What makes you think Mark Driscoll loves Jesus and some here to not?

How do you know Mark Driscoll is being greatly used and those here are not?

It is slightly disturbing. Though I don’t know all the details. That’s what happens when a story like this gets published. It’s got to be condensed and many details get left out. I wonder this – How did this story get into the paper to begin with?

At Mars Hill Church, the elders have largely been called into service by Driscoll, not the other way around. He started the church and populated the elder board with men of his own choosing. Under these circumstances, does anyone really believe the elders will vote to remove him from the pulpit, much less rebuke him? There is precedent for what happens when elders challenge him.

Greg

Is there ever a time when a joke/language is sinful? How would you “prove” that it were so? Is there ever a time where a joke/language would disqualify a pastor? How would we discern this? Have an example?

This is not about legalism. Frank has not said Driscoll will lose or improve his justification by repenting. *IF* a pastor ever does become disqualified to hold that office that would not mean he is not a Christian.

Jacob, I don’t really care if you have a low view of blogs. (No offense.) Maybe Driscoll should stop blogging, huh? Do you have a low view of all forms of one-way communication? Newspapers, letters, videos, mp3 sermons, etc.? A blog is just another way of doing this and they usually have avenues of instant feedback like the comment here.

There is a certain problem in this age of technology. If someone like a super-pastor does offend you how can you contact them? If their own congregation can’t even get to them how will you?

I don’t know if Driscoll should repent of this joke. But I’d love to see the answer to my first questions above answered.

Russ’s last blog post..Advance09 – Recap

Right, Jacob? Nobody called out by Driscoll ever.

As to proving the joke is a sin, it’s a plain violation of the command not to let filthy jesting in Eph. 5. The acid test is whether one would make that joke over dinner in a public place. Except for getting laughs on Hughley, I can’t think of anywhere that joke doesn’t offend.

Looking forward to your call, Jacob.

Matt S. & I have had a couple of conversations already about where this leads; he doesn’t see any disqualification, I see it as being immanent, if it hasn’t happened already. But I give him props for being consistent; he said he wouldn’t have a problem with his own pastor using the same sort of language and illustrations as Driscoll. Haven’t seen many other Driscoll supporters that consistent.

Finally, despite Jacob’s tone, I think he’s hit upon a brilliant idea. Frank is the ideal guy to go try to talk some sense into Pastor Driscoll. I’m going on record with a pledge of $20 toward Frank’s trip to Seattle.

First I will vouch first hand for Frank. He has the same type of language problem. I understand Frank’s initial question of repentance. He just listened to Driscoll call-out pastors he doesn’t know after listing a long line of idols that are made in ministry. Matt is also right. We don’t know if he’s repented. It would have been a great time to show humilty and explain that he has, if he has, repented. Perfect time to be an example.

I understand Kevin’s comment. We did just come back from an edifying time of learning and fellowship. It seemed like the wrong time for Frank’s comment. Sometimes you have to strike when the irons hot or it cools and does nothing. In light of the edifying time though this could also have lead to us slowing down and really considering Driscoll’s masterbation joke.

I have trouble with the joke. I do. And I also understand it. He was relating a story and even corrected the original comment. It seems though the affect of the joke was to get laughs and Hughley did laugh. Where was the focus? I don’t know. *IF* I had to name one, the biggest problem I had with the interview is the “Dig Jesus” comment. What does that mean? He could have contextualized better than that.

I even forgive Matt S. for misreading me and thinking I was asking Driscoll to repent when I was just giving the context. I was asked the context on twitter so I figured I’d give it.

I disagree with Jacob that Frank was espousing legalism. Frank was applying, agree or not, the qualifications of a pastor. Or it could be a wisdom issue. Again, there is a misconstruing of what happened in contacting Driscoll. It wasn’t just across the blogosphere. Either way, Driscoll has also publicly criticized folks. Pass! Right? Right. If two people approach you for the same issue and you only listen to one of them because you don’t like the approach, etc. of the other, you probably need to listen to Driscoll’s message and repent of some form of idolatry. I’m not sure what “man up” means in this context.

Frank comes back with a valid point. If it were one of my Christian bros I hung out with consistently talking like this I’d say something. If my pastor was going to be on TV and I had my family watch I would expect different comments than what was given on Hughley’s show. Not sure my wife and daughter would be ROFL.

Note to Matt: I am Driscoll’s age. I don’t understand why it seemingly has to be the f-bomb or nothing.

Can a joke be a sin? A masterbation joke? A racist joke? What if the N-word was used in a joke? A sexual joke? Should anyone ever have to repent of these types of jokes, or any, since they are just jokes?

