Jumpstarter 8 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 8

Using his “froward man” and “quit you like men” stories, David argues archaic wording creates real communication barriers even for educated listeners; when have you seen Scripture become functionally inaccessible because of church language, and what are the spiritual and pastoral costs of that in evangelism and discipleship?

Another way to ask: David says old church wording can block people from understanding the Bible, even smart people. When have you seen church language make Scripture hard to understand, and what does it cost in evangelism and discipleship?

Direct Answer The transcript’s main point is that archaic church language can make Scripture functionally inaccessible, so people may be stirred emotionally yet not understand God’s actual message. David suggests the pastoral cost is misunderstanding, lost clarity, and a barrier between “God’s living Word” and people who need it.

Support from Transcript:

David describes hearing a sermon about a “froward” man and feeling motivated, yet admits: “I had no idea what a froward person is.”
He recounts the phrase “quit you like men” being meaningless to him; later he learned it means “behave like men.”
He tested a church audience: asked who could define “froward,” and “no one raised their hand,” showing even regular hearers lacked confidence.
He says: “That’s terrible. God wants His Word to be understood by us. And if we don’t even know what we’re reading, what is the point?”
He frames the broader cost as a “communication barrier” and “a barrier between God’s living Word and today’s living English.”

Discussion Follow-ups How often do we mistake familiarity with religious tone for actual understanding—and how might that affect new believers or seekers?

Jumpstarter 8 of 10