Driscoll

I have read books by Driscoll and Miller's book listed here. As I went through seminary their texts weren't required, but I'm not in my 20s...according to the government...

I really like Miller's book, it is very good. Driscoll has a unique style and I like some of his earlier stuff but haven't like a lot of his latest stuff. (His book on marriage is terrible and deeply vexing.)

Here's the thing about Driscoll, I don't understand why people still gripe about his former (and I mean like 10 years ago) style where he was overly brash and terribly crude in his sermons. He has repented to God and publicly...the man has asked forgiveness from his church and others openly. Why does this still get brought up? The guy didn't sleep with anyone, he didn' steal, he admits he was wrong and asks for forgiveness. What else does he have to do?

Now, Driscoll's latest book isn't worth the paper its printed on. I am not thrilled about it and recommend Tim Keller's book on marriage which is far better.

I do know that Miller and Driscoll are being recommended for seminarians, but so are Barth, Multmann, Habermas (Jurgen), Wright, and a host of others we might find things to disagree with. Part of seminary, just like with education, is being exposed to many thinkers to help one craft their own intellectual identity. This is important work. If I were teaching a intro seminary course, maybe on something spiritual formation or something like that, I'd recommend one or two of the books. They are important because they are good.

 

Good post. Driscolls recent sermons that I have heard have been not much different than any other sort-of youngish sort-of-cool pastor. He does have some good insights on some topics.

I read Blue like Jazz about 7-8 years ago. I don't really know if he is pushing relativism or not. I don't really think so, but his book is not a theology book. His style of communication is not really concrete in may areas so you sort of come away thinking, "This is nice guy who is a good writer, but I'm not sure what conclusions he comes to." It seemed to me that he has bought into the popular idea of being against religion but For Jesus. But I don't think he's a heretic.

Driscolls message (available online somewhere) about his early associations with the emerging/emergen movement is very enlightening about the various strands that came out of that original group: [those who want to redefine the gospel (brian McLaren), those who want to use emergent methods but keep the evangelical message the same (Dan Kimball), and the new reformed edgy people (driscoll)]

 

I will add for those who really like Driscoll and think they can simply copy his style, Matt Chandler has a good warning based on the bible verse:

"fulfill YOUR ministry" (as opposed to someone elses)

Driscoll has the unique gift in a unique setting of being able to preach to 1,000 people a sermon entitled "7 reasons why you're stupid." and several hundred of them will get saved! They'll respond with "you're right, I"m stupid, I need jesus!!!"

Most of us don't have that gift, and would simply get ourselves fired.

 

Why was a pastor doing a sermon on another pastor? Whatever happened to the faithful preaching of Christ and Him crucified?