Masculine Love in Acts 29 Churches

"Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them." 

Genesis 1:26-27 (ESV)

Back in the 1990s, my family belonged to a large Methodist church that is well regarded in our community. As the mother of two young daughters, I felt God drawing me closer to Him, and I responded with a desire to study His Word more intently. I took my mothering role very seriously and devoted my life to training them up in the way they should go.

Our church offered Bible studies called “Disciple”, and I jumped at the opportunity to participate. Each study spanned the better part of a year and was led by an associate pastor. I completed Disciple 1 and Disciple 2 with this pastor. Our Bible study group was small and intimate, allowing for personal interaction between the pastor and the participants.

In the second year of study, the associate pastor had gotten to know us extremely well and began sharing personal convictions about the gender of God – specifically that God is both male and female. I became enraged! I had previously listened to a sermon by Adrian Rogers in which he described a “Re-Imagining Conference” that took place in 1993. At this conference, participants were worshiping Sophia and calling into question the gender of God.

I was so angry that I blurted out, “If God is female, then why did Jesus come to earth as a man, and why did He pray ‘Our Heavenly Father’ in the model prayer”? It was a defining moment in my Christian life, and it wasn’t too long after this unfortunate incident that we left the church and joined a Southern Baptist church (might I add where Paige and Dorothy Patterson were members).

While I continue to view God as masculine, always remembering that He is a Spirit, I have become just as upset by the backlash toward those who have been questioning the gender of God.  Have you heard of the masculinity movement, which appears to be a concerted effort to emphasize the masculine side of Jesus?

Did you know that in order to become a part of the Acts 29 Network, founded by Mark Driscoll, pastors are required to lead their churches with "masculine love like Jesus Christ"?  Here is how this is spelled out under Doctrine on the Acts 29 website: (link)

"We are not egalitarians and do believe that men should head their homes and male elders/pastors should lead their churches with masculine love like Jesus Christ."

A 'masculine love' like Jesus Christ'?  Gee, I thought our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ demonstrated agape love

Agape love is defined as:

1. Love as revealed in Jesus, seen as spiritual and selfless and a model for humanity.

2. Love that is spiritual, not sexual, in its nature.

Where is 'masculine love' in the Bible?  It's too bad that Acts 29 doesn't back up its doctrinal position with specific Bible references. 

At the present time, the Acts 29 Network is comprised of around 400 churches, and the pastors in those churches are putting forth this paradigm, which means "example, pattern; especially  an outstandingly clear or typical example or archetype".

Here's the problem we have with the paradigm of masculine love, as demonstrated by pastors in Acts 29 churches.  We are ALL called to view Christ as our role model; however, if Christ is only able to demonstrate masculine love, where does this leave women?   Women are effectively marginalized and unable to model Christ's love.  In other words, over half of the world's population is disqualified from demonstrating Christ's love because they are females.  Way to go guys!

Christianity Today featured an article entitled A Jesus for Real Men: What the new masculinity movement gets right and wrong back in April 2008, which explores this shift toward a macho image of Jesus.  Here is an excerpt from that article:

"The aspect of church that men find least appealing is its conception of Jesus. Driscoll put this bluntly in his sermon 'Death by Love' at the 2006 Resurgence theology conference (available at TheResurgence.com). According to Driscoll, 'real men' avoid the church because it projects a 'Richard Simmons, hippie, queer Christ' that 'is no one to live for [and] is no one to die for.' Driscoll explains, 'Jesus was not a long-haired … effeminate-looking dude'; rather, he had 'callused hands and big biceps.' This is the sort of Christ men are drawn to – what Driscoll calls 'Ultimate Fighting Jesus.' "

Is an 'ultimate fighting Jesus' an accurate portrayal of our Lord and Savior who sacrificially died for our sins?  According to the CT article, this is what the masculinity movement gets wrong

"Besides offering an extremely narrow view of masculinity, this framework totally excludes women from real discipleship. To begin with, it blames them for neutering the gospel. Left in their hands, the church became nice and affirming and lost its vision to reach the world. Perhaps worse, if Christ is the model of masculinity, then women can't imitate him. They can pursue him as the lover of their souls. They can imitate his devotion to the Father in their relationships with their husbands. But they can't become like him in any essential way."

"…Scripture gives no indication that Jesus came to earth to model masculinity. He is the "image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation" (Col. 1:15). As such, he is not simply the perfect male; he is the perfect human being. Through his obedience to the Father, Christ exhibited the qualities that should characterize all believers, both male and female."

"My point is this: If Adam and Eve illustrate the essential differences between men and women, Christ highlights their essential unity. All believers are called to imitate Christ by exhibiting the same qualities; Paul makes no distinction between masculine and feminine fruits of the Spirit. In fact, the evidence of the Spirit's work looks very different from the qualities the masculinity movement suggests typify a "real" man. Instead of "brash, offensive" (Stine), "self-reliant, competitive" (Murrow), "punch-you-in-the-nose dudes" (Driscoll), Paul says that those who are filled with the Holy Spirit will be loving, patient, peaceful, kind, and gentle."

We are grateful that Brandon O'Brien, who wrote this insightful article, sees the problems with the masculinity movement.  Please take the time to read his piece in its entirety.

It is difficult to comprehend masculine love when the Bible clearly states:

"Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them."   Genesis 1:26-27 (ESV)

"Man" in this passage is a generic term for mankind.  Furthermore, both male and female were created in the image of God.  Together they portray the fullness of God because the Holy Spirit indwells both men and women.

Please don't misunderstand.  While we refer to God as masculine, we don't believe gender is nearly as important to Him as Driscoll and his cohorts do.  Why don't these guys refer to themselves as the "bride of Christ"?  I guess gender only applies when it puts "dudes" in a superior position. 

