In response to his apology, Wayne Grudem, author of what I call, The Christian Answer Key, wrote John a personal email that John decided to make public on his website. You can read it here.
In response to all this, it seems that everyone who has a blog and an inclination toward Christianity has made some sort of a comment on this matter. Dan Edelen at Cerulean Sanctum, has in my opinion (which, by the way, is always objectively right) one of the best responses I have read yet. He says,
You can read his whole post here.The unbridled tongue that God hates isn't the one that says, "God kicks our asses." It's the one that says, "The guy in the cubicle next to mine at work is a real ass." There's no cursing in saying, "I will die." On the other hand, "I hope you die!" is a curse before God when said against another human being.
All this hoopla comes off as just another case of Evangelicals missing the point in their rush to appear holy. Do we think that 80 years of never uttering a "dirty word" is going to look good in heaven when every day we tear down another person with our supposedly clean words?
God forgive us for missing the point!
7 comments:
Finally - someone say Amen to that. I've been following and reading the multiple postings on this whole thing in various blogs with dismay and horror at the attention it's gotten and all the fuss. I can't imagine what people on the outside of Christianity would be saying if they knew anything of this (which fortunately, most of this conversation is so far removed from real life outside the Christian church world that it won't matter.) But if it was out there in the open - my gosh what babies and worse we'd all look like.
I'm glad someone finally kicked our ass over it.
- John
False dichotomy.
Jerry
what do you mean by that JT?
How about we be more careful with vulgar language, coarse joking, AND not tear down our neighbor!!! I don't understand how in our process of sanctification we shouldn't strive for holiness in every aspect of our lives????
All this to say that being earthy, relevant, and real is ok. I am not proposing we lock ourselves in a monastery.
I also suggest we don't reject passages like Ephesians 4:29 and Ephesians 5:4 on the basis that we feel the apostle Paul wrote them because he was irrelevant and immature. Point blank, Ephesians 5:4 says we are called to have "no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place." Was Paul being a “baby” with such a strong statement???
If we want to argue one position or another, let’s do it on the basis of the Bible and not simply our opinion, wherever we land on the issue. I would quite honestly be intrigued by someone giving a reasonable apologetic as to why and how the scriptures endorse the use of strong language and when it’s use is or is not appropriate.
John,
I don't think Dan's post makes a whole lot of sense. Why not both-and, rather than either-or?
In other words, let's say that it's not best to say (1) "God kicks our asses" and it's not best to say (2)"The guy in the cubicle next to mine at work is a real ass."
If both should be avoided, then saying "option 2 is worse!" doesn't really address whether "option 1" is bad.
OK, maybe I should stop. I'm starting to sound a bit convoluted.
JT
Scooter-AMEN brother. I completely agree with you. take it back to the bible.
I whole heartedly agree with you guys. Yes, we are called to be holy before God and others. And I'm not advocating use of foul/vulgar/inappropriate language in any context, especially church. BUT - is this really worth all of the looooong blog entries, letters, retractions, commotion, apologies, attention and time that it's taking up for merely someone saying "Kicks are a**"? (However I haven't read enough to know - did he use language beyond that one reference? I could be wrong then.) Ya, it's a bit out of "Christian character context" to say that, but is that just us being uptight Americans? Isn't that term used in perfect appropriate language in England, Europe, etc.? Like we would use buttox? (Arse, etc.?) What fascinates me is where and what along the timeline in history established a word as being vulgar. I'd love to study this stuff further and I know it's out there. Dictionary.com does site this usage of ass in the Bible, by the way, in the animal form of course:
Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary
"Frequently mentioned throughout Scripture. Of the domesticated species we read of, (1.) The she ass (Heb. 'athon), so named from its slowness (Gen. 12:16; 45:23; Num. 22:23; 1 Sam. 9:3).
(2.) The male ass (Heb. hamor), the common working ass of Western Asia, so called from its red colour. Issachar is compared to a strong ass (Gen. 49:14). It was forbidden to yoke together an ass and an ox in the plough (Deut. 22:10).
(3.) The ass's colt (Heb. 'air), mentioned Judg. 10:4; 12:14. It is rendered "foal" in Gen. 32:15; 49:11. (Comp. Job 11:12; Isa. 30:6.) The ass is an unclean animal, because it does not chew the cud (Lev. 11:26. Comp. 2 Kings 6:25). Asses constituted a considerable portion of wealth in ancient times (Gen. 12:16; 30:43; 1 Chr. 27:30; Job 1:3; 42:12). They were noted for their spirit and their attachment to their master (Isa. 1:3). They are frequently spoken of as having been ridden upon, as by Abraham (Gen. 22:3), Balaam (Num. 22:21), the disobedient prophet (1 Kings 13:23), the family of Abdon the judge, seventy in number (Judg. 12:14), Zipporah (Ex. 4:20), the Shunammite (1 Sam. 25:30), etc. Zechariah (9:9) predicted our Lord's triumphal entrance into Jerusalem, "riding upon an ass, and upon a colt," etc. (Matt. 21:5, R.V.). Of wild asses two species are noticed, (1) that called in Hebrew _'arod_, mentioned Job 39:5 and Dan. 5:21, noted for its swiftness; and (2) that called _pe're_, the wild ass of Asia (Job 39:6-8; 6:5; 11:12; Isa. 32:14; Jer. 2:24; 14:6, etc.). The wild ass was distinguished for its fleetness and its extreme shyness. In allusion to his mode of life, Ishmael is likened to a wild ass (Gen. 16:12. Here the word is simply rendered "wild" in the Authorized Version, but in the Revised Version, "wild-ass among men").
Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary
Post a Comment