Is swearing (foul language) really always a sin?

[pi_314]

Ok, I'm kinda new here (3rd post) so I hope this thread is in the correct place in the forums.

So I have been thinking from time-to-time if swearing is really always bad under all circumstances. What got me thinking was because I have come to the realization that many people say what is labeled as "swear words" but they don't seem to be purposely harming or insulting or degrading anyone. I don't know how old people are in this forum, but from what I have observed about the young generation (high school, university age-group), the culture is that swear words aren't really considered "rude" in an informal setting. Obviously, if you're swearing AT someone, then its not good. But seriously though, how is it that saying "shoot, darn, heck, [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]" any different from saying the other words. I mean as long as the person on the receiving end don't feel insulted or anything, why are we avoiding such words?

I remember back when I was in grade 6 all the way to maybe grade 9 people at school made fun of me because I was so "paranoid" at refusing to say swear words. So what do you think?

 

[Beanieboy]

I think that what is really important is the intent. When people are using God's name to express damning someone or thing to hell, it shows disrespect to God. Imagine having a child that said your name to express anger or frustration. Vulgar words that are said usually are a comment on the society, which is why most English speakers use words of bodily waste, sex, or derogatory words for someone's gender, race, religion or sexual orientation.

My parents were very strict, so even "Gee", or "Geez" got my mouth slapped because it was considered a short for of "Jesus". However, for me, it clearly wasn't, and I never thought "Jesus" when I said "Geez."

So, I believe it is more of the intent than the actual word itself. I don't think there is really a lot of difference in the result of saying, "*#&@)@)!!!" or a Charlie Brown "uuuuuuugh!"

The problem, I think, is when you know it is offensive, and don't care, when you offend others, and don't care, or use God's name in vain, and don't care. Because you don't care about being offensive in words, you can move on to offending people in actions as well, and not care.

I believe that God is more considered with our intentions (the fuel for eventual actions) than the actual words themselves.

 

[Beanieboy]

When I was 18, i found out about the gift of speaking in tongues the same weekend I received it. The bible says that the act of asking for and receiving tongues is symbolic, because the tongue is very small, like the rudder of a boat, but a rudder steers the boat, and the tongue has the same control over the person. Asking for and receiving tongues is a symbolic act of allowing God to steer your spiritual life.

Once I got used to the unusual feeling of my tongue and mouth forming words on their own and the foreign sounding language, it actually grew to feel second nature. However, from the time that it began, I felt much more spiritually connected to God, and sometimes, I have even felt the Spirit move physically within. While still allowed to make my own choices, I knew much more definitely when I had strayed from the path.

Buddhism teaches that actions are actually just words made physical, and words are just voiced thoughts. As a Christian, I was taught through implication that sin was simply action, and even if we wanted to punch our brother, it was ok if we did as long as we didn't act on it. First there is a thought about how angry I was at my brother, then I would say, "I would love to punch him and teach him a lesson," and then, the punch would come out when I was angry. However, if I stopped myself from punching, I would actually think I had done something good! I had done nothing good. If someone you know who hates you says, "I didn't beat you up. Look how good I am", do you believe them? That is what I think, "What you have done in your mind you have done in your heart" means.

Buddhism, on the other hand, teaches that what is important is to examine one's thoughts. Impure thoughts lead to impure words lead to impure actions. When white people had hatred in their hearts for black people as a race, they would then use derogatory words meant to dehumanize them. Then, seen as inferior or as animals, it was then easy to abuse and mistreat them. That is why people today say, "homosexual lifestyle" rather than "homosexual life," or say "they are abmoninations" to imply that God hates gays, so I do too.

With hatred in the mind and heart, hateful words come out to justify the hate, and then hateful actions come out.

Buddhism teaches that it is thought, rather than actions, that one should try to remain pure the most. That means, if you simply hate someone because they are, say, poor or Jewish or Saudi - you need to own it, really look at why you believe that, ask yourself if it is fair, if you are disobeying the call to love your neighbor as yourself, etc. An action can be acted upon or not acted upon. The thought, however, simply is. There is no "doing" or "not doing" a thought. My Catholic friend who practiced Zen Buddhism said that Zen was far more challenging than his Catholic upbringing, which would simply ask for an action of atonement after the fact. Zen taught him to address the thought, and acknowledge that he had it, and that it was impure, and do something about the thought. There was no hiding, no atoning. There was just a naked impure thought that was his.

By addressing the thought, we have no fuel for the action, rather than a storage of bad deeds that, if we could without consequence, we would act on. That is why "we have sinned in our heart."

One of the most depressing parts of coming to CF for me is this section being used, not to talk out something that someone actually struggles with, like, "What is the ethical thing to do when I pass a homeless person who is asking for change?" but rather, asking if X is something that they can get away with. That wouldn't be such a big deal, but most often, these threads are started by Christians.