Driscoll's obsession with masculine love likely contributed to a comment he made on his Facebook account, which he promptly removed after receiving much criticism.  Driscoll asked, “So, what story do you have about the most effeminate anatomically male worship leader you’ve ever personally witnessed?” 

For those who may have missed it, you can read about it here.  Once again, Driscoll opens his mouth and inserts his foot.  Then he removes the evidence.  It's such a predictable pattern.

We would love for our readers to chime in on masculine love.   Here are our questions.

(1) Do you believe this is the kind of love Jesus Christ emulates?

(2) How are women to demonstrate Christ's love?

(3) Is the concept of 'masculine love' helpful or harmful in fulfilling the Great Commission? 

We leave you with Macho Man Mark Driscoll's words of wisdom as he criticizes "soft, tender, chick-i-fied church boys", the feminine appearance of the church, and the make-up of the body of Christ, which is 60 percent women.   Mark Driscoll – what a DUDE!!  And to think that so many Christian guys want to emulate him…

 

 

Lydia's Corner:  Nehemiah 12:27-13:31  1 Corinthians 11:1-16   Psalm 35:1-16   Proverbs 21:17-18

Comments

Masculine Love in Acts 29 Churches — 153 Comments

  1. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing.

    Matthew 27:37,

  2. Wenatchee The Hatchet,

    Thanks for sharing the words of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

    Here’s a query for TWW readers. Do you recognize the guy with glasses in the Macho Man video at the 44 second mark?

  3. (1) Do you believe this is the kind of love Jesus Christ emulates?

    I think the A29 churches are deriving this doctrine out of the Pauline epistles which repeat a couple of times to love your wife as Christ loved the church. The formula is Christ’s love for the church= husband’s love for his wife. Husband= male. Christ= male. Christ’s love= “masculine love.”

    The teachings of Christ’s love for the church are mainly sacrificial in nature. So in terms of sacrificial love, yes. I think that this is the kind of love Jesus Christ emulates. A29’s choice of words is most definitely confusing. It does not seem like it is referring to “masculine love” in a scriptual light especially in light of extensions Driscoll has made. But having sat under A29 sermons myself, I would say that this sacrificial love is where the doctrine came from. No doubt there is a real problem in how they word/ do not word this statement.

    (2) How are women to demonstrate Christ’s love?

    Women are to demonstrate Christ’s love not unsimilar to how men should demonstrate Christ’s love. Is not submission sacrificial love? Is not sacrificial love submission? It is also the kind of love Christ emulates. This goes back to unity as a body of believers. We ARE unified in Christ as one body. We are to love sacrificially as Christ loves, regardless of gender.

    (3) Is the concept of ‘masculine love’ helpful or harmful in fulfilling the Great Commission?

    It can be helpful or harmful, depending on how it is approached. Unfortunately, with masculinity v. femininity people tend to take their viewpoint on how people should behave beyond Scripture. Some people might say I’m masculine because I like good, strong beer and drink my coffee black. Some might say my husband is feminine because he likes drinks wine and doesn’t play sports. When a religious doctrine such as this seems to open up to peoples’ interpretation of what is masculine and what is feminine, problems arise as peoples’ interpretations go wild.

    So what does masculine LOVE look like? If it means that the elders of my church and husband are going to sacrifice their will to the will of the Father… If they are going to “lay down their life” for the sake of the church, ok. It does emulate Jesus’ love. And I should do the same. If they start going crazy and say that masculine love is what they determine is best, then hmmmmm… can’t say that emulates his love. The A29 statement needs to be fleshed out, no doubt.

  4. Just for your info:

    “A ‘masculine love’ like Jesus Christ’? Gee, I thought our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ demonstrated agape love.

    Agape love is defined as:

    1. Love as revealed in Jesus, seen as spiritual and selfless and a model for humanity.

    2. Love that is spiritual, not sexual, in its nature.”

    From a review of “Exegetical Fallacies” by D.A. Carson (see page 31 of the book):

    “Agape is frequently used to describe lots of feelings outside of God’s love. The popular teaching that Agape is God’s love…that it means unconditional love…whereas Phileo means brotherly love doesn’t stand up if you do a basic word study in the bible of the two words. When I was first in the ministry I was stunned to find that word studies in the LXX & GNT did not back up this very popular teaching-that Agape is God’s unconditional love…and Phileo is human love…of a lower grade. Almost everyone in my congregation had heard that popular teaching somewhere…either on Christian radio, books, magazines, or TV. But in fact, it seemed that the two words for love were used interchangeably a lot. Not only that…agape is used in one place to describe a rapists feelings for his victim!!!! (This is very hard to believe for people who have only heard the pop definition of agape. But before you give me a poor review for saying this, just check your Greek LXX to see the first use of Agapaw. 2 Samuel 13:4 uses this term, and then describes how he went on to actually rape Tamar). How could that be God’s unconditional love? Something is very wrong with the popular teachings on love today.”

  5. sotnam
    Do you really think Driscoll preaches a sacrificial love? Hmmm”-punch them in the nose.” “whose the most effeminate worship leader?”, “the faith is chickified”. And since his elders support him, are they demonstrating “sacrificial” love?

    The Acts 29 statement is typical Driscoll nonsense and 400 churches have signed onto this statement. This leads me to wonder about the theological understanding of the pastors signing this declaration.

  6. Deb
    I frankly think these guys have gone off the deep end. Driscoll starts talking “chickified” and these pastors are like lemmings-jumping off the theological cliff without so much as a “hey, wait a minute-let’s think about this.” Driscoll has opened the floodgates for abolishment of all things feminine unless it is to be the other half of his SOS fantasy.

