It’s nice, now and then, to see a news segment that doesn’t have a hidden agenda
Yes, you either love him or hate him, but you can’t say he’s a) not passionate; or b) he doesn’t care about Jesus. But baseball? Reggie Jackson? Spurgeon? C’mon…
This entry was posted
on Friday, January 30th, 2009 at 12:19 pm and is filed under Church and Society.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
![Image of The Prodigal God (An Unabridged Production)[2-CD Set]; Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31Jl6fhDLxL._SL75_.jpg "The Prodigal God (An Unabridged Production)[2-CD Set]; Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith")
79 Comments(+Add)
Can I love him and hate him?
I do.
just so long as you remember he’s officially crossed into being a cult leader.
“They are sinning by questioning”.
A few random thoughts:
1) I’m willing to forgive Chris L’s diss of baseball: the greatest gift that God gave man after salvation
2) “doesn’t have a hidden agenda” — you mean like that piece of crap that appeared in the NYT ? Maybe Karlinsky could give Worthen a lesson in Journalism 101.
3) I love the exchange regarding the bat: “What does this have to do with preaching?” “Nothing.” Maybe now a few more people know that some pastors actually have a life.
4) nc, I don’t know the whole background of the circumstance that you referenced, but I’d sooner eat okra than believe anything in that NYT article.
The continuing carousel of publicity surounding Pastor Driscoll is in my opinion a self fulfilling prophecy. I think I’ll stay in Tampa.
I used to like baseball… but I have given up on he MLB. Is that what this thread is about?
Even if he didn’t say it’s in keeping with what went down in their leadership “transition”.
He came up against the boundary with he and his wife’s bat doo-doo crazy claims about church discipline for stay at home dads.
But the accumulation of behaviors is too much for this man.
Cult is as cult does.
Speaking of baseball and Tampa…Rick would you host me and Joe for spring training?
Sure! Yankee caps REQUIRED!!
Joe wears a Yankee cap in the shower, so that’ll be no trouble for him.
I *like* how he carefully avoided the question about his Calvinists beliefs as they relate to predestination ‘right out of the chute.’
I also think his sex topics are bizarre and shouldn’t be ‘preached’ from the pulpit. That’s just my opinion and I don’t really care to defend my opinion or debate about it.
So, aside from his bizarre sex sermons and silly exegesis of SOS, his rampant and disturbing views on election, he seems like a nice guy and is doing the Lord’s work there in Seattle.
38. “Some guys have all the luck,” –Rod Stewart.
On the plus side, he likes baseball. How can you not love a guy who loves baseball? (Unless that baseball fan is a Red Sox fan and then it’s rather easy.)
Peace and grace. Out.
#10. technically, I think it’s a shower beany
I liked the Spurgeon thing, actually. Showed he isn’t all about breaking with those who preceded him in the faith?
RED SOX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://csaproductions.com/01-14-08_0928.jpg
Well, I would like to take this opportunity to state that I could care less about baseball. My dad is a rabid Indians fan, so I sorta follow the tribe in tribute to him, but otherwise, I could care less.
You baseball fans really should switch to the most exciting sport on Earth, which is professional ice hockey.
When it comes to putting bat to ball there’s nothing like cricket!
And CRN posted the same video to prove the opposite of why Chris posted it here. Except for the “punk rock preacher” title, it was posted without comment. I’m going with the negative assessment myself, however a several things struck me by this dual posting.
* This proves free will and subjectivity – same clip, polar views.
* How can the ODMs fawn over John Piper, castigate Mark Driscoll, and watch as Piper supports Mark Driscall? Who is the Spirit leading?
* Perhaps the negative assessment of Driscoll would carry more weight if some of the ODMs were not so vociferous about everyone. When you scream about Ravi Zacharius being an apostate people tend not to listen to your opinion about anyone.
The exact same video used to prove polar opposites reminds me of the three stooges throwing a hand grenade and having that same hand grenade thrown back at them and on and on. I love being a spectator, it’s so easy, but wait until someone demeans the gay community again and I will leap off the bench and lead the charge!
Sometimes I feel like an enigma wrapped in a conundrum, or as Ingrid once charged “one of the most duplicitous people on the internet”. I responded that her definition of duplicitous is not holding that party line, which I believe defined the ministry of Jesus. I have a long way to go but I will continue to speak my conscience – which I hope isn’t seared!!
Red Sox & Yankees… perfect examples of why I have given up on MLB…
Oh Neil, Even God hates the Red Sox.
