Mark Driscoll Cuts to the Chase

Mark Driscoll preaches about the wrath of God.

YouTube Preview Image

A few points:

At 1:38, he mentions that he was interviewed by the folks who made the documentary Expelled. Apparently they’re doing a new documentary on Hell. This sermon is from Oct. 9th, 2011, so this must currently be in the works (through Driscoll is vague about when the interview happened.)

At about 4:45, you get this wonderful speech:

… [In order to be a real Christian] you need to know who the real God is, and how the real God feels. Some of you … God hates you. Some of you, God is sick of you. God is frustrated with you. God is wearied by you. God has suffered long enough with you. He doesn’t think you’re cute. He doesn’t think it’s funny. He doesn’t think your excuse is “meritous” [meritorious]. He doesn’t care if you compare yourself to someone worse than you, He hates them too. God hates, right now, personally, objectively hates some of you. He has had enough …

From what I’ve seen, this is basically 50% of Driscoll’s sermons reduced down into one compact form. You can go to The American Jesus where they are disagreeing with Driscoll’s Biblical justification, or Jesus Needs New PR where the commentators are mulling over this video and carefully ignoring Elemenope.

EDIT: Here’s another segment of the same sermon:

YouTube Preview Image
  • Elemenope

    …or Jesus Needs New PR where the commentators are mulling over this video and carefully ignoring Elemenope.

    Oh, now I don’t think that’s quite fair. Most of the commenters ended up making very similar points (linguistic tricks can’t get you out of the problem; God, if he exists, is still restricted by the rules of logic; and so forth) and a few did respond to me directly. The only question that really got ignored was a far more difficult one (essentially: “why does God’s love seem like a pale imitation of human love, rather than the other way around?”), and I don’t really blame ‘em for that.

    • Noelle

      Least you don’t get suggestions on reading material. I’m 1776 pages into the 4839 pages of the game of thrones series I got for my bday. I’d still like to read Ty’s book. The list of fiction I want to read grows constantly. There is no way I’m adding ministry or theology books to that list. I might consider a real history book. Though I probably wouldn’t actually read it. I rarely pick up non-fiction and prefer it to have interesting and/or gory medical or sciency stuff in it when I do.

      • Francesco

        gory stuff is quite common in the bible as i recall

        • Noelle

          Yes. There are some good stories in the bible. I especially like the generation-spanning family saga from Abraham to Isaac to Jacob and Esau to Jacob’s lively boys. All good stuff. That’s not what I’m talking about though. In response to one of my comments, I was told to go read up on some Trinity-infused gospel thing by some Torrence guy. Sounds boring.

    • vorjack

      Oh, now I don’t think that’s quite fair.

      Oh there you go again, being all mature and grown up and stuff.

  • Custador

    HAHAHA! Did you spot: Six seconds in, he says “’re all way too intelligent…” Then pauses and kind of does the *shifty eyes* thing.

    Is Mark Driscoll trolling real life?!

    • Revyloution

      Similar to what CS Lewis said of Jesus, I think that all hyper-charismatic preachers are either lunatics, truly inspired by god, or con-artists. Since they all have differing messages, we can rule out inspired. Since most lunatics can’t hold it together long enough to do something complex like run a church, I would lean to the con-artist. We even have pretty good evidence in the documentary The Story of Marjoe to make that claim.

  • Thin-ice

    Driscoll (at 3:32): “My job is to tell you the truth, your job is to make a decision…”

    There it is in a nutshell: “Congregation, don’t dare think for yourself! I will think for you, morons.” And they mindlessly obey . . .

  • L.Long

    What hypocrisy!! Has this buyBull thumper ever read about how ‘….no man may know the mind of g0d…’ yet states all this crap at 4:45. Oh sorry I forgot….the religidiots just makes stuff up when they don’t like the truth.

