Did Paul call the leaders of the Areopagus his brother like Driscoll did of Schuller?

When trying to use Scripture to justify your Golden Calf, at least try to use something that holds a little water.

I hope you find the articles helpful.

DP, thanks for clarifying the roles here. You wrote, “…we will have an article explaining our position and why we believe that we can no longer endorse Desiring God Ministries and John Piper.”

I will look forward to that article. Again, good to read the awakening to what Piper stands for and is defending. My IFB friends simply refuse to critically address the numerous disconcerting issues with Piper.

Lou

You wrote: “it seems relitive, in parts of the world I can say —— and — – —- and no one thinks twice. So I dont have anything to bring against him as far as his mouth”

Are you kidding? I don’t even want to repeat your ‘euphemisms’, much less agree with your assessment of MD.

- Jeff H

I will contact Driscoll and bring the alogations to him and the elders, although I do not know what to bring against him for having a “potty mouth” it seems relitive, in parts of the world I can say bloody and the F word and no one thinks twice. So I dont have anything to bring against him as far as his mouth, seriously if you guys want specific things brought to his attention email me, and I will bring them to before the church. falldown@lord.cc

Sadly, it runs much deeper than that and regards doctrinal teaching. In due course, we will have an article explaining our position and why we believe that we can no longer endorse Desiring God Ministries and John Piper. When that day comes, we encourage each reader to ponder and research for themselves – not just take our word for anything. Thanks.

The Desert Pastor

PS – In regards to the impeccability of Christ which we fully believe unlike many within evangelical circles, I would recommend these three posts from DefCon in August 2008.

Impeccability – Part 1

Impeccability – Part 2

Impeccability – Conc.

_________________________________________________________________________

Lou,

Thanks for the links. Just to clarify, I am not the blog’s host, but Pilgrim is. I am privileged to know Pilgrim and the work being done here, as well as the accountability factor amongst each of the editors and contributors. I am one of the editors.

The Desert Pastor

Never sinned; couldn’t have sinned; end of story.

I’m also curious (and a bit dismayed) about the John Piper question – I’ve always had great respect for him. Is there something specific that has already been discussed here? Will DefCon no longer endorse Desiring God solely because Piper endorses Potty Mouth Boy, or does it run deeper than that?

Lou, thanks for posting your link – will check it out when I get a chance.

You have to look at the context of Scripture. The previous verses are very serious as to what happens. I shared this with you and you obviously overlooked it so I will share it again!

I stated, "Holiness is a very serious and important matter which should NOT be taken lightly by anyone. If you have a candlestick and hide it then you are no better than the salt that lost its savor and therefore needs to be trodden underfoot (or rejected with disdain). You cannot be light or salt to the world when you are cursing and making light of God or His Word! Considering Jesus is the Son of God and always did the will of the Father (who sent Him), I know He definitely would NOT make light of God. He was definitely 100% man and 100% God but His manhood would NOT have done anything against His Godhood and that includes making light of a very serious matter such as the holiness of God!"

Sadly enough, I have seen people who take the holiness of God lightly because they believe that Jesus could have sinned (or even did sin) when He was a child. This is absolutely NOT possible so again I ask the questions I asked previously…

"So this brings us to a question of where do you think Christ stood? Do you believe that He might have been able to sin when He was a child? Why or why not?"

Thanks for speaking to the issues with Piper and acknowledging my joining you in those concerns. I have been on this subject for about two years.

If I may, with our host’s permission I am linking you to two articles at my blog that address John Piper. The first in relation to the corrupt communication of Mark Driscoll. The second deals with Piper and enumerates (with commentary) a number of the issues that should cause any balanced Bible-believing Christian to admonish him and if he continues to be unresponsive, separate from him as a disobedient brother.

This is the link to both articles.

Kind regards,

LM
__________________________________________________________________________________

Desert Pastor:

Hmm, looks like you are this blog’s host. So, with your permission for the above links. I’ll look forward to the updates on the “disturbing elements of his theology” you plan to post. Can I sign up for automatic alerts to these? Send me an e-mail with details.

Lou

Thanks for your comment and for stopping by. To our knowledge, Piper has never openly rebuked Driscoll and continues to endorse him despite fiascos like preaching at Crystal Cathedral. There are more issues at stake with Piper that are currently being researched, but as far as we are concerned at DefCon, we will no longer continue to endorse the ministry of Desiring God and John Piper.