To me, it is like being married to someone who says, "I love you, and I want to remain faithful. I know it is cheating if I have intercourse without someone else, but would oral sex still be cheating? Yes? Well, how about mutual masturbation? Still yes? Ok, let's just say that all we did was kiss - naked, but no sex. Still cheating??? Wow. Ok, making out, but touching with clothes on.. Still???? Really???? Ok, just a kiss, no touching. Oh, come on! No? Ok, we go out for dinner at a romantic restaurant, and...."

Does this say, "I love you" or "I want to fool around with other people without consequence based on a legal loophole"? I'm glad that is not what this OP is, because so many Christians on this board focus on law rather than love, and seem to frame their Christian walk as nothing more than refraining from bad, rather than living actively in love, which is what God cares about the most. One isn't being loving to God if one repeatedly focuses on a specific sin and then tries to see how far they can get to the sin without receiving consequence.

If the spouse didn't buy flowers for the other, make dinner for them, give them a backrub, listen to their day, support them in hard times, but could only say, "Look how much I love you - I haven't slept with anyone, I haven't beat you up, I haven't ..." that isn't a show of love, but a restraint of hateful action, and so, really depressing.

If we focus more on how we can act in love towards others, including in what we say to each other, then we don't have to really worry about whether saying this or that word is a sin. Instead, we focus on how we can help other people by offering support, encouragement, etc., in our words.

 

[LondonAssyrian]

We should always strive to glorify God in all that we do.

Swearing and cursing do not exemplify and honour Christ. Anger and harsh words breed further anger and frustration.

Take a deep breath, and give glory to God. Your soul, your mood and those around you will be all the better for it. I know it is easier said then done, but nothing comes without preserverance.

 

[pi_314]

If we focus more on how we can act in love towards others, including in what we say to each other, then we don't have to really worry about whether saying this or that word is a sin. Instead, we focus on how we can help other people by offering support, encouragement, etc., in our words.

I think this is part of what gives Christians a bad reputation. You are given a strict rule "no swearing" but you don't even know the purpose behind why swearing is bad. And when you become obsessed with avoiding swear words, you lose track of why you are doing it and other people look at you weird thinking that it is some sort of "superstition" that spewing out a certain sound from your mouth is always inappropriate under all circumstances.

 

[Beanieboy]

I think this is part of what gives Christians a bad reputation. You are given a strict rule "no swearing" but you don't even know the purpose behind why swearing is bad. And when you become obsessed with avoiding swear words, you lose track of why you are doing it and other people look at you weird thinking that it is some sort of "superstition" that spewing out a certain sound from your mouth is always inappropriate under all circumstances.

Can you expound on that, and give an example?

My mom would slap our mouth for saying "heck", for example, because saying heck was just simply saying hell but changing it enough to become a different word.

However, in my adulthood, I believe that saying "heck" because you don't want to swear is far more important, because the intent is that you don't want to swear, rather than, "Is X okay to say" because you do want to swear but get away with it under biblical law.

Today, people say "Oh my __________" and few people bat an eye, and yet, will mock Jews who write G-d, because they want to err on the side of caution, rather than risk taking God's name in vain,. and don't even write it.

I've noticed the same thing with a few of my Muslim students. The Quran is similar to the laws of the OT where there is a prohibition on eating pork. However, since Christians don't follow this law anymore, some of the students have told me that their Christian friends or homestay families have tried to slip them pork, knowing that they are forbidden to eat it, but to show them that it tastes good. Is the Christian sinning for eating pork? Not in the Christian religion, but trying to serve it to someone who believes it is a sin is an extremely offensive and hateful act, one in which they are trying to make the Muslim sin by deception.

I don't believe the act of eating or not eating pork is the issue at all.

The issue is not respecting the person that believes it is wrong, not only believing that it is not wrong for you, but trying to make someone else eat it who believes it is wrong, and doing it through deception (such as serving hotdogs to them, when they have never had one), and trying to purposefully make them sin, telling them only after they have eaten.

I think the same can be said of words - that intention is far more important.

Christ was condemned in the NT for "working on the Sabbath" because he had healed someone. He responded that if one has a choice, they should choose to rest from their week's work, but that man was not made for the law, but law for man, meaning, law serves man, not man who serves the law. He continues that basically, it's common sense. (So often, I will see a Christian poster point to this or that law with no understanding of it, as if they were a child shouting, "It's a rule!" It's a rule for a reason, always. We don't lie because we don't like to be lied to, and if we lie, trust is broken, and we are not trusted. We don't steal because we don't like to be stolen from, and can end up in jail, and it makes us feel unsafe. For every "law", there is a reason.)

So Christ points out that it is common sense. If we are doing good, if we are acting in love, we can't break the law. If a cow falls down a well, of course one should "work" to save the cow. The cow is suffering. You have an emergency. He healed someone on the Sabbath. How can healing be a sin, and displease God?

But the intention of his accusers was not to edify Jesus. They wanted to prove that he was not a Real Jew (TM), which would become "Not a Real Christian"(TM) in today's world. They didn't use the law to help guide him on his spiritual journey, but to make his daily walk with God a burden. The Truth, their condemning truth, didn't set people free. It burdened them, made them feel judged, guilty, unlovable, unworthy of God, unredeemable, while the accusers, casting stones at Christ himself, while claiming to serve God, did not live up to the laws they burdened others with, and when they did, it was only for show.