Frank quotes Driscoll on short comings and repentance. I agree that every Christian would be able to say what Driscoll did here. I actually think it’s more of a problem if we can’t see specific things we struggle with and if we don’t/won’t repent of them.

I like Jennifer’s “Seven A’s” list from Peacemakers, thanks.

Jacob, in fairness to Jennifer she wasn’t trying to answer Driscoll. She was kindly offering something to help us remember those aspects of our walk. Shall we go through Driscoll’s presentations and look for only biblical references and disregard all extra-biblical items? There wouldn’t be much left. The problem also is that Driscoll is applying his cultural norms to us. To everyone. The Advance09 conference was about the South. Yet, he came dressed in clothes and language from Seattle. And guess what? I understood him! I can show you some real watchbloggers if you like.

Man up? Again? I know that Frank would have absolutely no trouble sitting down with Driscoll and talking to him about this issue. Nor would I to tell him I’m torn on it. I’m not sure even his own flock has that kind of access to him. Our odds are pretty slim then. I’m glad you like the blog’s new look.

Frank has defended Driscoll in the past. On more than one occasion. I hope you two get to talk.

Again, I’m torn on this issue. Maybe I’ll pick some tulips and pull the pedals…repent, repent not, repent, repent not….

Thanks though! It was funny when he said watchbloggers. Then again, why is he watching them?

You e-mail Mark, Jacob, and he’ll give you my phone number. You call me and “man up”, because I am sure you’re right and I’m not the guy who, in 2007, took a lot of flack for calling Mark Driscoll “the next Billy Graham”.

Oh wait: that was me, and I did say that. Apparently I drank the hater kool-aid someplace.

Frank Turk’s last blog post..Paul Washer, too?

I’m humbled by your note taking ability while being soaking wet and sitting in a lobby! Great recaps.

Watchbloggers. LOL..that is funny, especially when Stetzer said it.

Russ’s last blog post..Greetings and Re:Launch

Btw, mark your blog looks pretty good on the iPhone, I guess I don’t need to get the kindle version….

There was not a specific denomination. A few speakers were Southern Baptist, atleast one Presbyterian and others non-denominational though being credo-baptist.

The seven A’s of confession were Address everyone involved
Avoid using words such as if, but and maybe
Admit specifically what you have done wrong
Acknowledge the hurt caused
Accept the consequences
Alter your behaviou
Ask for forgiveness.

I In this instance I think the point Admit specifically what you have done wrong is relevant.

I found the post “Spring Cleaning” to be also lacking in these qualities.

William’s last blog post..Damien Rice’s “Cold Water” – an exegesis

Right now I’m listening to the “Trials” audio from MHC called “Humble Pastors”, and around the 56th minute, Pastor Driscoll says something worth reviewing:

[QUOTE][56:08]
God opposes the proud! think about that! To be proud is to fight God — losing battle! And God gives grace to the humble — grace to the humble! grace just cuts to the front of the line. What we don’t need is pride: we need grace. And grace comes to the humble. God can’t give grace to the proud because their hands are closed — they need nothing. They’re absolutely self-sufficient. The proud – they oppose God. And the Humble – they beseech him for grace. “God I need help! I need a savior! I don’t need self-esteem – I need an identity in Christ. I don’t need to self-actualize – I need to worship. you. Live for your glory to my joy. I need to get out of myself; I’m addicted to myself. I think about myself; I love myself all the time. And only myself.”

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: there are tiems and ways that I have failed you. I have -failed- you. This is utterly condemning. Arrogance, hautiness, boastfulness. I have failed you. I have said this before and I’ll say it again: I deeply regret ways I have acted, things I have said. I ask your forgiveness. I’d ask us all to follow the example of Jesus. I hope by God’s grace to grow in this.
[/QUOTE][57:28]

Now, here’s the thing: that’s a fine general confession of being human, right? Who couldn’t make that confession? It’s the base-line of every-day, Gospel-informed living: I’m a sinful dude.

If I made that exact same apology for (as an example) belittling my wife in public, would it be sufficient? Does it actually cover what I did, or is it the least I can do — the kind of apology you make when you don’t want to apologize because you don’t think you did anything wrong?

Is this the repentance for making the joke on Hughley which has been part of his repertoire since his “Confessions” book? I can’t take it as a confession that he’s sorry for anything in particular — because it is no such thing.

That’s all I have to say about this for now. The rest of you are welcome to the last word here, and I apologize to our host, mark, for coopting his blog for this matter.

Frank Turk’s last blog post..Weekend Red Meat

If Mark Driscoll made a racist joke, would he be disqualified from ministry if he did not repent?