18:
Well, some of the imams do attack Piper because of the Driscoll connection.
Ingrid’s whole “ministry” of anger to the glory of herself is a sin, so I wouldn’t really be concerned about her sense of what is right or wrong.
Too bad CRN posted w/o comment, I wonder what they are objecting to… sure he’s a strict Calvinist, but that’s not heresy… and for all the complaining the ADM’s do about universalism, vague gospels, etc… Driscoll is clear about the need for Christ and the reality of sin and Hell. What’s their beef?
I don’t hate either team… it the system that is screwed up and they are the prime examples of it.
What’s the context of that statement?
#22
Neil,
You missed the biggest irony. They didn’t have the common decency to Hat Tip us. I find it odd, that their post went up hours after ours. I’m sure none of them were on here lurking.
Haha
I, like Jerry, do not like the graphic preaching about sex in the pulpit. I also did not like the SOS series. But this guy is definitely passionate about God, his family, and his church. He preaches a truthful message, and does not pull any punches. And, like he said in the interview, if you have no critics you are not really preaching anything.
I find myself more like Mark Driscoll- or like I imagine the Apostle Paul to be.
Like any good preacher, he has his critics. Like any human, he has his foibles. Like any pastor, he has his dragons attacking.
At least it is not the circus church, preach what you want to hear, contemplative incense sniffing yoga positioning mantra repeating garbage that passes for a church fellowship- and in Seattle, it could easily be.
nc – Piper’s invitation to Driscoll to speak at DG conference was a head scratcher. It seemed so incongruous.
There has developed an “observatory” blogdom which I equate with a doctrinal Wolfschanze (Wolf’s Lair). This is where you get all the reports about the latest teaching, moral failure, meeting, conference, cooperation, book, remark, or any other intelligence gathering on the enemy or his human emissaries, and with that information you discuss and plan how to attack them.
And any criticism of you is received as an attack on God and His truth and, as in any attack on the Wolfschanze, as being an act of spiritual treason. Only the most trusted generals are allowed inside your reinforced bunker, and every once in a while a disloyal general loses his or her invitation.
But perhaps the most startling and enigmatic paradox is this: It has become evident that in their search for “grievious wolves” which by definition kill sheep, they themselves have so often played the role of a wolf and have attacked the sheepfold. The definition of a spiritual wolf goes far beyond certain doctrinal compromises, it includes predatory canids, orthodox in systematic examinations, but rabid in their thirst for the blood of both goats and sheep.
And so, in a loose metaphor, I describe the blogs that are relentless in their self righteous attacks as part of the Wolfschanze.
Neil (#23)
God had something to say about that.
Besides, God doesn’t hate the Red Sox — He hates the Braves, and has shown His fury by visiting upon them Frank Wren.
Actually, PB, if you knew anything about Mars Hill it was a space that was part of the vanguard of incense, candles, etc etc etc.
I remember one person describing their worship as quasi-goth witchy-poo stuff.
Their methods and radically different means of ordering their gatherings was part of what garnered some attention and this was back before “emergent village” started and he was still friends with Pagitt, etc. etc.
This is the same church that has the big new year’s eve bash with alcohol and dancing that Ingrid threw hissy over.
So I don’t know if, by ODM standards, he isn’t still considered a “circus church”.
Do they use an organ exclusively? If not then *BAM* circus church!
Neil,
“sinning by questioning”.
First off, it’s never a sin to question human leaders. If it is, then we’re in deep doo doo.
The questioning was coming from members and leaders who didn’t like the re-org move to freeze out fellow elders who weren’t just rubber stamping Driscoll and his cronies mandates.
Gasp! They were acting like…elders.
Instead of working it through with guys he had labored with side by side for a long time, he just pushed through a way to make them “second-class” elders and be able to concentrate more power in himself.
This is behavior consistent with Mark’s approach to things way back before any of you ever even heard of the guy.
Honestly, I don’t know what context would ever merit saying that “questioning is sin”.
That’s scary.
NC,
I agree with the “questioning is sin” statement you made. However, I think to define mark on this one statement might be a bit unfair.
Where/when did this happen with the elders? I’m not saying its outside of possiblity for that to happen, it might even be probable, but I’d like to see a bit more documentation before I buy into it totally.
It’s not Driscoll’s Calvinism that bothers me, really. What I dislike is how he plays up the whole macho thing so much. Whether or not it’s intentional or not, he presents this idea that says Jesus came to reinforce our American male archetype.