Even though their actions were technically following the law, they were done for the praise of man, and Christ said that if that is the intent, then one has received their reward on earth, and will receive nothing for it from God.

Intent is far more important than the actual action, and the intent comes from our thoughts, what is in our hearts.

 

[yaypraisegod]

I always wondered this too as well.
What if the job requires you to curse, but not mean it ? For example, being in the entertainment industry, whether it be acting or stand-up comedy, I'm sure there are moments where you will have to curse.

Is it just the true intent that matters?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Ok, I'm kinda new here (3rd post) so I hope this thread is in the correct place in the forums.

So I have been thinking from time-to-time if swearing is really always bad under all circumstances. What got me thinking was because I have come to the realization that many people say what is labeled as "swear words" but they don't seem to be purposely harming or insulting or degrading anyone. I don't know how old people are in this forum, but from what I have observed about the young generation (high school, university age-group), the culture is that swear words aren't really considered "rude" in an informal setting. Obviously, if you're swearing AT someone, then its not good. But seriously though, how is it that saying "shoot, darn, heck, [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]" any different from saying the other words. I mean as long as the person on the receiving end don't feel insulted or anything, why are we avoiding such words?

I remember back when I was in grade 6 all the way to maybe grade 9 people at school made fun of me because I was so "paranoid" at refusing to say swear words. So what do you think?

All of this might depend if the said person is concerned about being 'Christ-like,' or not.

 

[pi_314]

Can you expound on that, and give an example?

My mom would slap our mouth for saying "heck", for example, because saying heck was just simply saying hell but changing it enough to become a different word.

However, in my adulthood, I believe that saying "heck" because you don't want to swear is far more important, because the intent is that you don't want to swear, rather than, "Is X okay to say" because you do want to swear but get away with it under biblical law.

Today, people say "Oh my __________" and few people bat an eye, and yet, will mock Jews who write G-d, because they want to err on the side of caution, rather than risk taking God's name in vain,. and don't even write it.

I've noticed the same thing with a few of my Muslim students. The Quran is similar to the laws of the OT where there is a prohibition on eating pork. However, since Christians don't follow this law anymore, some of the students have told me that their Christian friends or homestay families have tried to slip them pork, knowing that they are forbidden to eat it, but to show them that it tastes good. Is the Christian sinning for eating pork? Not in the Christian religion, but trying to serve it to someone who believes it is a sin is an extremely offensive and hateful act, one in which they are trying to make the Muslim sin by deception.

I don't believe the act of eating or not eating pork is the issue at all.

The issue is not respecting the person that believes it is wrong, not only believing that it is not wrong for you, but trying to make someone else eat it who believes it is wrong, and doing it through deception (such as serving hotdogs to them, when they have never had one), and trying to purposefully make them sin, telling them only after they have eaten.

I think the same can be said of words - that intention is far more important.

Christ was condemned in the NT for "working on the Sabbath" because he had healed someone. He responded that if one has a choice, they should choose to rest from their week's work, but that man was not made for the law, but law for man, meaning, law serves man, not man who serves the law. He continues that basically, it's common sense. (So often, I will see a Christian poster point to this or that law with no understanding of it, as if they were a child shouting, "It's a rule!" It's a rule for a reason, always. We don't lie because we don't like to be lied to, and if we lie, trust is broken, and we are not trusted. We don't steal because we don't like to be stolen from, and can end up in jail, and it makes us feel unsafe. For every "law", there is a reason.)

So Christ points out that it is common sense. If we are doing good, if we are acting in love, we can't break the law. If a cow falls down a well, of course one should "work" to save the cow. The cow is suffering. You have an emergency. He healed someone on the Sabbath. How can healing be a sin, and displease God?

But the intention of his accusers was not to edify Jesus. They wanted to prove that he was not a Real Jew (TM), which would become "Not a Real Christian"(TM) in today's world. They didn't use the law to help guide him on his spiritual journey, but to make his daily walk with God a burden. The Truth, their condemning truth, didn't set people free. It burdened them, made them feel judged, guilty, unlovable, unworthy of God, unredeemable, while the accusers, casting stones at Christ himself, while claiming to serve God, did not live up to the laws they burdened others with, and when they did, it was only for show.

Even though their actions were technically following the law, they were done for the praise of man, and Christ said that if that is the intent, then one has received their reward on earth, and will receive nothing for it from God.

Intent is far more important than the actual action, and the intent comes from our thoughts, what is in our hearts.

I understand the whole intention part of it, but I'm wondering if you believe that using swear words as part of your vocabulary really shows to other people that you are rude? I mean, take a random person aged 15-24, for example, if you are nice to them in a conversation and you use swear words at the same time, chances are THEY DON'T CARE. The generation sees swear words as just part of the way people talk. Its as if its a "dialect" in itself. I hope you understand where I'm getting at. I mean I bet there are many people out there who swears all the time and they also have a good heart and they help out in homeless shelters and stuff. I'm hoping that people don't start stereotyping others just because they use swear words.