Frank Turk’s last blog post..Weekend Red Meat

I think if he cannot repent, he is certainly disqualified based on the criteria in Titus and the letters to Timothy. Everybody makes mistakes — even gross errors. Some things are forgiveable — if there is repentance.

My express and singular point is the point MD made at the end of he second talk at Advance: if he cannot repent, he is violating the Gospel’s requirement of repentance. You may call that what he calls that — and therefore demonstrate that he ought to step down.

Frank Turk’s last blog post..Weekend Red Meat

I think that if you and I each separately produced a list of 10 watchblogs whiuch we should simply ignore because they are imbalanced and unhelpful, they’d look alike. If we exclude those blogs/sources from consideration, there’s nothing left here to say except that if Mark Driscoll has a proclivity for vulgarity, and he has not repented of it in the same way he demonstrated it (public vs. private; obvious vs. veiled; clear vs. vague), then we’re talking about the same thing and the side discussions are interesting but not necessary.

At the suggestion of the commentors here, I am going to re-listen to the most recent MHC sermons to find the repentance they has has been made — and when I find what they say is there, I’ll be glad to revise my own statements and take my own advice.

Frank Turk’s last blog post..Weekend Red Meat

What I’m saying is that what I see too often is an unbiblical restraint in language and a misapplication of this same principle to the opposite extreme.

I’m not making excuses for Driscoll’s bawdy language; he’s the one who has to give an account to Jesus for those things in the end, not me. I am saying that we can and should take into consideration that maybe our understanding is skewed sometimes, too.

I say foolish things far more often that I’d like, and probably more than I’ve consciously repented of, to be perfectly honest. I would suggest though, that while it’s right to call people to repentance, we should be careful to not do so from an arrogant posture (which many of the calls regarding Driscoll have been nothing short of); let’s be honest about our own sin, especially when we bring the sin of others to light.

Aaron’s last blog post..The Persevering Prophet: I Know the Plans I Have for You

Here’s what you’re really saying, Aaron: that the joke on Hughley was of the same prophetic and moral value, for example, as Ezekiel 16 or 23? That somehow conveying a joke about masturbation is in the same league as calling the idolatry of Israel lawless whoring?

I hate to tell you this: I agree with your principle, but I think you might be more serious about how you apply it. There’s a gigantic difference between what Ezekiel did, or even what Paul did when he spoke to the Galatians, and making Ecclesiastes into a joke about sexual misconduct. Moreover, isn’t your principle actually a call for restraint where the Bible is restrained — as in the Song of Solomon?

I think God’s ministers ought to be ministering God’s word as if it was the fire and hammers which God says it is in Jeremiah 23 — that is, as something which breaks down all our idols, and breaks our stony hearts. I’m pretty sure, however, that we don’t do that when we are actually appealing to the stony places in people’s hearts — such as their stony use of vulgar language, and their prideful immodesty about their own sexuality.

Frank Turk’s last blog post..Weekend Red Meat

God inspired some incredibly “improper” words, especially regarding our sinfulness (see large parts of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, & Hosea) and self-righteousness (such as Phil. 3:8).

I’m all being proper with our words, as long as that includes using the words God uses.

Regarding Driscoll repenting, if you’ve listened to some of the latest Mars Hill sermons, at least two have what sound to be genuine statements of repentance.

Aaron’s last blog post..The Persevering Prophet: I Know the Plans I Have for You

What if it was adultery? Or stealing? Or covetousness? or lying? You know: Driscoll himself said in Day 2, quoting J.I. Packer, that those who eliminate the need for repentance from the church are heretics — because the Gospel is predicated on repentance. If you don’t repent, he said, you’re a heretic.

The funny thing is that he was talking about guys who don’t want to repent of Sunday School — which, of course, he is right about. But where are we going when we can see the idolatry of sunday school but not the idolatry of the faddish and the vulgar? Where ar we when we have idolized Chris Rock in the same way others have idolized C. H. Spurgeon? DOes the message not apply?

Does he really not have to repent — can he really just get away with the general, vague, “I’m the chief of sinners, too”?

[QUOTE]
If we casted out mens ministry every time they have a fault and dont repeatedly apologize publicly for it not even Piper and MacArthur would be left standing.
[/QUOTE]

“Repeatedly”? I don’t mean to be intransigent here, but how about once? Moreover, I need you to draw your analogy here out a little more clearly and factually. Name some standards violation given to us by Scripture for the elders of the local church which either Piper or MacArthur (or Mahaney, of Dever, or Chandler, or etc.) have allegedly “repented of” and then repeats over and over? I can’t think of one. If you have more information there than I do, I am really ready to hear it.

Frank Turk’s last blog post..Weekend Red Meat