I think that actually does a disservice to the Gospel, personally. A big part of the cross was the fact that Jesus could be “beaten up” – that God wins through weakness, not dominance through force. Driscoll says in one his books that he can’t serve a Jesus he can beat up. Well isn’t that part of the point of the Gospel in some way? The weakness of God is stronger than the strength of men.
Within the last year or so, I believe.
I’m not saying it’s the one moment to define him. I’m saying it’s a moment that is not surprising given his whole demeanor and approach to leadership over the years.
The one thing I’m surprised at is that it hasn’t happened so blatantly before.
I don’t like de facto “single person” control…and no matter what people say to the contrary, that’s how it really works with MH.
Arbitrary, authoritarian, sometimes a bit crazy.
I mean…church discipline for a “stay at home dad”?
Really?
yikes.
We’re talking about an accumulation here.
I don’t care about his Calvinism, his language, his church parties, any of it.
What I’m more concerned about is the use of power, etc.
This guy is a self-confirmed guy who went out and started a church and then built an authenticating structure around him after the fact. A structure that, in reality, can do nothing more than that. Piper and those guys can “rebuke” him for non-essential things…but those are distractions. There’s no way to keep the man accountable about what really matters. He doesn’t have an independent Elder system around him. He really doesn’t.
35:
Also, his depiction of Jesus is a working-class, wrong side of the tracks, smart alecky, not like the sissified educated class version of Christ.
It sounds actually a lot like…well…Mark. Talk about taking your particular class insecurities and issues and putting a religious spin on them.
ick.
His whole theology of Jesus/masculinity is really a big therapeutic exercise for himself.
Those are kind of my thoughts, as well, but I guess I will try to restrain myself from becoming just another critic. I guess I just see Driscoll going down a well-worn path, despite how edgy he attempts to be.
As far as the macho thing, I’m not saying Jesus was by any means a scrawny little guy. I imagine he was rugged and tough – I mean a carpenter in those days was basically a stonecutter. So hauling around rocks wasn’t for weaklings.
But the fact that he was stronger and could have led an actual physical revolt makes the fact that he didn’t even more amazing.
Phil – just a few – and I mean a FEW – examples of Driscoll’s unapproachable authority.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKDgEufMKvQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKDgEufMKvQ
A minor snippet from Driscoll’s view of Christ:
Sometimes men who are obsessed with projecting their masculinity have problems. Sometimes.
I’ll grant that I don’t like popular depictions of Jesus. But the answer isn’t to co-opt Jesus for a particular sub-cultural view of masculinity that doesn’t exist in most places around the world.
Then again, I could be mistaken…
I mean it’s possible I was deluded into thinking that a Y Chromosome and a penis was sufficient argument for my being male.
all this other behavioral stuff is culturally constructed. I don’t have an obligation biblically to like violence, fix cars, be non-verbal, and have bad hygiene to be the man God wants me to be.
Sorry.
anyone who thinks so is just plain wrong…and maybe, on a good day, a little stupid.
nc – I’m pretty sure our challenge is to bring our lives into His focus than the reverse. A real man would not have conversed with the woman at the well, he would have just demanded her to get him some water!
I’m not a huge fan of Driscoll. His voice annoys me, his hyper wife shouldn’t work annoys me, even though I agree at a baseline with him there.
Having said that, I also agree with him on a baseline level that we have made Jesus and by extension the Christian male into a sissified persona.
Nice is the new spiritual virtue. By nice, we mean never offend anyone. Always find a positive spin, look like John Maxwell, kind of nice.
I am convinced that if Jesus walked our streets today we’d lead the charge to crucify Him in no small part because he wasn’t nice enough.
42.
Well, he’d only have to “demand” if his wife wasn’t godly–proven by the fact that she didn’t anticipate his needs and serve him in her glorious role of subjection.
ick.
That made me feel dirty just writing that.
Joe,
I agree people can shy from conflict as a seeming moral virtue. But Driscoll’s answer to the problem is NOT the answer.
If I was in the room with Driscoll he’d probably say I wasn’t living up to his standards. And I know that I have no problems laying the wood to someone when I need to.
It’s an irresponsible use of a substantive issue that knows no “gender” and turns it into an issue of style.
On the other side,
I don’t know what churches people are going to, because I was raised in the center of evangelicalism in the midwest and I didn’t see this sissified Jesus.
Fear of conflict was never connected to Jesus by anyone in my spiritual upbringing.
#44 – Flesh and blood did not reveal that to you, my son. You are growing.
#45.
