Mark Driscoll

[TwistTim]

my guess on the 4 1/2 pointer thing and I'm just guessing here.....

as one who is an Amyraldian (Four Point Calvinist)... while I do not believe in the Limited Atonement, I also do not believe in Unlimited Atonement... that is I don't believe in a Universal Salvation.... if your not saved by God's Favor... your not saved... so this view is its self Limiting... but not in the same way Limited Atonement is...

 

[AndOne]

Doesn't hold to a reformed creed. I don't like the fact that he's a 4 pointer but o wells. Theres a few of them running around here already.

Well ever since this thread came up I've looked into Driscoll and have subsequently fallen in love the guy and his ministry. So I felt the need to respond to this post. After looking into his ministry I've learned that he is a full blown five pointer and his church appears to hold to and promote the Heidelbergh Chatachism. He may have been a 4 pointer at one time but I can assure that is no longer the case.

 

[ReformedChapin]

Well ever since this thread came up I've looked into Driscoll and have subsequently fallen in love the guy and his ministry. So I felt the need to respond to this post. After looking into his ministry I've learned that he is a full blown five pointer and his church appears to hold to and promote the Heidelbergh Chatachism. He may have been a 4 pointer at one time but I can assure that is no longer the case.

source...

 

[arunma]

Personally the Amyraldianism issue doesn't concern me significantly. I believe in the five doctrines of Calvinism because they are taught in Scripture, not for their own sake. If Driscoll happens to word Limited Atonement differently, it doesn't matter that much to me. What matters is that he firmly holds to the belief that salvation is by grace through faith in Christ alone, apart from other religions. He stands up for the Biblical teaching that God really does send people to hell for not believing in Jesus. And for this I appreciate him and his ministry.

 

[ReformedChapin]

At first glance, unlimited and limited atonement appear to be in opposition. But that dilemma is resolved by nothing two things. First, the two categories are not mutually exclusive; since Jesus died for the sins of everyone, that means he also died for the sins of the elect. Second, Jesus’ death for all people does not accomplish the same thing as his death for the elect. This point is complicated, but it is, in fact, taught in Scripture… 1 Timothy 4:10… “We have out hope set on the living God, who is the Savior for all people, especially of those who believe.”
By dying for everyone, Jesus purchased everyone as his possession, and he then applies his forgiveness to the elect, those in Christ, by grace, and he applies his wrath to the non-elect, those who reject Christ. Objectively, Jesus’ death was sufficient to save anyone and, subjectively, efficient only to save those who repent of their sin and trust in him. This position is called unlimited limited atonement, or modified Calvinism (Death by Love: Letters from the Cross, pg. 171-172)

http://relentlessgrace.wordpress.com/2008/11/17/mark-driscolls-unlimited-limited-atonement/

 

[Epiphoskei]

Which seems to be the four and a half point calvinism I heard him defending once. That isn't exactly Amyraldism.

 

[AndOne]

source...

Sorry bro - I'm basing my statement solely on sermons I've downloaded from Mars Hill church with him preaching that I've listened to. In those sermons he flat out said he was a Calvinist and his sermons have hit on all five points including limited atonement. If you are really that bent on checking my sources feel free to go to the Mars Hill website and start listening.

As to the Heidelbergh Cathechism he has a podcast on Itunes under "The Resurgence" in which it is gone through point by point.

One last thing of interest. Mars Hill is releasing a new doctrinal statement some time this year that will reflect the one done by the Gospel Coalition. Given the guys in that bunch I find it hard to believe that it will have anything less than the full five points in it. We'll see I guess. You can see this here: http://www.marshillchurch.org/about/a-word-on-our-doctrinal-statement

I could be wrong - but I believe Driscoll's position has changed since the publishing of the book you referenced. It does not match up with what I'm hearing in his sermons and seeing on his websites.

 

[Anoetos]

I have been immensely blessed by his ministry and listen to his podcasts regularly.

I have never heard that he was a 4 pointer or a 4.5 pointer, but I am late to the party, like another here I am reasonably sure that he is down with all five now.

 

[JacobHall86]

If I lived within two hours of Seattle I would go to his church. People who complain about him being "Vulgar" are the people who won't see an "R" movie and endorse the Passion at the same time.

 

[arunma]

Jacob, it's great to see you again. How/where have you been?

Incidentally, I share your feelings on Mars Hill. I'd definitely attend his church if I lived in that area. A few of us from my church had a sermon party last night (yes, we drink beer and watch sermons), and we watched a sermon by Mark Driscoll. Apparently he recently met a couple who spent the money to travel all the way to Seattle just to go to Mars Hill one weekend...as their Valentine's Day outing! I can't see how anyone could live close to such a blessed church and not want to attend. It's hard to find Biblical preaching in America these days, and we ought to value churches that have a high view of Scripture.

 

[JacobHall86]

I have been immensely blessed by his ministry and listen to his podcasts regularly.

I have never heard that he was a 4 pointer or a 4.5 pointer, but I am late to the party, like another here I am reasonably sure that he is down with all five now.