Yes, Piper has endorsed Driscoll, NT Wright and others and glossed over the facts that people like NT Wright and Douglas Wilson are preaching another gospel. No, instead he invites them to share the pulpit. You are correct that there are disturbing elements of his theology which in short order will be placed on our site.

It is sad when pastors refuse to give clear cautions, but some sadly are more afraid of the opinions of men than they are what God thinks of the doctrinal deviances.

The Desert Pastor

I got of track a bit there. MD preached at a pagan temple of a god of self love and rule. He called this man a brother. He told them they will meet Jesus at the end of life implying they are saved. When did the biblical understanding for true faith become so distorted and accommodating to everyone.

You wrote: “The reason for shooting at the hip was it was an issue that I wanted to discuss, i have been occupied at home so I havnt been able to do a whole lot of research…”

Might I suggest that you stop posting here, then, until you can resolve your time issues and give full diligence to your posts.

In an apparent effort to muddy the water and take the focus off of your lack of respectful engagement, you’ve made some very sweeping accusations here at the expense of others (without doing your homework FIRST) – and those accusations are false. You would see that if you DID your homework.

You’ve also dodged requests for clear responses – again – by claiming a time constraint.

This is analogous to talking on your cell phone while your ordering your food at a restaurant. Neither party is served by doing that.

Take some time, and please do it right.

In Jesus,

- Jeff H
___________________________________________________________________________

The Scripture references that others have cited here make it clear that Mark Driscoll’s unabashedly filthy mouth disqualifies him from ministry. He needs to repent of that behavior, leave the pulpit, and return to the pews, at LEAST until he can bear fruit worthy of repentance. If he will not repent, then he should be subjected to biblical Church discipline.

As for agreeing to preach at the CC, I am in agreement that it is a slippery slope for a God fearing Pastor. This, however, does not apply to Driscoll.

Right now Driscoll is merely sullying the Lord’s Name.

In Jesus,

- Jeff H

You wrote, “Piper is now endorsing doctrines and ministers in direct opposition to the clearly stated Word of God.”

Finally, and thanks!!! People are starting to catch on and vocalize these things with Piper. He (Piper) tacitly endoreses the Toronto Blessing and has taken his staff there. More recently he endorsed elements of N. T. Wright’s ministry and teaching who (Wright) can rightly be called a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Calvinistc men in my IFB circles are very reluctant to give clear cautions to young people about the disturbing elements of Piper’s theology and methods of ministry.

BTW, has Piper ever openly rebuked Driscoll as MacArthur has more than once now?

LM

So whom do you guys subscribe to being the set apart of the church since the roman catholic split?

You make several incorrect assumptions. We do NOT follow Piper, Calvin, or Luther. While each of these men produced good material, we would not endorse them. Piper is now endorsing doctrines and ministers in direct opposition to the clearly stated Word of God. Luther had an incredible hatred of the Jews and never fully left the Roman Catholic heresy. Calvin endorsed a state religion along with a host of other issues which this post is not about.

I believe the false understanding that we are either Protestant or Catholic is erroneous at best. As a minister of an unaffiliated church, I am not Protestant. There is a clear and distinct line of true believers down through the centuries who have always stood for the truth. I do not believe they are necessarily labelled as Baptist, Evangelical, or otherwise. A Protestant belongs to a group or denomination that came out of the Roman Catholic system of heresy. This would clearly identify groups like the Methodists, Presbyterians, Anglicans, and Lutherans, but does not (and historically never has) identified those who were and are baptistic in faith and doctrine.

To conclude, you have made several comments about whether we “reach out to the lost, love our enemies, and preach the gospel to them.” You obviously have not spent nearly enough time on this blog or my own at The Desert Pastor otherwise you would have already received your answer. Missions both here and abroad is one of our highest priorities both with these blogs and in our own personal lives and the ministries in which we serve in our local churches.

The Desert Pastor

P.S. – I would highly recommend instead of “shooting from the hip” that you do a little more research before trying to tackle a situation of which you have no or little knowledge.

As far as the drinking etc goes, I was meerly trying to show that people make good things into absolute things like drinking and smoking by saying Driscoll is a false teacher because of this issue of sex and different positions ect would be false, I need to listen to the sermon to get the context, so lets take one thing at a time, the blog is about the crystal cathedral,

and if Driscoll is a false teacher and a friend of heritics and apostates (Dr. Schuller).

as far as the this quote “The whole tone of Scripture sounds very serious and I don’t see how anyone can say that Jesus was laughing about the situation.”

