Responding to Mark Driscoll with the Bible

In my New Year Predictions, I noted that Mark Driscoll had generally kept his pie hole shut recently. That ended with a tweet this week:

A high-profile Seattle clergyman delivered a jarring note as clergy across the country delivered best wishes to President Obama at the launch of his second term in the White House.

Mark Driscoll, founding pastor at the Mars Hill Church, tweeted: “Praying for our President, who today will place his hand on a Bible he does not believe to take an oath to a God he likely does not know.”

It has been retweeted more than 2,700 times.

He repeated the comment on Facebook and got more than 7,800 “likes.”

To this verbal diarrhea, I have just one response. It comes from the Bible, that book that Mark supposedly reveres so highly. It comes from Jesus, the manliest man he’s ever followed:

And whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, so that they may be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But whenever you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

  • Dan Lambert

    This is a delicious note that made me chuckle. Thanks Tony!!

  • http://anonymoustheologian.wordpress.com Christopher Baca

    I guess his reward was lots of Facebook likes. Bummer.

  • http://beingperfectlyhuman.blogspot.com Eric F

    Normally I think Mark Driscoll should just be ignored completely, but in this case, it is the perfect response.

  • Curtis

    Driscoll could respond that he is following Scripture, 1 Timothy 2:1-2 “I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— for kings and all those in authority”

    Of course, he would still be in violation of the last portion of verse 2: “… that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness.”

    Driscoll’s intent in this case is clearly not to promote peaceful and quiet lives.

    • http://tonyj.net Tony Jones

      It doesn’t say that those prayers should be made public.

      • http://n/a VG

        Jesus did pray in public, though.

        And I don’t think this post is that strong of an argument, but I don’t advocate for wasting time on M.D.

        • http://tonyj.net Tony Jones

          When did Jesus pray in public? The Lord’s Prayer? Nope, he was teaching that, not praying.

          • David

            Matthew 11:25-26, John 11:41-42, and the whole 17th chapter of John to name a few…

  • http://www.onpoptheology.com Benjamin Howard

    Clearly you’re just quoting the sissy Jesus, not the one who knows kung-fu. Come at me bro!

  • Nick

    Technically he is telling people he will pray and not actually praying in the tweet. Nice try. ;)

  • http://thisxianlife.com/ Colten Barnaby

    “…who today will place his hand on a Bible he does not believe to take an oath to a God he likely does not know.”

    …. Sounds a lot like what happens when Mark Driscoll takes an oath.

  • nathan

    he just can’t help himself.

    can you imagine how people would just plotz if someone tweeted they were praying for Mark Driscoll to realize that being a loudmouthed bully won’t alleviate his anxieties about his working class background and his sexual insecurities?

    • http://tonyj.net Tony Jones

      Snap!

    • Cathy Mia Kolwey

      double snap in a Z

  • Luke Allison

    I would respect him if he had the equal amount of vitriol for a candidate from the other party…at least he could play at the whole “Kingdom Rebel” thing. But none of these assertive, courageous, fireproof, lion-chasing, masturbation-resisting guys seem to have the guts to do that.

  • http://www.mattmessner.com mmessner

    And in making such a statement he alienates most of the people he is supposedly trying to reach with the Good News.

    • Pete

      The Good News being that God hates you…

  • Lee P.

    Driscoll is one of those guys who you can’t believe exists in real life. Selfishly, I like having the guy around because I think he is a hoot. He comes off as parody to me. But then I think about the folks who actually take him seriously and I weep a little inside (like the sissy-Jesus).

    As I said on Twitter:
    @PastorMark It’s pretty bad when we can’t tell which tweets are yours & which are the Driscoll parody @fakedriscoll #CaricatureForChrist

  • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/kimberlyknight Kimberly

    I keep hoping that we’ll find out that Driscoll is just some hoax by The Onion…sigh

  • Kyle

    - When this blog takes on challenging theological questions…..I love it.
    - When this blog challenges my assumptions and stretches my comfort zone….I love it.
    - When this blog turns into a breeding ground for gossip and mutual ripping on people we don’t like….I hate it.