  • Transformed

    It’s so interesting to me now to listen to some of the ‘preaching’ (I so easily received as a Christian) and it hits me on a totally different level. For instance, I find this phrase to be one of the most disgusting lines of hypocritical bullshit I think I may have ever heard:

    In our worst moments is the truest revelation of who we really are at the deepest level…. God doesn’t just hate what you do, but hates who you are

    This is particularly offensive to me.

    I never realized it until right now that I never really understood that whole “original sin” thing. That by Adam’s (Eve’s) original sin all of humanity is some how tainted?? This doesn’t seem right, and here’s kinda what I’m thinking….

    1) God creates earth, life etc. in perfect paradise. In it God, man and creation are perfectly constructed and work in perfect unison.

    2) God gives commandment to Adam not to eat of a specific tree. Trivial but should’ve been easy enough.

    3) man breaks God’s rules and God punishes not just Adam, but then punishes the entirety of humanity and breaks the harmony of nature and heaven.

    Here’s my confusion. Ya ready for this?

    If every living human is somehow born with flawed DNA so that all of us are by nature sinful, how could a perfect God have done so? And done so willingly? And doesn’t that kinda go against one of his omni’s?

    If every living human is born with perfect DNA and it is the world we live in that makes us sinful, then why the sacrifice of Jesus, why not just you know, give us really good instructions on how to navigate this now “broken” world? And I don’t see how, at this point, God could actually hate anybody. Or even blame anyone in that way….

    I just am lost on that whole proposition…. Anyone with more insight care to direct me?

    • Noelle

      Because it’s made up?

    • Michael Mock

      I’ll go you one further: if Adam and Eve were created perfect, how could they have sinned? (And, by the way, what was the point of warning them that if they ate the fruit, they would die? Death hadn’t been invented yet; the warning wouldn’t have meant anything. He might has well have warned them that they would blagisflevel.)

      • thread_of_fire

        any time language is looked at, it can be seen that the bible’s account of it is beyond rudimentary. it is dismissive.

      • Michael

        Not only had death not yet been invented, but neither had good and evil (or if they had been invented, at least Adam and Eve did not know about them).

        • UrsaMinor

          Evil had not been invented, as nothing evil had yet occurred. It was, at best, an unrealized concept, like faster-than-light travel is today. That is to say, a thought construct (in God’s mind, not Adam and Eve’s, because they hadn’t eaten of the Tree of Knowledge yet). Which leads us to the conclusion that God invented the concept of evil, and we’re back to the Euthyphro Dilemma. And also wondering why an omniscient, omnibenevolent God would invent something that would screw his creations.

          Although Christians attribute morality and moral law to God, it’s clear that they treat them as independent absolutes in many cases, to avoid laying the blame for bad stuff at God’s feet. Even though he is responsible for every single phenomenon in existence.

      • Jabster

        “if Adam and Eve were created perfect, how could they have sinned?”

        Oh really … it’s so bloody obvious – god’s perfect is not our perfect.

        • Transformed

          Seriously though, are there any theologic answers for this? Any sort of apologetics that might account for this confusion?

          • Ty

            They had that ever mystical ‘free will’.

            • UrsaMinor

              Which is inconsistent with Yahweh’s omniscience. But you knew that.

          • John C

            A theological answer you say?

            Yes, we’re in quite the quandary aren’t we? Mankind has a problem for which he is not responsible and for which there is no (human) solution because that (his current state of humanity/consciousness) is at the very heart of his problem. He is his own worst enemy and he cannot escape his own deathly grasp. Mankind in his current, ‘deformed form’ must die for ‘his wound is incurable and cannot be healed’ (Jer 30:12-15). So what’s the answer?

            Sure seems unfair that by one mans sin we should all suffer the consequences right? ‘for one man’s sin shall thy wrath rage against all’? (Numb 16:22) ‘Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned’ (Rom 5:12). For as in Adam all died, so also in Christ shall ALL be made alive, but EVERY MAN in his own order’ (1 Cor 15:22&23).