  7. Celeste
    Assuming what you say is correct, please talk about “masculine” love. What is the love that God exhibits? Are women capable of loving in the same way as men? Are we to emulate the love Christ had for His people?

  8. Dee:

    That’s a tall order. Here are a couple of Scriptures:

    Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. from Ephesians 5

    “As a mother comforts her child, so will I comfort you; and you will be comforted over Jerusalem.” Isaiah 66:13 (God is speaking through Isaiah.)

    The great love chapter, 1Cor.13, is addressed to all Christians.

    As you know, there are plenty of references to love in the letters addressed to the churches in the New Testament. I love my brand new NIV, published 2011, where believers are addressed as “brothers and sisters”. Greek adelphoi (s.) and adelphos (p.).

  9. Ooohhh ….. you lovely girls know me well know and you know if you want to make me REALLY angry, start me talking about Mark Driscoll and his mentor C J Mahaney and their “views” on masculinity!

    I’ve shared before about my struggles so won’t go there – but one of the deep hurts I have from my 2 horrendous years in SGM UK was the continued jibes that I wasn’t a “real” man because I hate sports (yes – HATE them!) although I am a proficient runner and have completed half marathons in 1 hour and 33 minutes! 😉

    Yes I am a man by gender – but just because I am not like C J Mahaney or Mark Driscoll in oogling women but rather hugely respecting, honouring and loving them. Just because I do actually care about what I look like and what I wear. Just because I don’t find it fun running around a field kicking a ball of air getting muddy. DOES NOT mean I’m not a true man surely!?

    I’m an intensive care nurse. I have worked an almost 90 hour week this week. I’ve had the blood of little babies splattered over my clothes and arms (sorry if anyone is squeamish!) while trying to resuscitate them and save their little lives. I’ve sat with parents who are teenagers and wept with them telling them bad news that their precious child won’t make it. I’ve held little 23 week old neonate babies who’s skin is translucent in my one hand while trying to keep them alive and reassure their traumatized mum. And I could go on …

    I defy C J Mahaney or Mark Driscoll to do my job for a week and tell me I’m not a true man just because I detest anything that those two men seek to tell me I should be like!

    Please?!

    I’d like to think that Jesus Christ the TRUE loving man, who wept because His friend died wasn’t like the role model that Driscoll is trying to set.

    And rant over … and breathe!

    Sorry girls!

    But I am so grateful I’m not the only one to have seen the strange things Driscoll says. He was invited to Terry Virgo’s conference in Brighton a few years ago – a conference I loved to attend regularly and found really encouraging. I just couldn’t stomach going and hearing him – so wrote to Terry and explained why.

    Terry was gracious and kind enough to write back and say he understood and appreciated my views – although he was sad I couldn’t come in conscience. Something I don’t think C J Mahaney ever would have done!

    🙂

  10. Dan,

    You are such a blessing to so many in the UK! Thanks for showing compassion that Macho Man Mark Driscoll will likely never understand.

    With regard to Terry Virgo, it appears that he and Driscoll are collaborating. You promote my book and I’ll plug yours…

    Here are Driscoll ad Virgo having a little chat on YouTube.

    Mark Driscoll interviews Terry Virgo – The Spirit Filled Church

    In case you haven’t heard, Driscoll has a new book coming out called Real Marriage and Virgo and his wife endorse it.

    “Mark and Grace have written an extraordinary book characterised by compassion for a bewildered generation which has failed to grasp the significance of marriage and covenant love, conviction that God’s grace and truth provide healing and guidance, and courage to go where few would dare to go as they display a costly and selfless transparency.” – Terry and Wendy Virgo, New Frontiers and Church of Christ the King, Brighton, England

  11. Eagle
    You know, I think you summed up the potential trajectory ( dedicate that word to a previous church) of this masculine nonsense. And yet, so many “leaders” endorse him. Maybe the “leaders” don’t know what they are doing. As Taylor Swift sang in her song Mean “Well you don’t know what you don’t know.”

  12. Celeste

    That’s a good answer. It is interesting to me that in the Isaiah verses God compares His love to that of a mother comforting her child. Driscoll would have a gender crisis just reading it.

  13. Dan
    These “real” men would run from the sights that you routinely see in your job. You have more guts than many of these men who prance around declaring themselves “real” men. Real men do not have to declare it as frequently as Driscoll and boys do which makes me wonder if , deep down inside, they are not comfortable in their own skin.

    You do more in a single day to help make a difference then many of these guys do in a lifetime of beating up on the flock.I know how hard it is to do your job and I burned out after a number of years. My daughter just successfully completed her nursing orientation in the Emergency Room and tells us stories that range from hard (the death of a child) to funny (antics of college students) to heartwarming (families gather around a sick prodigal).

    You live out the Scripture and the drama of life every day. Many of these guys have given up on the pastor role-few visit in hospitals or comfort grieving families. They are glorified conference speakers making an appearance once a week to “deliver” the sermon. Guess real men do not act like pastors. You, on the other hand, daily deliver grace and mercy to the least of these.

    Sports do not define a “real” man. Some of the saddest guys I have met are the washed up high school jocks who live out their glory days over and over again. Driscoll seems to me to be the kind of guy who is trying waaaaay to hard to convince people he is a real man. As I have said before, I think there is something really wrong here and I am concerned there will be a big crash one of these days. And all of his buddies will feign “surprise” that such a thing could happen.