I agree his answer isn’t the answer. I was just saying I agree with him that there is a problem.
48: HA!
49: Right-o, my friend.
I think this is the biggest reason why Driscoll takes fire on all sides. He’s a reactionary at heart, and what he’s reacting to is his niche in Seattle.
Bo,
Far be it for me to disagree with a catch of your abilities (should have stayed off of that ladder) but I think the problem is far bigger than just Seattle. I’ve seen it from the East Coast all the way across the country.
Now, I do agree that he is reacting and that is almost always a bad thing. It’s important to always be proactive, not reactive.
Oh…yawn. I’ve never understood how anyone can enjoy a game ending in a tie? (yes I know that 1 all star game)
That’s not sport that’s universalism.
There may be a problem in some quarters with characterizing Jesus as weak, but to build a whole theology of masculinity from it is a strange abberation.
He’s explicitly teaching that a man is feminized if he doesn’t like fighting or working with his hands.
And he connects it to the idea that some misconception of Jesus is responsible for such preferences.
A. That idea of masculinity is wrong.
B. There is no demonstrable connection between a mistaken conception of Jesus and personal gender identity.
Sociologically, people primarily get their gender identity from family, parents and peer group.
It’s just garbage.
Another thing…
I know a ton of people from Seattle, love the town. I don’t see how that town is some site of massive feminizing.
It’s horrible theology, but I could better “get it” from the guy if he was trying to work exclusively in West Hollywood, Los Angeles, OR the Castro in San Francisco.
I would caution ya’ll to not underestimate the feminization of men in our culture. If you know Chris, you know I don’t believe that you have to do manual labor or be tough in order to be masculine. (love you, honey!) The feminization is in the attitudes and choices that stem from them. The growing American male archetype is not what we see in old Clint Eastwood movies. It is a “share your feelings, get in touch with your feminine side, don’t have aggressive thoughts” type of thing. I see it in the raising of kids today. I blame both moms and dads…moms because they are entirely too overprotective and don’t appreciate a young boys desire to rescue people and kill bad guys (If you have sons, you know that they make a gun out of anything, and not because they are inundated with that from the media so much as that is in their makeup) and dads because they don’t stand up to overbearing mothers and insist that their boys be allowed to be boys. And the cycle is perpetuating itself, and I believe that this is what Mark speaks against. Don’t turn Jesus into a father-type man that just wants everyone “to get along”. Play nice, don’t run in the house, sit still, don’t ever get in a fight because hitting is never the answer, kind of expectations. He was a conqueror, and strong and bold man. He was my knight in shining armor. I think of Aragorn in LotR, not in a “OMG he is so cute way”, but in the strong, leader, wants peace but knows it make take war kind of way. Jesus is that to all of us. But the current culture (read: media mainly) IS trying to turn him into an easy-going, fully-accepting of all pov, everyone is lovely kind of guy. And the people in MH are influenced by the liberal media. So that is quite possibly what Mark is trying to fight against. Just my .02 worth from a woman’s pov.
Zan,
I agree with what you are saying. I agree that Mark has probably accurately described and diagnosed the problem, he’s just going about answering it the wrong way.
I guess i just think that our concepts of masculinity and femininity are already so conditioned by culture, that they’re almost meaningless. Obviously, at a biological level there is a real difference when it comes to mothers being able to nurture children, but beyond that there seems to be so much that’s just arbitrary. We could go back and look at gender roles from a first century Jewish perspective, but even then it seems we are willing to pick and choose to some degree.
I think Driscoll is overreacting to what he perceives to be the problem, and the way to correct a problem isn’t to overreact. It’s to present facts that correct the problem and act accordingly.
I will also add that I think it’s sort of funny that Tolkien’s and C.S. Lewis’ works are always brought up in these discussions as it comes to men and their mythic aspirations. In reality, Tolkien and Lewis were professors in the liberal arts – not really manly men. They sat around and smoked cigars and talked about philosophy and mythology. A lot of Christian men nowadays would probably find them too bookish and girly. They probably wouldn’t live up to Driscoll’s standards.
It is impossible to compartmentalize the Christ inside gender behavioral boxes. Sometimes He rebuked strongly, other times He played with children. Sometimes He cleansed the temple, other times He allowed Himslf to be spat upon.
He is Who He is, and to place Him either way in any cultural context will always lose something in that translation and many times reflect the God given demeanor of the teacher. That is obvious with Driscoll.
