What Words in Popular Christianity Should Be Banned?

[Calvin'scuz]

How about "Spirit-led."

 

[davidsuggs]

1 flesh out
2 agape (too too many sermons built entirely on this translation)
3 trespasses/those who have trespassed against me (just say debts/debtors!)
4 presuppositional (I'm in this camp but there has got to be a shorter word)
5 worldview (not all uses but at least the shallow overused part)
6 seeker-friendly "church"
7 "roman" catholic (stretching it I know, but surely the self-contradiction can be gotten rid of)
8 free will

 

[A5pointer]

How about "Spirit-led."

I am with you on that one, acually the first one to come to my mind but edited myself as I thought it might take the thread in another direction.

 

[GTMOPC]

4 presuppositional (I'm in this camp but there has got to be a shorter word)

I've thought the same thing for a while.

 

[lwadkins]

Culture / cultural
culturally relevant

 

[christianyouth]

"Lordship Salvation" - I don't like when people call the preaching of repentance "Lordsihp Salvation". It makes it sound like this is some new teaching.


Amen to "Innovative, fresh, hip, and sodomite".

I agree with the person who says "Bible based" is over used.

I like what Pergamum said about 'missional', I think it's a good word. It lets people know that this is a church has an outward focus and is about doing Christ's work.



Hmm.... I'm not sure about "World view". It's an over used phrase, but I can't think of a replacement for it. Some people say "World picture", and I've heard others call it a 'meta-narrative'. But world picture sounds corny to me, and meta-narrative is a term that is unfamiliar to most people, whereas most people understand the term 'world view'.



Good words here on this thread! I use some of these words sometimes though!

 

[rescuedbyLove]

1. "Born-Again Christian"- I still don't understand this. It seems repetitive.

2. "Evangelical Christian"- Ever met a non-evangelical Christian? I haven't because anyone, including Mormons, get grouped under this label. It means nothing now.

definitely these two!

 

[D. Paul]

TR = "Totally Reformed" or "Truly Reformed." As in, I'm more Reformed than the rest of you. It is usually used as a pejorative term.

Can "Reformed" be used in a quantitative manner anyway? How is it measured? Can one say " I've kept more Lord's Days than you." or "I've sung more Psalms Exclusively than you."?

-----Added 12/31/2008 at 05:14:25 EST-----

"Sodomite" is no more a "homophobic" (another word that should be cancelled) than "sinner." It simply points to Scripture.

The color of one's skin is simply ontology. Sodomy is behavioral.

Could I be a sodomite if it were not for God's grace? Of course. I could be worse. In fact, all of us could. But the desire to get rid of the word is simply a politically-correct attempt to sanitize our language and, by default, our minds.

Thanks for posting this, Staphlobob. It was just a couple weeks ago in a particular conversation that I got so tired of hearing "Gay" that I thought to myself, "No more. I'm going to refer to it matter-of-fact-ly as Scripture does and call their practice sodomy." It is a useful and proper term.

btw, I vote to ban "Ask Jesus into your heart" and "I felt led..."

 

[Marrow Man]

TR = "Totally Reformed" or "Truly Reformed." As in, I'm more Reformed than the rest of you. It is usually used as a pejorative term.

Can "Reformed" be used in a quantitative manner anyway? How is it measured? Can one say " I've kept more Lord's Days than you." or "I've sung more Psalms Exclusively than you."?

I think it's more of a "I'm closer to the original Reformers" than you are, or "I'm closer to the WCF than you are." For what it's worth, it's not usually the TRs who call themselves that, but others who direct the term at others. For instance, I was indirectly called a TR upon occasion while in seminary.

Something Doug Wilson said several years ago (and I think this might have even been during the original Auburn Avenue lectures) struck me as funny (even if I don't agree with him, he still has a great sense of humor). He referred to TRs, and then went on to talk about BRs (Barely Reformed), followed by the WRs (What's Reformed?).

 

[Staphlobob]

Do you favor using negro or black, sodomite or homosexual, jap or japanese, slant-eye or Chinese, spic or Hispanic, white or cracker, handicapped or crippled, mentally handicapped or retarded? Pepper your daily language with these terms and you'll see the impact for Christ you'll have.

Again, you're placing ontology into the same bowl as behavior.

OTOH, because I regularly use the word "sodomite" and rely upon nouthetic counseling rather than synthetic, I'm often referred to as a "TR." Then again, having an "impact for Christ" doesn't always mean being a doctrinal pushover but, quite often, aggravating those married to the zeitgeist by steadfast use of scriptural language and carrying around a biblical worldview.

