MondayMorningInsight

John MacArthur on Vulgarity and “Grunge Christianity”

Posted by: Todd
Posted on: Thu, March 01, 2007
Viewed 61
(94) comments so far

Johnny Mac talks mostly about Mark Driscoll in his article (that you can read in its fullness here)…

I love it when he says “Some of the things Driscoll talks freely and frequently about involve words and subject matter I would prefer not even to mention in public, so I am not going to quote or describe the objectionable parts.”

He then goes on to link to two people who DO quote Driscoll’s, “vulgar flippancy”.

Maybe the title of this post shoulda been “John MacArthur Endorses People Who Link to Vulgar Preachers”.

I’m not saying that John doesn’t make some good points. And I’m not sticking up for ‘cussing preachers’… but…

MacArthur continues: “When Paul spoke to that culture, he didn’t adopt Greek scatology to show off how hip he could be. He simply declared the truth of God’s Word to them in plain language. And not all of his pagan listeners were happy with that (v. 18). That’s to be expected. Jesus said, “If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you” (John 15:18-19).”

So, which is it? Did Paul speak the words of the Greek culture (without swearing, of course) or did he use language that didn’t fit the culture and play it safe?

Just a question… I’m assuming here that ‘grunge’ people need Jesus. (I hope I’m correct). Who will better reach them? Mark Driscoll or John MacArthur?

Let’s take it a step further… who IS currently reaching them? Driscoll or MacArthur?

And about the “world hating you” part… I wonder if John has put himself in Mark’s shoes? Driscoll’s had a lot of ‘hate’ showered his way lately by both the Christian and non-Christian community in Seattle.

All I’m saying is… John, man… don’t make me choose. Why does it have to be an either/or? You work at the work God has given you; and let Mark reach the people God hasn’t gifted you in reaching. And if a word slips out here or there, and yet a few more people make it into the Kingdom, I can accept that.

After all, those [expletive deleted] people need Jesus too!

Just my 2 cents…

Todd

I'm nothing if not an instigator. Here's a quote from John MacArthur for you to chew on... "I frankly wonder how any Christian who takes the Bible at face value could ever think that in order to be “culturally relevant” Christians should participate in society’s growing infatuation with vulgarity. Didn’t vulgarity and culture used to be considered polar opposites?"...

Comments

if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.

Leonard on Wed, March 07, 2007

Erica, I was not referring to Luther but to other hymn writers. Luther wrote in a mid-evil poetry form. But William Booth, Founder of the Salvation Army, often imitated street songs and was castigated for it by many Christians. Spurgeon was often criticized for his use of language. Fanny Crosby, writer of over 9000 hymns, some I am sure you sing or have sung, was often putting her poetry to secular, popular and even tavern music. Some historians have found that there was little contrast between the secular songs in mid-evil times and the religious songs of the same era. Often the only difference was lyrics.

As for your use of scripture here, thanks. In response I say this. First would be that there are several items one person considers vulgar that another person does not. I think we can both agree that profanity is out of line but what we might disagree on is what profanity is. Both the standards of scripture and the standards of community apply in this situation. For example, when my daughter was 2, it was not appropriate for her to say I went ____, but she could say I went potty. As she got older she would say I went poop. It was never okay to call someone else poop. These standards of decency are not laid out in scripture but in culture. In other countries of the world, (I have been to many) these standards shift and change. Some are more conservative some are less, but the standards of decency come from the culture.

When Paul was speaking about profane talk was he referring to the f-bomb? Not likely. Was he referring to rough language of the culture? Not likely. Was he referring to commonly accepted terms culture would consider profane? More than likely. Was he referring to standards of scripture about sexual deviance? Probably

I think that there are two issues here. One is how far into the language of culture can someone go without violating scripture? It is obvious listening to Macarthur that he does not speak the language of our culture. He speaks to a Christian society slipping away, calling it back to his understanding of biblical rightness. The problem is we live in a post Christian era. Our culture has long quit speaking that language. Our culture has little or no concept of biblical ideas, words, language or values. Our culture is not neutral towards these ideas; they are hostile toward their perception of the ideas. In my area right now on any given Sunday, less than 7% of people will be in a church where Christ is preached.

