Jump to content
IGNORED

A Christian Speaks Out Against Mark Driscoll


debrand

Recommended Posts

Because it can seem like Christians all agree with one another, I found this man's article refreshing. Yes, I know Christians are a very diverse group but the media normally only reports on the crazy ones. :lol:

I liked a lot of what the writer said.

jonathanmerritt.religionnews.com/2013/05/13/is-mark-driscoll-this-generations-pat-robertson/

Some of the comments he received were passive aggressive but polite disagreements with his view. I have to admit that this is one aspect of human nature that annoys me. You aren't any nicer a person just because you aren't calling the person names or are using the veneer of politeness. If you views are rude and obnoxious, it doesn't matter how politely you try to word them.

Driscoll’s raison d’etre seems to be creating conflict. In fact, his acquired taste for foot is so fierce that one can’t help but be reminded of a Christian leader from last generation: Pat Robertson.

and

Robertson’s meteoric rise to popularity morphed into a slow burn of outlandishness, a trajectory that Mark Driscoll is well on his way to mimicking. To wit,

Avatar is the “most demonic, satanic film†he’s ever seen.

Stay-at-home dads are “worse than unbelievers.â€

Women shouldn’t hold leadership positions in the church since they are “more gullible and easier to deceive than men.â€

Fallen pastor Ted Haggard’s wife may be to blame for his infidelity if she didn’t keep herself up. [Pastor Mark later apologized for this comment.]

Biblical wives should give their husbands frequent blowjobs and perhaps allow their husbands to have anal sex during menstruation.

If a man masturbates without a woman present, it is “a form of homosexuality.â€

Robertson’s incendiary comments are often political or prophetic, while Driscoll’s are usually theological or social, but it’s difficult to discern which are more provocative. And while Driscoll’s list of miscues stretch long for someone of such a young age, Robertson has had more opportunities at 83-years-old. What if Mark Driscoll had a daily television show where he could say anything he wanted? Might we not surmise that before long he would amass a Robertson-esque portfolio? It seems likely.

and

O

ver the years, both men have been pressured to issue apologies and clarifications. Ironically, when I received word of the comment made at Catalyst, I was in Malawi working with Christian brothers and sisters there who’ve been wracked by environmental devastation. I wondered why an American Christian leader would make insensitive and flippant comments about such a serious topic. One might make the case that in such a situation, it is beneficial for Christians who disagree with their perspectives to distance themselves. After all, when an influential Christian claims to follow Jesus but makes inappropriate remarks, those outside the faith may think they represent all Christians. Unless others speak up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Examples of some of the people who disagree with him.(and many people do agree with the writer)

Trey May 18, 2013 at 2:48 pm

I appreciate the article analysis, but not its faulty conclusions. It attempts to kill a gnat by using a shotgun which thereby defeats the very argument that it makes. The article condemns Driscoll for making bombastic remarks, but the article itself could be viewed as bombastic. This is irrelevant to the problem and misses the target completely. Furthermore, it also by implication condemns Jesus and the Apostles who speak against our sinfulness and preached God’s grace to sinners.....

Notice that when a Christian writer speaks out against other Christians, there is a polite way that people will try to shut him/her up.

Someone in the comment section wrote that Mark Driscoll told his followers on facebook to out gay Christian leaders and had to take the post down. I had not heard about that

Greg Milroy May 15, 2013 at 11:27 pm

Shems, really. The most fuel efficient car will still not benefit anyone in eternity. We are to be good stewards of resources NO DOUBT! But responding to the call of Jesus on our life makes ECO issues an idol. Blog less about seals and the environment and more about Jesus. Only one of those issues will last…..read Gods word more and mans word less…including your own!

and

kyle May 13, 2013 at 7:43 pm

Lore,

Classically the people who did that were considered heretics. Are you calling Mark and Pat heretics? Not sure I would go that far but I am just wondering

.

and

Mitch Miller May 13, 2013 at 5:39 pm

914 shares on an article by a Christian that criticizes another Christian for a handful of comments made during a career-full of preaching that Jesus is the savior. The tongue is a fire indeed!

and

Lore May 13, 2013 at 6:19 pm

I agree with you about the “get out of jail free†card. Absolutely. I do think that much of the christian blogosphere etc. needs to lessen up a bit on policing Driscoll’s jokes, though, and concern themselves more with things of lasting importance i.e. the children you met this past week, the sex-trafficked women I work with every day, the church planting initiatives of Acts 29. There are more important things at stake here, and that’s *exactly* what I’m saying.