            ‘For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all’ (Rom 11:32)

            ‘For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God’ (Rom 8:20&21)

            Man thinks he will make it better if he makes certain (external) changes in behavior (the illusion of morality) or social/economic/monetary/political ‘system’ adjustments but again, those are all external to man himself and thus do not address his root problem which is an inward one. ‘but Jesus entrusted himself to no man for he knew what was IN man’ (John 2:24&25) and ‘for this purpose was the Son of God made manifest, that He might destroy the (corrupting) works of the enemy (in man’s nature)’ (1st Jn 3:8).

            ‘is there no Balm in Gilead to heal the (incurable) wound of my people’? (Jer 8:22) He asks rhetorically. Christ is that Balm (healing ointment for snake bites, ie the garden, remember? And ‘just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up (on the cross) so that whoever believes in him may have eternal life’. John 3:14&15).

            ‘After two days he will revive US; on the third day he will raise US up, that we may live before Him’. (Hosea 6:2).

            Just who was it that died on the cruel-T-cross Tree that day? It was US. All of mankind, past/present/future was wrapped UP in Him. The man who no longer bore the ‘very image and likeness of God’ (Gen 1:26 & 27). He is the one who died and now Christ (who is the ‘express image of God, the exact representation of His being/nature…is our life again’ (an amalgamation of two verses, Heb 1:3 & Col 3:4 respectively).

            ‘I have been crucified with Christ nevertheless I live, YET NOT I but Christ lives in (and through) me now’…(Gal 2:20)

            ‘put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator. (like in the garden, before the fall, reversing the consequence of Adam’s sin). Col 3:10

            The gospel is a paradox (apart from paradox the thinking man is merely a professor, Kierkegaard).

            Life is only found through death (to self, to that false and fallen visage through the work of the cross) as Jesus said ‘For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it’ (Matt 16:25).

            There is no resurrection without there first being a death. The Remedy has already been provided, even (y)our death so that we might really live for, as Paul said ‘to live is Christ (has nothing to do with church or religion,ugh) and to die is gain’.

            And to top it off, to make it all even more absurd (as if it wasn’t enough already) its all initiated/apprehended by…FAITH. Foolish sounding? Yes. Offensive to the ‘all grown up and away from Him’ reasoning faculties of the adult mind? Absolutely. JC said ‘unless you become like a little child you can not enter in to the kingdom of God’ (in the here and now).

            So grow down that Life Himself might (paradoxically again) grow UP in you (starts out as small as a mustard seed and grows into the greatest tree in the ‘GARDEN’).

            Now we’re back to where we (all) started again, aren’t we? Fairy tales come true Transformed, didn’t they tell you? :)

            All the best sir.

            • Ty

              Was that supposed to be an answer?

              God declares you sinful so that he can then grant you mercy and redeem you?

              I guess he never heard the one about the doctor who starts shooting people in the street in order to drum up business. . .

            • Melody

              If you’re really not a poe, John, you must be a serious glutton for punishment. Constantly spouting off idealistic nonsense, knowing you’ll get slammed. Is Ned Flanders your best friend?

            • John C

              You don’t believe in Love & fairy tales Melody? Well you should. Take care.

            • Jabster

              “Is Ned Flanders your best friend?”

              Nope … his best friend is another fictional character.

            • Transformed

              @ ATB> Your answer still leaves me with some issues left unresolved. Its like your trying to fit a triangle over a rectangle.

              For instance, why the multiple judgements/punishments (resolutions of an ill fated creation with an all perfect creator)? There was:

              (1) Adam (and by extension the rest of creation)

              (2) Noah and the flood,

              (3) Moses and “the Law”,

              (4) Jesus and the new covenant

              (5) Multiple judgements in revelation.

              Shouldn’t we find more consistancy within an omniscient God? And be able to reason out such unreasonable items of doctrine? There MUST be more substance than, “I dunno…. faith.(?)”

              “There is no resurrection without there first being a death.”

