# Profanity from the pulpit?



## Vonnie Dee (Oct 21, 2009)

I've heard on several radio shows in the last couple of days that preachers, even in "conservative" churches are using profanity from the pulpit. The radio people stated that when asked about it, the preachers say they are meeting people where they are. They are trying to become more approachable to the "regular" people in the congregation. Is this really a trend? This doesn't happen ever in my church, but is this really becoming a problem in previously good churches?


----------



## Rich Koster (Oct 21, 2009)

I can only confirm the content of where I have been. Up to this date the only words I have heard from the pulpit which some may complain about being used are "hell" and "damn". However, they were used in their proper context as a place and an act of God respectively.

I have downloaded sermons with the word "sucks" included, but it was not related to nursing, it was expressing the inferiority of something. That may be an issue with some.


----------



## Jon Peters (Oct 21, 2009)

I think there is a Biblical basis for some tailoring of the message depending on the audience, but, as with most things, this is often taken way too far.

Without getting graphic, what words are they using? Not the defcon red stuff I hope.


----------



## py3ak (Oct 21, 2009)

[Moderator]*Don't go down the Driscoll road again.*[/Moderator]


----------



## Christusregnat (Oct 21, 2009)

Vonnie Dee said:


> I've heard on several radio shows in the last couple of days that preachers, even in "conservative" churches are using profanity from the pulpit. The radio people stated that when asked about it, the preachers say they are meeting people where they are. They are trying to become more approachable to the "regular" people in the congregation. Is this really a trend? This doesn't happen ever in my church, but is this really becoming a problem in previously good churches?



Evon,

Profanity is defined by Noah Webster under profaneness:



> PROFA'NENESS, n. Irreverence of sacred things; particularly, the use of language which implies irreverence towards God; the taking of God's name in vain.



No minister of the gospel may use profanity without being subject to God's curse, and should be brought up on charges.

There are other words which we may refer to as vulgarity, but which must not be confused with profanity. Vulgarity simply refers to words which are common to people, but does not necessarily mean that they are profane.

Also, there are some vulgarities which can be used in such a way as to violate the 7th Commandment, and these ought also to be chargeable offenses in a minister if used as such.

The interesting thing is that Scripture uses some of the vulgarities which may even seem overtly sexual, but which are not used so as to violate the 7th Commandment. Also, the Bible uses other non-profane vulgarity, and even quotes certain instances of profanity, or alludes to the same. The non-profane vulgarity used in the Prophets and Apostles ought to act as a check to prudishness, but should not be used as a license for regular vulgarity. Their vulgarity was calculated, discreet, and infrequent.

Cheers,


----------



## SolaSaint (Oct 21, 2009)

John MacArthur has a good discussion on CD about this. His ministry sent me one and I'm sure you can still acquire it through "Grace to You" Ministries. 

I believe it is just the next generation of what flows from the seeker sensitive movement we've seen for many years now. We've entertained people to death and still can't reach Joe six-pack, so now lets just start talking like Joe to get him to church. How sad.


----------



## TKarrer (Oct 21, 2009)

From what I have heard personally, and know, there are a very small number of teachers who, theologically, are conservative, and who have used language that is inappropriate. I'd say it most certainly is a growing trend, but I don't know that the language-usage aspect of it is necessarily a growing trend in good churches. The growing trend is called "missional adaptation", or "Gospel-contextualization". The idea, of itself, isn't necessarily wrong or evil, but it seems to be perverted often. It's basic premise is that we ought to preach the Gospel in a way, or teach in a way that relates the Gospel to people's culture; and that doesn't necessitate we use tv references. 

Matt Chandler is one example. He preaches down south, in Texas, where he believes legalism and moralism have dwarfed people's understanding of the Gospel; therefore, he sees his contextualization as being his teaching the Gospel, more often than not, in contrast to this legalism. Such reasoning can hardly be argued against, especially when you consider the apolegetical nature of many of the reformers sermons. The reformers would often state the Gospel in terms of its relation the false Gospel of the Roman catholic church. 

As far as the profane speech goes, and the mixing of worldliness with holiness in some people's sermons and church practices, history may prove that a large number of pastors ARE likely (already) influenced, to some degree, by this growing trend; others will likely continue to jump on board. Sadly, many, if not most of these men (and women) aren't even born-again; so for them to adopt unbiblical methods is not surprising. What we also know, however, is that God has a peculiar bunch who would rather be burnt alive than pervert the Gospel and their Gospel ministries; and that this zealous group will also make disciples to continue combating these unbiblical, demon-inspired idealogies. And to this end we should labor in prayer. We should do all that is within our power to influence the body of Christ with sound doctrine and practices- doing all things in humility and love.


----------



## Edward (Oct 21, 2009)

Christusregnat said:


> There are other words which we may refer to as vulgarity, but which must not be confused with profanity.



