a deconstruction of Mark Driscoll’s tweet about Obama

a deconstruction of Mark Driscoll's tweet about obama by nakedpastor david hayward

“A Deconstruction of Mark Driscoll’s Tweet About Obama” (David Hayward)

For those of you who don’t know, Mark Driscoll is pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle, Washington, who has become quite a controversial figure in today’s church and Christianity, as well as curiously popular.

About David Hayward

David Hayward runs the blog nakedpastor as a graffiti artist on the walls of religion where he critiques religion… specifically Christianity and the church. He also runs the online community The Lasting Supper where people can help themselves discover, explore and live in spiritual freedom.

  • Gary

    I am no fan of Obama…but your deconstruction of Driscoll’s tweet is spot on!!

  • http://facebook.com/priceofdiscernment David M

    Spot on. I don’t know if you’ve ever watched it, but if you go on Youtube and search “Hitler rants about Mark Driscoll”, you may or may not be pleasantly surprised. WARNING: Subtitles contain strong (but poignant) language.

  • John

    His head will really explode when Hillary wins in 2016.

  • Fiona

    As well as being completely passive-aggressive, as your deconstruction shows.

  • http://thewoundedbird.blogspot.com Grandmère Mimi

    May the Lord deliver us all from such a pastor, and, if the Lord doesn’t, may we deliver ourselves.

  • http://theoldadam.com/ Steve Martin

    It’s too early to mention either of those egotist’s names.

    I just ate.

  • http://soullibertyfaith.com Sisterlisa

    Ha! Well done, David. I think it’s obvious that Driscoll serves a different god. But nonetheless the true God forgives him, afterall..he knows not what he does. ;)

  • Stephanie Butcher

    Love it!

  • Kelly

    First time I’ve seen someone write a commentary on someone’s 140 character (or less) tweet. Hayward’s seeming fascination with Driscoll is….. interesting.

  • Kris

    This is the kind of stuff driving people away from religion. The arrogance of those who claim to know the truth and everybody else be damned.

    Until the Religious Right removes itself from politics, I will never take the Republican Party seriously.

  • Gary

    Kris I hear you loud and clear. I have been a Republican my entire adult life, but this issue of meddling in politics with terrible consequences has me walking away from them and denouncing them as as much to blame for our current mess as any other party.

    Kelly your strange characterization of David’s post is…interesting.

  • Gary

    I mean of course the way they, as a party, embrace the religious right’s meddling in politics.

  • Will Noble

    While I do disagree with Mr. Driscoll’s tweet, I feel that is deconstruction is not helpful for building up the body of Christ.

    “Nothing else to do but pray for? Nah. Against!”

    “It hasn’t happened yet. There’s still a chance God could prevent this travesty from occurring. If Mark’s prayer works.”

    Mr. Driscoll was rightfully attacked because he cannot know what is the President’s heart, however, it appears that Mr. Hayward committed a similar error. The two above quotes clearly indicate that Mr. Hayward is also judging Driscoll’s heart the way Driscoll has been attacked for judging the President’s heart.

  • BW

    Kelly, I would say Driscoll is a fascinating character…he represents everything wrong with organized religion all in one neat — easy to poke fun of — package.

  • http://www.jennifergrant.com Jennifer Grant


    And love the “curiously unpopular.” Hmm…why could that be?

  • http://demiurgiclust.net shelly

    Kelly obviously hasn’t visited the Facebook page for Stuff Christian Culture Likes. He gets quite a bit of coverage there. (The woman who runs the page, as well as the same-named blog, lives in the Seattle area and has interacted with people who’ve suffered from spiritual abuse at the hands of Driscoll and his “ministry”.)

  • http://nakedpastor.com nakedpastor

    I’m judging his words.

  • http://nakedpastor.com nakedpastor

    actually it’s “curiously popular”.

  • Julia

    ^”…building up the body of Christ”?? Perhaps the body of Christ needs to take herself down a few notches the way she (Republicans) so readily spews hatred about Obama! What ever happened to giving Caesar his due??

  • Gary

    Will why should our goal be to “build up the body of Christ”? Many here would argue that church has no exclusive claim to such a title…and certainly not the abusive hate mongers like Driscoll.

  • http://www.jennifergrant.com Jennifer Grant

    Oops. I read it wrong and saw it as “curiously un-popular.” I don’t know much about him or his work — only know him as a name who is decidedly (and wincingly) unpopular among even my most conservative friends – as well as my not-so conservative ones as well.

  • Adam Julians

    That is funny. Do you have anythign to say about Rob Bell?

  • Caryn LeMur

    Will Noble: Jesus stated, “Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth does speak”.

    Therefore, if we believe these words of Jesus, we can ascertain the overriding themes, major filters, dominant beliefs, etc., of someone’s ‘heart’ (at the moment of their speaking or writing) by an analysis of their spoken or written words.

    If Driscoll would show us the President’s words by which Driscoll estimated the President’s heart-themes, then, perhaps we could side with Driscoll. Until then, Driscoll’s statement is simply unfounded slander and/or character assassination.

    As I recall, the Bible does not speak well of slander… do you think it allows character assassination, by chance? [My own key word search of the bible under 'assassination' is showing the real thing... which appears to be done with sharpened metal or wet pillows... how oddly gross but accurate...]

