“But I’ve looked at his theology and his soteriology and I can’t argue with it. I can’t. He’s rock solid.” No, his WORDS are orthodox. The key issue is, what “jesus” does Driscoll preach? His outright blasphemy of Almighty God, as well as of Jesus, presenting a different “jesus” than He Who is described in the Scriptures, makes his “Gospel” orthodox in words only, but not in substance. To say he preaches the Gospel becomes meaningless when his “jesus” is not the sinless, non-worldly, non-fleshly, pure and all-holy Son of God.

We would do well to remember what Jesus Himself said (given already above by Mike Hernandez):

“Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (Matt. 7:20-23)

It is clear, acknowledging Jesus as “Lord”, doing “many wonderful works” in His name, even (apparently) believing one is a Christian, means NOTHING to Jesus, if we are ALSO practicing what He forbids (“iniquity”). Mr. Driscoll continues this day to practice what God forbids, continues to teach false doctrines. Notice also, Jesus did not say we would know them by their words. Anyone can say the “right” words. Their fruit is what tells us who is a Christian and who is not.

But you say we are not to make such judgments? How else are we to know who to fellowship with, and who not to fellowship with? It is imperative we make such judgments. Since we are not to be yoked with unbelievers, it is crucial we determine who are believers and who aren’t. Since we are not to keep company with anyone who claims to be a brother yet walks contrary to the Scriptures (1Cor. 5:11-13), we are directly commanded to make such judgments.

It might benefit you, and give you greater understanding as to where many of us stand regarding Mr. Driscoll, to read through the other posts on Driscoll on this site (type in “Driscoll” in the search box). This one instance concerning Driscoll and Schuller is but the tip of the iceberg. We do not judge him by “this one statement” as you accuse us of.

Lou–

I would agree with your response.

Thank you!

You wrote, “Because of that one statement, we’re going to assume he’s not saved and is leading people astray?”

Saved? Probably. Leading people astray? Definitely!

LM

You said you believe Driscoll is saved. By saying that, you have made a judgment for yourself.

The Bible is clear that we will know those who are saved by their fruits. I have read the things that Driscoll has said & done, read the stories about who he associates himself with, and more. The man’s fruits stink worse than a garbage dump in New Jersey.

As for your mention of grace, are we to abuse it? I see many people who claim to be Christians who abuse it greatly. They believe they can constantly sin and yet feel nothing because they know they have been saved by grace. We do struggle greatly with sin, but the difference is you know those who are saved by their hating of their sins and their going to the Lord to forgive them. You can see those who show no signs of salvation by the ways that they live & act & say.

You will know them by their fruits.

Matthew 7:20-23 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. (21) Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. (22) Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? (23) And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

But where is the verse that says “And make a judgement for yourself if someone is saved or not.” Or something of the like.

Mt 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

Mt 7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

Mt 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

Mt 7:19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

Mt 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Mt 7:21 ¶ Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Mt 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

Mt 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Mt 7:24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

Ac 20:29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.

Ac 20:30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

Ro 16:17 ¶ Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

Ro 16:18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

2Ti 3:1 ¶ This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

2Ti 3:2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,

2Ti 3:3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

2Ti 3:4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

2Ti 3:5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

Mt 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

Mt 7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

Mt 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

Mt 7:19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

Mt 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Mt 12:33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.

And please don’t pull out passages about holding other believers accountable to the Word of God. That’s not the same. We ALL fall short. Every day. That’s what grace is for.

I’ll be waiting for the answer…

So, if God is the judge of who is saved or not saved, why do people condemn those who confront teachers like Driscoll (who’s fruits truly show who he is) as saying we say he is not saved YET are so quick to say that Driscoll is saved without any evidence of the sort?

I’ll be waiting for the answer……..

No one has addressed this? I will:

“Schuller began by asking Driscoll how he came to know the Lord. This should have been the first opportunity for Driscoll to be NOT ASHAMED OF THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST, yet HE FAILED MISERABLY!

Driscoll responded, “I started reading the Bible and learned about Jesus.” This was followed by an off-handed attempt at humor. He continued by saying, “I got excited about Jesus and have been excited ever since!””

