Comments on: Potty-Mouth Christianity

By: Graham

Graham — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 19:09:06 +0000

Apparently, we need to start swearing to get taken seriously

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1299013/Swear-Bible-Vicar-urges-flock-modernise-start-using-blue-language-street.html

By: Don

Don — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 15:29:51 +0000

Let’s hope so. I guess my overall purpose for this post was less about indicting by name a particular person or people and more about pointing out an unhealthy trend among so called people of faith. While you may be right that Driscoll has toned some things down and that he’s gotten a little wiser, the fact is he still said what he said and unfortunately it’s indicative of the problem. I’m troubled by a church culture that would even flirt with the notion that coarse talk is acceptable and necessary in order for us to successfully further the gospel.

By: Byron

Byron — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 17:46:36 +0000

I agree with the gist of what you’re saying. In defense of Driscoll—and the article about him was well over three years old—I have the sense that he’s toned some things down a bit, possibly after hanging around with the Piper-types that he’s become accustomed to. I love Driscoll, just not everything about him, but I do think he’s gotten a little wiser with age with regard to his language.

By: Don

Don — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 17:46:02 +0000

Having not seen the film myself, your explanation is the general consensus of everyone I’ve heard from. But here’s the thing. If as you say (and by the way as all the film critics seem to agree) that this film is “geared toward those that are steeped in the church — particularly teens and youth leaders” and not necessarily geared toward the unchurched, then I go back to my original point. Why is it so necessary for Christians to swear in order to share the message of God, particularly when the audience is largely church people? My fear is that profanity has become such a part of our culture and that believers have become so desensitized to it that we don’t even think twice about it anymore.

By: fuzzywhumple

fuzzywhumple — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 15:01:36 +0000

FYI….

This may well be a bit of a bunny trail but the movie we were speaking of… I have now seen it. To say that it is an evangelical film is off base — in my opinion, way off base. The story could possibly be used as an evangelical tool, but really the story itself is geared toward those that are steeped in the church — particularly teens and youth leaders. I also would not call it a “Christian worldview” film, but rather a teenager worldview film. It shows teen struggles, teen issues, things that they face in the world and even shows how they are failed by friends, parents, and yes even churches. It ends up giving a glimpse of part of what Christianity is really about (relationally) and it does it by showing actions. Naturally this is a nut-shelled view, and an actual synopsis would take a while.

Honestly, I’d say it’s gotten more bad press than it deserves. Is what’s in it there to make it more accepted or relevant??….I don’t think so. I’d say it’s there to make it more real to life, and honestly it’s very tame in some ways compared to real life. Now, of course that doesn’t justify any decisions that were made in making the film, I’m just making some observations.

By: Don

Don — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:16:32 +0000

Something else. I think sometimes we think a little too highly of our importance in God’s eternal plan than we should. After all it wasn’t the little boy who fed the 5,000, it was Jesus. He didn’t need a little boy’s lunch in order to preform a miracle. But by using that lunch He allowed the boy the blessing of taking part in the work that God was doing. So really when you think about it that’s all we really have to offer, just loaves and fishes. God isn’t dependent on us to save the world. Thank goodness for that. He’d sure be in a mess if He were. But because He loves us He allows us to participate in what He is doing. And the very best way we can do that is to be just like Him as much as we possibly can be.

By: fuzzywhumple

fuzzywhumple — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 16:14:14 +0000

Ditto….

Kinda like dressing in camp missionary clothing

By: Don

Don — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:17:22 +0000

Well I guess when it comes to “dressing ourselves up” I like to go back to the example of Chinese missionary Hudson Taylor who adopted the Chinese dress and lifestyle in order to reach the Chinese culture despite criticism from the western community. The Apostle Paul was another example of a believer who to the Jews became as a Jew, to those outside the law became as one outside the law, to the weak became weak, adopting the particular culture, yet without compromising the law of Christ, so that he might lead someone to Christ. I have no problem with believers crossing cultural barriers in order to share their faith. If you believe saying “dude” and preaching from a coffee table enables you to better engage whatever culture you’re trying to reach, that’s fine. But we must be so careful not to allow our cultural engagement to cross the line over into behavior that is clearly unbiblical and unChristlike.

By: fuzzywhumple

fuzzywhumple — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 14:19:42 +0000

Oh, I definitely agree on the difference of the films. Also from what I’ve read, there may be some things that are over the top (i.e. unneeded) in the Christian worldview flick. It sounds like it does address issues that need to be taken on, BUT the question is does it go too far in portraying situations?

Now when we start to say that we’ve gotta swear and explicitly portray adult themes in order for people to take us seriously…I gotta say that’s wrong. There are “mature” topics that churches need to face…need to be willing to deal with…but those issues need to be approached with decency and with Christ as the focal point (not the issue as the focal point).

Here’s a question…. Does it really matter if the world takes us seriously within the word’s worldview? Where we stand is in opposition to the sinful nature of the world…so why try to dress ourselves up to be accepted by the world?? Isn’t that the same as putting a basket over our light?

By: Don

Don — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 19:45:30 +0000

I do think there is a difference between the two films you’re talking about. One was made in Hollywood for the purpose of entrainment. The other was written and co-produced by a youth pastor along with his church for the purpose of making a Christian worldview movie. I guess what I’m struggling with is this. What does it say about Christianity and our society when we feel we’ve gotta swear and use adult themes in order for people to take us seriously?