    Driscoll probably deserves the hits, but it would be nice to see this community rise above the temptation. But his name in the title drives traffic; I get it.

    • http://www.onpoptheology.com Benjamin Howard

      Kyle, is it possible that this kind of mutual venting can be a healthy way to vent frustration? I’m not convinced myself, but something about this feels like slightly more than gossip/ripping on people. I’ll admit, it’s not the blog in full bloom, but it is something that can be useful I think.

      • Kyle

        No….not this kind of venting.

    • Kimberly Knight

      It is important sometimes to speak up and firmly call a goat a goat, especially when they commit heresy and speak of hate in the name of Christ.

      • Rich

        Kimberly, where exactly is Driscoll wrong in his tweet? In no real way could Obama be considered a Christian… he kills Pakistanis with drones, he supports killing babies up to the point of full-term birth, he promotes laws that limit religious and civic freedom… if he’s a Christian, then the term has lost all meaning.

        • Sven

          How is Obama considered a Christian?
          Because he believed Jesus Christ is his Lord and Savior. Simple as that.
          Your ad-hoc definition of what is or is not a Christian is a shining example of the “No True Scotsman” fallacy. Look it up.

          • Rich

            Sven, you may want to check out the Bible. Jesus said not everyone who claims him is actually part of him. He said something about looking for fruit. Look it up.

            • http://www.rjaypearson.com R. Jay Pearson

              Rich, just a heads-up. We may begin nick-naming you Frank.

              • Rich

                I would be honored. Frank was a good guy, even if he was a bit trollish at times.

        • http://www.winter60.blogspot.com Lausten North

          “Christian” losing it’s meaning is a legitimate problem. President’s didn’t use to call themselves “Christians”, they used their Protestant denomination and brought atheists into the White House to show they were not influenced by their church. It was after Roe v. Wade that organizers realized they needed to build a coalition across those lines. C.S. Lewis noticed the trend even before that, and he didn’t like it. He compared it to “gentleman”, which used to mean you had a certain status and acted accordingly, then it changed to just mean someone who acted nice, now any raggedy young man can be called “gentleman”.

        • Tanya

          I truly am curious Rich. Is it the fact that Obama does/believes all of those things that make him “not a Christian,” or would any one of them be enough to cancel his right to the name?

          So. . . a person who supports reproductive choice? Not a Christian.
          A person who agrees with the way the war is being fought in Afghanistan . . . not a Christian.
          A person who interprets church/state separation as Obama does . . . not a Christian.
          A person who supports gun control (your “civic rights”–or did you have something else in mind?) . . . not a Christian.

          Do you have to check all those boxes, or just one or two?

    • Rich

      Kyle, amen. Unfortunately, Tony can’t rise above his own hatred. Move along, nothing new to see here.

      • Sven

        Are you sure you’re commenting under the right blog post? Not seeing any hatred here. Or does disagreement equal hatred to you? Does that mean you hate Tony?

        • Kyle

          I never used the word hate. But certainly posts like this mostly serve to feed the uglier parts of our human nature….the parts that like to tease, pick on, tear apart, gossip etc. Sure, we can try to defend it with things like:

          - “maybe it’s a healthy way to vent frustration….”
          - or as I often hear (I don’t see it in this thread, yet): “Hey, he has it coming. If people weren’t asses we would take it easy on them.” Or some such taste of their own medicine defense.
          - etc.

          And, this is beyond simple disagreement…it’s a purposeful opportunity to bad mouth somebody we don’t like.

          I’ll be back…looking forward to reading stuff that matters.

          • Sven

            I was replying to Rich, not you. The guy who called it “hatred”.

      • http://tonyj.net Tony Jones

        If you can’t use a Bible verse to rebuke a brother in Christ, then I don’t know what you can do.

    • Luke Allison

      Gonna have to go ahead and disagree with you on this one.

