Mark Driscoll in his own words...

That much is evident.

No one is disputing that, but it's the nature of the problems that is a stark contrast between what God tolerates in the ministry, and what the modern church movements are glorying in.

Never said that, but they weren't novices. Anyway, that's my whole point.

 

That is a rather subjective statement.

 

1. At this point, terminology means nothing. The question is: Are there any dangerous elements in the above paragraph?

2. I agree, If doctrine and practice are constant in the life of the Church, not just in a local church, the result is dead orthodoxy.

3. The Jerusalem church did not correspond 100% with the church at Antioch of Syria and neither with the church at Rome.

4. We need to understand Driscoll use of "doctrine and practice" in their context.

 

As SBC's association is closely aligned with MBTS, he may be interested in this blog by one of it's professors, Mark DeVine, (If he doesn't know about it already). A friend at work pointed this out to me today, and I remembered this discussion.

Lots in there about Mark Driscoll. http://www.theologyprof.com/

 

Now that I've got high speed internet, I started listening to Driscoll's address:

SBC, do you remember this discussion? http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=4565

Pay special attention to posts 14, 41 and 43.

There you were on the side saying that the SBC would never become Charismatic. Here, you're "glad God has called men like Driscoll to the ministry."

How long do you think that seat belt will stay buckled?

 

Wow....perhaps you should help us understand what Driscoll means by that statement. Do you think he means pentacostalism such as your background? Or, is that what you're assuming in order to prove your point?

If you're interested in Driscoll's thoughts...I would read and listen to a whole lot more of him before you make blanket statements like that.

 

Hey, it's Mark Driscoll in his own words. "I had one of those Charismatic moments. I'm Charismatic with a seat belt. That's my theological position, Charismatic with a seat belt." The term Charismatic is not a confusing or vague term. It implies a lot, and it's the term he chose to describe himself.

If it has a different meaning for him, then he shouldn't be using the term.

 

Keep reading, and listening to him. You're bound to find things you don't like...but you'll also see that there is nothing wrong with the man, or the ministry he is serving in.

If you disagree....then where is the problem? Because he used the term "charismatic"?

Don't be so picky.

 

Was he joking, or did he mean something by it?

 

He means he believes that God still speaks through direct revelation to him, but he does not believe in all that goes with charimatism, including the excesses of it. I would encourage you to listen to him some, and read his books, so that you would better understand what he means by it. (I disagree with him, but he has been saying that for years).

 

That's exactly what he means, Larry, but I don't have to read or listen to anymore than I have to see that. He doesn't buy into all the manifestations of Charismania (hence the "seat belt" qualification), but he buys into some of it. In this case, it happens to be the pivotal doctrine, that God still gives direct revelation. It's abundantly clear from this one address.

Once you've bought into that one, the rest is incidental.

 

Man, I sure would love to hear about anything unbiblical that is going on with Mark Driscoll and the ministry he serves with. I have yet to hear about it though...all I've heard is the seatbelt remark you don't like. I've never seen any sense that he tries to add to God's revelation with his own. Again...show me. I'd love to know about it.

The reason I'd love to know is the church I serve in is an Acts29 Network church-plant that was founded and currently led by Mark Driscoll.

 

Well, when your beginning is a fairy tale, what is the end? Don't matter what's in between.

 

I'm convinced. [insert sarcasm]

 

closed at the request of the originator of the OP