later tends to be true. However, I would suspect that the reason why people feel ashamed, or whatever, for swearing in their past it because their conversion to Christianity also required something of a conversion to middle-class sensibilities as well (which, it should be noted, is not the same thing as 'legalism').

Grace and peace,

Dan

(Reply to this)(Parent)

This post is...
(Anonymous)
2007-12-08 03:44 am UTC (link)
damn good.

(Reply to this)


[info]tinandcopper
2007-12-08 06:03 am UTC (link)
Good arguments, IMO. As an anthro student I've found it insane how certain socio-historically specific semiotic webs are imposed on others with religious justification--while recognizing the dissenting voices. In one mp3 I heard, the speaker said that in his culture, "sucks" was a highly offensive word and "fuck" was natural (e.g. get the fucking car). He was in another church with his wife and the pastor said "sucks" to his great shock. He then turned to his wife and said, "Did you fucking hear what he said?"

Personally, I think one of the most important elements of being persuaded by your arguments is sustained contact in a somewhat relativizing context, with other cultures.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


(Anonymous)
2007-12-08 04:30 pm UTC (link)
tinandcooper, that was the best story ever and i can't wait to tell it....i'm sitting here alone and laughed out loud for about 15 seconds...

(Reply to this)(Parent)

a quibble about fuck-ing
[info]ericdarylmeyer.wordpress.com
2007-12-08 08:54 pm UTC (link)
Dan,
Thanks for the post... Good thoughts. Bible Studies have long been one of my favorite places to cuss, and I've had this conversation (or something like it) with a number of friends. Being willing to cuss in Jesus' presence communicates the gritty reality of "spiritual" truths in a way that Thomas Kinkade utterly fails to do. A well placed profanity communicates the life-and-death seriousness of the gospel (especially to audiences for which such speech is typically "taboo") in a way that little else (unfortunately) does.

I am thankful for your cautions and qualifications as well. I'll add one more...

I hesitate to use the word "fuck" in a way that I don't with other words. "Shit" conjures an image of a pile of poo, and "ass" refers to a couple of cheeks, but "fuck" speaks of a violent sexual act. I recognize that violence and sex happen simultaneously all too often, but it's a conjunction that I am committed to eliminating. I don't know exactly what comes to mind when others hear the word, but the connotation in my mind is that of a phallus forcibly jammed into someone or something. And when it is used in reference to sex, it seems to be a predominantly male word, as in "I was fucking her" or "She's a great fuck" that both ignores the woman involved, and even celebrates that objectification as a conquest.

I have a harder time thinking of a redemptive use for this word than other profanity. I'm trying to use language accurately, and I can't think of anything that I should actually wish a "fucking" upon...

I wonder what others think of the distinction?
--Eric

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: a quibble about fuck-ing
[info]poserorprophet
2007-12-10 08:37 pm UTC (link)
Hey Eric,

Okay, the reference to Kinkade made me laugh!

That said, I can appreciate the point you make about the language of 'fuck-ing'. However, I, as well as several of my feminist friends, would object to the idea that 'fuck' is a predominately male word. Furthermore, I don't think that the language of 'fuck-ing' is necessarily a language that must be either sexual or violent. For example, in the post above I briefly mentioned how calling something 'fucked up' can be an act of empathic love. The way in which the language of 'fuck-ing' is used in that example does not mean that it is interpreted as either something sexual or something violent. It just means that what happened was really awful, really wrong, and really messed up. In fact, I would argue that that sort of meaning is the dominant meaning of the word 'fuck' as it appears in popular discourse. Granted, the language of 'fuck-ing' can also be used in the way in which you describe, and it is that use (as well as some others) that should be avoided.

Grace and peace,

Dan

(Reply to this)(Parent)

We're on the Same Fucked Up Page
(Anonymous)
2007-12-09 06:54 pm UTC (link)
A reader of my blog alerted me to your post, cuz dude, I just posted about the same thing, though my writing is a lot lighter. Same message. I love what you wrote here. Great insights on language and biblical instruction.

We really do miss the point way too often in Christendom!

Pam Hogeweide

http://godmessedmeup.blogspot.com/2007/12/cussing-christians-freakin.html

(ps, I tried the Open ID thing, thought blogger could post up this way, but ???)

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: We're on the Same Fucked Up Page
[info]poserorprophet
2007-12-10 08:38 pm UTC (link)
Hey Pam,

Welcome to the blog. I read, and enjoyed, your article.

Grace and peace,

Dan

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Swearing vs. Offensive Language
(Anonymous)
2007-12-10 03:13 pm UTC (link)
I would suggest that your Biblical examples show the use of offensive language but do not show examples of swearing. You seem to use those two labels interchangeably. That assumption to equate the two may be shaky?