      The only way to deal with someone who takes himself as seriously as Driscoll does is to laugh at him. That’s it. Take his ideas seriously, engage them seriously, and you’ve simply fueled the fire. As long as Driscoll can be seen by a growing amount of people as a farce whose words need not be heeded, the church is moving in a better direction.

      • Kyle

        Luke, disagreement is great.
        - I think this post and thread serve to fuel the fire, too.
        - A man with whom you disagree theologically, methodologically…even somebody as polarizing as Driscoll….isn’t necessarily a farce. To dismiss him as that isn’t intellectually honest.
        - Gonna have to disagree that this type of “tone” is helpful moving the church forward. It’s helpful in getting feeling better about ourselves by sticking it to somebody we think deserves it.
        - Those who don’t follow Jesus: You are not obligated to hold yourself to Christ’s standards of behavior. Those who do……

        • Luke Allison

          Gonna have to go ahead and agree to disagree.

          • Kyle

            Agreed. Wait…now I’m confused.

  • Sven

    Matthew 6, one of my favorite chapters.
    It astounds me when Christians insist that they MUST begin public meetings with invocations, and that they MUST have their kids pray out loud in schools, and that they MUST put crosses and nativity scenes on public land. No! You really don’t need to! Learn some goddamned humility, and keep your religion between you and your God!

  • Bobby

    Saddened that he said it, but not surprised. Driscoll himself has said he sticks his foot in his mouth, and that’s what’s happened here.

    Followed by the predictable parade of people who wait for him to say such things to fuel the bitterness and hate they hold toward him.

    Didn’t Tony post not long ago on the blurred line between teasing and hating?

    • http://skepticallyemerging.tumblr.com Rob Davis

      What should be a truism by now: criticizing isn’t hating.

      • Bobby

        I agree, and Driscoll should be criticized by those who agree and disagree with him. Obviously.

        I’m talking about those who take an almost perverse enjoyment in Driscoll’s foibles so that they might be given further ammunition to belittle and mock him, fueled by hate. Such actions mirror Driscoll’s in their childishness and general unhelpfulness in dealing with him. It’s the opposite of unbridled adulation by fans.

  • Luke Allison

    Did everyone see Dr. Cornell West talking about Obama’s use of MLK’s Bible for the swearing in?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96d_CzrfxsM

    This is the kind of criticism of a president I can stomach. Not “He doesn’t hold to my view of inerrancy.”

    • http://whateveryouart.com David

      Yes!

      Sorry for the one word response. Tony, is it possible for Patheos to institute some sort of “liking” or promoting of comments?

  • Rich

    Luke, so your concern isn’t if Obama honors God’s Word but if he properly honors the memory of MLK? Yikes.

    What about the FACT that our president is a known murderer (via drone planes in the Middle East) and a lifelong proponent of vast networks of infanticide, otherwise known as abortion mills? Can we criticize him for that, at least? Is that something you can “stomach”?

    • Luke Allison

      Where does the Bible talk about abortion? Where does the Bible assert that life begins at conception?

      The point of West’s comment isn’t that we “honor the memory of MLK,” but that we don’t coopt the prophetic tradition for the sake of a bureaucratic image-management strategy.

      Dude….every president is a murderer. Every president has innocent blood on their hands.
      There’s no point in having any kind of discussion with you in regard to the abortion mills you speak of. Obviously you have a strong opinion there.

      I fear you’ve missed the point of West’s statement completely. And obviously you don’t view the civil rights movement as anything having to do with Jesus. Probably because it wasn’t predicated on penal substutionary atonement and imputed righteousness, and the saving of disembodied souls to a Platonic heaven.

      I’m obviously making vast generalization, but my Spidey-sense is tingling. What can I do?

    • Luke Allison

      Also: God’s “word” isn’t the Bible. Look it up.

      • Derek

        Luke,

        Can you expand on that comment?