  14. Deb,

    Brilliant post. Your biblical conservatism shines as much as your passion for truth. Rachelle and I look forward to hosting you two classy ladies (fastidiously avoiding the word “chicks” as Mark Driscoll might like for us to call you) next week. This issue, left unchecked, is more dangerous to conservative Christianity than many are willing to admit. Why? Abuse of any kind–physical, sexual, and emotional–has at its core the belief that the abuser is superior to the the victim. So what if the church is 60% women? It is composed of 100% people made in the image of God.

    And, finally, as we seek the Lord’s wisdom and direction on the book being written, we might tap Eagle on the wing and request permission to use his priceless two paragraphs of irony that well illustrate the stupidity of Driscoll’s gender vision:

    “So after the pizzas arrived for the last supper Jesus saw that they were out of Keystone. He grabbed his girlfriend wearing a Garth Brooks country shirt, popped some chew in his mouth and got into his 1985 Ford F-250 with his squeeze. He started his ‘A-Train’ and it became clear that the muffler needed to be replaced. When Jesus got to 7-11 he picked up 2 12 packs of Keystone (buy 1 get one free special) and he and his squeeze returned to the pizza feast (Last Supper) and talked about the latest news about MMA fighter Diego Brando.

    The next day Jesus was tried and convicted and sentanced to death. He still felt he got a bum rap and was pissed off… Jesus decided to be a man. So on the way to Golgatha while carrying his cross. He stopped and beat the shit out of a Roman soldier, and spat on him. The solider reminded him too much of Richard Simmons and Jesus felt his ass deserved to be kicked. After not being able to get more beer while on the cross he settled for wine. Then he swore at God and said, “Father why do I have to die for these people? Dog shit has more value than these pieces of crap wondering the earth…” And with that he asked about the next MMA match and breathed his last…”

    That, kind Eagle, is a classic.

  15. Dee and All:

    A real man does not go around talking (bragging?) about being a “real man”. Rather, he is strong enough in his masculinity (humanity) to be able to love people, cuddle and care for children and others who may be hurting such as those who have lost a loved one, and even befriend someone with a different gender preference, all without any sexual overtones. He sees his role in human relationships as being a protector and helper, and not a dominator, always building others up and encouraging them in their faith journey. A real man stands up against hypocrisy, against putting children at risk or in harm’s way, and against sexism, racism, falsehood, etc.

  16. video @ 1:20:
    “They’re gonna get married, make money, make babies, build companies, buy real estate – they’re gonna make the culture of the future. If you get the young men, you get everything – the families, the women, the children, the business, everything. If you don’t get the young men you get nothing.”

    You don’t get it Deb.
    It’s all about gettin’ everything.

  17. A ‘masculine love’ like Jesus Christ’?

    The first thing I thought of when I read that was “A ‘masculine love’ like Mark Driscoll?”

    “I CAN BEAT YOU UP! I CAN BEAT YOU UP!! I CAN BEAT YOU UP!!!”

  18. Hi Wade

    Looking forward to Oklahoma and meeting your family. As you can see, our alert readers provide us with many ideas. I know Eagle-he would be happy to be quoted in a book.

    I would bet that this is going to take some people by surprise!

  19. The Word of the Lord as told to Hosea the prophet:

    “Like a bear robbed of her cubs,
    I will attack them and rip them open;
    like a lion I will devour them—
    a wild animal will tear them apart.” -Hosea 13:8, NIV

    Looks like the Almighty is alright with a bit of a Mama Grizzly show. Somebody tell Driscoll.

  20. Theophilus
    Now that is a great verse. But, Driscoll would think it is a bit chickified. He ought to write his own translation of the Bible, removing all those “girly” verses.

  21. Numo:

    re: D.A. Carson. You’ll have to buy his book “Exegetical Fallacies” and get yourself a Septuagint, if you don’t have one in your library. See 2Sam.13:4, the story of the rape of Tamar by her half-brother.

  22. “Women are to demonstrate Christ’s love not unsimilar to how men should demonstrate Christ’s love. Is not submission sacrificial love? Is not sacrificial love submission? It is also the kind of love Christ emulates. ”

    Yes! But the problem is, these Driscoll types with Acts 29 completely ignore Eph 5:21. Grudem even goes as far to teach it does not apply to everyone in the Body. (Love how they twist scripture for their own benefit) Read it in the Greek sometime and ignore the chapter breaks.

  23. Great article Deb!

    Jesus loved the weak, the alien, the homeless, the orphans, the poor, the sick, the outcasts…

    May this love of Christ be shed in our hearts.

    “if you don’t get the young men you get nothing…”

    Why aren’t the women in these churches insulted and appalled at that statement? Why do they willing go along with this demeaning attitude?

  24. We posted that video over two years ago when we did our first stories on Driscoll. — Dee

    Appropriate, isn’t it? All “calloused hands and BIG biceps” — no “long-haired effeminate looking dudes” here! There’s even a “Masculine Love” angle! All Driscoll, All Acts 29, All The Way!

    (P.S. The Village People are THE Guilty Pleasure of those like me who came of age in the Seventies. Just like MLP:FiM is THE Guilty Pleasure today.)

  25. Jesus loved the weak, the alien, the homeless, the orphans, the poor, the sick, the outcasts… — Diane

    The Goths, the Geeks, the Gamers, the Furries, the Bronies, all the Omega Males and Omega Females from high school….

    (Maybe that’s it. Driscoll’s either a High School Alpha Male or worshipper of same. He Never Left High School; he will Never Leave High School; and he won’t let any of the rest of us leave.)

  26. It is obvious, imo, he never left high school, he may not ever leave high school–there is always hope :-), and at this point he is so popular that he is succeeding in not letting any of the rest of us leave…

    I wish he would just leave period.

