Pulpit language

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

In a message dated 96-09-08 13:27:38 EDT, brian_berger@JUNO.COM (Brian K
Berger) writes:

<< The point of this entire discussion is that one wonders if we should use
 terms in our pulpits that are in scripture but not as pleasing. And as
 asked before when do we address this? If a word is a filthy word on the
 street but is shown in the King James Bible do we sidestep it? or does
 the terminology shown to sinners cause them to think further of just
 where they are.  >>

1) "Fag" is not used in Scripture, so if indeed that is the point of this
thread, I'm assuming the rest of you are conceding my point that this word
should not be used.

2) Yes, if a KJV word has a filthy connotation now, we definitely DO sidestep
it.  Contrary to some people's belief, the Bible was not written originally
in KJV English.  It was written in Hebrew, and the various "obscene" words
used in the KJV were translated from non-obscene Hebrew words.  Thus, the
argument that "I can say it because it's in the Bible" is ludicrous.

3)  "or does the terminology shown to sinners cause them to think further of
just
 where they are?"  No, calling your daughter a "slut" would not be any more
effective than just reminding her that she's in sin.

--Rich