        Thanks,

        Derek

        • Luke Allison

          Derek,

          Not sure you’re still reading this, but here’s my take:

          Every time we see “word of God,” “word of the Lord” “the word” etc. in the Scripture, we can’t assume that these phrases are referring to the Protestant Biblical Canon as we know it. This may seem obvious to some, but I’ll state it plainly: The “word of God” in Scripture isn’t “the word of God” as described by Protestants interested in defending some doctrine of “inerrancy.”

          A few reasons why:
          1. The Canon didn’t exist (honestly, this is a very good reason…)
          2. The “word of God” in the Hebrew Scripture has tremendous narrative weight; it refers to an actual thing that has happened and will happen in the history of Israel, not an objective “once-for-all-time” standard of faith and practice.
          3. The “Word” in John is Jesus,(and here the author is creating a somewhat complicated juxtaposition between an image of “Wisdom” personified in the Hebrew Scriptures, wrapped in a popular Greco-Roman philosophical concept of the “Logos”)
          4. When Jesus refers to Scripture in numerous places throughout the synoptics and John, nothing he says or implies gives us reason to believe that he’s referring to the “Old Testament” on a whole as “the word of God.” Rather, he seems to be implying that specific passages in the Scripture where God is actually speaking are “the word of God.” I don’t think we can easily jump from Jesus affirming the commandment to honor father and mother (as in Mark 7:9-13) as “the word of God” to a sentence in Ruth being honored as “the word of God.”
          5. I could be wrong about all of this, except for points 1, 2, or 3.

          • Derek

            Luke,

            That is well put and all right. Can you let me know how this relate to talking about Driscoll calling out Obama?

            Thanks,

            Derek

            • Luke Allison

              Derek,

              Because folks like Rich are saying things like “Obama doesn’t honor God’s word,” meaning “Obama doesn’t have a conservative evangelical view of inerrancy.”

              The whole point of Driscoll’s tweet is that Obama doesn’t ‘believe the Bible,” which Driscoll believes to be the infallible and inerrant “Word of God.” I’m just saying that we’re getting our categories confused.

              This is another example of how camps just talk past each other, using the same words but meaning highly different things. Which is a reason why it’s simply best to ignore/guffaw at Driscoll and his folks, rather than attempt to engage them.

  • http://www.winter60.blogspot.com Lausten North

    This is what I’m takin’ ’bout. If Christians just let each other off the hook, then they are no better than the “anything goes” culture of the 60′s where crystals could cure anything and aliens were coming to solve our political problems.

    To those who think that Tony should not speak up, I ask, where do you draw the line? Should he not speak up about the grievous actions of Westboro Baptist? Should he not speak out against all the churches that exclude gays? Should he not provide Biblical background knowledge when religious leaders abuse scripture? Have you read Matthew 18:15-20 lately?

    Mark is a cohort of Tony’s. They started out much closer in philosophies, but Mark has really drifted. Tony knows that story and knows Mark. He is the perfect person to be commenting on his works.

    • Kyle

      Speak up: Of course
      Speak up using sarcastic, “Pie Hole”, language: No.

      • Curtis

        Considering the hatred that comes out of it, pie hole sounds pretty mild to me. Anger need not always be pleasant to read. And sometimes anger is justified.

        • Kyle

          “He said it first, mom!”
          “His potty mouth is worse than ours.”

          Anger can be totally justified….I’m going to vote for an anger that isn’t muzzled to those who need to hear it by our own inability to express it at more than a 2nd grade level.

  • Lee P.

    Rich, unless you said the same thing about Bush during his term for his wars (and the patriot act, “taking rights away”) stfu

    I’ll bet you didn’t have anything to say then and I’d bet you had your little “W. The President” sticker on your vehicle next to your stick figure family and Jesus fish.

    • Derek

      Lee,

      I am new to the thread but I missed where Rich talked about bush? (Maybe it got deleted?) Can you give me some details on that?

      I thought the thread was about calling out Christians who publicly proclaim Jesus’s name and making it know that they are not true followers of Christ based on his Word in the Scriptures? (This is what Mark did in his Tweet)

      Thanks,

      Derek

      • Lee P.