In an unsettling reality, Jesus became a redemptive doormat for the world. We have been called to turn the cheek, love our enemies, suffer ourselves to be defrauded, rejoice when counted worthy to suffer for His sake, die to ourselves, overcome evil with good, season our speech with grace, esteem everyone better than ourselves, walk in mercy, be gentle as leaders, and a laundry list of commandments that we as men haven’ty even approached.
We don’t need to be more like fight club, we need to be more like cross club.
Rick,
I would agree. But the strength that he portrayed was that He was able to save himself off that cross, but He did, literally, force himself to stay there. That, to me, is ultimate strength. Not strength because he was afraid of confrontation, and just wanted everyone to play nice.
Phil,
I began my comment stating that masculine doesn’t show in your occupation so much as in your actions and attitudes. How you treat and protect others. I am not one to always bring up lewis or Tolkien in this regard, Aragorn is just the most recent example in my head, since I watched it again recently with my daughter. Mark isn’t over-reacting, just not necessarily saying things the way you or I would, but it is a very real situation.
btw, I married, live with, and gave birth to “bookish”. Doesn’t have to be girly. It is who God made them. And if they lived their lives with integrity, standing for what is right and fighting against wrong/sin, protecting and loving the innocent, then they were strong men. Not wimpy.
I strongly disagree with your generous assessment of Mark’s perspective, however I wonder if you have ever seen the movie “Fight Club”? And if you have (I have on TV), I wonder how that fits into the incarnate construct projected by Driscoll?
yeah, Fight Club isn’t anywhere to be seen on my Netflix queue! What is your assessment of it?
I don’t think Fight Club has a whole lot to do with the masculine/feminine paradigm that Driscoll injects into his ministry, except on a cursory level.
Fight Club probably does resonate with Driscoll and his congregants though. Its rejection of societal norms as to purpose and accumulation of wealth as well as subverting society itself would ring true to them, not to mention that generally the movie is a reflection of the discontent felt by Gen Xers squeezed between Boomers and Gen Y.
It is a foul mouthed play that includes profoundly disturbing violence and presents a psychotic masculinity that should be rejected by every follower of Jesus Christ. How in God’s dear name anyone can use that template and tether it to the Savior reveals a core problem that is either a hyper-reaction to the culture or something much more unsettling in our understanding of the life of Jesus Christ.
I believe that much of Driscoll’s teaching about the masculine revelation of Jesus Christ is a projection of himself. The way he deals with stubborn or recalcitrant elders is a reflection of his underatanding of Jesus.
Rick,
Your links above gave me no context whatsoever. I will only comment on his leader issues if I can hear some direct words from him on that. Otherwise, it is his church, Rick, and we need to keep out of it, unless he calls and asks what we think. (hell freezing over comes to mind).
Bo, I feel that way sometimes, since I am an Xer. I still don’t think I would like the movie. I remember when it came out, the reviews led me to decide I wouldn’t, but am not averse to it if I could glean a good lesson out of it. Like Bruce Almighty. Hated it while watching it, but in the end it really made me think.
This thread is sort of funny to me.
1. Driscoll may go too far at times about many things.
2. Driscoll is a dynamic and loud individual.
3. If you stand out, people will love you.
4. If you stand out, people will hate you.
5. Sex is not dirty.
6. There is some good sex in the bible.
7. There is much more bad sex in the bible.
8. SOS is a book of love, yet sex is very much a part of it.
9. Sex in marriage is pure.
10. Sex as stated bay Driscoll, outside of marriage is not pure.
11. Driscoll calls for purity in sex.
12. People are hung up on sex.
13. Young people (many who attend Driscoll’s church) are hung up on sex.
14. Porn is rampant in society and easily accessible.
15. Porn teaches more people about sex than Drsicoll.
16. Porn destroys sexual intimacy in marriage.
17. I appreciate pastors that speak sexual purity to a generation that is being taught perversion.
18. Jesus was not a girly man.
19. Jesus was not a testosterone, macho, superhero.
20. Calvin did not save us.
21. Mark seems more open to admit he may not understand predestination.
22. Driscoll admits his weaknesses.
23. Driscoll plays up his strengths.
24. Baseball is boring most the time.
25. I knew Reggie Jackson and was not impressed.
26. Driscoll is a flawed human like the rest of us.
27, Reggie Jackson had a cool car collections and his storage was two houses from my house in Ca.