Driscoll steps into a culture that is rife with vulgarity and profanity and deviance to share the life changing message of Jesus Christ with these people. How many people would have responded using Macarthur’s standard? Probably very few. I spent 8 years working with gangs, not one of them knew orthodox theology and none of them cared. I had to learn the language of their culture in order to reach that culture. I did not resort to the f-bomb but I realized that some of the use of their words carried a different meaning than my lily white background. By learning the language of the gangs, I was able to lead several gang member to Christ, help them leave gangs and become mature, responsible adults who follow Christ. One reason Christianity is so impotent in this society is too many Christians are failing to learn the language of culture and presenting a Jesus no person outside of faith would want.

The other issue and the point of the post is what right does Macarthur have to consistently attack other pastors and leaders he disagrees with? Macarthur does not seek to open dialog nor does he seek to gain understanding. His rants are about pointing how far off other Christians are. Has he ever contacted Driscoll? I would guess not. Has he ever spent time with him? I would guess not. No, his frustrations is from a quote from a Donald Miller book and a couple sermons in which he did not like the language. I listened to those sermons and was not offended at all. No cussing in them, no use of profanity, just real talk. I add that Macarthur is not thorough in his study of the issues here either. He has more than once misquoted those he castigates publicly. When confronted he issues no retraction or apology, just simply moves on to something else he disagrees with. I realize he is an icon for the watch dogs and he fuels their righteous indignation with all of us out here who wear Hawaiian shirts and sandals in the pulpit, not giving expository messages and having a U2 song played in church on Sunday. But the reality is my theology is almost identical with Macarthur but my implementation of faith is very different.

I grew up under the watchful eyes of Macarthur and the likes, went to LABC/Masters College I was told if my hair touched my ear I was being effeminate and the bible says I will go to hell for that. I was told no cards, movies, secular books or magazines, (not porn) no rock and roll but country was acceptable, no Christian Rock, no praise and worship music, just hymns. These rules are not biblical they are cultural, but they were presented as biblical. I was told do not witness in the park because we are to stay separate from the world. After all what fellowship has light with darkness? Who told me this? The people that ran Masters College.

Finally, and I apologize for such a long post, I feel saddened by Macarthur. He was poised to lead evangelical Christianity forward in the 70’s and early 80’s but instead decided to become a gate keeper for his standards of holiness. He could have become a mentor, coach and friend to people like myself and Driscoll but rather chooses to publicly shame and call into question our ethics and commitment to Christ. His tactics have created a hostile environment within Christianity and fostered other people to misquote, misrepresent and divide the body. There is in my mind no difference between Macarthur and Slice of Laodicea. I would go so far as to say he fuels their venom.
adude on Wed, March 07, 2007

Kevin said: “Come out from among them… you are a new creation, do not be conformed to the world but be transformed by the renewing of your mind… “

You are the light of the world, but what good is light if it is hidden under a bowl? You are the salt of the land, but what good is salt if it looses its salitness?

You are to be in the world but not of the world.

Let the proof-texting battle begin. BTW, you may want to grab a Greek Lexicon and look up the word “skubalon” from Philippians 3. Paul uses a pretty “trendy” slang word that would have been HIGHLY offensive in a 1st century setting.
mlouie on Mon, March 12, 2007

This has been an amazing learning experience. I hope it is benefiting everyone involved and those who are merely following the postings.

I want to first state that I’m a confessed sinner, a hypocrite, a fallen person who.. by the grace of God, is allowed to even speak Scripture through my fallen lips. Those same lips that have ‘cussed’ are now the ones that share God’s word. He is amazingly, infinitely gracious by letting us participate in this way. In our fallen ways, we are loyal to people in our social/church circles…. but despite that, we should take our focus away from ourselves and place it on how to please God.