        He didn’t say anything about Bush. I brought him up.

        Rich claims that Obama is a murderer and therefore not a Christian. I’m going to ignore the vapid comments about Obama “supporting abortion mills”. My question is, has Rich had similar criticisms for other Christian Presidents and their wars? My guess is that since Obama is brown and democrat (see: SO-SHUL-IST!) he gets the ire of Rich’s “who is and who isn’t a “Real Christian™”

        That’s just my guess. I could be wrong and he could have been claiming that Bush and all other war supporting Presidents. I mean, there are civilian casualties in ALL Wars. How about Harry Truman and the Atomic Bombing of Japan? How about Reagan and the civilian casualties in Grenada, Panama and the Libya Bombing? Did he or does he cry out that they aren’t “True Christians™”?

        By his critieria most presidents arent “True Christians™”. My guess, and I could be wrong, is that Rich is spouting typical ant-Obama rhetoric. My guess for Rich also applies to Driscoll. It is just meathead, bullshit, ignorant selective partison posturing.

        • Derek

          Lee,

          Outside of the political issues in what Rich and you have been saying do you believe Obama to be a Christian? Why or Why not?

          Thanks,

          Derek

          • Rich

            Thank you for focusing Lee’s attention to the matters at hand, Derek. I unfortunately brought us down a rabbit trail. My apologies. Lee, and all, what makes you believe Obama is a Christian? Merely because he says so? Do you understand how ludicrous it is, even in this postmodern world, to believe someone just because they say so? I can say I’m a rabbit, but that doesn’t make it so.

  • toddh

    I love how Driscoll is so sure that he knows who is “in” and who is “out” with God, and then can let us all know who qualifies. Why would Jesus ever give us Luke 13:23-30 if MD already knows the answer?

  • Jeff Straka

    I think Driscoll is just pissed that his buddy, Louis Giglio, had to step down from the benediction.

  • Used to live there

    I was looking forward to more posts about how your time in Malaysia is going – not so much this kind of correctional bashing.

    I saw this quote earlier today on another site: “People do not wish to know that the whole of human culture is based on the mythic process of conjuring away man’s violence by endlessly projecting it upon new victims. All cultures and all religions are built on this foundation, which they then conceal, just as the tomb is built around the dead body, which it conceals.” Rene Girard, “Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World” Obviously that has many layers of meaning, but the main takeaway for me personally was to seek to be aware of the ways I may be projecting my violence onto others.

    I like your blog a lot. It is challenging, outside the box, non-conventional, pushes the edges, challenges me to remain open to new ideas even when they are uncomfortable. I really hope you can keep doing that – but without the “gotcha!” strident tone I picked up in this post.

  • Ric Shewell

    Whoa! this ish got crazy quick! Is Rich new here? He has one too many letters in his name. And he has the same tired and boring arguments. (Maybe “boring” is more inflammatory than critical, but this a blog comment, I’m not getting a grade for it).

    Also, let’s make it official and kill “Look it up” as a closing one-liner. Thanks guys.

    • Luke Allison

      Ric,

      That was intended to be somewhat sarcastic on my part, since that’s a very typical rejoinder from the whole White-Middle-Class Pseudo-Reformed-Cessatio-Baptist guys.

      • Ric Shewell

        haha, I’m just trying to be light hearted. cheers!

    • http://www.winter60.blogspot.com Lausten North

      I give your post a B+ Ric. But seriously folks, I admit to a bit of troll feeding here, which I will now cease. Also a bit of tone-policing going on here, which has it’s place but can get old fast. There are issues to discuss here, like the definition of Christian and who gets to apply it to the President, or does it matter if he fits the definition or not?

      • Ric Shewell

        B+, and I wasn’t even trying (Actually, I did have to google the correct spelling of inflammatory), I’ll take it!

      • Derek

        Lausten

        That is the point i am getting at! Well said.

        I think to expand on that if the President applies Christian to him self publicly does that not give the right to Driscol (and others) to call him out on that?

        Second to that without it becoming a straight political banter right out the gate?