              Are you insinuating that God’s divine plan invloved the (human) practice of blood sacrifice? Surely this God you speak of could be a little more creative than that! This is the God of the cosmos, who created photosynthesis, hydrogen, atomic fusion, over 100 million (best guess estimate) of species that have lived and died on this planet. Some extinctions incude incredible destruction via meteor strike. Which is (I would argue) more creative and more a spectacle than nailing each dinosaur to a cross. Although the effort involved with a T-Rex achieving such a task would have been arguably more amusing.

              John, its not that Christians (or you) may not have all the answers, because after- all you’ re trying to answer for God (which is why the invocation of ‘faith’ as a tool for justification is readily at the tip of your tongue) it’s that the answers given are lame. They carry no weight at all.

              For example, to intellectually and deliberately disregard the omniscience of God, and yet juxtapose the attribute (equally) next the near inflamatory aspect of God’s omnipotence, leaves humanity with a God who is unquentiably thirsted for vengence AND alien to its origins. Or worse mute on the subject. I mean we are his creation aren’t we? It seems you produce a being that is far more interested in dealing out swelled judgements only to pity the judged for being the lesser.

              For how can the clay question the potter? Is Jesus confined to the same obstruction when addressing his own potter (the father)? It seems he IS as well. Not even Jesus escapes the grips of faith. And by extension, humanity is all the more stuck in the fly paper of faith. The intercession of Jesus as a necesary sacrifice for the satisfaction of the wrath of the Father is renderred folly as it slips into death as a default solution. He couldn’t have just, ya know, remedied our DNA? Maybe give humanity another go at the Garden of Eden, but this time give a clear (and with everlasting relevance) instruction manual for navigation? Or how about assigning angels to each human so as to ward off evil temptations? Or how about a cage match to the death between Jesus and Satan?

              I would reccomend, John, abstaining from the clutch of faith. Or atleast loosening the belt. It is nothing more than a dead end in intellectual thinking and may end up getting you killed for the amusment of a hell bound fist of “mercy”! Indeed it may be more merciful to spend eternity outside the bounds of a being who masks hate for love. Revenge for mercy. Servitude for slavery. Morality for manipulative variations of “I said so!”

            • Len

              Maybe I’m missing something, but I think you really need to go back and study Noelle’s comment to your first post (“It’s so interesting…”) here.

            • John C

              @ Transformed:

              The ‘multiple judgments’ you mention are actually evolutions in consciousness/reality as the plight of the patriarchs depicts the believers (faith-filled) journey’s ever higher as we go from ‘glory to glory’ meaning from one level of light/truth to another, higher level even still. For example the flood of Noah and baptism/resurrection depicts a ‘cleansed conscience’ before God (1 Pet 3:20&21) and many others but you will not appreciate them now for you are attempting to see with your own light/understanding whereas we can only see in truth by the Light He offers us (Ps 36:9). This of course makes us entirely dependent on Him which requires humility on our part for ‘he who humbles himself will be exalted (lifted UP to see) but he who exalts himSelf will be humbled (down where the perspective is merely an earthly one).

              While you’re definition of faith is essentially futility or weakness, it actually opens UP a whole (in every sense of the word) new and ‘better’ promise/covenant experience for us and allows us to ‘enter in’ to the higher kingdom reality available to us all in the here and now. All the best.

            • trj


              It’s funny how the people who “evolve their consciousness” and progress “from one level of light/truth to another” are never able to explain the insights they’ve gained. If anything their various explanations about God and spirituality tend to become more, not less, vague and inefficacious the closer they feel to God.