  27. These Acts 29 guys are funny – (Hypocrites???) They say in their “I believes” that…

    “We believe the Bible to be the inspired, the only infallible, authoritative Word of God.”

    “We are not egalitarians and do believe that men should head their homes and *male elders/pastors* should lead their churches with masculine love like Jesus Christ.”

    That sounds like a nobel ideal – The Bible is the – “authoritative Word of God.”
    BUT – Do they really believe that? 🙂

    How come – In the Bible…
    NOT one – “Disciple of Christ” – was called – Pastor or Reverend?
    NOT one – “Disciple of Christ” – had the “Title” Pastor or the “Title” Reverend?
    NOT one – “Disciple of Christ” – was called to be a Pastor/Reverend leading a church?

    ooops!!! I mean – leading “Their Church.”

    And all this time I thought the ekklesia, the called out ones, the Church, you and me,
    belonged to Jesus. Purchased with His Blood. Acts 20:28.

    You would think there would be at least one example of this – errr – stuff – in the Bible. 😉

    YEEEESSS!!! – We were bought with a price… And redeemed… With the Blood of Jesus…
    And believers are NOT to be – the servants of men. 1 Cor 7:23. 1 Pet 1:18-19.

    Thank you Jesus. For your Blood. That sets us free. 🙂

    If there are NO Pastor/Reverends in the Bible as we see them today… Leading Churches…
    Do the Acts 29 guys really believe the Bible? My… My… Tsk…Tsk…

    Or just that part of the Bible that allows them to dominate others? My… My… Tsk…Tsk…

    Here are a few verses they might NOT want to preach on… 😉

    Jer 2:8 KJV …*the pastors* also transgressed against me…
    Jer 10:21 KJV *the pastors* are become brutish…
    Jer 12:10 KJV *Many pastors* have destroyed my vineyard…
    Jer 22:22 KJV The wind (Spirit) shall eat up all *thy pastors*…
    Jer 23:1 KJV Woe be unto *the pastors* that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture!
    Jer 23:2 KJV…thus saith the LORD God of Israel *against the pastors* that feed my people…

    Jer 50:6 KJV
    *My people* hath been *lost sheep:*
    *their shepherds* have caused them *to go astray*…

    Hmmm? Did God have these Acts 29 guys in mind when having this written? 🙂

  28. This thinking is exactly where comp doctrine takes up. To a pink and blue Christianity. And it means that women cannot be really Christlike to them because it is all about gender for them. Even though Galatians 3 says different when it comes to spiritual things. These types are more insecure than we might imagine.

  29. Great discussion everyone!

    I’m out and about with my wonderful hubby and have been following the comments.

    Blessings!

  30. All hail TWW and our blog queens who are like twin ladies of liberty in a safe harbour ….”Give us your tired… give us your beat-up and shat upon…” Really girls, this has never been done before, it’s kinda sorta like the founding of the American experiment. Most other faith based blogs would have bounced me out on my ass long ago.

    Even that old Jew Muff (metaphorically), who is outside the pale of orthodoxy for many, is still allowed to comment, and hasn’t been sent east on a train to the crematoriums.

  31. Hi, Muff — i LOVE what you have to say. It’s always intelligent, thought-provoking, and the product of true scrutiny.

    You remind me of ‘Mater from Cars — do you sound like him when you talk?

  32. (1) Do you believe this is the kind of love Jesus Christ emulates?
    (No)

    (2) How are women to demonstrate Christ’s love?
    (As below)

    (3) Is the concept of ‘masculine love’ helpful or harmful in fulfilling the Great Commission?
    (Harmful – not what Jesus exemplifies)

    “Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come from God and was going back to God, rose from supper. He laid aside his outer garments, and taking a towel, tied it around his waist. Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples’ feet and to wipe them with the towel that was wrapped around him . . . If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet. For I have given you an example, that you also should do just as I have done to you. Truly, truly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. If you know these things, blessed are you if you do them.” John 13:3-17

    Many of today’s “hip,” “authoritarian,” and “limelight” kinda guys are NOT emulating what Jesus asked them to emulate – notice the “blessed are you if you do them” part. He actually asked them to “do” twice – hmm. I guess he knew the difficulty some (all of us at times) would have in the doing 🙂

  33. Muff –

    Don’t say such things “east on a train . . .” If anything – “go west young man” . . . the sunsets are pretty over this way!

  34. What Driscoll does is meander outside of scripture and into personal cultural commentary. I don’t see his cultural commentary to be Acts 29 doctrine, although the sacrificial love as it’s been explained to me, yes.

    If his commentary was A29 doctrine, I would have problems with the organization. But I’ve talked to pastors at an A29 church about this very thing and they explained Jesus’ “masculine” (driscoll’s words, not theirs) love as the sacrificial love similar to what I discussed in my post above.

    Declarations such as these should be clear, not take a sermon to explain. And these statements should not give the appearance of personal cultural biases. Maybe they do not realize how gender-mongering the phrase “masculine love” sounds, but it should be revised.

    Now with Driscoll himself, I have a real problem with people who project their personal ideas on living on others–especially those in leadership positions like Driscoll, Mahaney, etc. Believe me, having attended a SGM church for a period of years, that was prevelent, complementarianism/ homeschooling/ courtship, you name it.

    These same pastor friends of mine said that if A29 churches did not hold the autonomy they do (apart from Mars Hill/Driscoll influence), they would not be a part of Acts 29. They, an A29 church, distance themselves from Driscoll because of his outrageous behavior–it has not gone unnoticed in Acts 29 circles. The organization as a whole would benefit in distancing themselves from him. He’s an embarrassment.