        Thanks,

        Derek

        • http://www.winter60.blogspot.com Lausten North

          It’s a free country, you can argue all you want. That doesn’t change the rules of arguing. Peter and Paul started their witty banter before the gospel’s were canonized, so if you are going to “call him out”, you first need to settle the centuries old argument of what a Christian is. Driscoll is pretty clear on what he thinks, and although Tony and I disagree on many things, we agree that Driscoll fails a few simple tests of what is Christian, and we don’t like him going around claiming that he is.

          • Derek

            Lausten,

            If you dont mine me asking. What simple test of what is Christian does Driscoll fail?

            Thanks,

            Derek

  • http://patheos.com jason greene

    man christianity is so f’ing fun. we libs and cons rip each others asses like there’s no tomorrow. I am thinking that I’d like to have bare knuckle brawls for Jesus every third sunday at the church I attend. It would be awesome. My jeezzuz can kick your jeezzuz’s ass

  • Rich

    Tony, can you give a cogent argument for why Obama is self-evidently a Christian? If not, you own Driscoll an apology. Of course, no one will hold their breath on that one. Genuine apologies come from you like pears come from an apple tree.

    • Sven

      Obama seems to think he’s Christian. His friends and family and colleagues and supporters think he’s Christian. What do you think he is? And what makes you or Driscoll more qualified to decide what Obama’s religion is than, say, Obama?

      • Rich

        So that’s your argument, Sven? An argumentum ad populum. A Christian isn’t a Christian just because he claims to be (even Tony has admitted this with his comments about Mormons). A Christian is a Christian if he looks to Jesus as his LORD and SAVIOR and lives a life that shows it. This is in the Bible, it’s easy to find if you look for it. Jesus said look for the fruit, not the empty words. Christian behavior is NOT “something a Christian does.” That’s circular reasoning. No, Christian behavior and beliefs come from the Word of God.

  • Pingback: Tony Jones Responds to @PastorMark « TheoNerd

  • JPL

    All the snark aside, I honestly ran into this problem just the other day, and there are some challenging practical issues involved.

    A very traditional, Reformed pastor asked me, concerning someone whom I knew quite well, “Is she a Christian?” The question wasn’t at all simple to answer.

    By this individual’s ecclesiastical standards, raised in Catholic and Lutheran traditions, she was indeed Christian. She was baptized, confirmed, First Holy “Communioned”, etc.

    By her personal standards, things get trickier. Although she believes in God, it’s definitely in a deistic, not-very-involved way. In conversation with her, she might note that Jesus somehow comes from God, or is even his son, but had no idea how Jesus could “be” God. She lacks any Trinitarian conceptions, asking questions like “If Jesus is God, how could he pray to himself? What would be the point?” or “So if Jesus was God, wasn’t heaven empty when he was here?” And she shows absolutely no interest in the Bible, prayer, church attendance, or any other formal demonstration of faith. Her ideas about religion tend to fall close to the whole “Moral Therapeutic Deism” shtick…God wants people to be nice; if I help people and try hard, what difference does it make whether I go to church or read the Bible?

    Theologically, she would also conclude that all religions are equally true, and that all good people go to heaven, or just die into nothingness, which doesn’t concern her.

    Now, by some people’s standards, she could be considered Christian, particularly if the standard is “well, she said she is.” But by this Reformed pastor’s standards, she certainly would not be. She evinces no sign of faith, sanctification, or other fruit of the Spirit beyond the normal decency we expect people to show on average.

    Although Driscoll’s comments are perhaps unhelpful, they do highlight the challenge that can arise when we have a term (Christian) which now has so many potential definitions put forward by so many proponents that it’s hard to honestly know whether someone is “Christian” or not? All you can ask is “By who’s standard?”

    • http://www.christylambertson.com Christy

      My question in that situation would be “Why would the pastor need to get your assessment of someone else’s Christianity or lack thereof – someone who he presumably does not know very well or at all?

