By the standards of many (especially many seminary students that I encountered during my education), I basically just cursed in that title. Are subjectivity and faith mutually exclusive?
I don’t think so. I read a great blog post on Infuze Magazine this morning discussing the use of cursing in writing by authors of faith. I know a lot of Believers who would stop reading a book immediately upon encountering a colorful metaphor, or who can’t watch a movie without a device to remove all of the questionable language, and I think that’s sad.
We forget that it is okay to be offended. You can come away from an encounter with any story or visual experience strongly upset and full of dislike, and that’s okay, as long as you can articulate why you dislike or are disturbed by it. Good art, in whatever form, disturbs someone. That’s good, because disturbed people think.
I saw a bumper sticker with a great slogan last week: “Comfort the disturbed, disturb the comfortable.”
Perhaps modern evangelicals are so scared to be offended because they so love being comfortable. When they are offended, they think. And, for some reason, the common misconception about faith is that it involves checking one’s intellect at the door.
When I read the Scriptures, I realize that Jesus wasn’t one who was afraid of being offended. In fact, He frequently did the offending. All of us, including artists (perhaps especially artists), are called to do the same. When a Believer writes a novel, and a character curses, that’s fine if that is what the character would do. It is the overall message of the story that is important. The realism of that character is part of what is necessary to convey that message.
So, are we to take passages of Scripture that encourage us not to use objectionable language as subjective? I’m not arguing against a concept of absolute truth. I just wonder how God defines “objectionable language.” I imagine it is probably different that we would from within our cultural and semantic moors. A commenter on the above-mentioned blog post also draws the distinction between using rude language and swearing, or taking the name of God in vain. I strongly disagree with the latter, and would never utilize it in a story. There is a line. There is a point where the subjectivity stops.
I just think most of us arrive at that point far earlier than we need to.
I am surprised by your lack of understanding of the term “conviction”. You seem to be highly intelligent and well educated. Believe it or not, you have convictions. God deals with each of us, points out our weeknesses, and gives us the strength to battle through those weeknesses. That my friend is a “conviction”. When God tells you to deal with an issue you are “convicted” to deal with it. Just because you may not have the same issue and thus don’t understand that conviction doesn’t make it any less real to that individual. I would suggest that you read Numbers 12. That may help you to see that when God speaks not only is the person to whom He is speaking to responsible to listen, but those around that person need to support that “conviction”. If not they may be judged as Aaron and Miriam were. Don’t take convictions lightly. They are useful in your Christian walk. As I said before, believe it or not… You have convictions.
Honestly, I see it just the opposite way. This perverted concept of “conviction” is just one more buzz word we’ve formulated in our Christian subculture to force people to respect our opinions. Just because you feel strongly about some aspect of your faith journey, doesn’t mean I have to feel as strongly about the same. Once we’ve gone beyond the basics, the rest is preference and personality.
We’ve twisted the term to mean something different, the same as we have with everything else in our faith. That is what happens when theologians get ahold of these things.
Do I understand it? Yes. I’ve just transcended the point where I think it is holy.