You yourself said “sounds very serious” how do you know this, does it say, Jesus is serious right now?

Again what has anyone here done to reach out to the lost love your enemies and preach the gospel to them?

Let me also state I am not saying Driscoll is perfect, John MacAurther, John Piper, Calvin, Luther have stated things that are false and have acted on them, there is no perfect teacher, in saying that Im sure you guys still follow Piper and Calivin and Luther? Have they repented for there false teachings and what false teachings are teachings that should lable some a false teacher?

Are you sure this guy is a real Hebrew scholar? The whole tone of Scripture sounds very serious and I don't see how anyone can say that Jesus was laughing about the situation. I'm sure the Bible would say if He was laughing about it. It sounds like this "Hebrew scholar" was giving you a snow job or he's been snowed himself! Either that, or he's decided to get noticed by bringing something new into the picture that does not line up with Scripture. There are plenty of people (including Hebrew scholars) that would possibly do it for the sake of

1.) notoriety,
2.) to be noticed, or
3.) simply to follow the in-crowd!

Holiness is a very serious and important matter which should NOT be taken lightly by anyone. If you have a candlestick and hide it then you are no better than the salt that lost its savor and therefore needs to be trodden underfoot (or rejected with disdain). You cannot be light or salt to the world when you are cursing and making light of God or His Word! Considering Jesus is the Son of God and always did the will of the Father (who sent Him), I know He definitely would NOT make light of God. He was definitely 100% man and 100% God but His manhood would NOT have done anything against His Godhood and that includes making light of a very serious matter such as the holiness of God!

So this brings us to a question of where do you think Christ stood? Do you believe that He might have been able to sin when He was a child? Why or why not?

That is a very good quote!

Reminds me of this; “His zeal is false that seems hot against sin, but is cold to holiness.”

How would teaching your congregation that drinking, smoking and listening to rock music is sin label a pastor as a false teacher? I think you speak again from a gross misunderstanding of Scripture by the comments you are making.

The Desert Pastor

I ask again what are you doing to preach the gospel in your communities, to love your enemies?

As far as the joking goes I was reffering to Jesus talking about hiding the light, I have had a hebrew scholr tell me this is a very comical piece in scripture, thats how he was holdoing a crowd, preaching laughing, correcting he was man and God.

Ill respond a little more on the Driscoll stuff later, im sure we can come up with somethings your pastor says are sins that we could lable him a false teacher. (maybe drinking, smoking, listen to rock music….)

I was not saying Christ was sitting there cursing at the crowds, what I was saying is he uses mockery and has cursed in scripture, i will get the text tommorow, but thanks for the kindness.

For the record I dont think anything goes when it comes to being relevent, that would be unbiblical, I just think a lot of Christians take such a hard stance the opposite way and are in sin as well, by not preaching the gosple to his eighbor or coworker etc.

The sermon I mentioned is What was Paul doing on Mars Hill

AMEN, Manfred! You are spot on.

Why would we ever want to invite tares into Church with the wheat, or send wheat out to mix with a barn of tares? And yet, this is happening increasingly.

Tares WILL pull the Church away from Jesus, given the opportunity.

In Christ,

Jeff H

But how does Driscoll “contextualize” Jesus and the Gospel for today’s American culture? By perverting His holy character, describing Jesus as a “Prize fighter with a tatoo on his leg”, cool “party dude”, “punch-you-in-the-nose dude”, “bartender”, etc. Problem with such “contextualization” is, what image does that translate into today? I mean, if Jesus was a cool party dude, then since He is the same yesterday, today and forever, He would also be a cool party dude today: raving at the strippers, snorting cocaine, chugging booze, etc. How can such a person as that be holy, pure and sinless? How is the “punch you in the nose dude” that Driscoll says Jesus is, match the turn-the-other-cheek, meek, loving, long-suffering Christ that we see in the Scriptures? And how are women supposed to follow such a macho, prize fighter, party dude?

Referring to Jesus, you say “he made jokes to keep a crowd”. Really? Show me evidence of that in the Scriptures. I don’t see it. Do you mean when Jesus called the Pharisees a brood of vipers, that Driscoll seems to think is so funny? Or that when Jesus was standing at the door and knocking, that He was being left out of the church while they were having a potluck, like some stooge in a sitcom, which Driscoll thinks is so terribly funny? Was Jesus the standup comedian that Driscoll tries to be, telling the kind of jokes Driscoll tells from the pulpit: jokes on masturbation, on the male organ, sex acts, female anatomy, etc?