      If someone is interviewing for a position at a church or Christian organization or applying for membership in your church, then okay – I can see where determining whether or not they meet your definition of Christian is something you’d want to do. Otherwise, these questions generally are a way of asking, “Is this person a member of my tribe? Should I regard this individual as one of us or not?”

      My theory is this: If you want to know what someone believes, ask them. If you don’t know them well enough to do that, than their theological opinions probably aren’t any of your business. And as far as Obama and other non-religious public figures are concerned – I think that they should be judged on their job performance, not their theological orthodoxy, so whether Obama is a REAL Christian or not is entirely immaterial.

  • http://www.christianpiatt.com Christian Piatt

    My biggest struggle is around how to pray for someone like Driscoll with whom I disagree on so much. I find that I just try to put him out of mind, but I’m fairly sure that’s not a Gospel response. I want to pray for him to change, but again, that comes with an agenda other than love. It’s an ongoing struggle of mine.

  • http://www.rjaypearson.com R. Jay Pearson

    Well, this thread got dumb pretty fast.

    It is not the burden of the person next to me to somehow “prove” they are a Christian. It is my burden to accept and love them no matter what they are, or what they say they are. Their identity is irrelevant.

    I don’t care whether Barack Obama says he is a Christian, a Jew, a Hindu, a Wiccan, or an Atheist. He’s human. And a person’s humanity is the only necessary qualifier for me to accept and love them.

    • Rich

      Jay, as a Christian, I care whether someone is a Christian or not. For one, as a Christian, I know all people are required by God to pledge their allegiance to Him and repent of their rebellion or face His wrath. So if someone is already a Christian, then I know they are a fellow servant of our Lord, rather than a rebel. If he’s a rebel, then he needs to be shown the error of his ways and the freedom offered by Christ. You can love them both, but you love them differently.

      • Luke Allison

        “I know all people are required by God to pledge their allegiance to Him and repent of their rebellion or face His wrath”

        Where does it say that in Scripture?

        • Rich

          Umm, Romans 10:9, for one.

          • Luke Allison

            What you said there isn’t what it says there. Not even close.
            You don’t get to do that, even on a “liberal” message board.

      • http://www.rjaypearson.com R. Jay Pearson

        Rich, your opinion is your prerogative. As for me, I do not aim to love “differently.” I aim to love fully, without discrimination. I choose to see the full humanity in people rather than presume to identify what I perceive to be the “error” in people.

        The kind of religion that accentuates differences rather than upholds our common humanity is an obscene religion. The kind of religion that makes a virtue out of discrimination is a perverse religion. The kind of religion that beholds human beings as unequal shareholders and thereby dispenses love unequally as a dividend is an evil religion. Such a religion is a religion, not of love, but of hate and fear.

  • Pingback: Watch Evangelicals Lose Their Young

  • Todd

    Tony, he could tweet the same thing about you. The New Testament warns us over 30 times against false teachers, and scripture twisters. You take that to a whole new level. Your god is the god of your own imagination. I really hope you repent of your sin and trust the God of scripture. I agree with most of your Driscoll comments but at least he tries to stay true to scripture. His ego gets in the way of his message, sure it does, but your ego causes you to redefine sin. Praying for you Tony, really I am.

    • http://tonyj.net Tony Jones

      If he does tweet about me, I hope he’ll link to my blog.

  • http://www.briannakocka.com Brianna Kocka

    All of the replies on this blog are hilarious. It’s like a psychotic sociology experiment.

  • Pingback: Reflecting on Driscoll, The Inguration & State of Evangelicalism Today

  • Pingback: The Scandal of the Evangelical Heart at RHE « Notes from a Small Place

  • Pingback: Mark Driscoll & the Empty Politic of Evangelicalism | The Nuance

  • Pingback: yellow october

  • Pingback: water ionizers

  • Pingback: water ionizer

  • Pingback: public speaking training london

  • Pingback: xxxcams.mobi

  • Pingback: best bottled water

  • Pingback: kangen water

  • Pingback: kangen water machine


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X