The New York times just put out a piece on Marc Driscoll, from Seattle, WA’s Mars Hill Church (as opposed to Grand Rapids, MI’s Mars Hill, run by Rob Bell). Before you go any further, read the article here.

After reading the article, I have some big concerns (if the allegations are true – if they aren’t, then I apologise to Marc for some of the following I’m about to say) about Driscoll as a Christian teacher and leader.

First, the idea that “questioning is sinning” is a big one for me.  I have been taught to test and discern everything that is brought to my attention through the teaching of the word, like the Bereans in Acts 17:11. For someone to tell me that to question is to sin, and that blind following is the moral and Christian thing to do, then I would tell that person that they are a dangerous person and I’m not following your cult. By blindly following another human being, you put yourself in a false freedom – you are bound not to any god, let alone the Trinity, but to one person’s teachings. There is no freedom there. You take Driscoll’s yolk, not Jesus’: That’s contrary to the Gospel.

Second, Marc Driscoll is a straight-up jackhole. Pardon my rude language, but I really believe this. I’ve been following his remarks online for years now, and I bought his Vintage Jesus book as well, and I’ve heard next to no respectful things come from his mouth about anyone that disagrees with him. For someone who espouses what should be a humbling theology like hypercalvinism, he is an arrogant jerk who seems to show no sign of good fruit in his public life. Am I the only one who sees this a major problem? I don’t care about his swearing or vulgarity, all power to him, but he seems to murder people in his heart all the time. No Grace. I don’t see love in his actions or words. That’s the deal-breaker for me.

It seems that, in an effort to get away from the hyper-sensitive love Gospel being preached in North America in many places, Driscoll has gone on passed the middle and gone to the other extreme of truth with no love. I worry mostly that Driscoll’s position of power will propogate itself in the congregation(s) under his care and ultimately result in a Christianity with little love and grace, like early Calvinism and Lutheranism during the religious wars of the 1600′s.

I guess I’m just worried that the baby is being thrown out with the bathwater.

WK

The Good Shepherd, dated mid-3rd Century

The King has come.

The King, who came through a young, obedient girl. The King, who came under the care of a socially-scorned couple. The King, who came from the town of the old king, under the oppression of many evil kings. The King, who brought outcast shepherds and foreign powers to witness your birth and life. The King, for which  the very angels sang out in celebration upon the Earth. The King, who in very nature God, in communion with God and by the power of God, became lowly man.

The King, who would take in all that is God’s nation on Earth, and make it what it was to be. The King, who would show love to the unloved, justice to the oppressed, freedom to the captive, and hope to the hopeless.

The King, who would take on the sin of all humanity, so that we may be saved. The King, who on the Third Day rose again and defeated Death. The King, whose kingdom is now, but not yet. The King, whose new creation will herald renewed, complete, and everlasting communion with God.

The King, who will return soon.

Merry Christmas,

WK

Bebbington defines it as: the belief that the gospel needs to expressed in effort.  I define it as: the belief that the gospel needs to be expressed in effort to make Christianity the predominant Culture, ridding the evils of any one else’s point-of-view.

Out of all 4 points of the quadrilateral, this one is probably the one that would brand me a liberal by our more conservative brothers and sisters, but I feel this needs to be said: We do not live in a Christian culture, and the former ‘Christian’ culture of Canada was of face-value at best.  A culture war is an exercise in futility.

And there you have it. North-American Christianity, though far more prominent south of the border (though that seems to be changing), seems to be deadset on winning some cultural war against sex, homosexuality, postmodernism, religious plurality, and, it seems, the political left.  All of these contribute to the downfall of society, or so I was to believe, had I listened to the late Jerry Falwell, or even Pat “Assassination’s cool with God” Robertson.

Don’t get me wrong.  Some of these things are wrong. Some of these things aren’t bad, they are just reality.  I’m not going to tell you which, but I am going to say what I think are the two things Christians do in response to culture that is bogus: wholesale condemnation, followed by a really crappy, ‘cleansed’ copy.

First off, the condemnation. I don’t understand how we can condemn a culture that is devoid of the Word for doing things against the Word? Yes, there are things that are bad that need to be brought to justice and renewed (television standards and practices), and there are things beyond redemption that we need to just condemn outrightly (abortion), but we are doing it in just the dumbest way possible.  Scare tactics, guilt, and even outright hatred are not the ways of how Christians are to respond, let alone how Christ responded to things he that were wrong.  Where is the love for our fellow man in saying “God hates Fags,” or “Abortionists are Murderers?”

