Deviating down a familiar road…
BTW, before I begin, my final response to the swearing issue is in the comments to the last post. So there 
What’s really interesting about a lot of this is that my blog illustrates part of the point I’m talking about. Check out these stats since I posted the topic on swearing:
It kinda frustrates me that people are eager to debate and argue (at great length!) over personal issues like whether or not swearing is a big deal. Josh said its one of those “untouchable issues” and I guess I should have figured… I have gotten at least 5 responses (if not even more from personal e-mails) to this post whereas post on things like the meaning of truth, care for the poor, and thinking on pacifism got far fewer responses. Why do we care about things like this so much more? Why do we argue the color of carpet, whether or not to hang a flag in a church sanctuary, or how to serve communion? I can’t help but wonder what’s the point… Where do we get with that?
What is also interesting, is most of the people that responded to the swearing issue negatively are probably all over 40… Kevin (mid-20s?) responded neutral-to-positive, along with other people I polled here on campus who are within my own age category. What was somewhat laughable, was that everyone who posted a response after he posted argued against his point. There is some HUGE generation gap being shown here and its going to be wild to see what happens when my generation is suddenly “in power” (for lack of a better term) as the older generations fall out.
Somehow, the generation before me is obsessed with personal faith and holding to a rigid set of beliefs (not to say that’s bad), while my generation seems wildly disillusioned with those things and desires above all else to see action, to see truth at work. Both sides (speaking from inside of the Christian circle) claim the Bible is on their side. And what I think is cool is that perhaps it is! I can’t say either is wrong, but for me, beliefs lived out are far superior to beliefs alone, even if you views conflict with mine. If you can show me that your way of life and your faith/beliefs live out better than mine, are more consistent with what you say, and give me a better answer to the questions I have about life, be you Muslim, Buddhist, Mormon or Jehovah’s Witness, I’ll be there in a heartbeat. So far, I have found nothing so good as what Jesus Christ has offered me as he describes through the whole of Scripture.
I hope no one takes this as an angry tirade against anyone or any group (or church) personally (even though some personal issues are mentioned here). I also don’t mean this to say everyone else is wrong and I have it right. I really hope thats clear in what I’ve written. I have criticisms of plenty of people, but I know I am first to fail at many of these things. These are just the ramblings from the mind of a disillusioned, sometimes frustrated sinner of twenty-one years, who is bought with the blood of Jesus and has yet much to learn about what the hell that means.
Aaahhhhhh…. a sigh of tiredness….
And so I pray: Come soon, Lord Jesus!! Redeem this old and tired world through your church and through me as you see fit. Awaken your people to live as a witness to the truth of Yourself and Your Word. May your kingdom come here on earth in this present age. Let us not loose sight of today and what you are doing on earth now, even as we look forward to the day of your return. I love you. Help me do so with everything I am; to drop everything I have to follow you and become a fisher of men, whatever that should mean. You are a wonderful Savior and you have led me too far now and sacrificed too much to save my skeptical, sinful, doubting soul to screw me later on down the road. I’m hooked. You are far too good to me when I don’t deserve it, and I would and will gladly die in whatever pursuit you have prepared for me.
Yours forevermore: A simple, hungry and thirsty servant, Lukas.
the words we use, helping the poor, cleaning up the environment, what we wear or don’t wear, all these things are an expression of our faith…living it out so to speak. Some rank on the scale of importance higher one day, the next day not so high (I know it is always important to help the poor : )
But just so long as we live by Galatians 2:20…we are going in the right direction.
Love ya Luke!
Dan Oberg
April 8, 2008 at 11:08 am
Luke,
Rightly have you said that this talk on swearing was somewhat of a deviation from the main topic. I wish to return to the main topic of truth and postmodernism/the emergent church. I will do so after addressing the issue at hand.