            • John C

              Yes, very true in a way TRJ, I agree. As one enters more fully into the mystery of Christ in us (Col 1:27) he is at the same time leaving one reality and entering more fully into Another (God implores Abram who represents the principle of faith/journeying with God to ‘leave your fathers house and go out to a land that I will show you’ Gen 12:1). This makes the distance between us even greater and consequently harder to communicate though I continue to share occasionally here (not as much as before, I know…thankfully ha) with you in an attempt to at least make you aware of its availability to all, to my fellow man, feeble as my attempts may be right? You are correct sir. I can’t help it, Love compels me to share that…there is More! :)

            • trj

              Well, enjoy it over on your side. I prefer not to get involved in something which supposedly impedes my ability to communicate with the real world. Sorry to say it, but I’ve never gained any understanding at all from you sharing your “insight”, nor do I think anyone else has. And the reason we don’t learn anything from you isn’t due to you being slightly removed from us to a higher plane of understanding or existence; it’s that you’re talking bollocks.

  • Jess

    I may want to rip this guys hair out, but at least he’s being more honest about part (and most) of what Christianity is, and that is an excuse to hate. I’m sick of these lovey-dovey Christians, the whole god is love crap. I’d rather take this douche-bag any day over someone telling me to let Jesus into my heart.
    As Dylan Moran says “If god existed, I sure as hell wouldn’t let him in my heart, I wouldn’t even let him in my garden, I’d shoot him on sight” or something to that effect :)

    But in the end, Driscoll is by far the BEST example of how idiotic these people can be, and how crazy, unfeeling, and self-absorbed they are.

    • blotonthelandscape

      You shouldn’t generalise about that sort of thing; you’re inviting accusations of straw-manning, and good, loving christians will see it as an excuse to ignore what’s said.

      That said, Mark Driscoll is the best-dressed example of the “crazy, unfeeling, and self-absorbed” arm of the religion. The sooner his influence wanes, the better.

  • Sayingwhatneedsaying

    yOU JUST PROVED TO ME… THAT YOU, ALONG WITH YOUR IMAGINARY GHOD, ARE BOTH MAJOR ASSHOLES!!! And isn’t it apparent to you, asshole, that all the attributes you asscribe to gHod, are really human attributes? Do you really think that if a Being were able to construct an entire Universe, out of nothing, after the BIG BANG….he would lower himself to human level? If so….. he wouldn’t be much of a Diety, would he…. And certainly no one worth worshiping

    • John C

      ‘Do you really think that if a Being were able to construct an entire Universe, out of nothing, after the BIG BANG….he would lower himself to human level?’

      Yes, its called humility and love for His creation which has ‘fallen’ away from Him. He ‘stooped’ to our low level, he ‘who remembered us in our lowly (fallen) state, for His loving kindness is everlasting’ (Ps 136:23). I’m just saying what needs to be…heard. All the best.

      • Brian M

        But that’s the problem…this deity of which you speak is all knowing, all powerful, all everything. It is not OUR failure, not OUR fall, ultimately not OUR fault.

        It is all HIS.

        Your deity is a malignant monster who has creted, knowingly, a universe of sentient beings to torture and play with. That is monstrous, John C., no matter how much you have persuaded yourself that the indigestion you periodically epxerience is Jesus speaking to your heart.

      • Sayingwhatneedsaying

        I see you swallowed the line of crap without even putting any ketchup on it……

    • HigherOrbital

      It’s even more human than that. According to the logic of the Abrahamic religions, it would be irrational not to worship God, not because he’s infinitely just, all-loving, or all-knowing, but because he’s all-powerful. We worship him because he could end us if we don’t. He could send us to hell. His petty, childish games don’t matter – he could take on any number of our worst characteristics, and it still wouldn’t. Because he’s more powerful than us, and we’re automatically indebted to those who are more powerful.

      This is coercion, plain and simple. And I for one don’t like being blackmailed into loving something I don’t. If God is really so childish, I believe that there is a standard of ethics that are higher than him, of which he is in violation. Making him not God, but something else entirely.

  • vasaroti

    It’s funny how people who deeply resent the slightest material inconvenience will blandly sit and endure psychological abuse and defamation.

  • Transformed

    @ Len> Huh? No I’m with Noelle. And I don’t mean to draw anymore attention to this, no doubt, beaten down horse. I just wanted to explore the idea more for myself.

