Mark Driscoll

[chaz345]

All you have to do is read an excerpt from his book, to see the "character" he puts forth as christian. It's not what I read in the Bible. And, perhaps, the reason that his church is thriving in one of the most liberal parts of the country is because it really bears no resemblence to christianity and, instead, panders to the liberal mindset of perverse sexuality and unchristian behaviors? Yeah -- I bet all the guys are going if the pastor is getting up on stage and telling their wives its their duty to perform strip teases and oral sex, and promotes anal sex. None of these things, btw, does ANYTHING for the wife's sexual fulfillment, btw. They are entirely for the man's pleasure -- so sex becomes about servicing the man's desire and the wife is but a tool to that end.

If Driscoll were really that far out there, if he really said and meant what he is being claimed to say/mean, don't you think that at least a couple of nationally known and respected Christian speakers/teachers would have come out by now and said something particularly since, if what's being said about him is accurate, there's 10,000 or more people in the Seattle area being horrbily mislead.

 

[hijklmnop]

Popularity is now an indicator of correct theology? Ummm....nope. That doesn't work either. Next.

 

[Luther073082]

If Driscoll were really that far out there, if he really said and meant what he is being claimed to say/mean, don't you think that at least a couple of nationally known and respected Christian speakers/teachers would have come out by now and said something particularly since, if what's being said about him is accurate, there's 10,000 or more people in the Seattle area being horrbily mislead.

Unfortunutly Mark Driscoll has become so popular among many Christians that I think a lot of people are afraid to say it. Its sad really but it's also the reality of the world we live in. And unfortunutly Mark Driscoll has become extremely popular. He says things itching ears want to hear.

The macho cult in the Christian church is becomming huge and he's playing that crowd extremely well. Sadly many times the so called evangelicals go through these fads where they like to look through scripture through a certain lens. Right now a lot of people like to look at scripture through a macho lens that makes Jesus into some hypermasculine ultimate fighter instead of the spotless lamb of God.

Jesus was the lamb of God, not a ulitmate fighter.

 

[BigDaddy4]

Not taking sides on this lively chat, but here is a local article in which Driscoll and his wife defend their book on marriage and comments on sex.

My take: Why Christians are criticizing my Christian marriage and sex book - KCPQ

These are his words, not someone reporting on it or quoting him out of context.

Enjoy!

 

[chaz345]

Popularity is now an indicator of correct theology? Ummm....nope. That doesn't work either. Next.

No that's not what I said. I said that if his theology were really as far off as some are making it seem, other Christian leaders would have said something by now.

Look like I've said I'm not exactly a huge Driscoll fan and I actually agree that he's significantly off base in some things, particularly on sex in his new book assuming the quotes are accurate and in context. But my point is that I simply believe it's wrong to make the conclusions some have about his character, intent or even his Christianity. Further, if he were as far off base as some seem to want to portray, I can't believe that every major christian leader in the country would have remained silent for this long.

 

[chaz345]

The macho cult in the Christian church is becomming huge and he's playing that crowd extremely well.

The so called macho cult's way of thinking doesn't play well at all in highly liberal Seattle. Heck even Promise Keepers was never very well accepted in this corner of the country.


As for Jesus, yes he was the Lamb of God but he was also far more of a "man's man" that it's acceptable to be in today's society or even in today's church.

 

[BigDaddy4]

The so called macho cult's way of thinking doesn't play well at all in highly liberal Seattle. Heck even Promise Keepers was never very well accepted in this corner of the country.


As for Jesus, yes he was the Lamb of God but he was also far more of a "man's man" that it's acceptable to be in today's society or even in today's church.

The bolded is very true. We (Washington State) are near the top (or bottom depending on how you view it) of the list of least churched states.

We have just been informed by our local media that there are enough votes in our state legislature to become the 7th state in the US to legalize gay marriage.

This verse comes to mind when reading this thread...

38 “Teacher,” said John, “we saw someone driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us.”
39 “Do not stop him,” Jesus said. “For no one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, 40 for whoever is not against us is for us. 41 Truly I tell you, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to the Messiah will certainly not lose their reward. (Mark 9:38-41)


Mark Driscoll may not teach everything that is agreeable to everyone, but he is pointing a large number of our liberal population to Jesus. These are people who would be outcast or marginalized in some other churches. They have tattoos and piercings in places many others do not and "conservatitives" or "orthodox" would cringe at. They have a sexual orientation that the Bible calls sin, yet they still come to hear that Jesus loves them despite their sinful ways. Some of their churchgoers would no doubt identify with the "occupy" movement.

I have friends that attend one of the Mars Hill branches and they are theologically sound. I am told that members are encouraged to participate in Bible study small groups. I personally am not drawn to that church, but I am not opposed to them preaching the Gospel to the crowd that they serve and loving the "unlovable" that other churches may overlook.

To do this successfully in a highly liberal area like Seattle has been amazing.

To those who do not believe Driscoll doesn't have the "spirit of God" in him I ask in whose name do you think he is preaching the Gospel? Even the Pharisees accused Jesus of unholy teaching and being possessed by a demon, only because it ruffled their feathers and they couldn't understand him. Beware that blasphemy against the Spirit is the one sin that cannot be forgiven. In saying that Mark Driscoll does not have the Spirit of God in him, or is not a Christian, you have just elevated yourself to the position of Holy Judge - another sin.

 

[JanniGirl]

Not taking sides on this lively chat, but here is a local article in which Driscoll and his wife defend their book on marriage and comments on sex.

My take: Why Christians are criticizing my Christian marriage and sex book - KCPQ

These are his words, not someone reporting on it or quoting him out of context.

Enjoy!

And in his own words -- I find his twisting and turning of what sex really should be about, quite sickening.