  35. Ted, I have begun to wonder this year if it would be more accurate to say “get the white young men and you get everything.” Even in my early days at Mars Hill some family and I noted that Driscoll’s counterculture” he wanted to forge in Seattle looked pretty much the like same old whitebread upper-middle class suburban oasis.

    A. Amos Love, I thought you might throw in Jeremiah 8:8

    “‘How can you say, “We are wise,
    for we have the law of the LORD,”
    when actually the lying pen of the scribes
    has handled it falsely?

    Seeing as many of the controversies surrounding what preachers and theologians say comes down to this it seemed useful to point out that this was something that was criticized by at least one of the prophets. That seems to be the core of the point and counterpoint to me.

  36. Muff
    You don’t seem to understand. You add to this blog in a special way. I don’t think it would be as much fun or meaningful without the Muff!
    This is not a blog to preach. It is a place for Deb and me to flesh out our thoughts in the company of many people who are doing the same. We are all people in process and I love to watch us all grow in understanding and camaraderie. Thank you for being here.

  37. sotnam, I have found the opposite. Driscoll DNA is all over Acts 29 churches. I could give example after example. Perhaps it is because I see it from the pov of the SBC now funding Acts 29 church plants. And many times in cities that have a ton of sbc churches but they are not “correct doctrine” or comp enough.

    In fact, more and more SBC churches are withholding funds for church planting because of Acts 29 and the arrogant YRR leaders whos start them.

    What you do not realize is that the big name celebs are NOT distancing themselves from Driscoll and this is like a celebrity endorsement to these young YRR guys. In fact, I was on an SBC blog today that discussed that Akin, president of SEBTS is a big supporter of Driscoll and his own sons have planted Acts 29 churches which I have been to. And yes, they reek of Driscollism. So far, I have visted about 10 of them and that have Driscoll’s carbon foot print.

  38. Thank you for your post, Anonymous. These charismatic guys like Driscoll and the young men who follow them make me very nervous. My story is one of warning. My father was a hook, line and sinker charismaniac. Then he was betrayed by the idolatry of evangelists of the 80s. As a result, he chose to practice Christianity for the rest of his life privately. I think he could have benefitted from the body of believers, but he was too scarred to do participate in a church again.

    I concede. I may not see the extent of the Driscoll influence in Acts 29. I’m aware. I’m watching. I’m on guard. It makes me worried though. I once too much embraced an organization (SGM). Won’t do that again. I’ll hold my distance from A29 too.

    I’m nervous for Christians who are where my dad was. Why are people so influenced by a person? I pray that they would hold first and only onto Jesus and His Word.

  39. I was telling my mother once about why I did not like the gender neutral version of the Bible. I mentioned to my mother is that to be honest males are held in accountability than the females in regards to how the Bible approaches males and females. It is not really about a “masculine” love or a submission issue.

  40. And to put it to Driscoll, he is wrong about why men avoid church. He is totally rock-n-roll in his thinking about this. From a real good source, real men avoid the church because of hypocrisy.

  41. “I’m nervous for Christians who are where my dad was. Why are people so influenced by a person? I pray that they would hold first and only onto Jesus and His Word.”

    I understand your dad. Many churches are not safe. Some are. In fact, I think it is wise to be very wary of any organization where any person is exalted at all. Being a pastor can be a huge trap…people pay you to listen to you and follow you. I mean, how many jobs are there out there like that? You can see the temptation inherent in that situation. (Yes I know many pastors are challenged but let’s face it, the rise of the exalted celebrity pastor is fairly new in terms of numbers)

    What are we paying them for? To study the bible for us? To show us how to be Christlike? If we really think about it, all believers are “called” to some ministry and gift. Yet, we think we have to pay people to do it for us.

  42. “I was telling my mother once about why I did not like the gender neutral version of the Bible. I mentioned to my mother is that to be honest males are held in accountability than the females in regards to how the Bible approaches males and females. It is not really about a “masculine” love or a submission issue.”

    Casey, Don’t confuse a cultural reality seen in scripture for doctrinal truth. Women will stand before God…Alone.

    Patriarchy was a result of the fall. It was NOT God’s created order. No one can make that claim from Genesis without reading into the text. Patriarchy is sin pure and simple. God worked through and around that sinful state for His own purposes. There is no Greek or Jew, Male or Female….In Christ.

  43. Is there anything in the A29 docs about having mixed martial arts tournaments at church?! (j/k, but not really…)

  44. Just de-lurking to add my 2c. I don’t see God as being so fixated on our gender as Driscoll and co would have us believe. Once we are ‘in Christ’ God regards us all (male/female) as ‘sons and co-heirs with Christ’ and also, collectively, as the Bride. One very masculine image and one very feminine image.

  45. Just stumbled upon this site and wanted to ask a question. I spent most of my youth and early adulthood in fundamentalist circles similar to Bob Jones, and then I spent most of my 20’s and early 30’s in Charismatic churches that were egalitarian. I have come to embrace the Complementarian position because I see it as Biblical. I’ve also seen firsthand how egalitarianism works, and I’ve seen the negative impact on women.

    I am also reformed, and I have seen some of the issues you’ve talked about where it appears the pendulum is swinging a little too much toward male superiority rather than a true Biblical model of servant/leadership in men.

    Do you guys take the position that complementarianism automatically equals abuse and inferiority for women or just that complentarianism can be abused and taken to an extreme where these kinds of things result?