    @ ATB> Still not understanding….

    “The ‘multiple judgments’ you mention are actually evolutions in consciousness/reality as the plight of the patriarchs depicts the believers (faith-filled) journey’s ever higher as we go from ‘glory to glory’ meaning from one level of light/truth to another, higher level even still.”

    So, in other words, God has used different judgements upon humanity in order to break down the grip of sin one by one? And bring man and God ever closer together? Too vague, John. And this explanation is useless. God is still omniscient. Should’ve known, and the tactics for redemption seem primitive. (coincidence for the time? No!)

    “While you’re definition of faith is essentially futility or weakness…”

    What do you think my idea of faith is? What is yours? How does this bring us any closer to the problem of evil?

    I resent the fact that you use the bible (and biblical terms) to validate the bible. I don’t know how you can honestly answer my questions with (basically) “You have to be a christian in order to believe in Christianity.”

    • John C

      There is no Light in unbelief friend. You cannot ‘get there’ (where your heart longs to dwell in Him, in the very heart of the Father, where we were created to experience His Life’) via your current un-be-leaf (not abiding in the Vine which Christ Himself is) by a de-tach-meAnt from the very Source of Life. Your victory (overcoming your fallen-ness) is found in your agreement and re-align-meAnt with the Truth Himself. I’m sorry you ‘resent’ anything I would share but I am only sharing honestly/candidly with you from my own 25+ years of experience. All the best…still.

      • swmr1

        This is the kind of thing you say when you want something to be true but can’t back it up with anything of substance. Equivocate. Redefine everything. Play (not so clever) word games. I know, I did this in my own head for over 16 years. I find it sad that I ever played this game.

        • John C

          Yes, everything is contingent upon which reality, ours or His that we believe, isn’t it? And that’s the whole challenge to the carnal mind. Its trapped in a lower state/reality and cannot ‘see’ beyond its own, self-imposed limitations. All the best.

          • Brian M

            It is His reality that created our reality. He is a monster playing games with sentient beings.

            You may suffer from celestial Stockholm Sydrome. Most of us do not. Lucifer was right/

            • Brian M

              Mythologically speaking, that is.

            • Brian M

              The bottom line: why are the doubters and skeptics more “moral” than your genocidal maniac of a god? Your sad evasions of the question of evil involve sophistry and question begging and vague philosophy that ignores or sidesteps the fundamental questions. Sad…just sad. And a little infuriating, because your oh so soft and kind wording is also very, very condescending.

              No wonder the Cathars, with their superiority complex of secret knowledge, were eliminated in such a violent fashion. Faced with such…smugness…!

            • John C

              Still judging by appearances I see Brian. No such thing as morality, there are only descending degrees from its Essense. What you call ‘genocidal’ you don’t comprehend. Its not a literal, physical ‘killing’ but that of a false and fallen nature in mankind which is contrary to us and to our original One. No smugness here friend. I am no better than anyone else friend. All the very best sir.

            • UrsaMinor

              No such thing as morality, there are only descending degrees from its Essense [sic].

              I am no better than anyone else friend.

              In the absence of a moral yardstick by which to measure things, the second statement is completely empty. You have no way of telling good from bad, or better from worse.

              This is why people find you tiresome, John C. You have a set of unfounded beliefs, and you make up word salad at random and then tell us that it justifies those beliefs. It’s also more than a little disingenuous to deny that observation and deduction can arrive at conclusions, and then continuously draw conclusions of your own based on principles and facts that you have made up.

          • Transformed

            @ ATB> I want to clarify. I do not resent you. Not at all. I do not mean for my posts to become dilluded down to this point. And if thats all that you caught in my responses thus far. I am truly all the more saddened and yet renewed in our conversation. I’m going to try to reword my statements….

            I really want to pursue this line of thinking more>

            “You cannot ‘get there’ via your current un-be-leaf by a de-tach-meAnt from the very Source of Life. Your victory is found in your agreement and re-align-meAnt with the Truth Himself.”

