Revelation

Mark Driscoll of the Mars Hill Church in Seattle is preaching a series of sermons on "Doctrine: What Christians Should Believe." The second sermon is "Revelation: God Speaks":

...The big idea, building off the first week’s sermon on the Trinity, is that God communicates. For example, we read, “God said” ten times in Genesis 1 alone. For further reading on the topic of revelation, I have two new books coming out this summer: On the Old Testament and On the New Testament. Each is short enough to be read in about an hour.

No one is born with a clear comprehension of who God is. So, in an effort to know about God, various philosophers and religious leaders have presented their speculations about God with seemingly endless and contradictory declarations.

God has chosen to lift the fog of human speculation with divine revelation. Whereas speculation is the human attempt to comprehend God, revelation is God’s communication to humanity with clarity that is otherwise impossible. The object of that revelation is the sixty-six books of Scripture. .... [more]

Driscoll provides a useful bibliography for further reading about the Scriptures:

For Further Reading on Bible Translations

• “Pastoral Reflections on Bible Translations” by Mark Driscoll
• The Indestructible Book by W. Kenneth Connolly
• The Word of God in English by Leland Ryken
• Choosing a Bible by Leland Ryken
• The Bible in Translation by Bruce M. Metzger
• How We Got the Bible by John H. Sailhamer
• A General Introduction to the Bible by Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix

For Further Reading on How to Study Scripture

• Reading the Bible With Heart and Mind by Tremper Longman III
• Getting the Message by Daniel M. Doriani
• On the Old Testament by Mark Driscoll
• On the New Testament by Mark Driscoll

For Further Reading on Apparent Bible Contradictions

• When Critics Ask by Norman L. Geisler and Thomas Howe

For Further Reading on Miscellaneous Bible Issues

• The Origin of the Bible, edited by Philip Comfort, is a good introduction to the authority and perfection of Scripture from a team of theologians.
• Christ and the Bible, by John Wenham, is a very helpful survey of how Jesus Christ viewed the Old Testament.
• The Canon of Scripture, by F. F. Bruce, is a thorough book on how the sixty-six books of the Protestant canon came to be.
• The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?, by F. F. Bruce, is a good survey of the accuracy and credibility of the New Testament.
• The Indestructible Book, by W. Kenneth Connolly, is a fascinating historical look at how the Scriptures have been both opposed and adored over the ages.

The Mission & Vision | Revelation

Too few books in the Canon?

A Catholic blogger, Joe Heschmeyer, argues that Mark Driscoll is not only wrong about what we Protestants call the Old Testament Apocrypha, but that he is "...not wrong in the sense that I disagree with his reasoning or belief. Wrong in the sense that he makes factual claims that are objectively false." Heschmeyer later comments that "For the record, I think he's sloppy, not acting out of bad faith. He gets historical details wrong all over the place, and on important events." Heschmeyer:

Popular Protestant pastor Mark Driscoll (of Mars Hill church) thinks we Catholics have too many Books in our Bibles. That's no surprise; almost all Protestants think this. But thankfully, Driscoll takes the time to explain why he thinks this, which makes it easy to show where and how he's wrong.

If you're not familiar, the Catholic Bible has seven more Books [Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch (including the Epistle of Jeremy, a.k.a., Baruch 6), 1 and 2 Maccabees], along with longer versions of Esther and Daniel, compared to the Protestant Bible. We call these Books the Deuterocanon; Protestants call them (and several other books) the Apocrypha. So the question is: are Catholic Bibles too big? Or are Protestant Bibles too small? ....

Joe Heschmeyer goes on to quote Driscoll's arguments, responding to each.

A good description of the relationship of the Apocrypha to the rest of the Old Testament can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_apocrypha#Modern_editions. [Thanks, Ben]

Shameless Popery: Mark Driscoll and the Canon of Scripture

Evangelicals and Aquinas

From an interview with Gregg Allison, Baptist professor and author of Historical Theology: An Introduction to Christian Doctrine:

Do you really think evangelicals can and should be as familiar with Thomas Aquinas as they are with Mark Driscoll, as you write in the preface?

I bet Mark Driscoll would agree with me! He is a staunch proponent of sound doctrine and is attempting to articulate and defend it with a particular method well-suited for his contemporary audience and with a missional focus. .... Thomas Aquinas was a staunch proponent of sound doctrine—notice how often he quoted Augustine and other early church theologians—who attempted to articulate and defend it with a particular (Aristotelian) method well-suited for his medieval audience and with a missional focus. Just look at his masterpiece—Summa Theologica, or summary of theology. And don’t overlook his Summa contra Gentiles, a manual for missionaries working among Jews and Muslims, providing support for the Christian faith.

