clarification...
| Posted On: 03/19/08 05:51:42 PM |
Age 20, MN |
I just realized that I had made an error above I think in my post...I am saying that the strip tease thing is the exception to my issue with the WHAT, not the HOW. i.e. I did not appreciate it...
|
Hold On
| Posted On: 03/13/08 10:59:02 PM |
Age 16, IN |
Have you read these posts yet? If not, I recommend you do so, there's quite a backlog of debates to read.
|
Huh
| Posted On: 03/12/08 09:51:55 AM |
Age 31, TX |
I didn't hear him make a joke. I heard him mention an idea that others have that he doesn't think is true (and thinks it's ridiculous, so he finds the idea to be humorous), and I heard him not understanding how SoS could relate to Christ and the Church, and so make an extreme/outlandish statement based on his misunderstanding.
But I think *most* people don't understand SoS. So while I think he's missing a lot here, I'm not going to criticize him for it. I'm actually rather sad that he doesn't see the richness and depth in the book.
I'm a single woman who, as recommended by a trusted friend and counselor, read only SoS for 2 weeks when I was freaking out about moving across the country. I thought it was a ridiculous idea, but I did, and it brought a lot of piece and calm to me, hearing about God's deep love for His people -- for me.
I think SoS is a difficult book to "tackle" in our sex-obsessed society. There's so much garbage in our minds that we have to wade through when encountering this book. I feel like he shows some of that with how he jumps to certain conclusions if the book is talking about Christ and His people, and possibly when those comments get to people. To me it just shows a lack of understanding of what it means to be intimate with Jesus. Physical intimacy is not the only kind, but often I think people's brains jump there.
By God's grace, my mind has been kept pure in this area so I've been able to read SoS (and listen to this message) without any funny business in my mind. And I've essentially created a wall in my mind from going places it doesn't need to go. When a stray thought goes in that direction, I firmly cut it off and reign my thoughts in.
|
If the Message is the same?
| Posted On: 03/12/08 09:48:54 AM |
Age 50, MN |
I guess I'm just not willing to say it's an "act" anymore than the Liberians dancing in the aisles or the Mennonites having females sit on one side of the Church and males on the other. I think he would be 'acting' if he put on a 3 piece suit and starting speaking in King James English which some pastors feel they have to do to be accepted by some congregations. //Jesus didn't change his approach for his audience, which is why he was hated by the organized church and loved by the people - sound familiar?
|
Hope this helps
| Posted On: 03/11/08 05:45:33 PM |
Age 47, MO |
The jist of what I was trying to say has nothing to do with religion or culture, Peter was a smelly fisherman, Paul was an elite pharisee, both quite diverse, yet you wouldn't be able to tell 1Peter from Philippians if you didn't know the author. This is because the author is Christ and Christ's words have nothing to do with cultural relevance but truth. Truth is relevant to all cultures and doesn't have to be cool to be true. If we try to make it cool, we actually subtract from it's truth, not add to it, since Christ's truth is already 100% true. We Christians are tasked to deliver the truth to the culture but in a way that honors our LORD, and in a way that the hearer is prepared to receive it. This is what Paul meant to become all things to all people. It is not what goes into the mouth that makes the person unclean, but what comes out. You said "It is the message, not the medium." You are correct, and Mark played the fool's role of a medium (performance actor) instead of messenger (servant) of God. John
|
Culture
| Posted On: 03/11/08 09:41:45 AM |
Age 50, MN |
I don't totally understand your post - maybe we should just agree to disagree. Would I be correct in assuming then that you would not accept a American-Liberian Christian Church which looks totally culturally different or a Quaker Christian Church which is also very culturally different. I could give many more examples. I believe their theology is very orthodox, as I believe Mars Hill's is. //It seems most people's issue with Mark is he is 'trying to be hip' - he lives and breathes and was raised in a different culture than a lot of white middle class Americans - that doesn't compromise the gospel by itself anymore than be raised in a raucous Liberian church or a ultra conservative mennonite or quaker church.// It is the message, not the medium.
|
Indeed
| Posted On: 03/10/08 08:52:00 AM |
Age 47, MO |
You think well and I hope the Lord continues to give you discernment throughout life. Thanks for correcting my oversight for it was unintentional.
