Mark Driscoll
I’ve been listening to some sermons by Mark Driscoll from the Mars Hill church in Seattle and I have a lot of mixed feelings about the stuff he talks about.
On one hand, I really agree with some of the stuff he says about preaching and preaching exegetically, thematically and topically. I listened to this talk he gave about preaching and how much he struggled with being able to preach and everything. That was pretty cool. I love his emphasis on preaching and how powerful preaching from the word can be. I really agree with that stuff. He attacks the Emergent movement in some ways criticizing the dialogical and narrative preaching stuff. I pretty much agree with him on a lot of those points.
Then I hear him criticize the trajectory hermeneutic and apparently he’s a really strong voice for complimentarians. Just listening to him talk makes him seem really well read and like he knows a lot about the issues, but at the same time the content of what he says about those issues is very simplistic and reductionistic. Though I’m not sure about the trajectory hermeneutic, I found it very strange that the guy could so simply dismiss it as dangerous. But then I thought, this guy must know what he’s talking about. He’s a pastor of a big church, probably a PhD or something.
Then I do some research on the guy and find out he doesn’t even have a MDiv or a Masters from a seminary. He’s working on a degree from western right now. How can a guy who doesn’t have the education yet make any statements about trajectory hermeneutic and the women in ministry debate? It makes me think he’s just reading guys like Piper and without really knowing, just takes Piper’s word for it.
I suppose the issue is that his tone is that of an expert or authority on the issue. In actuality, he is neither an expert, nor an authority.
Don’t really like that.
Powered by FireStats
12 Comments, Comment or Ping
KingdomSheepDog
Perhaps, it is a knee-jerk reaction from someone whose manhood is threatened by women in leadership position.
I maintain that the gender issue is not just a woman issue. It is a man issue as well. Only when man comfortably accepts who he is without being threatened by the accomplishment of women can he looks at the issue objectively.
Piper is a Ph.D. and a pastor of a big church, so degrees have nothing to do with whether you are an authority on this subject or not.
Beware of what Mark says about the dialogical, narrative preaching stuff. Even though I am not good at narrative preaching, it can be done well, and I have a lot of respect for good, sound narrative preaching. Of course, good, sound narrative preaching is hard to come by.
Jan 8th, 2007
gforcegirls
I have to agree with KingdomSheepDog’s assessment of perspective… degrees are not equal to authority, and different styles of preaching can be done well though good preaching of any variety is hard to come by. I don’t know enough about Mark Driscoll to comment on his degree of expertise, though; but I would say that a lack of seminary education does not necessarily preclude expertise in a particular area (just as a degree does not necessarily confer expertise).
Jan 8th, 2007
im4GMG
Oops… that last comment was me. Apparently someone forgot to log-off gforcegirls.
Sorry.
Jan 8th, 2007
yftoad
I totally agree that lack of a seminary degree does not make Driscoll an expert on theology and doctrine. In fact, I dare to venture that having a seminary degree has a strong potential to predispose you to one strain of theology or another. I would also say that I myself am not very educated and I have a whole lot to learn. Driscoll is not one who sits around and listens to other pastors and copies off of them - in fact, though he and Piper agree theologically, Piper disagrees with some of his methodologies. You should check out the Desiring God website and listen to Driscoll’s message at the last Desiring God Conference. Pretty compelling, God-centered stuff.
Jan 8th, 2007
randplaty
Yeah, it’s not the seminary degree. Its his tone that he makes him seem like an expert and that the people who are doing the work don’t know what they’re talking about.
If he had a seminary degree, I would take his tone a little more seriously even though I still wouldn’t like it. I just think that someone without a seminary degree can still say the stuff he says, just not in such an arrogant and reductionistic tone.
If I read just a transcript about what he said regarding those issues, I would think he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. The fact that he doesn’t have a degree only reinforces that.
Jan 9th, 2007
KingdomSheepDog
From little that I know of Mark Driscoll, it sounds like he just copies Western Seminary for his position in the women leadership issue. Yee is right that a seminary degree often ”predisposes you to one strain of theology,” except for Bethel and Edinburgh. He, he, he!
Hey, I mean it. Neither Bethel nor Edinburgh has a fixed position on this issue.
Jan 9th, 2007
kanfood
“Hey, I mean it. Neither Bethel nor Edinburgh has a fixed position on this issue.”
haha…good for me!
Jan 9th, 2007
searchingfortreasures
I thought I saw Bethel associated with the Conservative Baptists of America — along with Western Seminary. Maybe someone can tell me whether or not this is really true? CBAs believe that women have the freedom to serve in all areas of ministry/leadership EXCEPT for being senior pastor.
Go here: http://www.cbamerica.org/ and look under “Connections” and then “Ministry Partners.”
Jan 9th, 2007
searchingfortreasures
Also, I just wanted to jump in and say that a LOT of people make categorical conclusions about things without doing their own personal research and study. Out of convenience, mostly, they just refer to what someone they respect believes about things, and then say they believe it too. I think that’s very lazy and foolish… and results in people who don’t know much perpetuating and peddling untruths or half-truths. That *really* irks me — especially in regard to the topic of women in ministry. It bothers me when those who have not studied the topic insist so passionately that women must be silent - when they admit that they have done no study on the topic or their study on it is only surface level, based on secondary sources (e.g. Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood). At least if you haven’t done the study, don’t act like you know it all. It bothers me that based on this method of ‘theology’, John Piper’s position on this topic has cornered the market on mainstream Christianity.
Jan 9th, 2007
KingdomSheepDog
Let me explain a little further why I said “neither Bethel nor Edinburgh has a fixed theology” on the gender issue. Dr. Scorgie of Bethel is an egalitarian, but Dr. Strauss (also of Bethel) is a complementarian. Edinburgh maintains even a wider spectrum of theological positions on its faculty, from very conservative to very liberal. Therefore, as a school, they don’t just teach one particular strain of theology. (Debates often happen among profressors themselves.) However, Bethel is thoroughly evangelical in the basic doctrines. Bethel Seminary is not Conservative Baptist. Bethel Seminary is General Baptist. However, a church in Escondido with the name Bethel is Southern Baptist, I believe.
Jan 9th, 2007
sc_q_jayce
That was the longest ad hominem I’ve ever read.
Jan 9th, 2007
pwrchords
this post makes me want to go to bethel. that’s all
Jan 10th, 2007
Reply to “Mark Driscoll”