Evangelicals can learn much from Aquinas: his careful reasoning, his appeal to Scripture, his attempt to use philosophy for the benefit of theology, his interaction with historical theology, his championing of sound doctrine, his contextualization of the faith, and much more. Why would we intentionally ignore such help as we seek to do much of the same in our contemporary society? Read Aquinas. Read Driscoll (or at least listen to his podcasts). We will progress further as result of both. ....

Driscoll, Aquinas, and the Need for Historical Theology – The Gospel Coalition Blog

Mark Driscoll

A fascinating description of Mark Driscoll's ministry in Seattle from Christianity Today.

....If he hasn't offended you, you've never read his books or listened to his sermons. On any given Sunday at Mars Hill, it's possible that a visiting fire marshal will get saved. But it's just as likely that a guest will flip him off before walking out.

The spectrum of response speaks to his sharp tongue—his greatest strength and his glaring weakness. But Driscoll also disturbs many fellow evangelicals because he straddles the borders that divide us. His unflinching Reformed theology grates on the church-growth crowd. His plan to grow a large church strikes postmoderns as arrogant. His roots in the emerging church worry Calvinists. No one group can claim him. Maybe that's why they all turn their guns on him. [more]

Some time ago I posted this video from Driscoll about church planting.

Pastor Provocateur | Christianity Today | A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction

"Stupid Evangelical tricks"

Internet Monk lists five "stupid Evangelical tricks." In his complete comments he qualifies and expands on the excerpts below:

... [L]et’s check in with what the iMonk feels are some of the most egregious and foolish of current evangelical blunders. ....

1. Eliminating All Hymns: .... I’m not trying to say a church needs to pursue a music program that ignores missional realities in pursuit of a mission to promote classical music. What I am saying is that the heritage ... has sustained, discipled and given words to evangelicals in ways you can’t discount. Throwing this away is ridiculous.

There’s another good point about preserving the heritage of hymnody: it’s already been sorted out by history. Go pick up a hymnal from 150 years ago, and you will find as many bad songs as you’re hearing on K-Love today, but a modern hymnal (Trinity, Celebration, Baptist) has sorted through those hymns to the best of the best. In other words, we know how God has used “Man of Sorrows” and “Immortal, Invisible.”

Evangelicals should find a way to keep the heritage of great hymns alive. Dumping them entirely for secular and CCM music is a dumb move and evidence that too many churches are leaving important decisions to the wrong people.

2. Goofy Youth Minister Style Preaching: .... Preaching has some basics. When Mark Driscoll suggests that Chris Rock is the preaching teacher you need, I am wincing. The preaching teacher you need is someone like Lloyd-Jones, D.A. Carson, John Piper, Sinclair Ferguson or Al Martin. Chris Rock - or Mark Driscoll - is the influence you need to add to basic preaching essentials in order to speak in some settings.

Basics? Yeah…Expository. In the text. Organized. Balanced. Applicatory. Good questions. Illustrations that serve, not drive. Christ-centered. Original. Gospel-fueled. Open Bible. Earnest. Evangelistic. ....

3. No Church Membership: Oh brother. The church is not an audience. It’s not a crowd that watches a show. It’s not a fan club. It’s a community. It has boundaries. Leadership doesn’t function in the church like a guy opening a store and filling it with customers. You are in it or you are out of it. Baptism is a door into a local church as well as the universal church. The Biblical passages on church shepherding/discipline are about real churches with real leaders and real boundaries. Creed, Confession, Covenant, Constitution (and bylaws.) Your church needs all four. ....

4. The MegaChurch Agenda vs The Healthy Church Agenda: .... The finest teacher of pastoral theology and preaching I’ve ever heard is Al Martin. You’ll never hear him unless you go looking. You can learn every thought Rick Warren’s ever had by just going to the book section at Wal-Mart.

I’m not saying megachurches aren’t healthy. I’m not trying to get rid of them. We need big churches in every city and in every region for lots of good reasons. But the megachurch agenda is different. We don’t need every church to make every decision on how to get more and more people in the building. We don’t need to have leaders who won’t go to a hospital or do a funeral because it doesn’t contribute to growth. We don’t need worship being judged by the applause meter. ....

Get in your Bible and find what the church is all about. Quit trying to be the latest thing. ....[T]he people in front of you - who may never be the congregation you have in your head - matter to God and need to matter to you.