I have kept up with your blog and its responses regularly but have not commented because I wanted to wait and see where it was going. My viewpoint was often expressed by orthodox believers and so I was happy to let them carry on the discussion. However, if their insight is outdated because they are older, then I – being 23 years old – respond. I, for one, agree with the older. No, not because I was raised as a Christian, because I was not. I grew up on MTV, the Simpsons, and Married with Children. I listened to any music without discretion including Limp Bizkit and Metallica. I will at least agree with you on one point: some non-Christian artists are the best of their kind. Limp Biskit is the most talented band of its kind that I’ve heard and Metallica has some of the coolest guitar solo’s recorded. I have a wider taste for music than most; the only music I don’t like is Opera, and even some of that is good. I own CD’s of country, rap, classical, rock, ska, and even “the screamy music” ((any embodiment fans out there?)). However, despite my upbringing and wide taste for music, I don’t suffer to listen to bands that have language or bad messages. Limp Biskit and Metallica are no longer found in my library, no is any other questionable CD. Why? Two reasons: firstly because I would do anything for the name of Christ – if society at large considers it evil and God’s word is debatable on the matter then I will not be found with it in my hands… if only for the sake of the integrity of our message. The other being my conviction that it is wrong and that I know that it does effect me, despite my resilience to it.
Concerning the first reason you have spoken a little bit already. I remember one time when I gave Andrew, Karen and Gene Butcher’s son, a ride home from church. I was the Sunday School teacher and he was looking through my CD’s when he found a shady one. He looked up at me in surprise and said, “You listen to them?” I could tell in his mind what had not happened: he had not suddenly found a new way to connect to me. He had, however, felt more free to follow my example and listen to whatever music he wanted. Convicted of the example I was setting I threw away every questionable CD I owned.
But he was middle class and white. What about street life? First allow me to build my integrity. I have been involved in “urban ministry” for lack of better terms. I am friends with Earnest, Bobby, Michael ((also called Patches because a friend blew his eye out when they were drunk one time and now he wears a patch)), and others including 4 years every week with my little brother who was born out of wedlock and now lives with his single, black mother and little sister who, in elementary school got put into Charter for punching her school teachers repeatedly. I could give all of their stories, but the one most applicable to this situation happened no less than a week ago. There are some skateboarders who come over late at night and skateboard at Kroger behind our apartments. At midnight I brought them milk and cookies in exchange for seeing their best moves. About 15 minutes after I arrived one of them shouted, “Can we ease off the F-bombs?” He had dropped a few himself, but I believe that he – our generation – knew that it was wrong.
Concerning Kevin’s comment – it is true that we are rational beings and I propose that he is right: that someone could listen to or watch anything and it wont affect them if they continue to use reason to filter what is bad. However, in your case – curse words go into Luke and now curse words come out of Luke. Afterwards, not before, Luke justifies his reasoning. Some of his generation agree, and some don’t agree. All of the older generation agree with one another, and wisely have we voided their opinion as scripture clearer states, “young men, instruct the older. Old men, be respectful of the younger.”
He also did a poor exegesis. “It is not what goes into a man that makes him unclean.” Jesus was referring to food and what goes into a man’s body. Jesus did have words concerning what goes into a man’s soul, “The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are good, your whole body will be full of light. But if your eyes are bad, your whole body will be full of darkness…You brood of vipers, how can you who are evil say anything good? For out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him.” And again, concerning exactly that which he misinterpreted: “Are you still so dull? Don’t you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man ‘unclean.’” We must therefore be very careful what comes out of our mouths because we “will be judged for every careless word.” What do you think Jesus was talking about there?
I am prepared to treat your claims fairly, though. There are many who believe that certain words are wrong which are not swear words. “Black”, “Homosexual”, “Indian” and many other words like them are examples. Some parties get more up in arms about using these words than we did about your swearing. I don’t feel compelled to “watch my language” concerning those words. Those words don’t offend me. So, following your logic, why should you “watch your language” around us? The words don’t offend you.
I give an answer, not as law or as trying to defeat your way of thinking, but as a man of Christ I give my opinion. Can you point to anything lavishly good that has come of your swearing? Does the good outweigh the bad? “All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are beneficial. I suggest that the stress you have put on your relationship with you parents and old friends is enough bad to outweigh the good. Would you trade stress with us in order to have ease with those on the streets? Should all Christians consider first the lost and not first the universal Church? Should we consider first our ministry and second our family? Should we consider first our family and second our God? That which is on the “inside” circles is the more important.
Enough about that, though. Lets talk about the Kingdom of God and how you are trying to build it. From what I have gathered about postmodernism and the emergent church I actually do have some praise: you seem to be thinking critically. I like your points and what you have to say. What is swearing in comparison with dying children?! ((I speak as if disregarding the swearing argument for a moment)). I would say the two things that are a let down are the character of the people produced by this philosophy and the lack of foresight. But perhaps you will be able to address these issues.