He believes in what is called "Limited Unlimited Atonement" in that God gave common grace to the world (good things happen to bad people kinda thing) but salvific grace to the elect.

If that makes someone a 4.5 pointer, I suppose i'm a 4.5 pointer.

 

[Anoetos]

He believes in what is called "Limited Unlimited Atonement" in that God gave common grace to the world (good things happen to bad people kinda thing) but salvific grace to the elect.

If that makes someone a 4.5 pointer, I suppose i'm a 4.5 pointer.

LOL

I'm pretty sure that's the classic Reformed view.

The question though is who did Christ die for, idnit?

What would Driscoll say to that? That He died only for the elect or that He died for everyone, the benefits accruing only to the elect?

As I understand it, the former is the classic Reformed view while the latter is a sort of halfway response raising more questions than it answers.

 

[JacobHall86]

Jacob, it's great to see you again. How/where have you been?

Incidentally, I share your feelings on Mars Hill. I'd definitely attend his church if I lived in that area. A few of us from my church had a sermon party last night (yes, we drink beer and watch sermons), and we watched a sermon by Mark Driscoll. Apparently he recently met a couple who spent the money to travel all the way to Seattle just to go to Mars Hill one weekend...as their Valentine's Day outing! I can't see how anyone could live close to such a blessed church and not want to attend. It's hard to find Biblical preaching in America these days, and we ought to value churches that have a high view of Scripture.

Its good to see you as well. I have been pretty busy, I started my MDiv last semester and took 19 hours. That kept me pretty busy. Got married this past June and she has been keeping me busy... (I'm a Driscoll fan so if some people think thats to vulgar, too bad).

I am working as the Pastoral Assistant/Youth at a Reformed SBC church in Atlanta, and part of my job is to be trained under our pastor for Pastoral Ministry, which is awesome for me because its the same process he went through under the leadership of Mark Dever. I know, I'm pretty stoked at that too.

I had almost forgotted about CF until I talked to someone from here on AIM and they said something negative about Driscoll, and so I figured I would see what all the fuss was on here about him. Her complaint was the same tired homeschool/funday rant about him being vulgar because he said Jesus went to the bathroom or something like that.

What have you been up to?

 

[JacobHall86]

LOL

I'm pretty sure that's the classic Reformed view.

The question though is who did Christ die for, idnit?

What would Driscoll say to that? That He died only for the elect or that He died for everyone, the benefits accruing only to the elect?

As I understand it, the former is the classic Reformed view while the latter is a sort of halfway response raising more questions than it answers.

I don't see how any view other than the one with Common Grace can be the reformed view. Otherwise it becomes Hyper-Calvinism/Pelagianism in that Jesus did nothing for the non-elect, and when they do good works they do them out of their own ability to do so.

I hold to the Whitefield idea, that I'm a Calvinist, and have not read anything by Calvin, and I see the truths of Calvinism in the Scriptures, and common Grace is one of those truths.

 

[Anoetos]

By way of clarification, when you said:

God gave common grace to the world (good things happen to bad people kinda thing) but salvific grace to the elect.

That's what I was calling the classic Reformed view.

 

[arunma]

Its good to see you as well. I have been pretty busy, I started my MDiv last semester and took 19 hours. That kept me pretty busy. Got married this past June and she has been keeping me busy... (I'm a Driscoll fan so if some people think thats to vulgar, too bad).

Congratulations! I wish you Providence on the MDiv.

I am working as the Pastoral Assistant/Youth at a Reformed SBC church in Atlanta, and part of my job is to be trained under our pastor for Pastoral Ministry, which is awesome for me because its the same process he went through under the leadership of Mark Dever. I know, I'm pretty stoked at that too.

That's awesome. Sort of makes you Mark Dever's spiritual grandson, doesn't it? I only learned about Mark recently, but it's good to hear that the "New Calvinist" movement has made it all the way to DC.

What have you been up to?

I don't remember quite when you left. But if I'm getting my chronology right, since we last spoke I graduated college, moved to a new town, and started working on my PhD in physics (which I'm 1.5 years in to). After a painfully long search for a Bible-believing church, I found an excellent community of believers with whom to worship and commune. It's pretty great, actually. I've probably spiritually grown more in the past year than I ever did in college. And of course I'm still here on CF, fighting the good fight of the faith and doing my best to fight heresy. Glad to have you back.

 

[AndOne]

If I lived within two hours of Seattle I would go to his church. People who complain about him being "Vulgar" are the people who won't see an "R" movie and endorse the Passion at the same time.

Dude! I'm moving to NC this summer but was told that I may only be there a year. If that's the case Seattle has moved to the top of the list of places I wanna go next! We shall see....

 

[zhilan]

Seattle is a great place to live. =) I grew up there.

 

[AndOne]

Seattle is a great place to live. =) I grew up there.

Being a Florida boy I don't like rain, don't like snow, don't like cold. But in Seattle's case I'll make an exception....

 

[Anoetos]

I lived there for 7 years in the late 80's, early 90's, when "Grunge" was happening. It was a lot of fun.

I think it snowed like three times the whole time I was there, and the rain is more of a persistent mist with low clouds, depressing enough for many.