5. Too Much Music: .... What’s going on right now seems to be this: The average church needs a band, a lead singer, a praise team, and 40 minutes of worship for “worship,” i.e. music. We’re going to stand the entire time. We’re going to sing what the musicians and worship leaders feel is “worshipful.” We’re going to do a lot of new songs, and we’re going to sing a lot of lyrics over again. Lights, sound and video projection are now essentials.

There is nothing inherently wrong with this picture, but there are a lot of actual and potential problems here. ....

(Someone will want to know about bad theology. That’s another five, or ten, or fifteen……I’ll get to that later.)

Source: internetmonk.com: Stupid Evangelical Tricks

Calvinism is back?

Time identifies some trends in "10 Ideas Changing the World Right Now." Such prognostications often have a very short shelf-life. Interestingly, number 3 on the list is "The New Calvinism." From the article [I added the links]:

If you really want to follow the development of conservative Christianity, track its musical hits. In the early 1900s you might have heard "The Old Rugged Cross," a celebration of the atonement. By the 1980s you could have shared the Jesus-is-my-buddy intimacy of "Shine, Jesus, Shine." And today, more and more top songs feature a God who is very big, while we are...well, hark the David Crowder Band: "I am full of earth/ You are heaven's worth/ I am stained with dirt/ Prone to depravity."....

Calvinism, cousin to the Reformation's other pillar, Lutheranism, is a bit less dour than its critics claim: it offers a rock-steady deity who orchestrates absolutely everything, including illness (or home foreclosure!), by a logic we may not understand but don't have to second-guess. Our satisfaction — and our purpose — is fulfilled simply by "glorifying" him. In the 1700s, Puritan preacher Jonathan Edwards invested Calvinism with a rapturous near mysticism. Yet it was soon overtaken in the U.S. by movements like Methodism that were more impressed with human will. Calvinist-descended liberal bodies like the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) discovered other emphases, while Evangelicalism's loss of appetite for rigid doctrine — and the triumph of that friendly, fuzzy Jesus — seemed to relegate hard-core Reformed preaching (Reformed operates as a loose synonym for Calvinist) to a few crotchety Southern churches.

No more. Neo-Calvinist ministers and authors don't operate quite on a Rick Warren scale. But, notes Ted Olsen, a managing editor at Christianity Today, "everyone knows where the energy and the passion are in the Evangelical world" — with the pioneering new-Calvinist John Piper of Minneapolis, Seattle's pugnacious Mark Driscoll and Albert Mohler, head of the Southern Seminary of the huge Southern Baptist Convention. The Calvinist-flavored ESV Study Bible sold out its first printing, and Reformed blogs like Between Two Worlds are among cyber-Christendom's hottest links. .... [more]

Driscoll comments on the article here and here and here. "While the article inaccurately painted God as essentially the author of evil, the fact that Reformed theology has gotten so big that it merits this kind of attention is nothing short of shocking." Time, of course, is far less important than it once was, nevertheless....

3. The New Calvinism - 10 Ideas Changing the World Right Now - TIME

Debates among Christians

As he begins his presentation about the doctrine of Creation — about which he has very definite views — Mark Driscoll of Seattle's Mars Hill Church gives an important caution:

I would like to stress that Genesis was not written as a scientific textbook. Rather, it is a theological narrative written to reveal the God of creation, which means it emphasizes God, not creation. As one example, Hebrews 11:3 says, “By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.”

The Bible in general, and the opening pages of Genesis in particular, are far more concerned with the questions of who made creation, how he made creation, and why he made creation than when he did. Therefore, as Galileo said, “the Holy Ghost intended to teach us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go.”

Therefore, at Mars Hill we want to be clear that there is a distinction between debates within Christian theology and debates that are not Christian. For example, godly Bible-believing and Jesus-loving people can and should graciously debate and discuss what Genesis 1 and 2 mean without viewing one another in the same light as non-Christians who hold to naturalistic and atheistic evolution. [more]

The Mission & Vision | Creation: God Makes

Well, at least they're reading...

And some Christian parents were worried about Harry Potter!

"Thou shalt not discriminate...against monsters"

Mark Driscoll:

Special Revelation or special revelation?

An interesting conversation between Mark Driscoll and Douglas Wilson about spiritual gifts and cessationism (via Justin Taylor):

"Boomers," our parents, and authenticity

Yesterday responding to a letter about his negative reaction to Mark Driscoll’s latest book, Chaplain Mike at Internet Monk made some useful distinctions:

.... I am a member of a generation (Baby Boomers) that has promoted the idea that qualities like vulnerability are key to a healthy life and relationships. The accepted wisdom is that the generations before us were “uptight” and kept secrets. Our parents and grandparents lived in a culture of “shame” that valued a respectable outward appearance, while the reality underneath was often not so pretty. Taboos were strong and subjects like sex were not talked about freely and openly. It wasn’t the Victorian Age, but it might as well have been.