Let’s start with the foresight issue. What truths do you propose are up for interpretation? Apparently language, and for the moment ((though I am not convinced)) lets say that you are at least reasonably still on the straight and narrow path in that area. What else do you have in mind? I give an example that might be applicable: many people today live together before they’re married. Christians call this fornication. Will you suffer those who live such a way to be “married” of a sort because our culture accepts it? If you say “no”, then in what way will you teach against it? Would you allow them in your church unrepentant for more than a year if the sin was widely known? Or would you rebuke them? How far are you willing to let the line slip? Please don’t take these as hypothetical questions. I am trying to get a feel for what sort of holiness you intend for the church to pursue.
I will not go so far as to suggest that Christ could be robbed of His divinity or humanity by someone’s cultural perception. Your church would, I assume, defend dogmatically a truth of that proportion.
Let’s start there. That will help me get a better idea of what you are proposing before we move on. Let us do one thing for each other – let’s not demand a defense of every exception from each other or try to catch one another in our words. I will give you the benefit of the doubt if you will give it to me. If in the end we disagree, then that is the end. Yet if by some means God grants us unity then I don’t want to look down a long tunnel of slander ((on my part)) and wish that I had spent the time understanding your ideas instead of trying to humiliate you ((or be humiliated by you)). How’s that?
Much love to God above and the beloved brethren in the north!
-Scott
Scott M.
April 8, 2008 at 7:00 pm
I’ve gone back and forth on whether I should comment… But here it is. Hopefully this wasn’t too stupid of me.
———–
“if society at large considers it evil and God’s word is debatable on the matter then I will not be found with it in my hands”
Does society consider it evil? Is God’s Word really debatable? That seems to be the issue at hand. And if God’s Word is debatable, why do you come down where you do? You seem to be saying that because the issue is debatable, you go with the default position. Why is that the default position?
“I know that it does effect me”
It’s great that you are willing to act on your convictions. But you can’t bind the conscience of others to your own difficulties. Just because it affects you does not mean it will affect everyone similarly.
“He had, however, felt more free to follow my example and listen to whatever music he wanted.”
That’s a bad thing? Again, seems to be the thing in question. If it means he would disobey his parents then its obviously bad. But why is it inherently bad to listen to “whatever music he wanted?”
“Convicted of the example I was setting I threw away every questionable CD I owned”
Questionable to whom? To your church? To your parents? To all churches? Where do you draw the line and why? There are those who would object to to own any type of music. So should you throw away all your CDs? Why not?
“He had dropped a few [f-bombs] himself, but I believe that he – our generation – knew that it was wrong”
Or maybe he was conscious of the over-sensitivity of Christians to swearing and was trying to be respectful to you.
“All of the older generation agree with one another”
All of the older generation that comments here. Do we want to consider the consensus of the church universal? Because I doubt you’d win that. And it’s not surprising that most people commenting are opposed to swearing — most (if not all?) of them are white, Anglo-Saxon Evangelicals.
“What do you think Jesus was talking about there?”
Using our words to tear people down. I’m pretty sure Luke isn’t defending that.
“Can you point to anything lavishly good that has come of your swearing?”
Is this the judge of good versus bad? Because it seems easy to put that question to many things and struggle to come up with a satisfactory answer. But even if it weren’t such an odd way of determining morality, we can also imagine cases where swearing could be used for good.
———–
The root issue here is that some people seem to have a Platonic view of words that there are words that are universally and inherently “bad” aside from usage or context.
For instance, if I say “those are some damn good cookies” most Evangelicals would likely be “offended” because I said “damn.” What if I said they were “darn good cookies?” Does the offense go away because I changed one letter? What if I said they were “super good cookies?” I doubt anyone would object. But why not? The meaning in all three of those sentences is the same. So why is using one form considered fine when using another isn’t?
Obviously, if I use swear words to insult someone or tear someone down I’m sinning. But it’s not because I’m using swear words, it’s because I’m using them to tear someone down. And I can do that without swear words just as easily. That is not the issue at hand.
Words are a means to meaning and it’s the meaning that matters, not the word.
Josh
April 9, 2008 at 3:50 pm
ps. that was in response to Scott’s comment, in case that wasn’t obvious.