            How is this any different than what I said here (just the post above yours):

            “I don’t know how you can honestly answer my questions with (basically) “You have to be a christian in order to believe in Christianity.”

            For me and for the entirety of my Christian experience the consignment of “faith” as a means for relationship with God, has always been a troubling source of conflict for me. Many, many, many nights were spent in tireless prayer, weeping and waiting. And… then…. no response…. then something would pop in my head. An idea, a revelation, a vision. Boom! Eureka! I would exclaim. Giving wild praises to God as he has enlightened me. And yet this premise is taken on faith that it was God (more specifically the God I’ve been talking to) that has, indeed, answered me.

            These “experiences” were a large sense of comfort and validation to my christianity. Many of these encounters piggy- backed off of other encounters, and thus I was launched into (what I thought were) higher planes of understanding and knowledge. ***This is precisely why my de- conversion took so long and was as painful as it was.

            You see, so much of this “knowledge” (faith) was really just a compilation of a lot of smaller (weak) beliefs…. Evid3nc3 has an incredible series on just this subject. In fact this series was a large part of my de- conversion. At the risk of sounding redundant I won’t push the idea further. But I would HIGHLY reccommend this series to you.

            The issue seems that when you zoom in on any part of your arguments and theories, you find at best vagueness, and at worst regurgitated non sense. And all pursuits for clarification almost always ends in one word. Can you guess it?

            I want you to put your faith into practical terms. What is the difference between the experiences that I had (and assigned to God) and that of your experiences (that you also assign to God)? Or even that of a devout Muslim? Can there really be an answer for that? This is what I meant when I asked you earlier about what you think my idea of faith really is.

            Couple things in closing. First thanks to all who have taken the time to read my lengthy responses. I really don’t get much debate time in with any Christians that I know. These experiences primarily ends in frustration (on their part) and the conversation is awkwardly dropped. Nextly, John, I do not expect you to explain/ quote the bible as a viable response to my quesitoning or our conversation. This is what I meant when I commented on where my resentment lies. It is precisely here. Your responses are entirely, “you must believe in order to belive.” And are dismissed as such. Or what else did you mean by the quoted statment above?

            • Brian M

              This is really not Christianity. I am not really being derogatory, but John C.’s beliefs appear to be much more Gnostic in character than traditional, orthodox “church-based” Christianity, which he himself has repeatedly rejected. Along with a strong dose of Calvinism, albeit with a more touchy feely aspect to it than usual

            • John C

              Mystic yes, Gnostic no…thank you. Gnosticism holds to an imperfect Being, a certain form of dualism and an intellectual based ‘faith’. I don’t hold to any labels save Christ alone Brian. They could not put a label on him, he didn’t fit any particular ‘brand’ that they had ever seen before saying ‘we know Moses, but we don’t know who this man is, or where he comes from’ (John 6:29).

              Its true that I don’t much care for (of fit in) to any ‘church’ or organized religious societies, ie the institutional church (IC) since its largely a dead and oppressive external behavior modification program void of the power to effect true inward transformation. All the best.

      • Transformed

        “….25+ years of experience…”

        This confuses me, when juxtaposed with this:

        “…’unless you become like a little child you can not enter in to the kingdom of God’…”

        You’ve had 25+ years experience at becoming a child?

        • John C

          ‘you’ve had 25+ years experience at becoming a child?’

          Yes. Growing down takes years of ‘unlearning’. But since the kingdom is a paradox, I am (paradoxically) growing UP at the same time but now en-grafted into the One Tree, Christ.

          *I have a busy day, will have to try and get back with you on your other questions friend. Until then…ATB!

  • Ebon Badger

    Isn’t Driscoll that prat who made some dumb facebook post about “effeminate” pastors? Also, given that gods tend to be in our image, we can assume that Driscoll is a hateful piece of crap.