(I, for one, do believe he’s saved, though I admittedly question some of his teaching/preaching methods. It is NOT. UP. TO. ME. to question his salvation. That is God’s job.) Anyway, my point. Because of that one statement, we’re going to assume he’s not saved and is leading people astray? Because he didn’t mention in that one statement his sin and his need for repentance? Let me ask you this: my son is 5. He is saved. I know this, because I know my son. I, too, was saved at 5. Does a 5 year old understand repentance, hell, and sin? No. But a 5 year old understands the need for Jesus in his heart. Does this make my 5 year old a heretic because he “prayed the sinner’s prayer”? At any rate…I digress…when my 5 year old is 39, like Driscoll, and has the opportunity to share with someone how he got saved, he would be lying if he included the words hell, repentance, and sin in telling *his* story, because how *he* got saved is by asking Jesus into his heart. So the fact that Driscoll read the Bible and got excited about Jesus does not mean that he is not saved or that he’s not preaching the Gospel. We don’t know his heart. We DO know that he does preach the Gospel, though some of you don’t (want to?) admit that.

I’ve questioned him, admittedly. But I’ve looked at his theology and his soteriology and I can’t argue with it. I can’t. He’s rock solid.

His methodology is questionable, I grant that. Maturity issue? Maybe. Arrogance? Maybe.

But the only perfect preacher to ever walk the earth was Jesus.

Have we forgotten that?

John Piper’s idea that God loves us because He loves himself and His glory is idiotic and narcississtic at its worst. “Christian” hedonism is idiotic, unBiblical and blasphemous. But hey, Calvinism is a blasphemous doctrine, so going further into it, as Piper does, is no surprise.

True love is to look away from ourselves. God loves us because He IS LOVE, and because he is full of compassion. Christ did not consider himself, but denied Himself out of love so as to die for the world.

I also have read Pipers comments on Driscoll. Pipers sees Driscoll like a son that will change if he has made errors and yes, Mark Driscoll has made errors and has had to readjust his sails. Piper also said Driscoll’s theology is “spot on”.

Can you lead me to more complete sources against Mark Driscoll as I make my own decision?

If you are in the pulpit you had BETTER be preaching the truth in its entirety… or step down, sir!

In Jesus,

- Jeff H

Lyn,
I ask that you would reconsider your stance on this statement or at least rephrase it. I don’t know of anyone in history who has ever taught nothing but truth… except our Lord Jesus. I don’t think any of us can preach truth in its entirety due to our fallen nature, even though we should strive for it daily.

I invite you to look in at a blog I visit. The blog’s administrator posted an article on Driscoll’s appearance at the CC. Below I link you to a point in the brief thread where you’ll find the two most recent comments.

The first is by a Rod Hodgamn who claimed on Driscoll’s preaching , “…I considered both sermons to be valid gospel messages.” To which I replied in by linking back to this article by you with an excerpt. See-

Mark Driscoll can Preach a Serious, Reverent Message About Christ

LM

We did listen to the message very carefully. I would highly recommend you either go troll on another blogsite or read our Rules of Engagement before you attempt to leave one more comment at DefCon. We rightly question anybody who has the audacity to support what Driscoll is doing. Sadly, those who defend people like Driscoll would definitely have had an issue with Paul, Peter, and even the words of the Lord Jesus Christ for they called people to account for their sins and demanded repentance.

The Desert Pastor

You said:
Funny how Martin Luther measured the success of the reformation in terms of persecution. We measure it in terms of a leader’s relevance to culture and popularity.

If DefCon ever had a top ten comments list, yours would definitely make it in the top three.

You said:
My heart goes out to those of his followers who are perhaps new to the faith, and perhaps are unaware of Driscoll’s abuses of the pulpit. But then there are also the militant defenders of Driscoll who, in supporting him in his errors, display an unwillingness to submit to the authority of the Scriptures. They would rather attack and undermine any effort to expose Driscoll’s errors by God’s word. And they typically do so with endless word games attempting to distract from the issue at hand.

I was beginning to wonder if I was the only one who noticed the myriad of distractions and word games being played here. I’m glad someone else noticed it to.

- The Pilgrim

“Paul says that death is our great enemy. That we will all die. Some of you are on the precipice of the end of your life wondering what awaits you on the other side. What awaits you on the other side is Jesus who has conquered death and came back to tell us He did die and He did rise, He did so on a Sunday. That’s why every Sunday, a few billion people on the earth gather to remember Jesus, not as a dead example, but as a living Savior. As the one who hears our prayers, who forgives our sins, who changes our lives, who guarantees our eternity and who conquers our death.”

Maybe I missed it, but I listened to this, and read it after listening, and I couldn’t find that he gave any qualifier for this. No mention of repentance. No mention of eternal punishment for those who do not believe the Gospel. To those sitting there, and those listening, who are “on the precipice of the end of your life” (that is, who are close to physically dying), he assured them that Jesus is waiting for them when they die. No mention that He might be their judge rather than Savior. On the contrary, he clearly infered as their Savior. To all who are dying. That isn’t biblical. On the contrary, to tell just anyone that they are going to heaven when they die is heretical. To tell the reported millions of viewers of the “hour of power” broadcast that they are all going to heaven when they die (and he didn’t say anything to the contrary) is to give false eternal security to an awful lot of people.

