"And all the nonsense of emerging, and Emergent, and new monastic communities, and, you know, all of these various kinds of ridiculous conversations - I'll tell you as one on the inside, they don't have converts. The silly little myth, the naked emperor is this: they will tell you it's all about being in culture to reach lost people, and they're not."
Driscoll, at the Convergent Conference at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary.
THOUGHTS?
Monday, May 12, 2008
Mark Driscoll Says What He Thinks
Posted by Todd Wright at 10:00 PM
Labels: blogging, mark driscoll, postmodernism
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
uh... bullseye
I think it would be a lot easier to listen to this guy if he wasn't such an arrogant, loudmouth, tough-talking, choker-necklace-wearing tool.
Seriously, he's right in a lot of what he says (here and otherwise), but I just can't see that his delivery is EVER a representation of Jesus. It's a schtick, and it makes me tired. We get it, Mark. You're a tough guy.
Sorry, you asked.
I agree with Ross.
I really want to like Driscoll and listen to his stuff, but I am constantly turned off by the "on the edge" Christian bit. To add to that, I'm growing a bit weary of Chandler's alcohol routine.
Wow, Paul. That actually surprises me a bit.
OK, it occurs to me that calling someone a "blah blah blah tool" isn't all that Christ-like, either. Hello, Mr Hypocrisy.
Sorry, I just get frustrated when I see someone who is saying so many great things, but who I know is alienating many of his potential "converts" to his way of thinking due to his lack of humility. I can't stress enough that I agree with Driscoll in a great deal of what I hear him saying (and in what he's writing). But I get so tired of people who seem to enjoy being a caricature. And that's how I experience Driscoll. It's like he's playing himself in a movie. And the movie also stars Steven Seagal and Tom Arnold.
Or something.
So, all the name-calling was a fumble. But I sure wish this guy seemed a little more humble, and a little less Rambo-for-Jesus.
I've now officially over-talked this...
Todd, I've been meaning to tell you this for months... Can you quit using Yellow Font? I know it looks cool on your template. but I can't see it for crap with my google reader.
I'm too lazy to go to your blog.
Just highlight it.
How about a nice burnt sienna?
One blog's also quoting him as saying:
1. I don’t mind a conversation…but when God speaks, we are not to converse, we are to obey.
2. Brian McLaren was asked this question: ‘What is your position on gay marriage?’ His answer was this: ‘You know what? The thing that breaks my heart is that there is no way I can answer it without hurting someone on either side.’ To which I would respond: ‘Now you have hurt God.’
3. The Southern Baptist Convention of North Carolina is bringing him [Doug Pagitt] to teach in October. Shame on you.
4. If Rabbis don’t love Jesus, they have a bad hermeneutic.
The Bible is all about Jesus. Ultimately, it’s all…about…Jesus.
5. Brian McLaren also has a new organization called “Deep Shift” and I think somebody inadvertently put an “F” in there.
6. I believe Emergent is, like Judas, in the process of hanging itself.
I can't speak to the blog's validity, although it is titled "pomomusings," and they don't seem to like Driscoll all that much.
It's a hard thing...I don't really know his stuff that much. Like Ross says, it does seem to be like a "bit" he's doing where he's playing the role of a jock who graduated seminary or something.
But there's also part of me that's grateful guys who are willing to say stuff that's unpopular. I am constantly amazed at how many preachers I hear that don't really say or stand for anything.
And I must say that I am shocked at Ross' outburst toward choker necklaces. That's not cool...don't worry, gang. I will speak with Ross about his "problems" with trendy neckwear.
I really like Driscoll. His schtick doesn't bug me, probably because I'm a bigger jackass than he is.
Each of us has a struggle, and abrasiveness and hot-headedness seem to be his. He's being sanctified out of that, so I try to be as patient with him as I am the milquetoast-ery of a huge majority of Evango preachers, er, "speakers."
One thing I'll say on his behalf...reading some of the Fathers and Reformers, Driscoll takes it pretty easy on some of the people he zings. And they deserve the zings. Remember, Jesus called Herod a "vixen" and had some choice words for the apostate Church leaders.
We should pray that he learns to consider his harsh words and insults before he opens his mouth. In other words, that he would deliver harsh words and insults in a Christlike way. I sure need that.
For the record, I don't have a problem with well-placed harshness. Anyone who has spent any amount of time with me knows that. For better or worse, I'm "in your face" and abrasive at times as well. I often sin in those areas, and maybe that's why I'm a little sensitive about this (perhaps unnecessarily so).
You guys could be right about this , and I could be wrong. Really.
I'm just a tiny bit uncomfortable with the wink-wink-nudge-nudge attitude there seems to be surrounding this guy's most outrageous statements. When/if he says something stupid/sinful, I don't sense that he's terribly broken up about it. In other words, when he SINS in speaking to thousands, I don't sense that he's as worried about THAT sin as he is about the sins of those whom he publicly criticizes.