Many comments have struck my heart and I wanted to address them here:

——————————J Mounts posts (march 5) “...God doesn’t care about that. Even at the expense of His holiness, let’s do anything to jam people into the Kingdom!”....“All I’m saying is… if a lustful look slips out here or there, and yet a few more people make it into the Kingdom, I can accept that.”——————————

In my opinion, even though we have freedom in Christ… that does not mean God does not care about His children sinning willfully. That is an act of disobedience that Paul addresses in Romans 6:15-19 states: “what then? shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? may it never be!....”. The Lord will chasten us in His perfect love when we fall into this. One of my brothers was in the same situation… and he was cut off from the fellowship of God. His joy in his salvation was robbed - he was pretty hard hearted for a while because of this rebelliousness… brother, it’s not about us and our standards… we should not “accept” anything except God’s standards.

——————————DanielR (a different Daniel) posts (march 5)… “mlouie, you ask “Why do unregenerate people even try to prevent their unregenerate children to “cuss”? WTF?”——————————

Brother, I stated that at the end of one of my blogs. Yes it is a secular argument… but I’m baffled about your reaction. You say “WTF?”… I encourage you to study the beatitudes… it teaches about meekness and gentleness…. believers attempt to do all to the glory of God…. that includes our writing, our actions, our reactions… let us show our Christlikeness… the comment “WTF?” I can suspect as the product of teaching like Driscoll’s. You know, followers emulate their teachers. there is no meekness and gentleness in this “In Your Face Style”. DanielR… I highly recommend to seek God’s revealed word more… brother, I know that this is not the main debate… but this is an opportunity for you and I to grow from these postings. I believe Driscoll can be a very effective and Godly Pastor even without the use of “Cuss Words”. We should pray for that. The Word is sharper than a two edged sword and penetrates us to the depths of our souls. we do not need anything else in our evangelism. In my opinion, Driscoll has already caused you to stumble…. I do not know you, but “WTF” is not very Christlike behavior.

My main concern with this debate is already covered by J.Mac. The banner of “Catering to the world” in our functions as a church… is what will hurt us. I know God is sovereign and He will protect His Word… but would we be willing to stand by while the church goes backwards into the dark ages again? (slowly, discreetly) we will need another reformation. The banner of “catering to the world” in evangelism, in preaching, in teaching, in raising families will weaken/destroy the church. Human wisdom already pollutes church doctrines….

catering to the world in the case of the idea of cussing-preaching, I believe is very very dangerous because this is a way to preach the truth, but in a distorted way. it is confusing because it seems faithful… but look at the fruit it bears - the “WTF” example above. people will want more and more to be catered to, not just with the use of foul language… if 1% of it is foul, why not make it 5%… ok, now we’re desensitized to it… why not make it 20%… and so on…

then why is it about the packaging of the message… about the “DELIVERY”?. Paul addresses this concern already… in 1corinthians2:1-4 “and when i came to you, brethren, i did not come with superiority of speech or of wisdom….and my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power”. again I quote titus2:7-8 and 2tim4:1-3. WHY DOES THE WORD have to be PACKAGED in that way with foul words when you have Scripture telling us that it is not about the PACKAGING?

——————————DanielR (a different Daniel) posts (march 5)… Isn’t what JM is basically saying “you’re lost, I have the truth that can save you, but if I can’t reach you or you’re not going to listen to me then don’t listen to anyone else and just stay lost”? Is that what we, as Christians, should be telling the lost?——————————-

I think the reason for the article is for pastors to repent about the ‘ungodly’ method and just trust in God that His Word is sufficient to shock and wake people up… relying on cuss words to build up a reputation of a pastor or to shock people for attention is a WORLDLY WAY… because of the WORLDLY idea of CATERING TO THE WORLD… which is what the EMERGING CHURCH BELIEVES IN. ... hence the MAJOR TOPIC in this discussion. Those of us who are the true saints belong to One church body… and have to admonish eachother when opportunity permits.