Josh
April 9, 2008 at 3:50 pm
The denotative meaning of those three phrases might be the same, but they’re connotatively different (maybe). I have this theory that most objections to “strong language” stem from cultural codes prohibiting “strong emotions” (be sad, not depressed; be happy, not giddy etc). Swearing is generally the strongest form among a variety of synonyms. The objection is either to the display of that emotion, or the pretense of displaying that emotion.
kevin
April 9, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Josh,
How hard you were on my response. You overlooked at the very end that I did not want to explain every exception, but instead to hear the main points of both sides. You have demanded that I find everyone everywhere in agreement completely which I know isn’t going to happen – so postmodernism wins on that. But I feel you’re being over philosophical and not using common sense. Suppose it’s ok in some cultures to cuss. I’ll grant that. My point is that it is not in yours and Luke’s culture ((if you are Josh, Luke’s cousin and are at Cedarville around white evangelicals, if not, then at least you can’t defend Luke since I know his surroundings)). Luke’s cussing was putting stress on his relationship with his parents and other people who love him as was obvious from their posts. Cussing certainly didn’t help the situation, not cussing would help. Therefore I gave my opinion that for now, it seemed to be loving not to cuss, and in general I couldn’t think of any situation where it was loving to cuss. If you feel strongly otherwise give me some practical examples where cussing would be more loving than not and I am open to listen. Only give them from a life well lived and not an untested theory.
However, I would like, rather, to make peace with you. I want to hear what you have to say and care little about an argument on the morality of cussing. If you are Luke’s cousin/roommate, as I suspect and will assume for the rest of this comment, then I know that you are the one who originally introduced him to these ideas. You are probably more acquainted with them. Since Luke doesn’t want to debate the issue anymore, understandably, I would like to understand your propositions better. Like I said, I definitely think you are thinking critically and broadly. I can see that not everyone in the universal church thinks the same on many issues – hence our many denominations. My personal red flags are that this line of thinking might be carried too far and eventually people will start failing to draw the line on real issues of morality – for example, abortion. “The fetus isn’t a baby to me, even if it is to you. The bible only implies that fetus’ are to be cherished as human beings, it doesn’t say it outright.” So lets have peace and agree not to be over critical with each other before moving on, and maybe Luke’s blog isn’t the place to “move on” ^_^. Regardless, if you are willing, describe a local body and the way they interact with each other ideally in your mind. I am in the midst of preparing to go into the ministry myself and am building my vision for what the Kingdom of God looks like in everyday life. I am sure that, despite our previous disagreement, you probably have quite a few insights into problems that need to be corrected in the church and wrong viewpoints. I feel like Luke has brought a lot of these up – hate of Muslims without understanding them, an over emphasis on minor doctrines, over institutionalization of the church instead of a real attempt to live as God’s people ((for example: teaching on fellowship and yet not living in fellowship. Perhaps the best way to teach it is just to go on and do it ^_^ perhaps some teaching is helpful)). I myself have decided not to overstress small issues in my future ministry, but instead of trying to build their knowledge of certain theological points – I intend to build a lifestyle and relationship to God into them so that they live blamelessly before Him, and as much as possible before men. It is unimportant to me whether I teach this by words or by spending time with them. It is important to me that they understand major doctrines – like God’s immutability, Christ’s humanity and divinity, and the obvious immorality of certain actions like adultery, fornication, murder, hate, etc… If you are willing, give some examples of issues that you think are not really all that important to hold too, and some examples of issues that are necessary to Christianity and you would have need of clinging too. I will not debate the issues with you like happened with cussing. If you chose an issue that every Christian who reads this blog accepts as the first one on your list, then I think you would better build my trust. But even if not, I am willing to listen silently to things I do not agree with in order to gain some things that are helpful. As again I agree with Kevin’s former statement without thinking it wise to suffer doing it all the time without discretion.
Luke mentioned at one point the idea of reading scripture more from the pulpit, and seems to like the idea of “just reading the bible.” I’m assuming he doesn’t want to throw out teaching altogether, but I would enjoy hearing more about this idea if one of you could develop it with words.