Again, I could be wrong about what "I don't sense." It's not like I know that guy personally. I just see him on video and read him on blogs and stuff.
Christian celebrity is tricky...
I've said plenty here, so I'll shut my trap for a bit. Thanks everyone for good dialogue.
My first question, Todd, is why are you just now posting a quote from a conference that took place late last year? Did you just now see it, or is this some smear campaign to keep this in the public consciousness. No accusation...just an honest question. It seems to be making its third or so round through the blogopshere...I just want to know people's motivations.
For further reading, Emergent Village actually pooled most of the responses from the intial quote into on blog post:
http://www.emergentvillage.com/weblog/mark-driscolls-critique-gets-mixed-response
Personally, I think this is the best responses I have read:
http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/2008/05/emergingmissional-church-they-dont-have.html
As a "friend" of Emergent, I have actually been to the churches Mark is attacking...something he cannot say. I worked at ecclesia in Houston with Chris Seay and at UBC in Waco with Kyle Lake and Crowder. I have been to the services at these churches. While the accusation might stick in some places, at least when viewed from Mark's still-missing-the-point perspective (as expressed in Fitch's post above), it certainly doesn't stick for all of them.
There is room in the Kingdom of God for all types of expressions of faith, appealing to vastly different groups of people. When will people of faith stop attacking other people of faith?
Wow, Cory...
First off...this was the first time I saw it. I didn't actually find out the date of the speech until a little while later. I guess I missed it when it happened.
It's interesting you're using the word "smear" campaign. I posted the quote and asked for thoughts. There are a lot of smart people who read this blog and I wanted to know what they thought of that. And they've spoken honestly.
I've added my two cents that I'm mixed on Driscoll; sometimes I dig it, sometimes I agree with those who think he's out of line.
So, smear campaign? Not even close, man. You say you're just curious, but "smear campaign?" Really? That insinuation is not cool, man, and I think you're a bit out of line for suggesting it.
I get what you're saying...seems like you're agreeing with most everybody here that Driscoll's methods (the "attacking people of other faith" you mentioned) are wrong. I've read those posts you've linked and I think there are balanced heads on both sides of this particular situation.
I appreciate your comment. Thanks for stopping by.
Anybody else think my post was a smear? 'Cause it isn't, and if the post reads that way, I need to change the way it reads.
Look, I don't know Mark, or his heart. But if I take this small (ad I'm sure out of context) quote correctly then he seems to be concerned about a legitimate problem with churches who don't urge repentance and belief.
Almost like we've spent hundreds of dollars on grandma's birthday party, hired a clown, blew balloons, smoking cake, lights, and all of that, but we forgot to actually sing happy birthday to her!
And Todd Wright launching a smear attack? Are you kidding me?
Todd's not smearing anything, obviously.
The responder to Driscoll misses the point, too. Both "modernist" Driscoll (that's kinda funny) and the "missional" responder are measuring conversion by the holding of a set of beliefs in the mind. One should rather measure conversions by baptism into the Church. The Scriptures present many examples of quite hasty "conversions" in which people come to faith and are baptized. They are converted Christians despite their lack of detailed instruction.
I also think the discipleship mentioned in the responding blog is Driscoll's point. He is criticizing (rightly or wrongly) the movement based on his perception of the fruit being borne.
As one highly critical of the emergent thing, I will say that Driscoll's point here is a side issue. It's a derivative issue and not the main problem, which is syncretism.
Yes, Todd, you posted the quote without commentary. But, I guess I was just wanting to know why that particular quote stuck out to you. I don't really know you that well or how you would approach the larger issues. I guess I was just wanting your commentary.
I'm sorry if I came across accusatory...it was an honest question. That's the problem with the written (and digital) word. I wasn't insinuating that you were launching a smear campaing...I was simply asking! There's a big difference...I mean, I actually said "no accusation - just an honest question". How does my asking a question get turned into an accusation?
There are people out there in the blogosphere who do post things like this simply to try and convince as many people as possible of their opinion of Emergent (what I mean by "smear"). I just wanted to make sure that wasn't your motivation.
Again, I just wanted to know where you were coming from...that's all. I promise. Sorry if that was unhelpful for hurtful in any way.
To the larger issue, I not only disagree with his methods, but I also disagree with his message. Are there churches out there that are not bearing fruit? Of course. Are there some of them that try to be "emergent". Yes. But just as many of them are mainline or evangelical or missional or any other label you want to put on it. The churches that are reaching vast numbers of new converts are in the minority.
Generalizations never work. Especially for a "movement" without clear borders/boundaries...
Post a Comment