28. Driscoll seems to have more of a healthy attitude than most do about sex.
29. Sex is a part of life.
30. Driscoll follows me on Twitter and is a friend of mine on Facebook… (Big whoop!)
31. Sex sell.
32. Driscoll really hasn’t said anything I haven’t heard some very good teachers state… he just speaks more about it.
I could go on all day, bu suffice it to say, there are things I appreciate about Driscoll and things where he may speak too much on. I haven’t heard any sermons by Driscoll but one, yet, if people are getting saved and seeking to life in the purity of Christ Jesus and Driscoll is promoting these ideas… then why the fuss? He is not promoting the prosperity gospel or some other gospel. He may see needs in his church and else where we may not as we may see things he does not. In an oversexed society, sometimes bluntness cuts through the wimpy attempt some people take do in getting to the core of issues. Sometimes we dress things up and sanitize things… especially the Bible and pretend it is G rated… If they ever made a movie true to the Bible… from start to finish… it would be x rated to violence and sex.
iggy
Is this not somewhat true of all of us…we have created God in our image?
On the “Fight Club” issue; A young man in my church came to Jesus specifically cause of the movie. Seriously. God can and does use all things.
Iggy,
That is a great list! I would encourage you to listen to his sermons. Coming from an avid anti-calvinist, I really like his preaching. I like his sarcasm (because, as is obvious from Job, God is the author of sarcasm), and his preaching style. He teaches straight from the bible, verse by verse. I really liked his Ruth series. I tried to make my boys listen to it. I was only moderately successful, but every little bit helps!
His teaching on dealing with elders are public and on YouTube and I have no interest in telling him how to pastor his church, but I do take issue with his Biblical interpretation to which we all should be accountable.
Rick,
I disagree completely, there’s much in Fight Club that couldn’t be tolerated within a Christ-following community, but the deeper themes in that film track almost directly with scriptural teachings.
The most substantial part of it deals with teh general discontent of what the average life has begun (Tyler Durden’s statement, “our great depression is our lives” sums it up well).
That is not the issue, Driscoll’s contention is that the nature of Christ is aggressive as evidenced in that film. I was saved partly by seeing Godspell so I am not ignorant of God using almost anything to draw people to Christ, but the themes in fight club do not reflect the nature of Christ.
The bootom line is that Driscoll has used a masculine driven culture as a template for understanding and interpreting the life of Jesus Christ. Nothing could be further from the truth, if anything, he was a redemptive doormat for the good of humanity. Driscoll’s interpretation comes from the Ann Coulter/Rush Limbaugh school of “Christian” behavior.
In my book Gandhi was closer to exhibiting a Christlike demeanor than would be those people.
We have two different conversations going on.
Fight Club has Biblical themes in it.
Mark Driscoll, at the very least, over reacts on the issue of masculinity.
Got any other Gordian Knots for me?
The reason fight club is in the conversation is because that seems to be the favorite movie at MH including Driscoll.
I don’t see how the “problem” is addressed by clearly indicating that a male’s ability to beat up someone is the standard by which we understand “godly” masculinity.
That’s what the guy says and is saying.
He’s come right out and basically said that if, as a man, you don’t enjoy Ultimate Fighting, then something’s wrong with you and you’ve been feminized.
C’mon, folks.
Even if you see this “feminization” stuff around you, this guy isn’t someone you want in your corner.
I just cringe every time he runs his mouth.
It’s one thing to believe that women shouldn’t work out of the home, it’s another thing to start telling everyone else that something’s wrong with you if you don’t agree and to attack their sense of masculinity to neutralize reasonable disagreement.
I remember hearing him say one time that if, as a man, you don’t keep up a discipline of bible reading then you’ve become a feminine man.
ummm…do you people hear this rhetoric and it’s clear implications for femininity, much less masculinity?
Humans have bad habits sometimes, or fail. That’s work enough.
We don’t need to unnecessarily saddle it with “gender” too. I don’t see how that’s supposed to motivate someone.
Honestly, I get really offended when people “gender” an issue that doesn’t need it or has anything to do with it.
It only adds to the confusion…
btw,
I loved Fight Club.
I guess I’m a man.
I don’t see how the urge to protect is either masculine or feminine, really. I know women who are very protective as well. I just think the whole concept of masculinity and femininity are very ambiguous and culturally conditioned.
I read both of Driscoll’s books a few years ago, and I actually liked them a lot back then. I actually recommended them to people and gave them as gifts. But over the last couple years, I’ve noticed a change in him that’s kind of to explain. It could just be that I’ve changed, but in any case, it’s just hard for me look at him the same way.
I’ve never seen Fight Club, so I can’t comment on that…
#35
There’s a new flavor on the double negative.
Carry on.