  46. Deb, thanks for this post. I have been in counseling for a year and a half. A break through moment came about this time last year. I had an emotionally distant mother as a child and have struggled through my adult years seeking to fill this void. All the talk about God as Father never seemed to help me feel closer to God. As I was talking with my Biblical counselor last December asking where was God when I was that scared, confused child and why didn’t he give me a new mom when I asked him for one as a child? His answer came that night as I sat quietly in his presence — “I was there with you and I want to go back there with you now to fill that mother hole. I am not only Father God, but I can also be be “mother” for you too.” I studied the feminine attributes of God. I have been experiencing an intimacy with God that I could not have imagined.

  47. Mrs. Stretch,

    So glad you are being helped! I, too, feel intimacy with God that I don’t think the patriarchs will ever understand. It’s really too bad for them. The macho mania in Christendom has got to stop!

  48. Sorry I left a word out, I meant that men are held accountability in a different manner from females. There are some things that don’t fall on women the same way as it does on men. This does not mean that they are not held into account about various issues as well. For example, a single mother should not be told by a male judge how she IS RESPONSIBLE for a 16 year old male about missing school. By biblical standards, he is old enough to know and often the mothers try to do their best. The philandering wayfaring ex-husband has a measure of accountability as well. I understand this is not always the case but in my line of work I see it a lot. Egalitarian justice has consequences that are really unfair to women from my standpoint. A lot of males need a kick in the pants. If you study church history patriarchialism began when the early church left Hebraic roots of the faith. Jewish women actually had a strong understanding of the faith and were responsible in teaching their sons its applications. I am convinced that a lot that Timothy was dealing with were Gentile women with were becoming sycretistic in their views. Every woman that I have knows that has known Jewish elements of the faith does well in their teaching and THEY SHOULD NOT BE A CONCERN. Ms. Klouda was one of them. She knew the Hebrew language better then a lot of Baptist men. I am telling you landmarkism is being advanced with the SBC.

  49. Paul’s views of submission often was mutual and never absolute. Ever thought about Romans 13 and the laws of Rome with regard to participating in pagan festivals. If one prooftexts the passage, it means to not cause an uprising. Also, in Corinthians, women could indeed leave their husbands.

  50. “Sorry I left a word out, I meant that men are held accountability in a different manner from females. There are some things that don’t fall on women the same way as it does on men….For example, a single mother should not be told by a male judge how she IS RESPONSIBLE for a 16 year old male about missing school”

    Not sure I understand this thinking. Are you sure you are not seeing a cultural aspect of this? Sounds to me you are saying the sin of the son falls on the father to deal with but not the mother. But it is a problem of sin not gender. There ARE widows with 16 year old sons, you know. Why should the judge give them a pass if their 16 year old son does not attend school because they are female?

    “If you study church history patriarchialism began when the early church left Hebraic roots of the faith.”

    Patriarchy began at the fall. Eve blamed the serpent and Adam blamed Eve and God. In Genesis 3 we see a very bad translation of teshuqa. It means “turning” not desire. Eve “turned” to Adam (instead of God) and because she did that, he ruled over her. This has been taught wrong for centuries and has created a whole industry of roles and rules. And a pink and blue Christianity.

    “a lot that Timothy was dealing with were Gentile women with were becoming sycretistic in their views.”

    Can you expand on this? In what way?

    ” Every woman that I have knows that has known Jewish elements of the faith does well in their teaching and THEY SHOULD NOT BE A CONCERN”

    This does not bode well for Gentiles, does it? Yet, we are full heirs to the all the promises.

  51. The other thing that is interesting about early church history is that the notion that the patriarchs are the reason the church became strong and began to have an influence on leaders like Constantine is misguided. Most likely (one historian notes) the Christian women would be hired as nannies among the Roman elites and their children would be more exposed to the Gospel through the compassionate caregiver.

  52. Casey,

    hmmmm,… not totally following you here.

    You say, “There are some things that don’t fall on women the same way as it does on men….For example, a single mother should not be told by a male judge how she IS RESPONSIBLE for a 16 year old male about missing school. By biblical standards, he is old enough to know and often the mothers try to do their best. The philandering wayfaring ex-husband has a measure of accountability as well.”

    So, my responses are

    (1) the same would apply if the judge were female, the parent a single father (who also tries to do his best), and the 16 year old a female missing school (she, too, is old enough to know).

    (2) actually, I believe the parent(s) ARE responsible for their children who are under age 18, including if they miss school, and should be held accountable by a male judge or a female jude whether the parent(s) are married or single.

    (3) The philandering wayfaring ex-husband OR ex-wife has a measure of accountability as well.

    (4) But, accountability to who? A “philandering wayfaring ex” is an oxymoron — if a marriage has been dissolved and legally ended, then each is free to pursue other relationships.

    Casey, where do you get this notion of different levels of responsibility & accountability for men and women?

  53. Just out of curiosity, how would you feel about Douglas Wilsons’s description of Biblical Masculinity as: “The glad assumption of responsibility”? Driscoll was present and in agreement.

  54. Hi Everyone,

    Sorry I don’t have time to read all the great (I’m sure!) comments on this one, so this may have already been stated. I think Driscoll looks “chickified” in his necklaces and Mickey Mouse t-shirts! Haha!! 🙂

  55. Miguel

    If I do something wrong, let’s say I I decided to shoplift a designer bathrobe to wear when I blog. Assume that my husband provides very well for my family but he does not want me to buy designer clothes and, instead, save money for our retirement. Who is responsible before God? I am. I do not need an intermediary to take responsibility for my soul. Jesus is quite sufficient. He is the One who will forgive me. My husband is not responsible for my decision unless he drove me, knowingly to the mall, to steal the robe.

