Pastor Ryan Gaffney

I want to talk a bit about some f***ing profanity.

I feel strange doing it. I find myself asking “Really? This is the most important thing to talk about right now?” But I honestly think it is. Not as an end in and of itself, but as a means to an end. There are some topics I really feel aught to be talked about, and I feel that I can not do them justice without using words which may not be appropriate for children.

(incidentally if you are a child reading this please go read something else, and if you are easily offended by profanity please grow up, get a pair, and keep reading because this S*-t is biblical)

There is of course no list of “Bad words” in scripture. If there were, they would be words like “Mamzer” and”Raca” not “bastard” as the bible was not written in 21st century English. The Recourse our Sunday School teachers take then is to argue that we shouldn’t use any words that are considered offensive, in whatever society we happen to be living in.

But the Bible doesn’t follow that rule! Both the Hebrew “Mamzer” and the Greek “Raca” can be found in scripture^[1]. both words refer to illegitimate children, both are more offensive to their cultures than the word “bastard” is to ours. Matthew 5:22 says:

But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

Here Jesus clearly speaks against filippant profanity. But not so much that he feels compelled to refer to the “R-Word”. Instead he essentially says “You’re right you probably shouldn’t say “bastard”. You shouldn’t call people morons^[2] either” the irony though. Is that no translator I’ve found has been so bold as to translate it that way, so we censor it by leaving an untranslated Greek word in our English bibles. I daresay if Jesus wanted the blow softened he could have done that himself.

So do we stop there? Should we take Jesus word on the subject as final and literal?

Maybe we shouldn’t say bastard or moron because those are bad words, Jesus just said them each once so that we wouldn’t have any doubt which words were the bad ones.

But if that’s the case Jesus must have changed his mind because later in Matthew he does refer to people as Morons (6 times^[3])

If we look holistically at scripture we can see a clear pattern emerging. biblical authors (Jesus included) are not afraid to use harsh language and profanity to get a point across, they do not pepper their speech with expletives, but neither do they censor themselves. The prophet Isiah said in 64:6:

But we are all like an unclean thing, And all our righteous acts are dirty tampons ; We all fade as a leaf, And our iniquities, like the wind, Have taken us away.

The Hebrew reads “‘iddah beged” literally meaning “menstruation cloth”

In Galations 5:12 Paul wishes the Judiazers would cut their dicks off

In Mark 7:27 Jesus appears to use an ethnic slur

In 1 Kings 18:27 Elijah taunts the worshipers of Baal that perhaps their god won’t answer because he’s taking a dump

And Ezekiel 23:20… Well… Even I won’t say that one. you can look it up…

Perhaps the most impressive instance of biblical profanity though is Philipians 3:8

Yea doubtless, and I count all things loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and consider it a pile of shit, that I may win Christ,

The Greek word being “skubalon” which is refers literally to excrement, particularly that of animals. Josephus used the word this way, along with Strabo and Aretaeus. Philipians however is the first instance on file of it being used metaphorically to refer to a worthless and profane experience, Implying that Paul not only approves of this kind of swearing, he actually invented it!

—————————————————————————————-

1. Deuteronomy 23:2 contains “Mamzer”, Matthew 5:22 contains “Raca”
2. Literaly. “Morons” from the greek μωρός (Moros)
3. Matt 7:26, 23:17, 23:19, 25:2, 25:3, and 25:8

So I’ve been learning to bake this year, and in my experimentation I found to my great joy that bread is incredible when the 5tsp or so or butter is substituted for ½ cup of Bacon grease. Further proof of the idea that everything is better when you add bacon.

The whole baking experience has had me thinking about the Lord’s supper. What with all of the biblical references to bread and leavening that are beginning to make more and more sense now. I wondered if it might be a neat ministry to provide churches with fresh baked steamy loafs to use for communion on Sunday instead of the seemingly expensive store-bought loafs most churches now use, and when I made the bacon bread, I thought about how cool it would be to use that in the sacrament. I could just see the words of the invitation

“At this church we believe that the sprit of Christ is spiritually present within the bread and the cup, we also believe that the body of Christ is delicious so we made it with bacon! Any and all who have accepted Christ as their savior are invited to come forward and eat of this loaf and drink of this cup…”

Unfortunately I think this would probably offend some vegetarians who now wouldn’t partake, so most churches probably wouldn’t be interested. Which is okay, In fact after thinking about it for a bit I’m pretty sure the loaf is vegan as well. They probably don’t use eggs and use oil instead of butter… And that got me thinking…

Should Jesus’ body be vegetarian? Because if so I think it takes us down a slippery slope. If Jesus needs to be made without animal byproducts doesn’t it follow that he should also be low-carb, low-fat, sugar free, gluten free, fair-trade, organic and processed in a bakery that doesn’t contain peanuts? Because that sounds like some really horrible boring bread.

The question goes deeper than the bread of course. When we present Jesus the man at our churches, just what sort of Jesus are we allowed to present? Must we actually offer fourth an unaffiliated, politically uninterested, non-denominational Jesus. Does Jesus need to be depicted as androgynous, independent of ethnic origin and cultural influence, existing without socioeconomic status and secular opinion?

Might that just possibly create an object of worship as safe and bland as a horrible communion wafer?

But otherwise we run a risk that  is not to be scoffed at. That if we don’t, we create a quorum of people who will have no choice but to leave Jesus on the alter.

Thoughts?