I think the watchdog debate is a side issue, a distraction from the real debate… the real debate is WHY WE SHOULD / SHOULD NOT CATER TO THE WORLD….. and also the exposition of the truth behind the verse “be all things to all men”-I think it means ALL THAT IS IN LINE WITH GOD’S WILL… otherwise this VERSE NULLIFIES THE LAW… a loophole in God’s contract… do you see that as having a low view of God?… for the defense of a cussing pastor?

I disagree with Wendi that ‘watchdogging’ should only occur when clear lines of orthodoxy are crossed…. for the reasons mentioned above.

——————————Leonard posts (march5)...“some person in SoCal is not comfortable with how Driscoll has impacted the culture of Seattle youth, does not mean Big Mac is correct. Frankly think Mac Daddy is out of touch with where the church is going and where culture is going. He is still pastoring and leading in a way that you did 30 years ago not in a post Christian secular culture.”——————————

Brother please shift your thinking… The true church will always be out of touch with culture. We are not of this world… we cannot go where culture goes (1st john first chapters)… by the way, J.Mac has been preaching for 40 years… by God’s grace, the flock he teaches has grown… and has grown younger and younger… the college ministry alone is about 3,000+ strong… they hunger for the unaltered, undoctored truth…. also, what do you mean by “a post Christian secular culture”? That is exactly why J.Mac is restating his stance, supported by 1st John…

I also want to say that you stated you “guessed that J.Mac did not contact Driscoll” and proceeded to build a large paragraph around that issue…. earth to planet Leonard… come back! sorry, a little brotherly joking! If you had problems at Master’s College, then that’s another issue…

I highly recommend watching the “does the truth matter anymore” film by crosstv (see my previous posts).

I appreciate “adude’s” comment regarding proof-texting… but what about the catering to culture as the degradation of the church doctrines occur… the demise of Spurgeon and Great Britain’s churches… no one has discussed this… we are missing J.Mac’s point…a valuable lesson…let us acknowledge this…. but if anyone disagrees, why disagree for the sake of catering to the world? As a final note about new hymns/songs in Spurgeon’s time (as offensive)… I don’t know much about that, but I think this argument is not the same. Nothing but the bible is Holy revelation, hymns, no matter what time period or how offensive they are.. .. are not equal to Scripture, therefore they should be accepted as long as they glorify God. The cussing argument is really about the “Catering to the world argument” (manifested in cussing). Just my opinion.

mlouie

Redeemed!
Dan Moore on Mon, March 12, 2007

Wendi! Wow! Are you upset with me? I still disagree with you about John Mac ... and me now. I read the blog of John MacArthur carefully. I read all the information on Mark Driscoll. Both are basically leaders of autonomous churches and public ministry figures. John MacArthur is not using accusatory languagte the in blog. He states that Mark ventures into areas where he would not venture and uses language that he would not use and then backs it up.

It is the same way I would treat a difference in theology. Some in my church have mentioned some of the teachings of Charismatic preachers. I have said, “Pastor so-and-so has said the following about the spiritual gift of healing or tongues [two most common ones]. He has quoted the following passages. Baptist believe…. and this is where I differ from Pastor so-and-so.”

Does that make me accusatory? I don’t think so. I have mentioned the things I liked about Rick Warren and Bill Hybels from the pulpit and those practices that I question. Should I have gone to them for an apology and be reconciled? I don’t think so.

I believe the real problem for many folks is the John MacArthur is a fundamentalist. Period. And I have learned that many would rather fundamentalists to just keep quiet and keep their opinions to themselves.
Wendi on Mon, March 12, 2007

Dan Moore –

No, I’m not mad at you, but you didn’t answer my question. What you say to your own congregation, within the context of teaching your own flock, about a well known pastor with whom you differ (theologically or methodologically), is quite different from using a public platform (like a national website or blog, radio show, magazine article or book) to criticize (or even “bring down”) another pastor (and brother in Christ) who you have never even met.

Plus, you suggest that you’d say “this is where I differ from pastor so-and-so.” That is also quite different (and much more appropriate and grace filled), than calling pastor so-and-so a false prophet or heretic (words on the record from JM when describing some with whom he disagrees).

