Comments on: Why We Use ‘Sucks’

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 28 Nov 2011 19:06:30 +0000

Best comment on here! Well written and to the point.
I laughed out loud at the end.

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 02:51:39 +0000

I was just referred to this site by a pastor. Frankly, I don’t care if I’m considered politically incorrect, behind the times, or a stick in the mud. Get a better name. Avoid all appearance of evil. Don’t step as close to the line of poor and vulgar language just for shock effect or to be “cool”.

If we Christians resort to the world’s language to win them over, to what are we winning them over? I’m glad there’s a difference between the Christian and the unbeliever, and I celebrate it. It’s all, 100% God’s doing, not mine – and I’m grateful.

I’m really not inclined to read much on this website after reading its name. I did read your defense of your word choice, but it’s not impressive. You may have some really good ideas going on with your work, but your name is seriously flawed. Too bad.

I suspect you won’t change a thing because of my thoughts, but you need to know that not every Christian is OK with your name.

By: Doreen

Doreen — Wed, 27 Jul 2011 05:04:32 +0000

Could you fix the ‘L’ on loves?

By: scott

scott — Sat, 29 Jan 2011 13:44:07 +0000

how can this be good? i’ve read some venomous responses on this site and honestly it’s making me sad. if this is the result of one word, God come quickly!!

By: Edward

Edward — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 17:37:01 +0000

I’ve been in the advertising industry and I think, Church Marketing Sucks’ marketing failed big time. You’ve already lost a significant part of the market you’re trying to reach out. I agree that your concept is witty, the double-meaning thing. But sometimes, like what happens inside the brainstorm rooms of ad agencies, a merely witty idea should be killed in favor of an idea that would get the message across in the most effective way.

I really appreciate your vision for the Church. Too bad a lot of people belonging to your target market wouldn’t bother reading the important things you have to say. Think about it brother.

By: David McClave

David McClave — Mon, 11 Oct 2010 22:31:02 +0000

Kevin,
I’m a professional marketer, and have been a junior high pastor at my church, where I was harshly criticized once for blurring the lines of sin. Hahahaah! In my attempt to DEFINE sin by drawing a line between (1) that which goes against our bodies, fellow humans and God and (2) that which Man says is unacceptable, I inadvertently angered a few parents who have a personal problem with alcohol. This was a very similar battle to your battle of words, and I must say that I agree with your defense of the use of “sucks.” Our pastors in my church have all used the word.

A GREAT argument about the changing context of our culture and word use is with the word “gay.” Imagine a girl in the 1920s referring to a carnival she’d like to go to, saying to her mother, “THAT is so gay!” Now imagine a 13 year old boy today, referring to something that “sucks:” “THAT is so gay!” Interesting how the cultural context and specific context completely change the meaning, AND whether or not you consider the word to be vulgar!

To those who are law-based, rule-focused, judgmental Christians, I’d say, “open your bible and read through the whole New Testament again and relax your grip on your perception of those around you. Jesus came with a message of love, (not the feeling, the ACTION), and the book of Matthew is rife with examples of his unconditional love for the lowest of low. Paul speaks in many of his letters about loving rather than judging, and it’s good advice, if not downright saving advice.

To those of you who like to sprinkle all your speech with “colorful metaphors,” I’d caution you to heed Paul’s words about not using profanity, (or whatever your translation says it it – it IS low speech), if for no other reason than the fact that raising your personal standard WILL raise that of those influenced by you. It doesn’t mean not being real, it means raising the standard for all.

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 15:17:24 +0000

The whole “Relevancy” and “authentic” movements su….no, I’m not going to use that word. Using words like s*ck just shows how hard you’re trying to prove that you are hip and relevant and authentic. I attended a Phoenix Suns playoff game, and was shocked at how many young people (under 25) were using the F word, and with what frequency and volume. Clearly, this is a word that – in our day and age – is being used commonly to describe great emotion. So should we use it in the pulpit? Why not – isn’t it relevant – - authentic? You are missing the whole point: Christ doesnt change. He doesnt alter Himself or His message for what we think is hip. We can still use Baptist Hymnals from the 1970s if we want, (after all, many are still in great condition)…or we can donate our pianos and organs in favor of drums and guitars, and get our long-haired youth to join the praise band. Neither is right or wrong. There is a line in a song from Swithcfoot I like, talking about how we are ALL “painfully uncool”. Yes, we are all dweebs. The Lord looks for the intent. Let us follow Him as the Shepherd, and administer in the Body of believers where He sends us, in the path He has chosen for us (Proverbs 25), using the method we believe He would have us use for that Body (Paul asys he has become all things to all people so that he might win some). Whatever we do, let’s do all for the glory of God. I’m not convinced that using the word s*ck glorifies Him….its just another feeble attempt to prove that we are on the supposed “cool” side, which doesn’t exist.

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 15:08:15 +0000

Yes, and while God still sent His Son for you and still oves you, He would probably still wish you’d use another word.

By: AP

AP — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 16:14:30 +0000

The site seems pretty cool out of what I have seen. But I will say Tony Campolo is far from being a good standard for what is right and wrong.

By: Ken J.

Ken J. — Fri, 20 Aug 2010 12:18:16 +0000

What troubles me is not so much the use of a particular word, but the idea that in using that word we are becoming “authentic” or “real”. This seems to indicate that genuineness is defined by acting out whatever we feel. I don’t believe the Scriptures teach us that. Rather, we are to be self-controlled and godly in our speech and actions despite what we may “feel” at any given time. There is to be a distinct difference between us and the world, yet so often today we seek to “market the church” by imitating the world.