BLESS GOD! John
|
Should Christians Dialogue?
| Posted On: 03/10/08 12:11:53 AM |
Age 39, WA |
A Christian does not 'dialogue' to consensus with anyone; (( Maybe you could write him an email, as a brother in Christ, and dialoge with *him* about his error)) but as Christ did, use the Word as the sword and let your 'yes' be 'yes' and 'no' be 'no'. Dialogue was Satan's idea, so common now even in church's, but first seen in the garden- with the snake~'hey Eve, lets talk about this, did God really say?.....We have no business going to this pastor to discuss his 'why's and how's', but tell him the truth from God's Word- we are not big enough to take God's place, and using man's wisdom to 'evangelize'is no wisdom at all. The bottom line is this, I am filled with the Spirit of Holy God, and as others commented, also have His Spirit-we are very uncomfortable with Mark's method's, his word's and his 'humor'; it is coarse and crude, and does not bear witness with the Word or my Spirit. Point in case, particularly the 19 year old's comment- it sure didn't edify s/he....to even bring ideas like 'gay' and the image, and the other 'visions' to mind are no different than the various other airwaves of the world, and this is not of God, my mind and heart didn't become more purified, more inclined to surrender, holiness and repentance, my mind was raped by perverse thoughts I had to rebuke- his message was just as much something I would keep my kids from as the California public schools. He is using God's Word as the 'good' to get away with this rough 'teaching', not unlike homosexuals wanting their lifestyle taught to 6 year olds so they can better understand, and market it as wholesome reality-way of the world. Garbage!!! Read 2 Peter 2:1-22
BTW-50,MN~ How does the fact his wife was a pastors daughter lend any credibility tothe man? Be not a respector of person's. We all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God- we all must go through the blood and repentance for salvation, she is no more righteous in Christ than any other life given to Him. She has a free will to sin as anyone else.....We do not know her condition. Sadly, that Mark is her head I am concerned with her 'solid foundation' as you would describe. Their situation sounds much like Casey Treat-Christian Faith Center, Seattle, he too was brought to the cross by his future wife....
I have a couple friends in 'Mars Hill', all I can say is that I shudder and pray at the lack of fear or regard for the holiness of God and no fear for the sins of our nation and destruction for her sins...all I can pray is for true PASSION for GOD to fill their hearts. I see a passion for everything around about God, but a lack of personal passion to serve him- HIS way. Only God knows their true condition, but again it comes to bearing witness....
|
Restricted Study
| Posted On: 03/09/08 03:59:55 PM |
Age 16, IN |
Does it strike you as odd that Steve says to examine SoS for ourselves, but sets us up for failure by placing restrictions on our study?
|
Ahh...
| Posted On: 03/09/08 03:56:25 PM |
Age 16, IN |
I do see your point, and I agree, but the manner in which he spoke in this ad struck me as strange. Compared to all the sermons I've heard, this sounds like he made his first foray into "mainstream" advertising and made a fool of himself in the process by trying to be "shocking." (Controversy makes for some of the best advertisement...)
|
I am afraid for him.
| Posted On: 03/09/08 12:38:43 AM |
Age 45, TN |
If he is indeed a brother, and I really think he is, then he is REALLY asking for a big ole back-hand from the Almighty. Mark, please, PLEASE learn not to blaspheme before God has to discipline you. I am NOT KIDDING.
On the other hand... if he is just another poser, time will tell. He will continue to blaspheme, grow increasingly popular, make tons of money, write a few best-sellers, lead a bunch of folks to hell and die in the bulls-eye of God's wrath.
|
HMMM
| Posted On: 03/08/08 03:20:25 PM |
Age 31, CA |
The way he went about it irritated me and does make it blasphemy.
He could've done so much better but wanted to sound hip and cool
|
Good works doesn't justify lame jokes
| Posted On: 03/08/08 03:15:12 PM |
Age 31, CA |
While I agree that he has a successful church, this joke was just lame and I hope he apologized for it.
He can do all the right things, but then you can negate it all with comments like this.
His "I am a hip pastor" schtick is really lame and it diminishes from his messages. I can get the same message from other pastors who treat the word of God with more respect.
Also, I don't just post here, I do go out and share my faith and people like him make our job harder because he preaches a good word but then acts like an stupid sometimes with "I am a hip pastor" routines and totally failed in this instance. If he apologized, then cool. Otherwise, he deserves the slack he gets.
|
Mark Driscoll
| Posted On: 03/08/08 10:53:46 AM |
Age 27, FL |
I'm really pained to see this continued "outrage" and "more outrage" against Mark Driscoll. This is a man who with his wife and no money started what's become a very successful church in Seattle. Wait . . . not successful because lots of people show up, successful because he preaches God's word, he preaches against sin, he preaches the exclusivity and sufficiency of salvation in Jesus. Because of it he has been attacked, both spiritually and physically, on several occasions.
And to make all these worse, he's got his brothers in Christ scouring Youtube for reasons to criticize him. Please, pick any sermon, and listen to the whole thing. You will hear him preach, probably expositionally, from the Bible. The amount of painstaking study that goes into each sermon will be evident. You will hear him unapologetically condemn sin, and lift up Jesus Christ as our all sufficient savior. And you will thank God that he's raised up men like this one to take his Gospel to the Godless parts of his country.