Don’t forget, too he said a few billion remember Jesus as their savior every Sunday. Oh, really? Some 1/3 of the world population are true Christians? Didn’t Jesus Himself say the way to heaven is narrow and those who find it are few? Who does Driscoll consider to be a Christian?

Could you possibly post the entire transcription that you have on here in full? From what I did get I wouldn’t say it was a total failure, more like a soft gospel intended for a certain audience who responds to that sort of thing. When in Rome … seems to be Mark’s method of operation, whether it’s with the street folks or the ‘elite’. Noticed he wore a suit this time. Hmmm… quite a departure from his usual style of dress.

Thanks, and God bless.

My question again was
“You think Osteen would EVER preach the kind of Christology Driscoll preached on Sunday?”

Here’s the explanation given on the website:

Vintage Jesus

Unfortunately the full hour of this week’s episode is not available. We apologize for the inconvenience but you can still view the episode in segments.

Message: Mark Driscoll
Guest: Bill Dallas
Music: Bridgette Bentley
Music: Mark Schultz
Choir: Crystal Cathedral Choir

What’s up with that?

I like Piper’s view that God loves us because He loves himself and wants glory.

The amazing thing is that he wants to share that love with wretched unworthy sinners.

Jesus comes into history and to those who are being saved he is winsome, loving and kind. But to those who reject him, he is hard to understand and judgemental.

Do we believe that a sovereign God will call his elect through winsome preaching? Do we really trust that God will save to the utmost those who he is calling?

Did not CH Spurgeon get saved by a replacement preacher who could only say “Look ye unto him” – a preacher who missed a whole load of theology – no judgement, no clear definition of sin.

Thankfully God is sovereign.

That makes me really glad.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Roseborough at Pirate Christian Radio loved his sermon.

Said he dealt with the law ‘lawfully’ and pointed people to Jesus for repentance and forgiveness of sins.

You can listen to the whole sermon and his comments on it on his radio show aired just this week

“5. Jesus said He could forgive our sin.

Driscoll noted under this point that “God needs to forgive us, love us, pursue us, embrace us, cleanse us, renew us, and restore us. Jesus is going to die on the cross to pay for our sins so that we could become new people with new lives, new hopes, new dreams, new passions, new pleasures, and new purposes for our whole life.”

Mark, I am afraid you once again failed in both your understanding of Scripture and your delivery. First, God NEEDS NOTHING! Second, Jesus did NOT die so we could have the things Driscoll mentions. He died so that we would be saved from the wrath to come. He died to satisfy the just penalty that every sinner rightly deserves. 2 Cor. 5:21 makes it clear that He died so that we would become new creations in Christ.”

I think you failed to understand his use of the word ‘need’

Let me explain.

God did not ‘need’ to create us
God did not ‘need’ to save us

But God decided in his sovereignty to create a race that he knew would fall into sin.
God decided in his sovereign will not only to create, but to redeem a people.

Once God had chosen to do this, he ‘needed’ to do so in line with his character and attributes. So God DID need to save us in a particular way so that his own justice was satisfied. Any other way wouldn’t do.

God didn’t ‘need’ to save us
But having decided so to do, he did ‘need’ to do it in a certain way.

I believe this is what Driscoll is referring to.

Actually, we ‘need’ a Savior and we are helpless, so we ‘need’ someone to do it for us.

And every joke he ever makes about unintelligent people seems to be a joke about people from KY which is where I live. I can take a lot of jokes and make fun of myself, A LOT, but for some reason every joke he makes about idiots and uneducated people are always about people from KY.

This issue though, I can only say so much since I haven’t listened to the messages yet and you seem to know more about him than I do. All I can do is trust that you know him better than I do and hope that your heart is the Lord’s heart.

I just haven’t heard him be the failure I hear him being called now. But even if he was a failure in this matter, I believe we need to be very careful of how we discuss these things when the whole world is able to watch the conversation.

I haven’t watched the video’s yet, so I cannot talk with you about the points he made or what he neglected to say or how he said what he did say. But, if we think he didn’t present the gospel the way we wanted it to be told, then should we not just go and present that message ourselves?

Do we really need to take the time to point out those who fouled their message up, before we do present the gospel for ourselves?