But that is not all. Feelings of all kinds were not shared aloud. It was considered bad form, a loss of self-control, an admission of weakness. “Keeping up appearances” was paramount. We feared shame more than hypocrisy. We feared loss of status and the disapproval of our peers. We didn’t like drawing attention to ourselves. We hated to think that people might pity us or think we were not self-reliant. ....

I know these folks well. I grew up among them. I have always had a healthy representation of them in my churches. As a hospice chaplain, I now visit with them daily. This is what I hear and have heard my whole life about “vulnerability.” ....

He discusses the reaction to my parents' generation: that "authenticity" and "vulnerability" and "transparency" were better — and he affirms that — but then:

I think that the practice of “vulnerability” as personal transparency may have gone to seed. ....

Vulnerability defined as “letting it all hang out” is not necessarily the same thing as serving others personally and humbly in my weakness. “Telling my story” may be more about meeting my own needs than about ministering to others. Sharing my feelings and personal experiences can be an act of humility and generosity, or a selfish attempt to put myself in the spotlight. It can keep me from listening well to what another is saying. It can prevent me from understanding my friend’s needs by keeping the focus on my own “need” to share. I may be so intent on sharing the details of my life that I fail to see that what I share about myself may be irrelevant to my friend’s situation. My story may give them a completely misleading idea about what it means for their journey.

Being vulnerable or transparent, sharing my feelings, speaking honestly and openly about my own mistakes and failures, confessing my doubts and fears and limitations, acknowledging my weaknesses, being willing to laugh at myself, shed tears without shame, admit my need for help, and say, “I don’t know” — these are essential qualities of humility and honesty. These qualities won’t look the same in everybody, they will be channeled through our individual personalities and temperaments. But they are necessary if we are to relate to one another well.

But…

Vulnerability must always be limited and guided by love. To love means to be with another and for another for their benefit. If allowing a glimpse inside my life through telling my story or sharing my feelings will accomplish that, then I should do so thoughtfully and with care and discernment. But I may be called to simply listen, ministering by my silence and presence. It may be more important for me to point my friend away from me in order to provide help. What is essential is that I am committed to loving others by laying down my life for them. But “laying down my life” does not always mean “sharing every detail of my life.”

The love that limits and guides vulnerability is a virtuous love. Sharing my life transparently with others is limited by love that recognizes a place for privacy. Certain details of life are private. Some things are not meant to be shared with anyone but kept in my own heart. Other things are meant only to be shared with those who share my private spaces. Without that, intimacy with the appropriate people in our lives is not possible. ....

Virtue and the Limits of Vulnerability | internetmonk.com

"Do pastors rebuke any more?"

Jared Wilson:

Okay, okay, it's not very pastoral. :-)

We should restore sinners gently (Gal. 6:1). But I do think that sometimes, in our desires to bear burdens, extend grace, restore gently, counsel toward disciplines, we can inadvertently coddle some who best need stern rebuke.

Do pastors rebuke any more?

Thanks to Jared Wilson at The Gospel-Driven Church, not only for the video and comment, but also for Mark Driscoll's account, which set the context.

The Gospel-Driven Church: Just Stop It

Church planting

Mark Driscoll prepared the video below for a church planting conference held recently. The video was well received by those present, but was not distributed to the attendees as had been planned. That is a pity. It is a very frank and straightforward presentation.

Source:The Banned Church Planting Video | TheResurgence

By their fruit...

At the end of Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, he says, "Beware of false prophets; by their fruit you will know them." We quote our Teacher. So why don't we apply his words? "So often Christians approach that as if it says, 'by their gifts you shall know them' or 'by their results or charisma you shall know them,'"

In Leadership Journal I find "The Painful Lessons of Mars Hill," by a pastor from the Pacific Northwest. He summarizes those lessons and they have broader implications than merely flaws in Mark Driscoll's management style.

1. A pastor's character shapes the church.

Pastors and leaders need to stop obsessing over methodology and cultivate the fruit of the Spirit in their lives. Schlaepfer says, "You need to realize the fact that you are going to reproduce your soul in your church, whether you intend to or not. And if you are sarcastic and defensive and arrogant, that's going to be reproduced in your people. Your soul, the fruit of the Spirit that's in your life, your strength and weaknesses as a leader, are going to be reproduced in that church."