Plus, this title says "frequently" and you provide only a handful of examples from the entire Bible. Seems to me that this is about as infrequent as it gets...there are plenty more times that God and Jesus offended people but didn't bother to use swearing and offensive language, they just offended the ideas and people directly.

That being said, I do get a kick out of using minor swearing these days. I'm very much a product of my Christianese so I always used the clean versions of swear words, as you listed. Simply using the word "ass" for comic effect, 'cause it's funnier than "butt," gets a reaction out of people. Much concern has been expressed about my failing moral standards. Heh.

The flip side is that intentiontally removing my legalistic tendancies has also led me to swear much more often during stressful situations. Eventually, I found that I was swearing readily for simply being stuck in traffic. Not a pretty thing to see in myself since self-control and patience are better in those cases. In my life, I have found that it's quite easy to go too far with it if swearing becomes a habit, as another commentator remarked about non-Christians that get saved and decide to stop swearing.

-JAG

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: Swearing vs. Offensive Language
[info]yougavemehope
2007-12-10 08:16 pm UTC (link)
Valid point but here's a question for you: when you swear in traffic, is it the swearing that's bad or the anger?

Let's say a guy cut you off. If you were theoretically capable of yelling 'fluffy bunny slippers' in utter hatred towards him, would it be any worse than 'fucking douchebag'? Aside from, you know, if grandma were in the car.

I agree that we shouldn't swear in traffic, but that's not because of swearing, it's because we shouldn't be spiteful towards drivers no matter how much their driving angers us.

Jesus teaches that the true worship isn't the external appearance, but the inner state of our connection with him. Using 'bad words' like those salt&peppered throughout this entry (+replies) isn't an inherent evil, but it can represent a more deeply-rooted evil, as in the traffic example.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Swearing vs. Offensive Language
(Anonymous)
2007-12-10 08:32 pm UTC (link)
Chicken or the egg? Maybe I'm swearing because I'm angry and I shouldn't be angry. Maybe I'm swearing because it's a verbal habit and this encourages angry feelings.

I mostly see swear words as a clear indication of my own emotions and I'm disgusted with both my anger and my swearing in those minor situations.

-JAG

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]kelglitter
2007-12-10 05:20 pm UTC (link)
I know a few people who've been linking to your blog every now and then (specifically Peter & Brent) so that's how I got here.

I have often tried to express this very thing but haven't had quite the credentials to back it up. So instead I just point to Bono and how concerned he often is that he might accidentally say "fuck" on US national TV. Similarly I point to "bloody" as the "fucking" equivalent in Great Britain and try to stay true to a pastor/teacher's comment about how words are like buckets, you fill them up and empty them out with meaning.

And so I do swear. I have a favorite swear-word, and it's the one I'm most likely to use, but I tend to keep it in reserve for when I really mean something or if I want to pointedly throw my chips in with a group which frequently utters such expletives - but obviously without crossing the line into epithet.

That said, I have a friend who is as best I can tell a secular Jew, and she swears a great deal - so much so that I noted it the first time I met her and am continually surprised by the language that leaves her mouth. I am somewhat concerned in myself as to "why?" I am noticing this in her. I have a few theories but no answers - maybe it's because she looks like a really nice girl, never lived with her also Jewish husband before marriage, and her husband is soft-spoken, polite and insightful. Maybe it's because I know she's educated and thus I assume she must have a really good vocabulary. Maybe it's because she has 9 pet birds which she lovingly takes care of and somehow I cannot attribute such language to such kindness....

I don't know why I noticed this about her and I don't know what it says about me; I just know I don't like it.

(Reply to this)

It sometimes hits the nail on the head
(Anonymous)
2007-12-12 03:35 am UTC (link)
Sometimes a curse word will hit the nail on the head when other language fails. Just recently we had an unexpected death in our family during the same week as a few other emotion wrenching trials and pain. Many of my non-Christian family were left with "why does this happen" type of questions. The only honest response I could muster was "To use religious language, the world is a fucked up place". They appreciated that.

Two things: 1. It's true. 2. This got me a lot further with them relationally speaking than some sermon-lecture on the Fall, etc,.

(Reply to this)

Vulgar topics but not vulgar language
(Anonymous)
2007-12-14 06:08 am UTC (link)

I think you are confusing vulgar subject matter with vulgar language. Talking about horse ejaculate is not using vulgar language. The topic may be a little "off color" but the language itself is entirely respectable. Vulgar language would be, for example, saying "shooting wads of jis like a horse." Similarly with "bloody menstrual rags." This is not vulgar language. The image is shocking, perhaps, but not the language. Did Paul use the Greek equivalent to "shit?" I don't know. Strong's Concordance has the following for the word translated "dung" in the KJV:

what is thrown to the dogs, i.e. refuse: -- dung

From this, his use of the word does not seem to equate to our "shit." Now, of course, Strong's definitions may be watered down, as well, but this is all I have for reference.

