MacArthur: The Rape of Solomons Song
John MacArthur has addressed coarse and unseemly language in the pulpit, most specifically directing comments toward Mark Driscoll, in a four-part series ending in this Q&A:
The Rape of Solomons Song Part 4–conclusion
Dr. MacArthur writes in part:
One of the fundamental problems with this whole discussion is a refusal by many to acknowledge the crucial (and elementary) distinction between strong language and obscene language. …
Scripture condemns heretics in powerful, sometimes indelicate, terms (e.g., Galatians 5:12). But the Bible is never smutty, and the strong language in Scripture certainly doesn’t make profane language or filthy joking acceptable (Ephesians 5:4).
I’ve found myself defending Mark Driscoll often in discussions — online and in person — but not this time. MacArthur is right when he laments the effect this has on young pastors and students. Too many — and I fear this is a big problem among Acts 29 churches — try to out-Driscoll Driscoll in their dress, their speech, and their need to be perceived as hip. His effectiveness, and that of those who emulate or try to top him, is not measured by coolness. His effectiveness, and that of any preacher or evangelist, stems from a clear presentation of the Gospel.
Not all that Mark Driscoll does to reach the culture is wrong; most of it is right. And Driscoll is indisputably a gifted communicator. (I was particularly thrilled with his repeated emphasis on the Gospel on ABC’s Nightline.) However, Driscoll is in a specific place with a specific audience, and much of what he does interacts with that specific culture.
So … his approach is not appropriate everywhere.
And, as Dr. MacArthur points out, some of it is not appropriate anywhere.
Subscribe to RSS Feed