2. "Submitted" does not mean "quiet."

"I am wrestling now with what loyalty means," says Clem, looking back on his days as a Mars Hill pastor. "I feel like I kept quiet as a pastor and elder at Mars Hill in a commitment to 'unity.' I put up with stuff I probably should not have put up with because I thought I was submitting to authority. ....

3. Beware of false "success."

Statements like, "Good leaders have followers" or "Living things grow" become mantras at churches like Mars Hill, says Gaydos. This logic extrapolates quickly to "great leaders have tons of followers" and "the faster things grow, the more alive they are." Soon, small attendance numbers and slow growth become problems to conquer. ....

"If you are finding yourself worrying about 'leaving a legacy' or 'What does the city think about what we're doing' or 'What will you leave behind,' soon it will be all about your movement and not about your relationship with Jesus at all, simply receiving his love and presence." ....

4) Emulate Christ's servant-leadership.

McKnight comments, "Jesus offers what I think is the most significant statement about leadership in the entire Bible that will lead us toward a gospel culture. He uses language that we are all afraid of. He says that you are not to be called Rabbi, you are not to call anyone father, you are not to be called instructors, because you have one teacher—Jesus, and you have one Father—God the Father, and you have one instructor—the Messiah. The greatest will be your servant. .... [more]

The Painful Lessons of Mars Hill | Leadership Journal

The problem of personality-driven leadership

In a post inspired partly by the controversies surrounding Mark Driscoll, Miles Mullin at The Anxious Bench argues that personality-driven leadership is a problem and not just a problem in mega-churches:

.... The reality of charismatic, personality-driven leadership functions at all levels of ministry in American evangelicalism, including the level of the local congregation.  With some exceptions, evangelical laypeople choose a church based upon the pastor. Denomination and doctrine matter to some extent for some people, but the person of the pastor matters most for most people.  Those who prefer an affable, personable leader choose a church with an affable, personal pastor.  Those who like a somber, serious-minded preacher choose one that suits their tastes. ....

This systemic reality functions to empower the people while simultaneously putting them under the persuasive power of a charismatic pastoral leader.  In evangelical churches, such leaders often accumulate significant power over time.  At first, this power comes through their personal charisma and powers of suasion.  However, as the congregation grows numerically, procedural and governance practices that protect the pastor from criticism and critique are implemented.  ....  The growing scope of the ministry “demands” efficiency and these changes provide the pastor freedom to act decisively, leading quickly and efficiently.  At the same time, they exacerbate the problems latent in personality-driven leadership as they create an echo chamber around the pastor, isolate him from the people, and eventually set him up as an untouchable celebrity.

A perfect solution to this challenge does not exist.  More hierarchical structures bring their own problems.  Yet there are steps that can be taken–by rank-and-file evangelicals and their leaders–to help mitigate these challenges.  First, no matter how much they love their charismatic pastor, evangelical laypeople need to insist on the transparency of governing processes and accountability for leaders in their congregations.  Second, local church leaders need adopt a long-term vision that looks beyond their tenure by putting into place structures of accountability that will work to guarantee integrity and accountability in their congregations–even if it means less efficiency for them in the short-term.  This takes an incredible amount of fortitude, patience, and humility.  After all, what charismatic leader wants to spend time on developing processes that slow down the implementation of their vision? And yet, by doing so, His kingdom is best served–even if theirs is not. [more]

Personality-Driven Leadership in the Local Congregation

Influential churches

ChurchReport.com has posted its list of "America's 50 Most Influential Churches." I've linked to the Mars Hill Church, whose pastor, Mark Driscoll has appeared in a number of posts on this site. The leading churches:

Willow Creek Community Church (South Barrington, Ill.), Saddleback Church (Lake Forest, Calif.), North Point Community Church (Alpharetta, Ga.) and Fellowship Church (Grapevine, Texas) lead this years 50 Most Influential Churches list.

New to the top 10 churches are Granger Community Church (Granger, Ind.), Mars Hill Church (Seattle, Wash.) and Seacoast Church (Mt Pleasant, S.C.). All but Granger Community Church and The Potter’s House are multi-site churches.

Four of the top 10 churches are affiliated with denominations and six are non-affiliated. Lakewood Church and The Potter’s House are the only two of the 10 that are charismatic congregations. Two of the churches (Saddleback and Fellowship) are affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention. [the article]

8/11 Update: Note the comment which quotes a news article making pretty serious and credible allegations about the source of the list. I will not knowingly cite information from The Church Report again.

ChurchReport.com