It is always good to distinguish between profanity and vulgarity, but vulgarity is still not appropriate in polite society.


----------



## Christusregnat (Oct 21, 2009)

Edward said:


> Christusregnat said:
> 
> 
> > There are other words which we may refer to as vulgarity, but which must not be confused with profanity.
> ...



Then I will stay out of polite society with Moses, Isaiah and the Apostle Paul who used vulgarity when necessary.


----------



## Pergamum (Oct 21, 2009)

Here's a note on Paul's use of "vulgarity" - skubalon: http://www.leithart.com/archives/002863.php


----------



## Christusregnat (Oct 21, 2009)

Pergamum said:


> Here's a note on Paul's use of "vulgarity" - skubalon: http://http://www.leithart.com/archives/002863.php



I can't seem to pull up this link (it says it's broken).

This is the word sometime translated "dung," albeit this is a less vulgar English word than could legitimately be used.


----------



## Berean (Oct 21, 2009)

Christusregnat said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> > Here's a note on Paul's use of "vulgarity" - skubalon: http://http://www.leithart.com/archives/002863.php
> ...



The link had a double "http" in it. Try this:

Leithart.com | Skubalon


----------



## Montanablue (Oct 21, 2009)

I just don't see the point of profanity. Is there not a more creative way to get your point across?

I understand letting a word slip in a shocking or painful situation, but it seems odd to _plan_ to say a vulgar or profane word - especially in any sort of public address.

I guess I'm just too old fashioned...


----------



## Southern Twang (Oct 22, 2009)

Montanablue said:


> I guess I'm just too old fashioned...



I wish people would admit this....some people are just "old fashioned" and not necessarily biblical.


----------



## Christopher88 (Oct 22, 2009)

Men of God are sick with the seeker friendly movement, it has turned our Churches into a pool of weakness filled with fairy's. 
Men of God are now preaching tough messages out of rebellion to the current Church, and to get the message across. I'm not for cursing in the pulpit, nor do I like cursing, however I am for harsh words being thrown out. Even Jesus used harsh words. "You blood sucking Vipers fit for hell." Even OT prohets used harsh words. If we preach Jesus is my girl Friend for the next five years, Christianity will die in Americia. Face it, we are looking at the coffins right now. 

Things have got to change, but that does not mean we should be cursing, but we should be getting stern.


----------



## kvanlaan (Oct 22, 2009)

> I believe it is just the next generation of what flows from the seeker sensitive movement we've seen for many years now. We've entertained people to death and still can't reach Joe six-pack, so now lets just start talking like Joe to get him to church. How sad.



Pastor Dan Phillips (of Pyromaniacs) does a great sermon on this, in which he talks about the use of such things as the F-word in society, and how many mainstream evangelicals want to put the Bible and preaching into the "language of the people". I remember something to the effect of him asking "Why would such a great idea be neglected by the secular world? Why is the 6 o'clock news not filled with the expletives so common in our everyday language? How is it that they are able to communicate all the major events going on around the globe without dropping the F-bomb even once?"

When I hear/see it used by preachers, this always comes to mind: "For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh." I don't know that there is _ever_ a reason to use it in transmitting the gospel, _skubalon_ notwithstanding.

"Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers." How do those that use such vulgarities apply this?


----------



## kvanlaan (Oct 22, 2009)

> Look, Friends, those of you who want to disparage us old prudes, etc. because we're old fashioned, doesn't mean that the only reason we believe such things is because it's old fashioned. Bad language, and poor use of acceptable language, has been around since the Fall. Let's not fool ourselves. The use of profanity, in whatever culture one finds himself, is ubiquitous and ubiquitously wrong.



Thank you, from one old fuddy duddy to another.

And let me tell you, the weight of my own tongue is heavy. Whenever I ask the boys why there's **** all over their room, I go back upstairs and think: "Hey, I'll betcha I'm going to hear that again later..." And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

(That's ****, rhyming with trap.)


----------



## Edward (Oct 22, 2009)

kvanlaan said:


> > Look, Friends, those of you who want to disparage us old prudes, etc. because we're old fashioned, doesn't mean that the only reason we believe such things is because it's old fashioned. Bad language, and poor use of acceptable language, has been around since the Fall. Let's not fool ourselves. The use of profanity, in whatever culture one finds himself, is ubiquitous and ubiquitously wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks for the explanation. I was thinking of a word more in touch with my Anglo-Saxon roots. 

I'd rather be though of as old fashion than to try to be one of the cool kids with a filthy mouth. Now, if I could always just act accordingly.


----------



## reformed trucker (Oct 22, 2009)

Vulgar and profane speech is a sign of limited vocabulary and weak intellect. One should be able to get their point across without being crass.

I work in the construction industry, and have to guard myself against "talking like one of the boys". If I heard talk like that coming from the pulpit, I would walk out and never come back.