    • Brian M

      Actually, I’m sure we will find out Driscoll is a 110% heterosexual HE-MAN, just like Jesus’ General.

    • Brian M

      Even worse…He claims that Jebus has given him the ability…and the authority…to “see” past child abuse…including ritual abuse. He has demanded members of his congregation who are “victims” confront their “victimizers”. All kinds of interesting dynamics here.

      These people are simply obsessed with slotting human beings into rigid, narrowly defined roles…man/woman/elect/damned….This church worships “masculinity” and uses a cult-like ambience to disguise reactionary views in a “hip” veneer. This kind of marketing to me is more “Lying for Jesus”.

      • aerie

        A tiny bit petty and off-topic but dude reminds me of a young Jim Jones – 21st century style. Maybe not so off-topic after all – it’s this very extremism, zealotry, & schizophrenic frothing at the mouth that leads to a ‘Jonestown’.

  • Brian M

    What does this even mean? “There is no such thing as morality, only degrees of difference from its Essence”. How can you claim to be worshipping Jesus Christ when you sound like a Brahman? Or a Buddhist? Why is Essence capitalized?

    That’s all well and good, I guess.

    We are being unfair to John C. when we tie him to “Christianity” as he (obviously) makes statements that have nothing to do with anything ever taught or promoted by Christian churches. His “C-ism” is its own unique religion, with no ties to ny church history, doctrine (or even common sense). Vague mumblings about ESSENCES and subjective states of mind are enough in C-ism.

    JohnC is basically one of the more far-out Gnostic mystics. Fascinating. Such a rare species!

  • Rechelle

    He looks like he is wearing make-up. Put a wig on that man! He would be great in drag.

  • Morgan Guyton

    To be Christian means believing that Jesus is the best representation of the character of God. Thus, understanding who God hates boils down to a question of who Jesus hates. He tells us in Matthew 23.

    P.S. Many people today earn their salvation by being “unreasonable” and agreeing with tough, politically-incorrect propositional truths about God.

    • Melody

      You’re on the wrong website if you think you’re going to convince anyone here of your sensations. Nice try.

  • Melody

    Ack! Swype! Delusions, not sensations.

  • Leo

    The video has been removed by the user, and is gone now. would someone please re-up to youtube the video? if you watched it in internet explorer, your computer stored a cache of the flv. it should be easy to find it from there.

  • FreedomWonks

    I think what really throws me off is that he looks like Ricky Gervais. Who, apart from being a comedian, is a devout atheist.

    • Custador

      And a crappy actor.

  • Chris Schultz

    “Jesus hates me, this I know,
    Marky Driscoll told me so,
    May sound crazy, may sound nuts,
    But Marky said God hates my guts.”

  • mhogny jones

    As a child in the So. Baptist Church, I remember being told by my devout christian minister “if someone wrongs you, do not pray for G_D to smite them. Just ask G_D to bless them and pray for their forgiveness (in Jesus’name…), and G_D will pour his wrath out upon them!”

    This always confused me, as I wondered, “if I am righteous, if Christianity is righteous, then why would G_D do the exact opposite of what I ask of him? And would not an omniscient being sense my insincerity? Are human beings so inherently wicked as to presuppose rejection by the Father and to be left with only a coercive, manipulative, childish game of wishing; the tool by which we can foster our will occasionally upon the Almighty?”

    The amount of time that had elapsed before the Papacy dictated what we think of today as the fundamental tenets of Christianity is astounding! 325 years after the death of Jesus it was decided that a trinity of deity would define the Lord’s nature. The legend of G. Washington with all its folklore and mythos is by comparison only 235 years old. Imagine if we had waited 350 years after the revolution of 1776 to write our constitution. What kind of constitution would the people of 2131 write? What would they have in common with the founders of the nation? Who knows. Sadly, no matter who or what the historical Jesus was, modern Christianity is an Ad Hoc religion established to maintain the affluence of the wealthy and to control the populace.

  • Pingback: Hellbound | Unreasonable Faith