The fact that you’re reading this blog almost
guarantees that you will use other social media, too.
It has become almost universal in recent years. I expect many of you
will also know of, if not be familiar with, ‘text-speak’. Articulate texters, for example, use strange
words where a single character replaces a whole syllable. This tends to appeal to the younger generation – perhaps in this context that's the under-fifties – to some of whom this language has become
almost ‘2nd n8r.’
E-mails have also brought with them another, and more gentle, linguistic phenomenon. This is a whole new generation of acronyms. I occasionally see SKS, in an appeal for favours from ‘some kind soul’, and an amusing comment may be terminated by LOL. This could mean either ‘lots of laughter’, ‘laughs out loud’ or - as in an embarrassing political context not long ago - ‘lots of love’! Someone who is uncertain of his authority, but wishes to join in an exchange of views, might add to his offering FWIW (for what it’s worth); a bolder participant might begin IMHO (in my humble opinion).
As usual, there are two sides to the debate about these, and many critics say they are contrived, a mere novelty, and degrade the rich heritage that is the English language. Before you condemn them, though, I want to suggest that even these can direct our minds to God. Let’s focus our Christmas thoughts on those last two items.
‘For what it’s worth’ – Jesus taught that we are of high value to God. In Matt. 10:29-31 He tells us that we are worth more than many sparrows, each of which is individually precious. Later in his Gospel, Matthew gives an account of separating ‘sheep’ from ‘goats’. This decision will be based on the way people have treated each other, particularly those of a lower level of society, the needy, the sick or those in prison. Jesus says that the treatment offered or not offered to them is done ‘to Him’ (Matt. 25:32,40,45.) We should be in no doubt of the worthiness to God of people who, to many, are the dregs of society. Peter underlined this universality of God in his talk with the centurion Cornelius: ‘... God does not show favouritism but accepts from every nation the one who fears him and does what is right.’ (Acts 10:34-35).
E-mails have also brought with them another, and more gentle, linguistic phenomenon. This is a whole new generation of acronyms. I occasionally see SKS, in an appeal for favours from ‘some kind soul’, and an amusing comment may be terminated by LOL. This could mean either ‘lots of laughter’, ‘laughs out loud’ or - as in an embarrassing political context not long ago - ‘lots of love’! Someone who is uncertain of his authority, but wishes to join in an exchange of views, might add to his offering FWIW (for what it’s worth); a bolder participant might begin IMHO (in my humble opinion).
As usual, there are two sides to the debate about these, and many critics say they are contrived, a mere novelty, and degrade the rich heritage that is the English language. Before you condemn them, though, I want to suggest that even these can direct our minds to God. Let’s focus our Christmas thoughts on those last two items.
‘For what it’s worth’ – Jesus taught that we are of high value to God. In Matt. 10:29-31 He tells us that we are worth more than many sparrows, each of which is individually precious. Later in his Gospel, Matthew gives an account of separating ‘sheep’ from ‘goats’. This decision will be based on the way people have treated each other, particularly those of a lower level of society, the needy, the sick or those in prison. Jesus says that the treatment offered or not offered to them is done ‘to Him’ (Matt. 25:32,40,45.) We should be in no doubt of the worthiness to God of people who, to many, are the dregs of society. Peter underlined this universality of God in his talk with the centurion Cornelius: ‘... God does not show favouritism but accepts from every nation the one who fears him and does what is right.’ (Acts 10:34-35).
‘In my humble opinion’ is just an embellished form of the more familiar term ‘with respect.’ My dictionary tells me that humble is ‘having or showing a low estimate of one’s own importance’, and respect is ‘deferential esteem felt or shown towards a person or quality’. In other words both terms imply placing a lower value on oneself than on the other party.
These phrases are rarely used with genuine feeling these days, however. Often they are no more than a formula, an attempt to excuse an outrageous statement; and the expanded ‘with all due respect’ may well indicate that the speaker has no respect at all for his protagonist, and is by no means humble himself.
So, where do we look for real humility? It ought to be found in someone whose high rank is in no doubt, but who doesn’t stand on his own importance, rather seeking out the lower echelons of society to join them instead (Phil. 2:6-8.)
Our Lord came to earth, not in a palace fit for a King, but to join common folk, people of equal worth to the king, in the person of the illegitimate child of a carpenter’s fiancée. He was born in squalor and laid in a manger because there wasn’t a place in the inn for ‘people like them.’ We shouldn't really be surprised that true humility was found in an animals' feeding trough ... and soon was to live the life of a refugee!