You said Jesus “even cursed like them”. Where is that in Scripture? I encourage you to read Eph. 4:17-29; Eph. 5:3-12; Col. 3:5-10; Rom. 8:6-8; Prov. 3:32; Prov.4:24; Prov.6:12; Prov. 8:13; Titus 2:6. Thus He couldn’t have used cursing or foul language and also be sinless.

Sure Paul was all things to all men (to the Jew he became as a Jew, etc.). How does he actually display that in the Scriptures? To the murderer, he certainly didn’t become a murderer. Nor did he become a thief, liar, etc. to be “relevant” to them. Rather, Paul “became” like them in their understanding, but not in behavior. How else are we to communicate the Gospel unless we understand where they are coming from.

You ask where Driscoll is a false teacher? How about when he has taught Christian women, in a church gathering, that God commands they perform a certain particular unnatural sexual act, and if she does not do so, she is a sinner. Driscoll actually teaches (I have heard this in his sermons, and read it in at least one of his books) that God describes that act in Scripture. First, there is no such command in Scripture. Nor does the Scripture (Song of Solomon) even describe what Driscoll insists. Nor does the intenal evidence of the book even support Driscoll’s theology. Driscoll’s teaching is absolute false doctrine. Then to make it a sin for not performing such an act, is also false doctrine. To teach that God commands such a thing is an attack on the very character of God, making Him a perverse, exploitive chauvinist.

You say our culture is “intrigued by Mark Driscoll”. Why wouldn’t they be? He gives them what they want. He gives them a perverted Gospel, a perverted God, a perverted Jesus, and displays by his own unbiblical examples just how hip, cool, and unholy you can be and still call yourself a “Christian”. But what has God said about all this? “You adulteresses, do you not know that friendship with the world is hostility toward God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.” James 4:4

You said, “From what I recall Jesus had large followings, and was culturally relevant, he was where the people were, he made jokes to keep a crowd he dressed like them he ate with them, he talked like them, and yes cursed liked them.”

Are you serious? Best check your recall with Scripture.

Further, don’t err by misreading Paul’s description of his approach to evangelism. Paul is telling us that he did not allow his culture to impeded the Gospel. Also, the purpose of the gathering of saints on the Lord’s day is not evangelism – it’s for the worship of the Lord and building up of the saints for the ministry of the church.

From what I recall Jesus had large followings, and was culturally relevant, he was where the people were, he made jokes to keep a crowd he dressed like them he ate with them, he talked like them, and yes cursed liked them.

If Mark is excusing the sin of Dr Schuller we have issues, but I would say to you don’t be so quick to judge, if I had the opportunity to speak at the CC then I would take it, and deal with the scripture, Mark should confront Schuller on his false teaching, but you and I do not know if that has or hasn’t happened.

There should be no excuse for sin including the sin of compliancy where the church is not relevant at all, nothing in scripture says we should do Sundays this way or that, or that we should dress this way or that (as far as style goes) there are many things that scripture is silent about, but that is where wisdom and discernment come in, some people would say you cant have drum set in church yet they use and organ as if it is some sort of holy instrument. My point is, it is vital that we can relate to the culture we live in, to the beach bum I became a beach bum, to the cowboy I became a cowboy to the people at the CC he became part of that culture, but to do all of these things in Love, (not the modern term love) correcting, kindness, prayerful, discipline…..and not giving into the culture,

so I ask again where has he become a false teacher

and, what are you doing to bring light into your communities, and preach the gospel

this is a very relevant topic, seeing our culture is intrigued by Mark Driscoll, so I applaud you on being relevant.

You are correct. However, you readily seem to have forgotten that NEITHER Jesus nor Paul called the religious leader “brother”, did not recognize the Pharisees as Christians, and certainly DID NOT tell the listeners that “Jesus was waiting to welcome them into heaven with open arms.” Unlike Driscoll’s recent debacle, BOTH Jesus and Paul preached repentance and turning from sin. They taught the way is narrow. They taught that repentance and salvation brings a change from the world!

So, now I ask what is your point?

The Desert Pastor

PS – I understand that both Paul and Jesus never had large followings. Maybe they should have used modern vernacular curse words and spoken crudely of the relationship between men and women. Too bad they just didn’t understand what it means to be “culturally relevant!”