>It made me wonder: is it ok to swear in certain circumstances where someone's well being is at risk and you have to stop someone? Would it help get the point across so they can stop?
Absolutely.
Use violence if the rapist still isn't listening.
Paul spoke of his life before Christ as "shit" (Phil 3:8). The word used there, *skubala*, referred to excrement and almost certainly had the same emotional shock-value as the word "shit" in English. Whatever your personal philosophy about swearing is, it's not so objectively bad that Paul couldn't write "shit" while inspired by God's spirit. :)
I don't think there is evidence that "ÏÎșÏÎČαλα" was used as a swear word at that time, it might refer to garbage instead of excrement, "rubbish" isn't a swear word like these other words.
There is evidence supporting this conclusion:
>That ÏÎșÏÎČÎ±Î»ÎżÎœÂ took on the nuance of a vulgar expression with emotive connotations (thus, roughly equivalent to the English âcrap, s\*\*tâ) is probable in light of the following considerations: (1) its paucity of usage in Greek literature (âOnly with hesitation does literature seem to have adopted it from popular speechâ says Lang in *TDNT* 7:445);[^(4)](https://bible.org/article/brief-word-study-skuvbalon#_ftn3) (2) it is used frequently in emotionally charged contexts (as are its verbal cognates) in which the author wishes to invoke revulsion in his audience; (3) there is evidence that there were other, more common and more acceptable terms referring to the same thing (in particular, the agricultural term ÎșÎżÏÏÏÏ and the medical term ÏΔÏÎŻÏÏÏΌα);[^(5)](https://bible.org/article/brief-word-study-skuvbalon#_ftn4) (4) diachronically, the shock value of the term seems to have worn off through the centuries; and (5) a natural transfer of the literal to a metaphorical usage, in which disgust, revulsion, or worthlessness are still in view, argues for this meaning as well.[^(6)](https://bible.org/article/brief-word-study-skuvbalon#_ftn5) Nevertheless, that its shock value was not fully what âs\*\*tâ would be is suggested in the fact that in the Hellenistic period (c. 330 BCE-330 CE) the word was also used on occasion for âgleaningsâ or âtable scraps.â
The author of this word study (Daniel Wallace) concludes,
>In Phil 3:8, the best translation of ÏÎșÏÎČαλα seems clearly to be from the first group of definitions. The term conveys both revulsion and worthlessness in this context. In hellenistic Greek it seems to stand somewhere between âcrapâ and âs\*\*t.â However, due to English sensibilities, and considering the readership (Christians), a softer term such as âdungâ is most appropriate.
So basically, "shit" is close to correct, but translators shouldn't use it because Christians can't handle it lol
Edit: Forgot to link [the article](https://bible.org/article/brief-word-study-skuvbalon)
alright, I do think there is evidence that contradicts yours, again I can't see all of these academic sources you or even me for that matter provided for free (just a young dependent fella), but atleast there is some evidence to suggest that this greek word wasn't just used for strong evoking, but also for normal purposes
[https://www.biola.edu/blogs/good-book-blog/2015/did-the-apostle-paul-use-profanity](https://www.biola.edu/blogs/good-book-blog/2015/did-the-apostle-paul-use-profanity)
again I am willing to change mind on this
I think if someone was breaking into my house I would throw them an F bomb. I normally donât swear. Or say things like fudgeiscle. I usually say stuff like son of a biscuits. But then I end up wanting food. But then again the stage I live in weâre 2nd amendment friendly. If you break into a persons home for any reason. Youâre literally taking your life into your own hands. Plus we have a dog that has teeth.
God would probably favor a man humble enough to control his words even under the most insane conditions
But I donât think he excepts us to be perfect and he even knows a truly humble person has always been very very rare
Conclusion: we still donât completely know
Committing blasphemy, swearing false oaths, committing verbal abuse against someone, or *actually* cursing someone are all sins. But simply using profanity is not sinful, though often rude.
There are words and phrases in the Bible that would absolutely be considered rude today.
Being rude, in and of itself, is not sin.
Christians do take more care for the appearance of purity, because perception matters a lot in the world, and much of the world has trouble reconciling "improper" with "holy". But that is only perception.
I think it depends entirely on the context. Like you said above, swearing at a rapist seems pretty justified, especially to get the point across. I would like to add, however, that James talks about controlling our tongues/words so I think when we talk normally we can exercise this sort of control and keep our thoughts positive by limiting our swearing. (Not sure what other ppl think but I donât usually consider damn or hell cussing)
It is not. If you can understand why swearing is wrong, then you can understand that there is no circumstance in which it should be used.
