Bad Language: The Real Story

Dear Evangelicals:

Have you ever wondered why the obsession with cussing looms so large in Christian culture? It's not prohibited in the ten commandments. It's certainly not part of the Great Commandment.

Many, many Scriptures call us to watch what comes out of our mouths. There are Scriptures that caution against "crooked" and "perverted" speech, against lying, gossip, and double-talk. There's plenty of criticism of "cursing", but in the Bible, anytime someone curses someone, he's praying for their downfall, even unto the third and fourth generations, as it were.

Any default interpretation of these things as "cussing" is more a reflection of American and Christian culture than it is of God's Word.

To be sure, Ephesians 4:29 warns against "corrupting talk", while Ephesians 5:4 prohibits "filthiness ... foolish talk, or crude joking."

What, then, are we to make of  Philippians 3:8, where Paul says:

"Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ."

From the pulpit, Francis Chan has said that, when Paul wrote, "dung," he was not exactly using the Greek word for "poop". Paul's meaning was closer to another excremental noun whose use is still somewhat restricted on basic cable.

And what of this, from Jesus Himself in Luke 13:32, in response to threats on His life by Herod Antipas?

"And He said to them, 'Go, tell that fox, ‘Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I shall be perfected.'"

In Peculiar Treasures, Frederick Buechner interprets Jesus this way.

In other words, Jesus is saying, it's pretty amusing that Herod A. makes murderous threats in public when in private, all he wants to do is be somebody's b----.

And before you go getting all self-righteous about that, understand that Jesus is calling out Herod's hypocrisy, not his sex life. But I digress.

Was Paul in sin when he used the word "dung"? Was Jesus crossing a line when He said something everybody already knew about Antipas' private life?

Maybe Paul was being a hypocrite -- maybe. But Jesus? If you believe He is God, you have to believe that He did not sin.

So, what do you think?

Here's how I interpret it, based on the balance of Scripture:

It would seem that "corrupting talk" and "filthiness" don't apply to truth-telling, but to gratuitous nonsense. You know how some people seem to cuss more, tell dirtier jokes to impress people and alleviate their nerves? (See Adele's Glastonbury set from yesterday, poor darling. I'm not judging her; she seems to have been quite overwhelmed by the occasion, except when she was singing.)

It appears that Paul was cautioning against using cheap talk, dirty jokes, coarse language as a social lubricant. If we have the Holy Spirit, we shouldn't have to white-knuckle it through tense social situations by dropping the f-bomb and telling the one about ... whatever. When Jesus didn't know what to say, He stalled for time by writing on the ground, or making clay from the mud to put on a blind man's eyes. We, too, can wait a couple of beats rather than rushing to fill the silence.

On the other hand, when something was disgusting, hypocritical, abusive, oppressive, or otherwise hateful, neither Jesus nor Paul beat around the bush. They called things exactly what they were.

We should do the same -- even if nobody else has the guts.