goldenspines wrote:Its only stealing if you don't get caught.
Warrior 4 Jesus wrote:Peanut, but some people can grow to enjoy 'light' pain like rubberbands around wrists.
goldenspines wrote:Its only stealing if you don't get caught.
RedMage wrote:1) even if we personally don't have a conviction that certain language is sinful, other Christians might be convicted differently, and we should therefore refrain from using that language to avoid offending them or causing them to stumble, for the sake of unity and harmony in the body of believers...
The problem with creating different "language profiles" for use with different groups, as Kaligraphic suggests, is that it fundamentally smacks of deception and duplicity. To talk one way around fellow Christians and a different way around unbelievers only really means that you're being perpetually dishonest to at least two groups of people.
Creating different "speech profiles" can only result in either one's fellow Christians or one's unbelieving acquaintances, or both, feeling that one is a fraud when and if they discover the change that takes place once you move from one sphere to the other. If you aren't honest and consistent about your language, what else are you putting up a front about? I think we can all agree that we should want everyone, fellow Christians and unbelievers, to feel that they can know and trust us without reservation.
Kaligraphic wrote:Some of us interact with more than one demographic,
and limiting ourselves to one speech profile in the name of "honesty" will cut off communication just as surely as refusing to speak French to a Frenchman who doesn't speak English. The purpose of Language is communication, not superiority.
Nate wrote:I don't see how, any more than it would be "dishonest" to not eat meat around a vegetarian friend and eat tons of meat with anyone else.
And I disagree with this completely. I'm extremely honest about the language I use with people. I constantly say, "Avoid my LJ if you don't like language because I use it a lot." And who are we to judge the convictions of others? We avoid nudity because of the danger of lust as Christians, but if a person is an artist and takes an art class with nude models, are we to say, "Well he goes and looks at naked people so he's not a Christian." By no means! We all have different convictions]
Even if your fellow Christian is wrong in judging you based on your language, we are called to put our brothers and sisters before ourselves, and if there is no doctrinal point in danger of being compromised, we should acquiesce to their conviction for the sake of the unity of the body, so that the "weaker brother" will not be caused to stumble.
Just as importantly, if not even more importantly, there are plenty of non-Christians who do have a "conviction" that certain language is wrong. Are we willing to alienate them by presenting an image of a Christian who doesn't even measure up to their personal "moral" standards as a non-believer?Also remember Jesus said anyone who called their brother a fool was in danger of the fires of Hell. Fool isn't a "bad word" last time I checked, but Jesus says that calling someone that is a terrible sin. This shows it isn't the word that's the problem but the intent behind it. At least as far as I'm concerned.
Yes, we all agree that words have no inherent moral value in and of themselves, but that isn't the issue.EDIT: So as not to misunderstand, I'm not implying you called us fools, I was using it as an example. I don't THINK anyone would read into that, but I thought I'd clear it up.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 124 guests