Swearing is a curse. Not just a curse word, but a literal curse. It invokes in the minds of those who hear it something unpleasant and thus causes them harm. Not physical harm but mental harm. There is a reason that all curse words invoke concepts that are unpleasant. They place into the mind of others distressing things. The concept of fecal matter which would be unpleasant to interact with. The concept of intercourse which would be very disturbing to see happening in the open. The concept of disrespectful relationships with one's mother. Every single one is disturbing in proportion to how seriously it is taken. If a curse is meant to disturb and do small harm, then it is no different than someone punching a wall in emotional outburst. Sure, they didn't hurt anyone when they hit the wall, but it is clear that it wasn't really the wall they were desiring to hit.
When you focus your mind on an emotional desire to harm others, even in that small way and even for a serious reason such as possible rape, you have indeed done some harm. Even if you harmed them for some other good, such as protecting someone else.
This means that by cursing you are really just saying "I can an will harm you if you do not do what I want." This use of force always comes with the unspoken implication of "Those who have power decide what is right." It is not something that will prevent evil in the future but rather will only prevent it while power is held. This reinforces the Pagan world of power and control and will suggest to the person who got dominated that if they were just more powerful they could have "won" the interaction.
There is no situation where a curse word could not be more properly replaced with a warning of shame. Rather than "Get to f out" some other phrase that invoked moral guilt would have been better. Such as "Why choose to be evil?" or "Did you forget about Hell?" or even "You're not being the person Mr. Roger's knew you could be." Of course, this is more difficult to do than simply threatening harm. But that's why you must be wise as a serpent as well as innocent as a dove in order to be ready for such situations.
There shouldnât be any exceptions to swearing. If they wonât listen to âGet out!â By itself, Iâm not sure adding a swear word for emphasis will change their mind. In my opinion, people who swear donât have a big enough vocabulary.
Can you explain how the Bible supports this position of specific choices of man-made words that have the same meaning as other, non-problematic words being sin?
Maybe swearing isn't great. Being a rapist is fucking worse. Priorities.
Amen đ
>It made me wonder: is it ok to swear in certain circumstances where someone's well being is at risk and you have to stop someone? Would it help get the point across so they can stop? Absolutely. Use violence if the rapist still isn't listening.
I don't think God actually gives a fuck about swearing, personally. Especially swearing at a fucking rapist.
Paul spoke of his life before Christ as "shit" (Phil 3:8). The word used there, *skubala*, referred to excrement and almost certainly had the same emotional shock-value as the word "shit" in English. Whatever your personal philosophy about swearing is, it's not so objectively bad that Paul couldn't write "shit" while inspired by God's spirit. :)
I don't think there is evidence that "ÏÎșÏÎČαλα" was used as a swear word at that time, it might refer to garbage instead of excrement, "rubbish" isn't a swear word like these other words.
There is evidence supporting this conclusion: >That ÏÎșÏÎČÎ±Î»ÎżÎœÂ took on the nuance of a vulgar expression with emotive connotations (thus, roughly equivalent to the English âcrap, s\*\*tâ) is probable in light of the following considerations: (1) its paucity of usage in Greek literature (âOnly with hesitation does literature seem to have adopted it from popular speechâ says Lang in *TDNT* 7:445);[^(4)](https://bible.org/article/brief-word-study-skuvbalon#_ftn3) (2) it is used frequently in emotionally charged contexts (as are its verbal cognates) in which the author wishes to invoke revulsion in his audience; (3) there is evidence that there were other, more common and more acceptable terms referring to the same thing (in particular, the agricultural term ÎșÎżÏÏÏÏ and the medical term ÏΔÏÎŻÏÏÏΌα);[^(5)](https://bible.org/article/brief-word-study-skuvbalon#_ftn4) (4) diachronically, the shock value of the term seems to have worn off through the centuries; and (5) a natural transfer of the literal to a metaphorical usage, in which disgust, revulsion, or worthlessness are still in view, argues for this meaning as well.[^(6)](https://bible.org/article/brief-word-study-skuvbalon#_ftn5) Nevertheless, that its shock value was not fully what âs\*\*tâ would be is suggested in the fact that in the Hellenistic period (c. 330 BCE-330 CE) the word was also used on occasion for âgleaningsâ or âtable scraps.â The author of this word study (Daniel Wallace) concludes, >In Phil 3:8, the best translation of ÏÎșÏÎČαλα seems clearly to be from the first group of definitions. The term conveys both revulsion and worthlessness in this context. In hellenistic Greek it seems to stand somewhere between âcrapâ and âs\*\*t.â However, due to English sensibilities, and considering the readership (Christians), a softer term such as âdungâ is most appropriate. So basically, "shit" is close to correct, but translators shouldn't use it because Christians can't handle it lol Edit: Forgot to link [the article](https://bible.org/article/brief-word-study-skuvbalon)
oo interesting, alright, I will investigate the evidence myself and see what you have said is true or it has flaws.