Leaders aren’t exempt from careful consideration, you’re right, they have put themselves there and ought to be above reproach in all matters. My concern is, like Mitch says above, that we’re not eating our own with no mind for the good they’re doing. Driscoll is so caricatured by the christian-sphere, I wonder how many of us have a clear picture of him at all. I feel like I can say that with some measure of authority because my own pastor is well-known all over the world, but to me, to us, to his church? He’s simply a man well aware of his faults and failures in front of us and others, but who loves us deeply and repents often.

The underlined part is why Christians might ultimately lose members in the United States. If you don't criticise the members of your group who do wrong, society will view you as agreeing with that person and judge you accordingly.

There is more and, in all fairness, most of the commenters agree with the writer. We wonder why more moderate Christians don't speak out against the right wing crazies but I think that there is pressure among some not to criticise other Christians. I'd like to know if some of the religious bloggers/writers on this forum have to deal with polite versions of "Don't speak against bad Christians" on their sites?

Jonathan May 13, 2013 at 8:21 pm

Very unprofessional, biased, defaming, and wicked intended post. If you have a problem with Driscoll, why don’t you find a way to talk to him about it as the bible says to go to your brother if you have a problem with them? You should be praying for him instead of criticizing him. Bad journalism.

Several people said much more politely that the way to criticise a religious leader is only in private. This is another way to shut up someone who disagrees. The public ends up thinking that religious Christians have the same views when they don't.

and

Lindsay Snyder May 13, 2013 at 10:17 pm

Satan loves this, he loves to see us argue!

Reply

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Colleen May 16, 2013 at 11:17 am

Jonathan, I have supported you when others circled the wagons in an attempt to do you harm. But, this is nonsense. I was there. Mark was joking. BTW, He was also correct. God is in control of the environment. Mark lives in a part of the world where they act as if salvation is accomplished through recycling.

I have issues with many of the things Mark Driscoll has done. Very serious issues, but this was way below you. It’s simply unkind, unwarranted, and thoughtless. You can do better.

To say that something is wrong is 'unkind and thoughtless." The message some of the comments seem to be making is shut up, be nice and show outward support or you are hurting other Christians and being a bad example for nonChristians.

Driscoll doesn't hesitate to make negative comments about Rob Bell but discussing him is a horrible, unchristian thing to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God is in control of the environment.

Oh yeah? Well the Patriach of Constantinople, the leader of close to 16 million Greek Orthodox Christians, has stated in letters to all communities that the world's environmental crisis is sinful, and that everybody has an obligation to do their part to arrest and reverse the trend. I'll go with it's my Christian obligation to recycle, use as few resources as possible, and lobby for stricter environmental controls. In addition to it being an ethical obligation of a human being regardless of religious status.

Thanks Mark. I'm sure your version is going to circulate and non Christians will come away with the idea that it is an obligation of Christian faith to piss gasoline. :pull-hair:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ugh. Even when I was a Christian, I believed that God gave us the earth to take care of, we are to be stewards of it. Even if it's all going to burn (and the church I was part of believes, has always believed, that Jesus is coming in their lifetimes) we have to live on it NOW. Should we not then work to make the earth more liveable for our fellow man?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shit, I guess my church is wrong on this.

Processes of environmental degradation feed on one another. Decisions affecting an immediate locale often affect the entire planet. The resulting damages to environmental systems are frightening:

depletion of non-renewable resources, especially oil;

loss of the variety of life through rapid destruction of habitats;

erosion of topsoil through unsustainable agriculture and forestry practices;

pollution of air by toxic emissions from industries and vehicles, and pollution of water by wastes;

increasing volumes of wastes; and

prevalence of acid rain, which damages forests, lakes, and streams.

Even more widespread and serious, according to the preponderance of evidence from scientists worldwide, are:

the depletion of the protective ozone layer, resulting from the use of volatile compounds containing chlorine and bromine; and

dangerous global warming, caused by the buildup of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide.

The idea of the earth as a boundless warehouse has proven both false and dangerous. Damage to the environment eventually will affect most people through increased conflict over scarce resources, decline in food security, and greater vulnerability to disease.