So back to my question, if we’ve never met, but I listen to one of your messages and decide that you are wrong and I’m right about something UNRELATED to historic Christian orthodoxy, how (or where) does scripture give me the authority to begin a public campaign against you? And my campaign is not with my own flock, but rather using my influence to prevent people I’ve never met and with whom I have no relationship, from listening to you, attending your church, reading your books. In fact I want to persuade people I don’t know and who don’t know you personally that you are a heretic (granted, JM didn’t use this word related to MD, but he has used it and worse when describing other brothers).

I’m not mad at you, but I am curious how you’d defend my behavior as described above, which I believe is exactly JM’s behavior.

Wendi
DanielR (a different Daniel) on Mon, March 12, 2007

mlouie, I’m sorry you missed the sarcasm of my “WTF” Comment.   Maybe I’m the only one who thought is was funny.   It was in response to your comment, “Why do unregenerate people even try to prevent their unregenerate children to “cuss”? I’d say it again if I weren’t afraid it would offend. Later you state, “The Word is sharper than a two edged sword and penetrates us to the depths of our souls. we do not need anything else in our evangelism.” Again, what? You make statements like these and I think that we are not living in the same world.

Trust me, Mark Driscoll has not caused me to stumble, I am not a follower or student of Driscoll, some of his theology is not for me, especially his teachings re: women and their appropriate roles. I do absolutely love the fact that he is reaching the lost in large numbers. Is there anyone reaching more lost souls in Seattle? Would John McArthur reach as many? Would he reach the same people? I don’t think so. So why does MacArthur begrudge the Kingdom of God the souls of the people Driscoll is reaching when he has no chance of reaching them himself? Would John McArthur prefer these people NOT be saved, rather than have Driscoll reach them?   That is what I don’t respect in his attacks and your defense of them.

Driscoll does not “cater to the world” in his teaching, he only caters to the world in his language. He uses language that he believes people will understand and react to in an attempt to reach the lost. And he IS reaching them.

What I don’t understand is why the “watchdogs” would rather work against the Kingdom of God than try to reach lost souls. Do you consider the people of Mars Hill (Driscoll’s) Church still lost? Why would you tell them not to listen to the man who helped bring them to a relationship with Christ, that what he has taught them is wrong? He’s taught people the Jesus Christ is our savior, and you want to tell them he is wrong and not to listen to anything he says?

And you didn’t answer my question, Do you disagree with what Mark Driscoll teaches? Or do you just not like the style in which he teaches? Your ignorance of Mark Driscoll is demonstrated by the fact that you lump him in with the “emerging church” movement you so disdain when he has very publicly distanced himself from that movement over issues of theology. His church has been described as “theologically conservative and culturally liberal”, he describes himself as (in order of importance) “first Christian, second Evangelical, third Missional, and fourth Reformed.”

I’ll say it again, if you knew his theology I don’t think you would disagree with it, I think you just don’t like the man. You don’t like his style. Get over that. Get on with the work of the kingdom and don’t try to be the watchdog over others doing God’s work. Read Leonard’s comments, he gets it.
mlouie on Tue, March 13, 2007

Hi DanielR… may I ask you to elaborate a little on your statement in the last posting (see below). I’d like to know a little more before I write anything new. Thanks in advance. -mlouie-

——————————Posted by DanielR (a different daniel) march 12: “Later you state, “The Word is sharper than a two edged sword and penetrates us to the depths of our souls. we do not need anything else in our evangelism.” Again, what? You make statements like these and I think that we are not living in the same world.”——————————
DanielR (a different Daniel) on Tue, March 13, 2007

mlouie, you ask what I mean by:

…you state, “The Word is sharper than a two edged sword and penetrates us to the depths of our souls. we do not need anything else in our evangelism.” Again, what? You make statements like these and I think that we are not living in the same world.

Do you really reach people, unchurched, lost souls, with statements like that? Mark Driscoll is criticized by John MacArthur for his use of common or coarse language, but he is trying (successfully) to communicate the Gospel to people in language he believes they will understand and relate to. How do people relate to you when you’re talking about the Gospel and use statements like “The Word is sharper than a two edged sword and penetrates us to the depths of our souls”?