Ken
punctum-saliens.org (http://punctum-saliens.org)

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: Vulgar topics but not vulgar language
[info]poserorprophet
2007-12-15 08:08 pm UTC (link)
Ken,

Interesting idea, but I don't think it works. First of all, vulgar language is simply language that refers to subject matter that is considered vulgar, so I don't think that your distinction holds. Furthermore, context regularly determines what makes language vulgar or not. If, for example, I am a horse-breeder then I'm sure there is nothing vulgar about talking about horse ejaculate. However, when I'm describing a woman as a person who lusts after people who ejaculate like horses (note: I used more technical language but the translation you provided might better capture the offense intended in the Ez passage) then surely the mention of horse ejaculate is vulgar. Thus, the example of 'bloody menstrual rags' is shocking precisely because it is so vulgar (particularly in a context that saw menstruation as something obscene and 'unclean'!).

Grace and peace,

Dan

(Reply to this)(Parent)

original vs translations
(Anonymous)
2007-12-15 04:14 pm UTC (link)
the NLT ( New Living Translation ) puts 1 Kings 12 : 10 this way ...

The young men replied, "This is what you should tell those complainers who want a lighter burden: `My little finger is thicker than my father's waist!'

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: original vs translations
[info]poserorprophet
2007-12-15 08:02 pm UTC (link)
Yeah, I remember when I was younger, I read that translation and thought "what the hell does that mean?" Consequently, our bourgeois morality not only significantly changes the text at hand, it also obscures its meaning.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Alright, I made it
(Anonymous)
2008-03-04 01:11 am UTC (link)
Hey Dan. commented on the "Triumph-inspired" lyrics above.
Thank you again for writing on these matters.
Your synopsis is great--reverent and contextual.
Edification, reverence, and wholsomeness are where the bar is set, vocabulary, diction, and inflection are merely means by which we communicate. We want to use any and every means we are afforded in serving the Lord (loving God and loving our neighbors as ourselves).

I write and perform spoken word poetry.
I pray and labor over expression.
Sometimes my greatest struggle is whether I will err on emotive impact (emotion) or on subculturally religious blamelessness.
Like any messenger or conveyer of the message, we have to "choose our battles wisely," because we may "offend" or cut-off many conservative listeners in order to impact the less-privileged. This has become the path I am taking. It seems you have too. May God's grace be with us in this less-affectioned part of the body.

Garret Potter
garretpotter@yahoo.com

(Reply to this)

meaning
(Anonymous)
2008-03-26 06:15 am UTC (link)
The Bible is a book that was written by people in culture to people in culture. It was also written to bring about change in the people and the culture. The Bible is a very cultural book. In fact, without cultural context there would be much of the Bible that would mean nothing or very little. When Paul uses the words "obscene" (Col 3:8), "corrupting" (Eph 4:29), and "profane" or "irreverent" (2 Tim 2:16) he actually means something when he uses them.* And his meaning is defined by the culture.

This may sound crazy, but Paul really does mean that we are to not use obscene, corrupting, profane language. What “obscene,” “corrupting” and “profane” are is defined by the culture. Therefore, for those of us in the US, if our culture defines certain words as profane (and there are a few words, not a great long list, but just a few) then as Christians we should not use those words.**

This is only if we take the Bible as authoritative in our lives and as a book that was written to real people who lived in real culture and who understood what words meant. If not, then we can say anything we want.

*Example of why the meaning of words is important in how we live: Our culture defines the word “murder” as killing someone unlawfully. The word “murder” actually means something and it is culturally defined. The definition of the word is what tells us what God’s command means and what then keeps up from killing someone unlawfully. If you take the definition away from the word then you could make it mean whatever you want and your actions would only be defined by how you define the word.

**As Christians our speech needs to be controlled much more so than just having a list of words not to say. On top of the culturally defined obscene words, there is content that is outside the bounds of Biblical speech. We are actually called to a very high standard of how we speak, which includes the very words, the content, and the heart behind our speech.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: meaning
[info]tinandcopper
2008-04-07 04:28 am UTC (link)
I hope you check back on this, since you post as anon and can't receive email replies.

I am an anthro student and am no stranger to other cultures' ideas of vulgarity and uncleanness (cf. Douglas, Danger and Purity). While you are correct that without context there is no meaning, the main argument you make is a non-sequitur.

I will grant for sake of argument that what is "obscene" is defined by culture (er, as long as you don't reify culture). But your "therefore" does not follow. You conclude that Christians (in the US) must use US notions of obscenity. You missed a premise: that Christians must adopt their particular culture's notions of obscenity. So I ask, why must Christians accept their culture's notions of obscenity? Assuming you don't think that Christians should accept their culture's definitions entirely, why is obscenity to be accepted and not other notions? Feel free to supply another premise if I've misread you.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…