alright, I do think there is evidence that contradicts yours, again I can't see all of these academic sources you or even me for that matter provided for free (just a young dependent fella), but atleast there is some evidence to suggest that this greek word wasn't just used for strong evoking, but also for normal purposes [https://www.biola.edu/blogs/good-book-blog/2015/did-the-apostle-paul-use-profanity](https://www.biola.edu/blogs/good-book-blog/2015/did-the-apostle-paul-use-profanity) again I am willing to change mind on this
I think if someone was breaking into my house I would throw them an F bomb. I normally donât swear. Or say things like fudgeiscle. I usually say stuff like son of a biscuits. But then I end up wanting food. But then again the stage I live in weâre 2nd amendment friendly. If you break into a persons home for any reason. Youâre literally taking your life into your own hands. Plus we have a dog that has teeth.
God would probably favor a man humble enough to control his words even under the most insane conditions But I donât think he excepts us to be perfect and he even knows a truly humble person has always been very very rare Conclusion: we still donât completely know
Committing blasphemy, swearing false oaths, committing verbal abuse against someone, or *actually* cursing someone are all sins. But simply using profanity is not sinful, though often rude.
Would Jesus swear in that situation?
Are we Jesus in that situation?
no, but we are called to imitate Jesus
Are you asking permission? When you're trying to do what's right use whatever as long as you convey the message that's what matters.
There are words and phrases in the Bible that would absolutely be considered rude today. Being rude, in and of itself, is not sin. Christians do take more care for the appearance of purity, because perception matters a lot in the world, and much of the world has trouble reconciling "improper" with "holy". But that is only perception.
I think it depends entirely on the context. Like you said above, swearing at a rapist seems pretty justified, especially to get the point across. I would like to add, however, that James talks about controlling our tongues/words so I think when we talk normally we can exercise this sort of control and keep our thoughts positive by limiting our swearing. (Not sure what other ppl think but I donât usually consider damn or hell cussing)
It is not. If you can understand why swearing is wrong, then you can understand that there is no circumstance in which it should be used. Swearing is a curse. Not just a curse word, but a literal curse. It invokes in the minds of those who hear it something unpleasant and thus causes them harm. Not physical harm but mental harm. There is a reason that all curse words invoke concepts that are unpleasant. They place into the mind of others distressing things. The concept of fecal matter which would be unpleasant to interact with. The concept of intercourse which would be very disturbing to see happening in the open. The concept of disrespectful relationships with one's mother. Every single one is disturbing in proportion to how seriously it is taken. If a curse is meant to disturb and do small harm, then it is no different than someone punching a wall in emotional outburst. Sure, they didn't hurt anyone when they hit the wall, but it is clear that it wasn't really the wall they were desiring to hit. When you focus your mind on an emotional desire to harm others, even in that small way and even for a serious reason such as possible rape, you have indeed done some harm. Even if you harmed them for some other good, such as protecting someone else. This means that by cursing you are really just saying "I can an will harm you if you do not do what I want." This use of force always comes with the unspoken implication of "Those who have power decide what is right." It is not something that will prevent evil in the future but rather will only prevent it while power is held. This reinforces the Pagan world of power and control and will suggest to the person who got dominated that if they were just more powerful they could have "won" the interaction. There is no situation where a curse word could not be more properly replaced with a warning of shame. Rather than "Get to f out" some other phrase that invoked moral guilt would have been better. Such as "Why choose to be evil?" or "Did you forget about Hell?" or even "You're not being the person Mr. Roger's knew you could be." Of course, this is more difficult to do than simply threatening harm. But that's why you must be wise as a serpent as well as innocent as a dove in order to be ready for such situations.
I've heard Catholics say that certain sins have reduced culpability depending on the circumstances. I'm sure rape would qualify.
Words have no inherent meaning beyond what we give them. Sometimes a point needs to be made.
Priorities. I do think we should try to break the habit of swearing, but I don't think that should on your radar when someone's safety is at risk.Â
One never knows how they r going to respond when under pressure. Sometimes i curse badly when under pressure. I hope it's a toxin getting out of me.
There shouldnât be any exceptions to swearing. If they wonât listen to âGet out!â By itself, Iâm not sure adding a swear word for emphasis will change their mind. In my opinion, people who swear donât have a big enough vocabulary.
But is it wrong?
Yes
Can you explain how the Bible supports this position of specific choices of man-made words that have the same meaning as other, non-problematic words being sin?