Do you think Mark Driscoll’s motives were to hurt or take advantage of people? If you do, then go get him, but if not, then isn’t there a case to be made for a more gentle spirit in communicating that you think your brother messed up so as to protect him from the wicked one. I’m not talking about you particularly, but all of us.

I can’t help but think that we give ammunition to Satan when we jump on the internet and scold our brothers and sisters. Once again, if they are a 2Peter2 kind of teacher, then fine, let everyone know, but we should also think a bit about how Paul started out when it came time to deal with the Corinthian church and their rejection of him for the false teachers.

Obviously, he knew — and did — end up having to say some harsh things in the last 4 chapters of 2Cor — but notice how he began — as a man who stopped in the midst of such great emotions, to check his flesh and be careful to approach the conflict in the spirit so that the fruits of the spirit would be dominating the flesh and guiding his words.

He began to confront their rejection of him and their disobedience to God, and their deception by the false teachers with a meek and gentle spirit. And even though we say we have the best intentions, our words and the way we communicate before others, especially when the world can look in, makes it a different matter.

And how much more careful should we be now that we have the internet recording everything we say about others. It’s a different game than a minister writing a personal letter to a ministry he pastors.

Now yes, I know of all the verses where Paul calls people out and names people for being divisive and hurtful, but I’m not to sure this is a similar situation. Robert Schuller maybe, but not Driscoll speaking at the CrystalC.

I don’t know…just some thoughts. I think it is wise to consider Paul’s example in being gentle. Even though he did end up having to say some heavier words of warning and there are a few lessons to be learned in between verse 1 of ch10 leading up to when he did have to come out and say something more painful and direct. And I’m not to sure he really was anything but gentle with those in the church; even those rejecting him.

Now that I think of it, all of these behaviors you speak of about Mark is not unlike, nor probably as bad as those in the church at Corinth, including some of those in the leadership apparently who were allowing or encouraging some of their bad behaviors. Yet Paul spoke to them as beloved sons.

Should we feel the same way about our own family in Christ? Should we think of how we would treat our own sons and daughters as we are writing about the sons and daughters of God? A good question to ask ourselves would be, would we write that same stuff if Mark [or whoever] WAS our own blood son or daughter who messed up?

If we would, then it must be terrible what they did or consistently do. But we would be VERY VERY thoughtful and careful wouldn’t we, and yet how much more should we feel this way about a family that is more real than our own flesh and blood if they do not belong to the family of God? Paul, not only did he not want to shame his family, his children in Christ, but he continually reminds them, filling them with extra assurance that they are “in Christ.”

So there is a good balance with Paul in sharing the truth of sin and consequences of sin as well as God’s love for us that never takes us away from being “in Christ”. He even gives thanks for the grace God has to show them in-spite of their carnal weaknesses, because the testimony of Christ is confirmed in them all the more. So much so that they will be confirmed unto the end and blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.

God is faithful, by whom we were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord — even when we fail to say and do the right things — even though we are sincere.

Again, just some thoughts about how gentle our Lord is with us, even when we mess up, even as leadership, and unless you are a 2Pe2 kind of man/woman, should we take these conversations outside of the church to be judged also by the world?

Should our ability to communicate with so many people like we do through the INet make us think twice about what we say and who we talk about, even if it is a immature Christian who didn’t give the best message he could give when he had the chance.

I’m not a big fan of Mark. I do like some of his thoughts, but still not a big supporter. Although I am very concerned about how we are representing the King in our zeal to defend Him. Do we pray for a while before we write or type? Probably not most of the time, although we should.

I’m not telling you what to think. If you know stuff that terrible about him that I don’t, then I pray you are doing or writing what God is telling you to do. But I also hope you don’t mind a little encouragement to approach all of these situations with the meekness and gentleness of Christ — something I guess Mark could do a lot better at too, huh?

So if you have to talk about it, OK. It sure would be glorious though to see someone write what they do, as if that was their own child they were writing about. The words chosen and the tone would be so different. People would go out of their way to clarify just how much they are writing in love and with care and concern. The result would be a message more like the way Christ would speak to you and me. I think it is a neat thought.

Yes their is death and hell and wrath and punishment to speak of and blood shed for our sins. This is how much God loved us. When we think of what great pains He went through to save us and to reveal His love for us, our taking the extra effort to be a little more gentle is nothing in comparison, remember what love is — “Herein is love, not that we loved God, because that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.”

Also very well demonstrated by Jesus, washing the feet, even the feet of a man who he knew would betray Him that night, and another who would deny Him. It’s remarkable stuff!

And again, I’m not directing this at anyone in particular…just all of us. Sorry, I went on for so long.