 

[McScribe]

Excuse me, but how exactly is it twisted? I mean he's talking about exploring sex as a couple. What is wrong with that?

 

[I Art Laughing]

And in his own words -- I find his twisting and turning of what sex really should be about, quite sickening.

Do you have a Biblical reference to provide some insight into what "sex really should be about" or are we working on a pop culture retread? What authority are we operating under?

 

[k450ofu3k-gh-5ipe]

The so called macho cult's way of thinking doesn't play well at all in highly liberal Seattle. Heck even Promise Keepers was never very well accepted in this corner of the country.


As for Jesus, yes he was the Lamb of God but he was also far more of a "man's man" that it's acceptable to be in today's society or even in today's church.

I didn't see anything wrong with what was written in the article there. His views of sex from that short article are sound.

 

[Luther073082]

The so called macho cult's way of thinking doesn't play well at all in highly liberal Seattle. Heck even Promise Keepers was never very well accepted in this corner of the country.

How do you know what plays well in Seattle? It seems to be, Driscoll is a big part of it, if not their leader.

As for Jesus, yes he was the Lamb of God but he was also far more of a "man's man" that it's acceptable to be in today's society or even in today's church.

In what way? Jesus was not an ultimate fighter. He's the person who said turn the other cheek, not "break their nose". Real pastor's take Jesus's advice on these things. Driscoll takes an ultimate fighter's advice.

 

[Luther073082]

I didn't see anything wrong with what was written in the article there. His views of sex from that short article are sound.

Except Driscoll is failing to mention the things that he's actually being criticised for. . . such as stating that its a sin for a wife to NOT provide oral sex.

Or his anger at his wife for being sexually abused.

Driscoll is setting up his own strawman in terms of criticisms so he can refute the ones easily. He's not responding to what people are actually being critical of. . . at least the people on here.

 

[JanniGirl]

Exactly. If you read the book and read his article, you'd clearly see how he is playing the shell game. Only those who haven't read the book will be fooled by the article. It does make me sick.

 

[k450ofu3k-gh-5ipe]

Except Driscoll is failing to mention the things that he's actually being criticised for. . . such as stating that its a sin for a wife to NOT provide oral sex.

Or his anger at his wife for being sexually abused.

Driscoll is setting up his own strawman in terms of criticisms so he can refute the ones easily. He's not responding to what people are actually being critical of. . . at least the people on here.

But he didn't say anything like your highlighted in the book... He in fact heavily emphasized the opposite according to the reviews I have read. According to one reviewer:

"Among the activities that the authors deem permissible within this taxonomy are masturbation, felatio/[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse], sodomy (on both spouses), menstrual sex, role-playing, sex toys, birth control, cosmetic surgery, cybersex, and sexual medication. The Driscolls are careful to stipulate that these are activities spouses may participate in by mutual agreement, but not that they must participate in (p. 180). No spouse should be manipulated into doing anything that violates his or her conscience (p. 178). The only item in the list deemed impermissible in every circumstance is sexual assault."

Highlighted for emphasis.

The review I quoted is here.

From the review I read, there isn't really anything I particularly disagree with Driscoll about except his misinterpretation of 1 Cor 6:12. The other thing that I would have disagreement with him about is "sodomy (on both spouses)" is ok. But I don't base my disagreement on strong theological reasons. They are more personally based.

 

[k450ofu3k-gh-5ipe]

Exactly. If you read the book and read his article, you'd clearly see how he is playing the shell game. Only those who haven't read the book will be fooled by the article. It does make me sick.

See my post above.

 

[JanniGirl]

Once again. Read the book; in it's entirety. I did. Reading someone else's review of the book is relating a second-hand opinion. If you want that, take my opinion. I read the book.

 

[k450ofu3k-gh-5ipe]

Once again. Read the book; in it's entirety. I did. Reading someone else's review of the book is relating a second-hand opinion. If you want that, take my opinion. I read the book.

Can you get your book and find the quote/quotes that you have a problem with? Or could you find specific quotes of his from elsewhere that you have a problem with? Cause I haven't seen any actual quotes from him that I've disagreed with on this thread concerning sex from his new books. All I've seen is people claiming he said x and y but all the evidence I've looked at points to the direct opposite of said claim.

 

[chaz345]

How do you know what plays well in Seattle? It seems to be, Driscoll is a big part of it, if not their leader.

I live not too far down the road in Portland OR and have spent enough time in Seattle and hear/see enough on the news to have a pretty good handle on the political/social climate of the area and I can say with a pretty high degree of certainty that the whole macho male domination thing does not play well at all.

In what way? Jesus was not an ultimate fighter. He's the person who said turn the other cheek, not "break their nose". Real pastor's take Jesus's advice on these things. Driscoll takes an ultimate fighter's advice.

The interpretation of turn the other cheek as a directive to sit there and take it is badly off the mark. It was, due to the culture of the time and the "rules" about how you are allowed to strike someone, an insult or a challenge more than it was a show of meekness. I'll attempt to find the study I saw on the subject.

I'm of course not suggesting that the first response to any aggression is to hit back harder, but the idea that Jesus directive was to humbly submit to it, and pretty much any other wrong perpetrated against you is sadly mistaken. In looking only at the Lamb side of Jesus, the Lion side is too often ignored.

 

[k450ofu3k-gh-5ipe]

Don't get me wrong. I'm not condoning everything he's said or written. I do have strong disagreements with Driscoll about some of his teaching, but I have first hand seen him speak about those things. In regard to his book and this oral sex thing that Luther has mentioned. I have seen zero evidence pointing to him actually saying that denying a husband oral sex is a sin. In fact, I have evidence to the opposite of that claim by Luther.

I just want a quote from Driscoll proving what people are saying.