    Your thoughts? Caryn

  • Liza

    I guess I have just been through so much with regards to religion that I get David’s stuff. All I see when I look at this is that some people think themselves to be equal with God in making judgements about others. Some people want religion to dictate politics, but that is not fair to everyone. Even if our President is an Atheist, I wouldn’t judge him just based on that one fact. I would want to know whether he believes in equality for all, and know his stand on other important matters. So many religious people are worried that our country is going to get judged by God if we don’t have a religious leader. I have heard this so many times in churches and I used to believe this fearful stuff. Then I go on a journey of getting to know God for myself, on my own, and discover that so much of what they said in churches has been incorrect and caused me more stress then needed. I like how David picked this apart and pointed out things out about this tweet because so many won’t get what is really going on. We need people like David who aren’t afraid to expose ignorance for what it is.

  • heartscry

    “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. (Matthew 18:15-17 ESV)

    Do not speak evil against one another, brothers. The one who speaks against a brother or judges his brother, speaks evil against the law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge. There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor? (James 4:11, 12 ESV)

    “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, “Let me take the speck out of your eye,” when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye. (Matthew 7:1-5 ESV)

    What causes quarrels and what causes fights among you? Is it not this, that your passions are at war within you? You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel. You do not have, because you do not ask. You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly, to spend it on your passions. You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. Or do you suppose it is to no purpose that the Scripture says, “He yearns jealously over the spirit that he has made to dwell in us”? But he gives more grace. Therefore it says, “God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble.” Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. Draw near to God, and he will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded. Be wretched and mourn and weep. Let your laughter be turned to mourning and your joy to gloom. Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will exalt you. (James 4:1-10 ESV)

  • http://nakedpastor.com nakedpastor

    Ya, maybe we should all crawl back into our little holes of denial and let the abusers continue unchallenged.

  • Caryn LeMur

    Heartscry: In all gentleness, I wish to offer that if our Lord Jesus is calling you to hear those verses (in your post), then, you should hear them and do them. For ‘whatever is not of faith, is sin’ and Romans 14 is wise advice for all believers.

    Yet, other persons within the Body hear all your scriptures and more scriptures. They may have the freedom to confront, and then the responsibility to compare the speaker’s words to the scriptures and/or to good doctrine. To see this in action, please read Galatians 2:11-21, wherein Paul confronts Peter concerning Peter’s behavior and false application and/or false doctrine.

    Compare Matthew 18 to this: I note that Paul’s confrontation was public, and his rationale was offered vocally for all the hearers to research, and [presumably] disagree and/or correct. Paul’s confrontation and correction were not rude, but the confrontation certainly was not ‘in private’ nor with just ’2 or 3 witnesses’.

    Compare James 4:11-12 to this: Paul did not speak evil of Peter, but clearly spoke of the evil of Peter’s doctrine, Peter’s action, and Peter’s negative effect on other believers.

    Compare Matthew 7 to Paul’s engagement and willingness to be judged by his own words [Paul had not avoided the Gentiles in Antioch and therefore, could be easily be justified or condemned by the listeners].

    Compare James 4:1-10 with this: Paul did not avoid confrontation in Gal chapter 2 – therefore, confrontation is not always due to ‘the passions at war within you’.

    Hang with me, please. You have raised a very important issue.

    There is, in my current thinking, a ‘fork in the road’ in the full teaching of the scriptures concerning judging/discernment/private reconciliation vs public confrontation. In short:
    - If I have something between just Pastor X and me, I will pray about invoking Matthew 18:15 and onward.
    - However, if Pastor X is publically teaching (by oratory or by example) a false doctrine, then I will pray about gently and publically confronting Pastor X and his teaching(s) per Gal Chapter 2.

    Thus: If I sense the Spirit moves me to do the former, then, I will do all my actions privately, then with 1 or 2 witnesses, and then within the confines of Pastor X’s denomination.

    However: If I sense the Spirit moves me to do the latter, then, I must show my rationale publically, and endure the scrutiny of those hearers/readers that are ‘more noble’ and who wish ‘to compare my words to the words to the scripture’ [Acts 17:11]. I also personally believe that I must allow my readers to ‘have voice’ [that is, to provide a stage for their research/comments, and to not delete their comments/disagreement].

    Again, hang with me.

    I note that Driscoll ‘tweeted’ publically, and did not afford me a blog on which to publically disagree with him. [Perhaps you can point me to a blog that I have overlooked?]

    I note that NP showed his disagreement with Driscoll publically on this blog. NP provided all of us more than enough statements to research and compare NP’s doctrinal basis to the scriptures. I also note that NP did not delete your disagreement with him, and allowed you a ‘voice’.

    At this point in this ‘exchange’, I lean towards Driscoll being very much in error like Peter the Apostle. I note that Driscoll is urging people to withdraw from ‘giving honor to whom honor is due’ [that is, giving honor to the President], and is discouraging praying in love for the President’s faith to grow in depth and wisdom [instead, Driscoll has been rude and has urged people to pray in contempt, and not in love].

    Again, I offer that there is a ‘fork in the road’ as demonstrated by Paul the Apostle in Gal Chapter 2. This is part of the full teachings of the New Testament concerning judgment, judging, discerning, and private reconciliation vs. public confrontation.

    However, once again, I urge you to please do realize the scriptures that our Lord is speaking to your own heart, and work with those concepts first-and-foremost. Keep running with the wisdom that He has given you, so to speak [see Phil 3:12 and 3:16]. You may not wish to engage in public confrontation, even though Christ did so, and Paul the Apostle showed the freedom to do the same.

    Public confrontation – whether in a structured debate format with a facilitator; or whether in an unstructured blog format; or whether in an open oratory as Paul the Apostle did in Gal chapter 2 – is a very difficult thing to do in a Christ-like manner.

    Much love in Christ always and unconditionally; Caryn