-----Added 12/31/2008 at 05:39:12 EST-----

7 "roman" catholic (stretching it I know, but surely the self-contradiction can be gotten rid of)

When I was one of their seminary students and clergy, we were often offended by the protestant use of the word "Roman." Then we were taught to soften our stance and, in a strong move towards "multi-culturalism", taught that it was simply a reference to a particular flavor of catholicism. So I still use it.

 

[panta dokimazete]

emerging
emergent

emerge already!

 

[Curt]

Resonate.

 

[py3ak]

My all-time most hated term-

'JudeoChristian'

Theognome

I second that one!

 

[Confessor]

Papist.

Even if you think "Catholic" is a gross misnomer for the RCC, calling someone something that they do not like being called can only create negative dissension.

For what it's worth I only use the word as a joke around my Catholic friends.

 

[Matthew1034]

Tim,

I voted for "Personal Savior" in your blog. I seldom hear this phrase said in a meaningful way -- it is associated with something *you* must do. Such as, "you need a personal relationship with Jesus" or "you need to have Jesus as your personal Savior." The phrase itself puts man before the Savior and disassociates the Savior from His Bride. He is a kinsman redeemer, a family Savior, not a personal one.

I associate the term loosely with those who say "well, my Jesus wouldn't send billions of people to hell" or "if there was only one person on the earth, Jesus would have died for them."

 

[Confessor]

Tim,

I voted for "Personal Savior" in your blog. I seldom hear this phrase said in a meaningful way -- it is associated with something *you* must do. Such as, "you need a personal relationship with Jesus" or "you need to have Jesus as your personal Savior." The phrase itself puts man before the Savior and disassociates the Savior with His Bride. He is a kinsman redeemer, a family Savior, not a personal one.

I associate the term loosely with those who say "well, my Jesus wouldn't send billions of people to hell."

How did I overlook "personal savior"?!

I dislike that for the same reasons you listed, and also because it makes Christ, the sovereign King of the universe, appear to be a beggar who just wants to be chosen by men. It makes Him an option among other options, rather than the only option.

 

[Matthew1034]

Tim,

I voted for "Personal Savior" in your blog. I seldom hear this phrase said in a meaningful way -- it is associated with something *you* must do. Such as, "you need a personal relationship with Jesus" or "you need to have Jesus as your personal Savior." The phrase itself puts man before the Savior and disassociates the Savior with His Bride. He is a kinsman redeemer, a family Savior, not a personal one.

I associate the term loosely with those who say "well, my Jesus wouldn't send billions of people to hell."

How did I overlook "personal savior"?!

I dislike that for the same reasons you listed, and also because it makes Christ, the sovereign King of the universe, appear to be a beggar who just wants to be chosen by men. It makes Him an option among other options, rather than the only option.

Well put, Ben, I concur. Its as if when you tell someone they need to have Jesus as their personal Savior they think it is because of their power or will that He is not already, and leads them to think its optional, like you said, and may even make someone feel prideful that God's will for their needs is according to their own will!

The phrase, in the public contexts I've heard it used, doesn't even generate conversation. But if we say, "Jesus died for His people," or "Jesus is the Savior of his people" then those who hear will wonder who his people are instead of wondering why their fate depends so much on their personal interest in Jesus, who is only a historical figure at best to them at that point anyway.

 

[Zeno333]

I saw a story this morning about Lake Superior State University's annual list of words and phrases that are overused and should be banned from the English language in the coming new year. Here are some of the words that made the list this year:

• Green
• Carbon Footprint
• Maverick
• Bailout

If one were to compile a similar list for overused words in popular Christianity, what words do you think should make the list? I posted a poll with some suggestions at my blog here, so if you have time, I'd appreciate your vote/opinion there as well.

The phrase "Inner Self"

It has way too many connotations and connections to the New Age Movement that denies all major tenants of Christianity.

 

[shackleton]

Seeker Sensitive, Seeker Friendly, Purpose Driven whatever, anything that has to do with sitting and talking about your feelings, any music where the theme is, Jesus is my boyfriend.

 

[Zeno333]

How about Puritan?

'Puritan' in a derogatory sense. I mean the sense that culture has stereotyped puritans as.

good one...

Very few realize that many Puritans had lots of children partly since they loved sex....(that is sex within marriage as God intended it to be). In contrast, the term "puritanical" many times refers to the idea of something non-sexual.

 

[jd.morrison]

holistic

Pergy!

 

[rescuedbyLove]

emerging
emergent

emerge already!

hehe!

