Two issues were raised — no, three.

(1) One comment states it is wrong to bring in other issues into this discussion, such as modesty of dress in a discussion of language. However, the root of the “rules” in both areas is the same –
It is much easier to make a rule than to teach a congregation of sinners how to listen to the Holy Spirit and be led by Him; and, “power” is lost when the final decision on whether a behavior is right or wrong is given to someone else to determine.
This is why so many churches that claim to be led by the Holy Spirit, or claim to not be legalistic because we are saved by grace but “good Christians” follow these rules, are the most legalistic places on earth.

(2) Being a “stumbling block.” OY!
As I grew up in a legalistic church, this was presented as not going to movies because someone might see you in line at the new duplex cinema and wrongly assume you were going to the PG movie (while you were in line for G movie aqll along) and be led to believe it was okay for them to go to that movie and thereby sin. That someone might be either another believer who wasn’t as well founded in faith as you were or even a non-believer. Hmm … Can I make an unbeliever any less unsaved by stopping him from sinning? (I won’t say anything about how farcical that arument was about a PG movie being a sin in the first place.) Can I make him any more unsaved by letting an unsaved person know I like Disney movies (but not their politics)?
In its full context, the passage about being a stumbling block refers to causing a Believer to once again accept the tyrrany of Law rather than the freedom of Grace.

Well, I thought I had three points — maybe they blended together in those two.

Jesus would call us all Pharisees. They, like the Puritans, started as a movement to cleanse the Temple of all the wrong things happening there (like the selling of the priesthood, etc.). Over the years, they became more and more interested in the outward appearance and the “letter of the Law” than in the heart of worship.

Maya Angelou writes how her grandmother beat her brother for “taking the Lord’s name in vain” when he said “By the way, did you know …?” because Jesus is “the Way.”

I’d rather be a real person, warts and sins and all, than a Pharisee any day. G@sh dern it!

We went all out with a paper football tournament… the whole nine yards. Just before halftime, I noticed a group of kids that I had really connected well with were leaving. I asked a few of our kids what had happened and they told me that one of the Deacons (who was at that meeting and had assured me there would be no problems with what I described as possible scenarios) had gotten all over a kid for wearing a Motley Crue t-shirt.

And, that as they say, was all she wrote. We never recovered from that incident while I or the former leadership team was in place. I can thankfully say that I’ve followed the church a little through their website and they are now approaching mega-church numbers but only after they’ve changed church buildings and leadership.

I wish we didn’t work so hard to shoot ourselves in the foot all the time!!!

Obviously, I think, Michael wrote a great post with great thoughts about the issue of swearing and how it relates to the issue of a Christian subculture. But I think we, as self-examining Christians, ought to remember to deal with each “issue” individually, considering the particulars and not generalizing one gripe with another.

I noticed a comment about clothing and modesty, which, to me, is a separate issue. There’s a separate list of arguments for and against modesty in clothing, and the degrees of modesty, and how it relates to Biblical instruction or sin issues. The same with music, Sunday morning attire, tithe, and the whole lot. Whether each of these are included in the do’s and don’ts of a/the Christian subculture is irrelevant to their legitimacy as a real issues. Basically, I just mean to suggest the idea that a Christian subculture is a by-product of the religious’izing (yes, I made that word up) of particular issues, not a concerted effort to create a subculture and in doing so adopting some “by-laws” like “no cussing.”

I think the reason this kind of post, and this kind of dialogue, is so valuable is that we really think about the issues. We really examine them, hopefully through the lens of Scripture and good sense.

-T

Whats wrong with this picture?

I’ve got news for you. I’ve known michael for a couple of years now, and if you are expecting him to give you any kind of final answer, forget it. He squirms like a…oh wait, that probably would cross the line.

In fact, his response to your question would probably be something like “You’ve put your finger on a real problem…blah blah.” Well, that’s what I’d say anyway, and i’m squirmy, too.

But you are right in saying that their is a fine line between becoming conformed to the world and creating a subculture, and that line is necessarily different depending on the culture in which we find ourselves.

Thanks,

P.S. My mother has a pillow that reads, “Better to remain silent and thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt” I often think about that when my tongue gets ready to get me in trouble!!!

There is no question that we are to guard our mouth, and absolutely never say the Lord’s name in vain, (even “Oh my g@$h” or “Oh g@!!y”. are his name, essencially.) however I wonder if that means that we can’t curse at all…meaning, not an actual curse word, but a comment stemming from pain or a sudden shock. Are we supposed to remain silent?

(Quick side note, can an atheist say, “Oh my G@%!” ?)

I always imagined the folks in the Bible as sort of non-human and without feeling – using perfect language as the writers did and quite honestly, almost sinless. I never imagined their feelings or Peter swearing because a really big fish got away while he was fishing. But the Bible is full of emotion (see the entire book of Job), especially when Christ made the whip and drove the traders out of the temple angrily (to say the least.) Jn 2:12-17. I’m am by no means saying that Christ swore at all, but I was struck by the “zeal” for God that we are to have, and that is an emotion in itself. Jesus calls Judas a “devil,” (Jn 6:70) because it is the truth, and Jesus is perfect. I’m sure that it offended a few of the desciples, though, who considered themselves quite clean.

My point is that so long as it is the truth, and in no way blasphemes against our Lord and Savior, I think that using a term such as “a%%” in the correct context may get our point across better than saying “backside.” Whoever is listening knows that we mean the same thing anyway. Either say it, or nothing at all. I believe that we as Christians are supposed to say nothing at all, in that case. Though many of us do not, and expel from our mouth something or other.

Personally, I dont’ swear, (I guess because I never learned it) but things do come out of my mouth such as “man!”, when I stub my toe. Once again, that derived, I believe, from it’s four letter rhyming word of “d#&n!” Isn’t that just as bad?

At least we’re trying, and personally I would rather use the “cleaner” word, but they all mean essencially the same thing. I pray that the Holy Spirit empowers me to keep my mouth shut because we are to be examples and set ourselves apart. (see quoted scriptures in original article.)

I guess that whole, “if you can’t say something nice…” thing is right.