If you are willing to do this I will, as I said, not be over critical, but respectful and open. It will also do me a great service. I don’t have time to read every book out there ((although I have moved to a 4-day work week so I can spend an extra 10 hours a week reading, having putting in about 16-20 hours a week regularly for months now)). I am currently reading through Augustin’s “City of God”, Eusebius’ “Ecclesiastical History,” and other works of great Christian men of the past ((the history book isn’t as boring as it sounds, it captures the life of the early church which, despite what I was taught in schools, was vibrant and alive up until about 800AD, where it, in my opinion, did seem to nearly die until the Reformation)). How interesting and mind opening are all their view points! The Kingdom of God is so great and vast! So many kingdom’s come and go, even the mighty Rome, but the Kingdom of God alone endures! It’s so neat to see how the body of Christ has lived in the past. I have chosen, for the moment, not to read the newer books because it is hard to determine which ones will actually influence society. I have no doubt the postmodern/emergent church will influence society, but who can tell if it will be considered the orthodox body of Christ in 400 years, if the world goes on so long? I know that a similar movement called the “Jesus People Movement” came about in the 1970’s with somewhat similar ideas, but for some reason it died out. You two, however, are interested in the emergent church and their ideas and are reading many of their books and visiting the sites. If you can talk with me in summary of all of your acquired knowledge then you will help me filter through those books which are useful and those which were not as helpful. Thus, by influencing a man who has devoted his whole life to building the Kingdom you will do a service unto everyone I am able to reach. What great reward it will be in heaven to see all those people who knew better how to love each other because you were willing to discuss these things with me!
Scott McEwan
April 10, 2008 at 4:39 pm
Hey Scott,
I’m sorry if I offended you with my response. I didn’t intend to come off as attacking you, though I guess it did come off too strong. The internet as a medium for discussion sucks and it’s easy for me to be overly critical as I was here. I’m sorry about that. That’s why I was hesitant to post; in hindsight it probably was not wise of me. And I am Luke’s cousin/roommate.
I was trying to understand where and why you draw the line and why it is not arbitrary. Morality seems inherently filled with line-drawing but I hate to do it without reason. That’s why I asked you those questions. I wanted to honestly know how you would answer them because I have a hard time understanding the rationale behind the other position.
I’m not sure if I am the one who introduced Lukas to these ideas, though I would doubt it–he would know better than I. And I’m actually not an emergent guy. Lukas and I raise a lot of the same questions and our answers are sometimes similar, but where we end up going with that is very different. He’s read more books by the emergent guys (actually, I’m not sure I’ve read any…) and I’m sure he does a better job than I would at articulating their thought.
Eusebius’ history is a good read. I’d be curious to know sometime why you think the church went off-track in 800AD, and what you do with certain other church fathers (esp. Ignatius), but that’s probably a discussion for another time.
I probably won’t directly respond to comments much anymore, but if you ever feel like I’m being too critical or offensive, please feel free to email me at joshaber (at) gmail (dot) com.
Josh
April 11, 2008 at 11:28 pm
Thats awesome! Thats the kind of conversation I want to see. Thanks on my end Josh, that means a lot.
plukevdh
April 12, 2008 at 12:20 am
Hello!
I enjoyed reading the last few threads…partly because I’ve been deeply involved with discussing most of those same things with Josh.
From talking with you, Luke, I thought I might have something to say concerning cussing after reading your post. I feel like I can kind of see both ways, but I “kind of can’t” as well. It just leads me to a stale-mate. From a personal standpoint, and Josh and I have had so many inconclusive talks about this, cussing is a frustrating thing FOR ME. My parents used to cuss about us children under their breath in anger. For me, cussing stirs up those emotions of hurt. For me, I never want to utter those words at my children, and if I practice them or listen to them casually, what will prevent me from saying them in anger?
But then there is that legitimate issue of cultural definitions, like Josh’s example of the exclamation of the cookies. They all mean the same. Even if connotations aren’t the same, the connotation for “damn” might be different for other people as well. I’m from the south, and “damn” is pretty much commonplace among hicks. Ever heard of “Damn Yankees”? It’s a song (a play even, I believe), from the south no less. I guess it doesn’t justify it necessarily, but if something is said in the same emotion, means the same thing, what difference does it make? But then I always come back to, is there a lack of self-control?
Basically, I am on the fence. I prefer not to hear cussing and not to engage in it…but I have cussed before. I’ve f-bombed a vacuum cleaner for crime’s sake (and immediately cried, haha…)… But I don’t know. Does the world see a difference in us by not cussing? Maybe that’s a good question to ask… or maybe not, since there is OBVIOUSLY a difference… Maybe, rather, does it make a good difference?
I don’t think I said anything substantial here, but that’s okay. Those are my on-the-fence thoughts that argue with one another in my head and get me ultimately no where!
Take care, Lukas!
Michelle
April 17, 2008 at 2:50 pm