Shark!I guess it’s time for the weekly question about Mark Driscoll: Do the ODM’s love him or hate him this week?

[spins the wheel]

Love Mark – Hate Mark – Like Mark – Hate Mark – Like Mark …

-Hate Mark-

Oops! Guess it’s his time to toss Mark in the barrel. Why, you might ask? Let’s start with the video below, part of the promotion for a one-night appearance in Sydney, Australia called Burn Your Plastic Jesus. subtitled “Mark Driscoll takes a blow-torch to the 21st century Jesus, and rediscovers the Jesus of the New Testament”.

YouTube Preview Image

Probably the quote that tipped it over the edge was the one the held a mirror to a particular type of Christian, of which discernments are a key subset -

Ask the average person, walking down the street, what they think of Jesus, and they will immediately identify him with someone who is religious, loves rules, is unpleasant, unkind, unhelpful. Someone they do not want to be with. Someone they do not want to be like.

Does that sound like the most accurate understanding of Jesus? In no way.

When Jesus was on the earth, he called sinners to repent of sin, go find your pants, stop drinking, get a job, move out of your parents’ house, grow up… He said those sorts of things and people loved him for it.

Religious people hated him the most. He told them to repent of their religion. Stop being so prideful. Stop being so self-righteous, so judgmental, so holier-than-thou. The result is that they despised, opposed and ultimately murdered him.

This may shock you – Jesus is as opposed to ‘religion’ as he is to sin…

Ah – no need to wonder anymore why the teeth were set to ‘gnash’ in ‘discernment-ville’ today.

Apparently, Mark’s public message in Australia, which partly concludes (if the advertisement is correct) that Jesus wants to save Christians in addition to the lost, isn’t going to cut the mustard because he is disrespectful of the plastic, pop-culture “Jesus”, represented by the kitschy bobble-head represented on the page. Or possibly that he describes religious folk as being just as bad as sinners. The mysterious “editor” doesn’t let us know.

And so whose spiritual advice does the anonymous discerner give regarding Driscoll ? Jesus? James? Peter? John? Paul? Nope – a few steps above those (though still below Spurgeon) – Christian mystic A. W. Tozer:

Some preachers have such a phobia for repetition and such an unnatural fear of the familiar that they are forever straining after the odd and the startling… We dare not impugn the honesty or the sincerity of the men who thus flap their short wings so rapidly in an effort to take off into the wild blue yonder, but we do deplore their attitudes.

Ah, poor Mark. He didn’t get the ODM playbook on the only proper ways to preach. I just wish these guys would make up their minds about Driscoll – is he OK or not? Will they not discern for the masses?

Or – have the sheep already heard the echo of the master’s voice in his under-shepherd from Seattle and recognized the baying of the wolves for what it is?

  • Share/Bookmark
This entry was posted on Thursday, May 29th, 2008 at 2:38 pm and is filed under Commentary, Editor, Emergent Church, Legalism, ODM Responses, ODM Writers, Original Articles. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+/- Collapse/Expand All

8 Comments(+Add)

1   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
May 29th, 2008 at 3:14 pm

Mark Driscoll uses theatrics and metaphorical shock as a medium through which to draw attention to his message. He is predicably irreverent and sometimes employs salaciousness as a kind of “in your face” approach to spiritual things.

There is nothing new here, just more of the same. His supposed Calvinism has been his life raft, I wonder when it will completely spring a leak?

2   jazzact13    
May 29th, 2008 at 3:18 pm

I’m not sure you can make that article say that CRN hates Driscoll. The quote at the end is a bit odd, but not completely negative.

–Some preachers have such a phobia for repetition and such an unnatural fear of the familiar that they are forever straining after the odd and the startling… We dare not impugn the honesty or the sincerity of the men who thus flap their short wings so rapidly in an effort to take off into the wild blue yonder, but we do deplore their attitudes.

–A.W. Tozer–

I almost think that you could sum up that article as “Like the message, question the method and so of the rhetoric”.

But we’ll see, I think. For my part, I like Driscoll’s idea.

3   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
May 29th, 2008 at 3:36 pm

CR?N only approves of Driscoll when he says something bad about his friends (Pagitt and McLaren).

I wouldn’t be surprised if the “editor” was Steve Camp in this case, as he’s the consistent Driscoll-hater there, with most of his articles on the subject hotlinked to CR?N…

4   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
May 29th, 2008 at 5:48 pm

Again… which is their “Truth”

A Little Leaven mocks gauche christianity…

The mysterious editor chastises Mark for burning a bobble headed Jesus doll in protest against gauche christianity and for true faith in Christ….

Can you point to the truth there PB? Please, your friends seem a little confused as to what is truth to them… it seems to random to me what they choose!

iggy

5   JohnD    
May 29th, 2008 at 9:11 pm

I’m actually a little surprised that the “editor” didn’t decide to support Driscoll. After all, he is burning a “plastic” Jesus which is not a big jump to burning a “plastic” seeker sensitive, purpose driven, emergent, watered down, man pleasing, works based gospel.

6   iggy    http://wordofmouthministries.blogspot.com/
May 30th, 2008 at 12:24 pm

JohnD,

that is my point… why I am so confused as to these peoples condemnation of people like me who ahve a very straightforward theology… yet amongst themselves cannot even agree on their own truth.

Again, their truth is “RELATIVISTIC” to they own theology… it is not based “just on the bible” as somehow I can quote passage after passage to prove my point, and am still wrong cuz they can quote Spurgeon or Calvin! And even in that they do not agree…

Regeneration cannot happen

1. Before salvation.
2. At the moment of salvation
3. At the moment and then carry on as one grows in Christ…
4. When one is baptized.

And all of this is “truth” according to different people.

1. Steve Camp
2. Pastorboy
3. me!
4. Chris Rosebrough

We cannot honestly say that we are all right if we all disagree… that is why Grace is so important on matters like this.

Because if Pastorboy is right, Steve Camp and I are both heretics. If Steve Camp is right then Pastorboy and I are heretics.
If I am right then Steve Camp and Pastorboy are heretics.

The huge difference between myself and them is I acknowledge we differ on this view and still accept them as brothers. I would almost bet that Steve would assert Pastorboy might not be saved becuase he does not have “right doctrine”… but that is negated becuase PB attacks the same people Steve Does…

Again Though at times I am dogmatic on my own doctrine, I still see that I could be wrong and give others Grace to also be wrong.

I do not say that to show I am better than them, but i think is shows an honest humility we all need.

I keep asking PB this over and over and he just ignores it or just cannot see it for whatever reason.

iggy

7   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
May 30th, 2008 at 12:32 pm

I have a vey generous and expansive definition of heresy. In a few months it will have expanded to be stated as anyone who does not agree with me on every point.

That will make my wife a heretic as well. I plan on taking her to Salem.

8   chris    http://agendalesslove.wordpress.com
May 30th, 2008 at 1:35 pm

Again Though at times I am dogmatic on my own doctrine, I still see that I could be wrong and give others Grace to also be wrong.

It’s been my experience that those who have been given much Grace, by God, also give much Grace.

It’s also my belief that you can’t fully grasp the concept of Grace until you’ve experienced it. And then still be found wanting.