Biblical to call homosexuals a filthy pig?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Max Hase

Puritan Board Freshman
I need your honest advice: Is it biblical to call homosexuals a filthy pig in the sermon? Is that too harsh a phrase or is it justified?

I find it very upsetting how much homosexuality is being played down more and more, even in Christian circles. It is pretended to be a sin like any other. But Homosexuality is one of the worst sins of all.
 
Last edited:

Max Hase

Puritan Board Freshman
Oh sorry, I made a mistake. (Can I change my headline afterwards?) Unfortunately, English is not my mother tongue. I meant filthy pig.
 

jwithnell

Moderator
Staff member
Ad hominem arguments are rarely if ever useful. One can speak directly to the sin without calling people names. I am giving a link to an article as an example of being clear about sin (it shreds the idea of "identifying as") without making an attack on a person.

Sometimes a man may indeed be called by his sin. "When you drink to excess, you are a drunkard who defies the image of God," uses the terminology of scripture. "When you drink too much you are a lousy jerk," merely calls names with no real explanation as to what is wrong.
 

Stephen L Smith

Administrator
Staff member
I need your honest advice: Is it biblical to call homosexuals a filthy pig in the sermon? Is that too harsh a phrase or is it justified?
Note Eph 4:15 "speaking the truth in love"
But Homosexuality is one of the worst sins of all.
Bear in mind that when the Bible speaks about homosexuality if often lists other serious sins as well. See Rom 1:29-31; 1 Tim 1:9-10.

Rosaria Butterfield, a former Lesbian and godly Reformed Christian, has written much on this topic. She says unbelief is the worst sin. It is unbelief that sends a person to hell.
 

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
Many types of sinners are filthy pigs. Focusing on the most literal definition of a filthy pig, have you ever heard a sermon calling morbidly obese people filthy pigs over their sin of gluttony though? Well, there might be a lesson there. It is not needful and it won't serve your purpose well.
 

Santos

Puritan Board Freshman
I need your honest advice: Is it biblical to call homosexuals a filthy pig in the sermon? Is that too harsh a phrase or is it justified?

I find it very upsetting how much homosexuality is being played down more and more, even in Christian circles. It is pretended to be a sin like any other. But Homosexuality is one of the worst sins of all.
Why would you want to call a homosexual a filthy pig? Do pigs do what homosexuals do? Or do homosexuals do what pigs do?

I don't know what calling out sin and hurling insults at people have to do with one another.
 

JimmyH

Puritan Board Senior
Love the sinner (figuratively speaking) and hate the sin. I think the pastor used a poor choice of words in this particular instance.

There's little doubt in my mind that the day is fast approaching, if not already here, when the church will be persecuted for calling sin what it is, sin, and homosexuality, among many other transgressions is certainly sin.
 

hLuke

Puritan Board Freshman
I need your honest advice: Is it biblical to call homosexuals a filthy pig in the sermon? Is that too harsh a phrase or is it justified?

I find it very upsetting how much homosexuality is being played down more and more, even in Christian circles. It is pretended to be a sin like any other. But Homosexuality is one of the worst sins of all.
Everyone is made in God's image, to degrade another person and call them a filthy pig because of their sin is not loving or Christ like in my view. Yes, homosexuality is abhorrent... So is pride, so is haughtiness, and all sin is filthy and worthy only of God's holy indignation.
 

ChristianLibertarian

Puritan Board Freshman
I would prefer to speak about homosexuals in the way scripture does. Rather than calling them filthy pigs, it is best to call their acts an abomination. Lev. 18:22.
 

hLuke

Puritan Board Freshman
call their acts
This is an important distinction. The act is the issue.

Still not disregarding the fact that the person willingly contributes to the issue.

Isaiah 64:6: But we are all as an unclean thing,
And all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags;
And we all do fade as a leaf;
And our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
 

hLuke

Puritan Board Freshman
Not all the time. Proverbs 6:19 specifically says that, in at least that particular instance, it is the person that is an abomination.
Spot on. In that case-- for the unrepentant, God sends the sinner and the sin to hell. E.g. a practicing homosexual who denies the only True God.
But for us to go against Christ's command to love and show mercy to sinners, calling someone made in his image a filthy pig, I believe, is wrong.
 

SolaScriptura

Puritanboard Brimstone
I needed a good laugh today. I can't stop now. Lol
Ha! Well, I was seriously scratching my head. I thought it was some odd was of spelling pigeon, but then I thought “filthy pigeon”? That didn’t make sense. Then I thought this was perhaps some slang word from one of those non-American places that speak English… but anyway… turns out it was a simple typo!
 

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
Ha! Well, I was seriously scratching my head. I thought it was some odd was of spelling pigeon, but then I thought “filthy pigeon”? That didn’t make sense. Then I thought this was perhaps some slang word from one of those non-American places that speak English… but anyway… turns out it was a simple typo!
Pigs might be LESS filthy than pigeons. Birds have no sphincters.
 

arapahoepark

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Ha! Well, I was seriously scratching my head. I thought it was some odd was of spelling pigeon, but then I thought “filthy pigeon”? That didn’t make sense. Then I thought this was perhaps some slang word from one of those non-American places that speak English… but anyway… turns out it was a simple typo!
Yeah filthy pigeon is rather redundant...
 

SolaScriptura

Puritanboard Brimstone
Well, there is precedent in Scripture for referring to people as animals (many kinds, actually)… so I’m not prepared to say that it is sinful to do so… but I think it is profoundly ill advised to take the sin de jour, one that even sincere Christians are struggling to come to terms with, and then being so flamboyant and brazenly derogatory. Why? Different culture. Back in the day people were a bit tougher and could handle roughness. You could refer to mentally handicapped people as retards or imbeciles and no one thought you were being inflammatory. But now… people can’t handle that kind of thing. And instead of having their conscience pricked, they’ll just tune you out. So I advise against dehumanizing language for anyone.
 
Last edited:

ZackF

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Mapping a particular sin to an animal is the cautionary tale, or tail. :) Though it is done.

Wolves in sheep’s clothing is another example.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top