Or . . . you can refuse to do those things and write articles attacking him at every opportunity.
Song of Songs - is not pornographic. It's a vivid illustration of a man and wife physically enjoying each other, an integral part of God's design and a rich illustration of God and his Church. When you remove the man and wife from Song of Solomon, as so many pious, virgin-eared interpreters have done, you are left with the absurd notion that God and the Church are enjoying each other physically. Driscoll is going to preach *From the Bible* on this matter, and simply pointed out the absurdity of the re-interpretation. I can see how you would be shocked at him taking the interpretation to its logical conclusion. Maybe you could write him an email, as a brother in Christ, and dialoge with *him* about his error.
Or you could continue to lambast and borderline- slander him on Christian Worldview Network while he's fighting for the gospel in a God-hating city.
|
The real issue is this.
| Posted On: 03/08/08 10:32:47 AM |
Age 47, MO |
You wrote: " I would bet you would have very little differences with him theologically - so ... it's all cultural." Let's discuss your theological cultural distinction for a moment. Liberals in politics like to say they don't wear their faith on their sleeves. They like to say that their personal faith is just that, personal, and that it doesn't affect their governance or their politics. However, what is a man? Is he not a living soul in a tent of a body of dust? So the soul governs the body, and the spirit (if it's alive) has all authority. So then, man is his soul since the body will return to dust. The soul is our dreams, our hopes, our education, our experiences, our thoughts, our sins, our words, and our actions. Since our God; whether it is acceptance, alcohol, drugs, or Jesus, is "that which no higher can be thought," then indeed our theology and our cultural relevence are inter-connected. Basically, we are what we eat, think, and do. So no, Mark and I would not agree theologically and yet remain culturally diverse. Mark lives his theological conviction and it does not agree with mine. He may think of God as savior but not as LORD. Hope this helps clear up the difference. John
|
no regrets?
| Posted On: 03/07/08 04:34:17 PM |
Age 50, MN |
a simple fact check - exactly, didn't you owe him and yourself that? - before you wrote what you did and if I hadn't responded how many people would of been misled by your statements? It appears no regrets on your part because it's all justified because you have an issue with his methods. //Again if you hear him preach or know what he believes I would bet you would have very little differences with him theologically - so if it's all cultural -who really has the problem and needs to rethink?
|
response
| Posted On: 03/07/08 02:31:29 PM |
Age 47, MO |
Read my reply above and you will see how I derived my error. However, I do want to take issue with something you wrote in your response to George Cancilla. You wrote: "It is evident in his sermons that he has a passion for Christ and would not intentionally blaspheme Him." You don't see blaspheme in Mark's obsurd illustration? You see reverence, holiness, Creator-created distinction? I see new age pomp of Jesus as friend, lover, and our equal. Jesus said: "those who love me, keep my commands." Not, those who love me partner with me and are really cool. John
|
Mark did say
| Posted On: 03/07/08 02:20:56 PM |
Age 47, MO |
he is gay, which I heard distinctly, but just prior to that he said: "Other may say..." Sorry, I didn't hear that comment first go around, so you are correct. I don't know the man so I can't attest to his private life, only what I thought I heard him say...my bad. However, he was making an obsurd allegorical comment that some, including myself, find offensive. It seems that holiness and purity of truth that leads to a circumsized heart, is thrown out the window in favor of cultural relevence. But hey, he sure sounds cool. God would be so pleased!? I find your response stating: "Really this is the kind of misrepresntations we always want to accuse the left of, but yet we feel free to pass on ridiculous rumour and inneudo without even a second thought." to be quite interesting when I said: "Didn't Mark say he was gay?" A simple fact check would verify the veracity of that statement, though he stated it alegorically. Friend, you are quick to jump to the defense of a hip, cool, foolish "pastor" without a second thought. Perhaps you should rethink your position. John
|
twofer
| Posted On: 03/07/08 01:53:02 PM |
Age 50, MN |
always great when you can get off an insult in the same sentence with your apology - makes it a 2 for 1 deal. Very nice.
|
You don't get it
| Posted On: 03/06/08 08:38:35 PM |
Age 31, CA |
light hearted way???? Are you serious!? Referring to Jesus as homosexual is something anyone can say if they want. If you are a PASTOR however, you need to be more careful and treat the WORD OF GOD with a little more respect than that. This "I am a hip pastor" schtick that he has going is really lame and on top of that his comment was blasphemous. LIGHT HEARTED?! HA!
I am sorry I don't subscribe to your pragmatic approach to teaching the bible.
I am sorry for the dude remark, didn't realize you were older since your comment came off really childish.
|
|
|
|
|