----------



## Pergamum (Oct 23, 2009)

Translating the Scripture into the vulgar tongue of a people is a very good thing and can be done in a plain and "clean" manner. 

Let's not let any folks who use profanity to limit our efforts in always presenting the Gospel in plain, accurate, understandable and meaningful language for a target people. Their understanding is already darkened, so let us try not to add any darkness by keeping our language obscure and archaic in the name of keeping it "holy."

I do hope that we avoid the "profane" - which is sinful, even while making sure our language is "vulgar" - or common - in that the pastor preaches and prays using words and expressions commonly expressed among the people to whom they are ministering.


----------



## Scott1 (Oct 23, 2009)

> Ephesians 4:29
> 29Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.



The Westminster Larger Catechism summarizes the doctrine of Scripture to say some sins are "aggravated" (worse) because, among other things, they affect more people, are done under pretense of authority, in greater presence of grace, etc.

All these are violated, and make it aggravated when a church leader uses cursing, swearing language as part of an authoritative act such as preaching. It ought to be subject of church discipline, as appropriate for aggravated sin.

Recently, the long-time Pastor of our President was shown on video and audio repeatedly taking our Lord's Name in vain- from the pulpit. Brazenly, repeatedly cursed God _from the pulpit._



> Exodus 20:7 (King James Version)
> 
> 7Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.



My first reaction was, where is the church discipline on this? 

Why did the members of his congregation not demand it, let alone its leaders?

Why was there no official denunciation from his church, made public?

Why didn't other churches in that denomination demand it? 

Imagine the irony- the FCC broadcast guidelines held a higher standard than apparently the Pastor, the leaders of his church, the members, and those related to it with influence.

A brazen act of cursing the Lord, from the pulpit, repeatedly by one who would presume our Lord's authority to teach and disciple His people, disseminated publicly to believer and nonbeliever alike, and without concern or remedy, apparently.


----------



## tt1106 (Oct 23, 2009)

Two weeks ago, I did 72 hours of prison ministry. I don't remember hearing any of the inmates swear or use any kind of profanity. They were probably cleaning it up for our behalf, but that's ok from my perspective. 
My wife and I pray Psalm 141:3 on a regular basis and knowing it or not, these men were concerned about perception and decency and we're doing the same thing, maybe even knowingly, considering their knowledge of scripture.
I see no reason why we should lower our standards to try and be more worldly, Especially from our pulpits.


----------



## tlharvey7 (Oct 23, 2009)

tt1106 said:


> Two weeks ago, I did 72 hours of prison ministry. I don't remember hearing any of the inmates swear or use any kind of profanity. They were probably cleaning it up for our behalf, but that's ok from my perspective.
> My wife and I pray Psalm 141:3 on a regular basis and knowing it or not, these men were concerned about perception and decency and we're doing the same thing, maybe even knowingly, considering their knowledge of scripture.
> I see no reason why we should lower our standards to try and be more worldly, Especially from our pulpits.



that is a great point... and the way it should be
the light we give people, the Light we represent...
should cause sinners to want to "clean up their act" in our presence.
even hardened criminals know that profanity has NO PLACE in the house of God, or in expounding His word


----------



## Southern Twang (Oct 28, 2009)

Joshua said:


> I like this quote that LawrenceU shared from a few years back:
> 
> 
> > The use of profanity by a man is inversely proportional to the adequacy of his vocabulary.




This is simply not true. The repetitious use of ANY word indicates inadequate vocabulary. The usage of profanity actually adds to your repertoire of words...just don't abuse it and know when to use it. 

For example:

The American Vision Collision with Pietism


----------



## Andres (Oct 28, 2009)

Southern Twang said:


> Joshua said:
> 
> 
> > I like this quote that LawrenceU shared from a few years back:
> ...



just curious as to when is the appropriate time to use profanity?


----------



## jwithnell (Oct 28, 2009)

This is classic "end justifying the means" and shows a deep distrust in the fact that it is God, and God only who illuminates his Word.


----------



## Archlute (Oct 28, 2009)

I appreciate Driscoll's convictions on much, but thought this might lighten up the thread a bit.


----------



## jwithnell (Oct 28, 2009)

But I'm partial to Crystal Louisiana style myself!


----------



## kvanlaan (Oct 28, 2009)

> Whatever. I'm tired of the "Pietism" accusations thrown against those who are not Pietists (moralists, perfectionists, etc.), but really do think that biblical piety is not only to be desired, but is demanded and required by God, and is a result of justification.





Ah! (breathes a happy sigh)

We love to quote Puritans, but nobody seems to want to live like them. I think most of us could do with a good deal more biblical piety in our lives.


----------



## Sgt Grit (Oct 29, 2009)

Johnny Mac has a podcast on the GTY web site called the case against the R-Rated church Radio Archive.


----------

