On Christians and "Bad Language"

No, this isn't about cursing or "Christian cussing"! I read a blog post today that rightly moves the emphasis in the "bad language" debate to where it belongs. I'll give you the link in a minute - let me interact with what he says first...

What follows is the exact text of Eric Hogue's blog post, with my comments showing up in purple italics:

-----

Christians tend to use 'bad language'; our words are vulgar to the hearts of those in today's culture. Hold on, he's not saying what you think he is.

We struggle to make ourselves worthy, we become self-righteous. We use clever words, phrases and references that we don't even fully understand. Somehow we think, if we can come off sounding intelligent about spiritual things, then that will convince people to come to faith in Jesus. Our audio of "forced rhetoric" accomplishes the opposite. How many times have I been more interested in sounding like a theologian than a caring follower of Christ?

What people don't understand, when we use our flowery language of 'Christianese' (This talk is nails down a chalk board), we actually condemn people. We push them to the edges of a relationship and in the process wear ego's performances over a love's sacrifice. We talk as if we are exclusive members of a religious social club, and the culture doesn't want a membership because of it. You mean relationship is more important than the Christianese?! Now he's starting to speak my language!

I've been associated with some conversations that include secret hand-shakes, ceremonial jesters and those wonderful self-righteous 'rolling of the judgmental eyes'. Who are we kidding? Sadly, I too have been associated with some of those kinds of conversations. They only serve to make us feel better about ourselves at the expense of broken people who need the LORD.

When we learn to talk for the purpose of relating in an real communication, then we can start to express our experiences with relational success. We need to focus on using 'real words', 'real phrases' and 'real adjectives' when we talk. It may involve some slang. Do we live enough inside of today's culture to know the language and communicate with ease? Here's where some of you might be getting uncomfortable. Yes, he's saying the actual words you use are vastly less important than the relationship. He's also saying we must strategically pick and choose our words not for their heritage, but for their impact.

Yes, more and more of today's culture is bi-lingual, but very few own a second language of 'Christianese'.

What they do understand is the language of sinners; the 'real talk' that relates with a hunger for grace, a deep need for community in the midst of a creation of dismay and hope. What they do understand is their spiritual hunger for more; an inner-voice who's volume is turned up by constant, relational love. This is where the force of postmodern culture really becomes a good thing - our culture's increasing need for community and grace can be traced directly to the roots of postmodernity. Use the good for His glory; ditch the bad. It's a simple principle that fits postmodernity, too! If we speak in such a way that our words seem genuine, understandable, and powerful - look out! We will at last come alongside of God's work, rather than trying to be God's tactical invasion squad.

Often, when I'm attending a party, there will come a time during the night that the social drinking will take off some of the rough edges, and people will begin to get comfortable with each other. That's when the conversation really starts. I've been in some great discussions while attending a party, discussions that are blunt, direct and open about Jesus. If you're disturbed by the fact that he would be at a party with social drinking, you may as well stop reading right now - unless my reminding you of the places Jesus often went brings you back to your senses, that is.

One of the most popular questions, usually the first when someone knows you as a Jesus follower, is, "What do you think about homosexuality?" Relax, it's a great launching point, but it holds many dangerous results if you're not careful to speak the language. Each person is ready for the rote (empty) phrases, the quick religious replies of 'homosexuality is a sin', and the lack of any compassion in representation of Jesus - a man they tend to admire for his love. This is what amazes me: in our quest for 'love the sinner and hate the sin' we've clearly placed the 'hate the sin' part way ahead of the 'love the sinner' part. But isn't that backwards? Thank God that Jesus didn't follow our example with the woman caught in adultery, eh?

Here's a secret, don't address the question narrowly. Address it corporately, "We are all looking for an antidote of things that control us." It's not about the homosexual, or even the gossiper - it's about the grace of God for all of us called his creation, coming in a person called Jesus, who loves as we are and desires of In spite of ourselves. Excellent point! He's hit on a great way to keep 'love the sinner and hate the sin' and keep the priorities straight. Remember Jesus and the adulterous woman? Let he who is without sin cast the first stone; yet all to many of us when confronted with the 'homosexual question' are willing to start lobbing chunks of rock before we even grasp the context we're in.

If you desire to clear the room, and feel self-righteous over your orchestrated persecution, use your 'secret language'. If you care to communicate the situation of creation's sin induced decay, use real words with real meaning and understanding. But get ready, their will be more drinks served, and more people who crowd around to hear about love. Imagine that - people actually want to hear about love but are repelled by those that throw stones! It's so simple, yet we often just don't get it.

Paul talked about our language in his letter to the gang of followers in Corinth. In case you missed it, there's an example of using modern day language to make a point. He didn't say "his letter to the Corinthian church". I wonder what most people think of when they hear "Corinthian"? Leather, probably. Star Trek, maybe. A "gang of followers" in Corinith? I doubt it.

Paul told them that their spiritual language (I know we are talking about tongues here, but go with me) is confusion to those in the marketplace. He stated a fact, that if you really want to love people then you must communicate with people in a loving way;

"If you praise him in the private language of (confusing) tongues, God understands you but no one else does, for you are sharing intimacies just between you and him. But when you proclaim (in a real way) his truth in everyday speech, you're letting others in on the truth so that they can grow (to understand) and be strong and experience his presence ('realness') with you."

"So if you speak in a way no one can understand, what's the point of opening your mouth? There are many languages in the world and they all mean something to someone. But if I don't understand the language, it's not going to do me much good. It's no different with you. Since you're so eager to participate in what God is doing, why don't you concentrate on doing what help everyone..." (1 Corithians 13)

Not only should our lives be relevant, so should are language. You don't have to have all of the answers (we barely see through a glass), it's actually better to leave a few of the tougher questions of the table. Setting aside for the moment his poor exegesis of 1 Cor 13, he makes a good point. I think Paul would whole-heartedly agree with him on this point, just not on the basis of 1 Cor 13, eh?

The goal is relationship, to speak with an experience of love for those who are looking for the love that changes lives inside a ragamuffin relationship with Jesus. Speak the culture's language...and if you must, use some words. This relational approach to the Gospel is one of the fundamental differences between Missional and Traditional thinking. I'm not so sure we should be talking about "sharing the Gospel" anymore - we are the Gospel to people.

Or at least we should be.

Hatushili