Secondly, we really suck at creating an alternative. Contemporary Christian Music tends to be about 4 years behind realities tastes and flavours, not even mentioning how mediocre most of the talent is, and don’t even get me started on Kirk Cameron and his Left Behind movies (or for that matter, Tim Le Haye and Jerry Jenkins for coming up with those pieces of trash).  We North-American Christians, by and large, seem to hate to be innovative or creative.  What happened to 2000 years of Art History centred around Jesus? What made Christians hate good art so much that they would create all this garbage? For the sake of the Lord, make something decent.

Solutions:  First of all, I think we need to cast off the ‘Christian’ label we have attached to everything in our God-fearing households, and replace them with socially-responsible products (which I’m pretty sure Jesus would appreciate it more than you may think).  Second, we to interact and dialogue with our communities, to not feel better abour oursevles, but to serve the needs of those seeking out the kingdom, wherever they may be.

So that ends this cycle on Evangelicalism. I think I may write one more post on implicatiions, but we’ll have to see.  I hope you’ve gotten something out of thise.

WK

Now, I don’t mean that I don’t think it’s imperative for the kingdom, nor do I mean that I think everyone does it wrong (that’s another post entirely); It’s just that I don’t find myself in situations to do this. At least not the level that I’ve been on the periphery of these last 6 months.

I seem to find myself in situations where I’m either amongst Christians who already have the good word, or I’m among people who couldn’t care less about Jesus (seriously, I tried – it did not go well).  I’ve always said that unless the Lord was giving big opportunities or the conversation was steering in that direction, I would keep my mouth shut.  Nothing says crazy like, “Do you have a personal relationship with our Lord and Saviour, the Son of God Jesus Christ the Messiah???” Sure, I’d love for those people to have a relationship with the Creator that makes them whole and brings them eternal hope and joy, but I’ve been given very few opportunities to speak of the Good News.

Christine, my wife, on the other hand, gets enough for 5 people.

It’s amazing that Christine has found her way humbly into the faith journeys of people across the spectrum (lapsed, atheist, agnostic, theist, weird heresies, etc. ) and has clearly been an impact on these people’s lives.  And for Christine, she just feels like she’s telling her story.  And people hear a story of creation, fall, redemption, kingdom, and love without the judgement that sadly has pervaded these peoples’ views of Christianity. I get kind of jealous sometimes, but mostly I just feel really lucky to know someone who is expanding the kingdom on the frontiers for those of us back on the homefront.

So here’s the thing: to be a witness – to testify in court – isn’t to prove one’s case, like a lawyer, or pass judgement, like a judge; it’s to simply tell your story.  If you tell your story, then how will judgement enter the arena?  How does condemnation of others fall into your story?  It doesn’t, because it is about you, and your story. That’s it.

That’s probably the greatest gift our culture of individualism and postmodernity has done for us. No more proofs, no more join the crowd. It’s all about telling a story and letting God sort out the rest.

Tell a story.

WK

• biblicism, a particular regard for the Bible (e.g. all spiritual truth is to be found in its pages)
• crucicentrism, a focus on the atoning work of Christ on the cross
• converionism, the belief that human beings need to be converted
• activism, the belief that the gospel needs to be expressed in effort

Those are great ideals to strive for, and they make sense, at a macro-level, within Protestant Christianity (I say Protestant Christianity, because I just don’t know about Roman Catholicism or Orthodox Streams to speak into them.) Sadly, I think North-American Evangelicalism has narrowed these ideals into the following:

• biblicism, a particular regard for an ahistorical, context-free reading of the Bible (e.g. read what you want to read)
• crucicentrism, a focus on the atoning work of Christ on the cross as fire-insurance.
• converionism, the belief that human beings need to be converted to a very particular ideology
• activism, the belief that the gospel needs to be expressed in effort to make Christianity the predominant Culture, ridding the evils of any one else’s point-of-view.

As our culture changes (and seriously, people, it is changing), Evangelicals need to re-assess the quadrilateral and expand it from being 4 points for person-centered judgement to 4 points for spirit-led love. To help people think about these, I think I’m going to break this up and talk about each one of these points in a pattern of origin, fall, and redemption. This means some research on my part, so they’ll show up eventually.  Until then, think about the 4 points and what you think about my subversion of the definition.

WK