Indeed, our church already ministers with and to people:

who know firsthand the effects of environmental deterioration because they work for polluting industries or live near incinerators or waste dumps;

who make choices between preserving the environment and damaging it further in order to live wastefully or merely to survive; and

who can no longer make their living from forests, seas, or soils that are either depleted or protected by law.

In our ministry, we learn about the extent of the environmental crisis, its complexities, and the suffering it entails. Meeting the needs of today's generations for food, clothing, and shelter requires a sound environment. Action to counter degradation, especially within this decade, is essential to the future of our children and our children's children. Time is very short.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for pointing this out, debrand. It's about time other Christians said something about Mark Driscoll (is a whack job and also a tool).

My concern is, like Mitch says above, that we’re not eating our own with no mind for the good they’re doing.

That's pretty funny when said in defense of Driscoll. From http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/april/27.48.html

(an article in Christianity Today that actually is in favor of Driscoll's nonsense):

In Driscoll's opinion, the church has produced "a bunch of nice, soft, tender, chickified church boys. … Sixty percent of Christians are chicks," he explains, "and the forty percent that are dudes are still sort of chicks."

The aspect of church that men find least appealing is its conception of Jesus. Driscoll put this bluntly in his sermon "Death by Love" at the 2006 Resurgence theology conference (available at TheResurgence.com). According to Driscoll, "real men" avoid the church because it projects a "Richard Simmons, hippie, queer Christ" that "is no one to live for [and] is no one to die for."

Yeah . . . but that's totally not "eating our own," is it? When Driscoll does it, he's just telling it like it is. When someone criticizes him, he's being persecuted. Oh the drama.

Also . . .

Biblical wives should give their husbands frequent blowjobs and perhaps allow their husbands to have anal sex during menstruation.

Wow . . . so, poo is actually less icky for the Man than menstrual blood? It's hard to wrap my head around this. And I speak as one who has no particular objection to sex in either of those modes. However, that is MY preference. No jackass preacher has ANY right to tell any woman what she should feel comfortable with and what she should permit. Because Jesus was all about wives having to give blowjobs?? Good grief. He's turning Jesus into a pimp who punishes women for not giving the man what he wants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/200 ... 27.48.html

(an article in Christianity Today that actually is in favor of Driscoll's nonsense):

It is actually not at all in favor of Driscoll's nonsense. When it is read all the way through, the first two pages just give examples and evidence of what people like Driscoll believe. The last two pages refutes them.

In the first two pages there is a quote by someone of the same ilk as Driscoll. A guy named Murrow who also believes the church isn't masculine enough.

He says that women believe the purpose of Christianity is to find "a happy relationship with a wonderful man"—Jesus—whereas men recognize God's call to "save the world against impossible odds."

:angry-banghead:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AreteJo said:

It is actually not at all in favor of Driscoll's nonsense. When it is read all the way through, the first two pages just give examples and evidence of what people like Driscoll believe. The last two pages refutes them.

Oops--you're right, AreteJo. Thanks for the correction. This is what happens when I read the first page+ and my mind boggles immediately. The rest of the article does attempt to refute Driscoll (and Eldredge and the other uber-manly Christians). I found it pretty weak sauce, though, because the author never really comes right out and says Driscoll is unacceptable, which I think he clearly is. Driscoll isn't just going a bit too far in his defense of Christian manliness. He's sailing right out to sea in his douche canoe. His ideas about men and women have absolutely nothing to do with the message of Jesus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We live just outside of Seattle, which Driscoll seems to believe is not quite Manly Enough for him. He's free to leave at any time. One of my colleagues goes to his church. Suffice it to say I am afraid for her. Her husband spouts Driscoll's patriarchal bullshit 24x7. There is no doubt in my mind that she will end up enduring the same issues so many of Driscoll's former adherents have -- shunning, "church discipline", etcetera, for speaking up for herself. If you have a couple of hours sometime, be sure and read the investigative reporting The Stranger has done on Mars Hill and his "ministry".

Driscoll and others like him are the reason why I left the church twenty-three years ago, and the reason I will never, ever go back. His religion is not Christianity. He's all about narcissism, control, and cash. It is stunning to me how many of the hipsters have bought his BS hook, line and sinker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked that article and the guy is spot on, Driscoll is basically a young hipster version of Pat. Driscoll spouts out a lot of sexist bullshit and he is loved by many fundie lites. Lori Alexander is a fucking monster, is a fan of Driscoll and her church promotes his crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.