In the world I live in, the world where I try to reach out to people and talk to them about Jesus Christ, people are not impressed by flowery prose or scriptures in Ye Olde English, they’re not interested if I can speak Latin. People are looking for the truth, in language they can understand. Why not speak in language people can understand?
mlouie on Wed, March 14, 2007

Thanks DanielR for the explanation. I will be glad to write a more complete reply. I am sick right now so I will wait until tomorrow to write my reply.

I wanted to make a prayer request from all the saints out there… for the Lord to heal me quickly. That would be great.

mlouie

redeemed in Christ!

Amen!
mlouie on Wed, March 14, 2007

Also, I don’t know how long this article will be available… but if it is taken out before I’m able to post, I will post my reply on other article blogs. I’ll find a way to post it somehow.

mlouie

For His Glory
Leonard on Wed, March 14, 2007

Mlouie

I disagree, the true church should never be out of touch with the culture. Jesus himself put on skin and made his home with people in order to redeem people. When he finished his life he did something really astounding, he linked the sending of himself into the world with the sending of his followers into the world. As the Father has sent me, I am now sending you. The problem lies in the fact too many Christian leaders are out of touch with the culture.

You state; “by the way, J.Mac has been preaching for 40 years… by God’s grace, the flock he teaches has grown… and has grown younger and younger… the college ministry alone is about 3,000+ strong… they hunger for the unaltered, un-doctored truth….”

As for Mac’s church having 3000 college students, 800 by count of the college pastor, spoke to him today. Of those over 100 come as a direct result of the Masters College. He is not growing younger and younger and not 3000 as you state.

As for this being a post Christian secular culture. The average guy on the street does not attend church. The average guy on the street has no clue about Jesus, the bible, Salvation and a host of other Christina thoughts and truths. His heritage is not hymns, not the great teachings of Spurgeon and not the rules of traditional or biblical Christianity. His heritage is football on Sundays, the beach on Sundays, beer on Sundays and the likes. His focus is not on honoring God but gaining more stuff and feeling better. He does not speak the language of the bible; he could care less if it was written in Greek, Hebrew or by 5th graders in crayon. He does not care if I wear a suit or a Hawaiian shirt on Sunday morning. Do you know why; he won’t be there. If the church does not learn to speak the language of the culture soon it will be whole generations lost.

When I suggested that Mad had not contacted Driscoll directly you replied: “earth to planet Leonard… come back! sorry, a little brotherly joking! If you had problems at Master’s College, then that’s another issue…”

I would like some more clarity here on what you are saying.
mlouie on Wed, March 28, 2007

...sorry I’ve been sick (bronchitis)… will post soon Lord willing…
mlouie on Fri, March 30, 2007

Hi everyone, I really would like for everyone to be able to access my post when I reply to the questions/statements by others…. so if this article is not up in April, I will post my reply on the other Mark Driscoll article titled “Mark Driscoll on the trends in worship styles”. ... this link:

http://mondaymorninginsight.com/index.php/site/comments/mark_driscoll_on_the_trends_in_worship_styles/

That’s only if this article is not accessible in April. Looking forward to post next time - still sick!

mlouie,

praise to my gracious Lord
mlouie on Mon, April 02, 2007

Praise God! I’m better!

I want to first provide some resources to the readers. Here is a valuable link:

http://www.biblebb.com/mac-a-g.htm

I hope you guys will read these sermons, for your own edification. I am composing my response and will post soon.
mlouie on Mon, April 02, 2007

also, on the bottom of that web page is another link to the articles from “h-z”. the one articles are broken into two webpages. the first webpage (link I provided) shows articles from “a-g”. please scroll to the bottom and note the link to “h-z”.

this is a treasure because it explains God’s Word most excellently. I hope the Holy Spirit brings wisdom to you all who desire knowledge of God’s Word and desire it deeply for our ailing hearts!

praise God for J.M.