 

[Notthemama1984]

"Sodomite" is no more a "homophobic" (another word that should be cancelled) than "sinner." It simply points to Scripture.

The color of one's skin is simply ontology. Sodomy is behavioral.

Could I be a sodomite if it were not for God's grace? Of course. I could be worse. In fact, all of us could. But the desire to get rid of the word is simply a politically-correct attempt to sanitize our language and, by default, our minds.

If you would like, let's start another thread on the good and bad of political correctness.


Being careful about how we use words is to show love to others and to eliminate the ignorance of those who do not strive to think of others.

Do you favor using negro or black, sodomite or homosexual, jap or japanese, slant-eye or Chinese, spic or Hispanic, white or cracker, handicapped or crippled, mentally handicapped or retarded? Pepper your daily language with these terms and you'll see the impact for Christ you'll have.

How many Scriptures do we need to post to reinforce the idea that out of our mouths should come gentleness and that we try not to needlessly offend others.

BINGO!

I thought about this at work today. Christ did not say to the woman caught in adultery, "Hey Whore......" Technically she was a whore, but Christ did not refer to her as one.

 

[Pergamum]

Bolivar....I laughed out loud when I read your "Hey Whore" post above. Great example.

 

[Staphlobob]

"Sodomite" is no more a "homophobic" (another word that should be cancelled) than "sinner." It simply points to Scripture.

The color of one's skin is simply ontology. Sodomy is behavioral.

Could I be a sodomite if it were not for God's grace? Of course. I could be worse. In fact, all of us could. But the desire to get rid of the word is simply a politically-correct attempt to sanitize our language and, by default, our minds.

If you would like, let's start another thread on the good and bad of political correctness.


Being careful about how we use words is to show love to others and to eliminate the ignorance of those who do not strive to think of others.

Do you favor using negro or black, sodomite or homosexual, jap or japanese, slant-eye or Chinese, spic or Hispanic, white or cracker, handicapped or crippled, mentally handicapped or retarded? Pepper your daily language with these terms and you'll see the impact for Christ you'll have.

How many Scriptures do we need to post to reinforce the idea that out of our mouths should come gentleness and that we try not to needlessly offend others.

BINGO!

I thought about this at work today. Christ did not say to the woman caught in adultery, "Hey Whore......" Technically she was a whore, but Christ did not refer to her as one.

You're right. No more "sodomite." Not even "homosexual" as it might offend them.

"Abusers of themselves with mankind" is now the phrase for me.

 

[Pergamum]

Why don't we start another thread on homosexual evangelism.

I'm sure some of you guys endear yourself to this needy group of folks with your rhetoric.

-----Added 1/1/2009 at 01:44:47 EST-----

Discernment

This too often means pickiness.

Same goes for the word "convicted" - too often means some personal guilt trip that they want to lay on you too, "Brother, I've really been feeling convicted lately...."

 

[Staphlobob]

Why don't we start another thread on homosexual evangelism.

I'm sure some of you guys endear yourself to this needy group of folks with your rhetoric.

-----Added 1/1/2009 at 01:44:47 EST-----

Discernment

This too often means pickiness.

Same goes for the word "convicted" - too often means some personal guilt trip that they want to lay on you too, "Brother, I've really been feeling convicted lately...."

Better yet ... a thread on the difference between wanting to be liked by the world, and standing upon gospel truth. When do we step onto a slippery slope? Or, what's the difference between wanting to win friends and influence people, and the sharp edges of Christianity?

 

[Pergamum]

We want only the cross to be an offense, not our own offensiveness in calling folks derogatory terms.

 

[Confessor]

We want only the cross to be an offense, not our own offensiveness in calling folks derogatory terms.

I think what he's trying to ask is where we would draw the line -- i.e. when does a statement move from the category of being offensive in a good way to offensive in a bad way?

FTR I am not a fan of "sodomite."

 

[Christusregnat]

I saw a story this morning about Lake Superior State University's annual list of words and phrases that are overused and should be banned from the English language in the coming new year. Here are some of the words that made the list this year:

• Green
• Carbon Footprint
• Maverick
• Bailout

If one were to compile a similar list for overused words in popular Christianity, what words do you think should make the list? I posted a poll with some suggestions at my blog here, so if you have time, I'd appreciate your vote/opinion there as well.

Words are not to be banned; they are to be used in their proper context, for the glory of God. "Proper context" could be satire, teaching, poetry, curses, blessings, etc. I know that the idea of the post wasn't to argue against that, but I figured it'd be fun to be a stick in the mud.

Cheers,

Adam