  56. Wendy

    Did you know that Driscoll is why we make jokes about being well-dressed? he once made a statement how pastors’ wives let themselves go and they need to dress up and be physically attractive. I snorted out loud as I looked at him in his Mickey Mouse shirt. Once again, in his world, it’s the woman who is the problem.

  57. BeenThere

    No, we do not take the position that complementarianism=abuse. I know some families who function quite well under this paradigm. I believe that it is a secondary issue that is being raised to a primary issue by Neo-Calvinists and the GCR within the SBC. I deeply object to it being a primary issue. My goal is not to convince you to be an egalitarian. My hope is that you will respect those who are not complementarian.

    I know that you believe in complementarianism because it is Biblical. Do you also understand that egalitarians believe as they do because they are convinced it is Biblical? Do you recognize that we have a gazillion denominations because each one feels they are being Biblical in some matter of the practice and doctrine of the faith? Is it Biblical to be so disunified?

    So, the question gets thrown back to you. Do you think that one can be an egalitarian and be a faithful Biblical Christian?

  58. Estelle
    Welcome. You must “de-lurk” more often. I believe that, by focusing on gender issues, these groups can more readily ignore more pressing issues such as pedophilia and the church, pastors who use the church as the personal bank, and churches that routinely abuse the “flock” while holding up the pastor as the anointed deliverer of the ignorant.

  59. sotnam
    People idolize their pastors because there is a subtle teaching that the pastor is somehow “God’s man” and different from the rest of the sheep. New Christians, eager to follow Christ, are told to listen to their pastor because he speaks the very words of God. he defines the faith from his bias.

    Jesus had a real thing against the Pharisees. he said they were making the people twice as fit for hell by their peculiar, legalistic, priest biased teaching. He called them white washed tombs meaning they looked good on the outside but we dead on the inside.

    The blogosphere is talking back. Whereas in the past, the preachers had the microphone and thereby limited opposing viewpoints, now the people can discuss what they hear. And some of them are saying “You know, I have always felt that way but thought i was the only one.”

  60. “I’ve also seen firsthand how egalitarianism works, and I’ve seen the negative impact on women””

    I would be very interested in hearing what exactly was the negative impact you saw. For myself, I am a mutualist. Mutual submission in Christ. Both genders are accountable before God.

  61. Mutualism is a natural outcome of egalitarianism. All are equal and all are equally obligated to submission to the Lordship of Christ and to each other. Submission in this context does not infer inferiority, but a willingness to work together with others in love.

  62. Been There,

    Yes, just what is the negative impact on women, where egalitarianism is concerned?

    Are you a woman?

  63. Sooooo much could be said just about the “macho man” video alone. MD points out John the Baptist, Elijah, Paul, and David as being “rough” manly examples to follow. But each did/said things also or was described in ways which wouldn’t fit with MD’s model. For example, Paul positively gushes affectionately toward his Corinthian “brothers” and his friend Titus for a full 2 chapters II Cor 7-8. He even cals Titus his “partner”. Oh, what MD might do with that one! David is described as being handsome and ruddy and wasn’t considered kingly material by his own father, and spent lots of time walking around singing love songs to the Lord.
    If you want a really great Bible example of a “rough” man (literally described by that term), you have ESAU. Hairy arms, bushy beard, always out hunting, Dad’s favorite, not a Mama’s boy like his brother… There’s a fellow whom Christian men should emulate. Or maybe king Saul — head and shoulders above all the other guys. David couldn’t even walk when he tried to wear Saul’s armour.
    PS I watched a few “related” YouTube videos of MD and Mrs MD, and soon lost track of what they were saying due to the body language. MD has his hand on the Mrs’s knee in every one. I couldn’t help but think of dog trainers who say when the dog puts its paw on your leg like that, it’s showing dominant, Alpha dog status…. If he’s not meaning that, I guess that’s a little overly PDA for me, on a church stage.
    PPS to Been There I’ve been there as well, and I may be more “reformed” or “complementary” than our blog queens or many who comment here, though I dislike both those terms. The most charismatic church I was part of was also both those other things to a large extent, far ahead of the times. I can tell you the most detrimental and painful things my wife and I experienced there (amongst many wonderful) came from an elder who carried the headship/submission teachings to an extreme. This was back when Driscoll was in diapers and complementarianism had not yet been invented, per se.

  64. Been There

    My husband and I have an egalitarian marriage. I chose to stay home with the children and led what some would call a “traditional” life. We appeared complementarian on the surface. When we married, my husband supported me when I went back for my MBA. I supported him as he pursued a fair number of subspecialty certifications. We discussed our thoughts about how to conduct our home life prior to our marriage. Disagreements occurred and there was bending on both sides.

    Now, I could see how some egalitarian marriages could have problems, just as i can see of there could be problems in complementarian marriages. One side does not hold a “biblical” upper hand. I have seen how people on both sides of the aisle have had both successes and failures. I do not think it has anything to do with the “right” way. It has everything to do with the attitude of those involved in the process. There are jerks on both sides of the fence. There are plenty of divorces on both sides as well.

    Oh, one other point. I tire of the argument that only complementarianism can solve a disagreement when two people have diametrically opposed points of view. Both sides usually solve such a thing in one of three ways. Someone caves, a compromise is reached, or divorce/separation occurs. If one looks at the divorces rate in the SBC, one sees a 50% rate of marriages ending (did you know atheists have a lower divorce rate?). Since the SBC is decidedly complementarian, it does not seem they have solved the problem with irreconcilable differences.

  65. Mark Driscoll is a Calvinist, and, therefore, above criticism.

    Kidding.

    Really, what can you expect from a guy who says that he wouldn’t respect Jesus if he could beat Him up? He’s not in high-school – he’s in elementary school.

    Driscoll has a bullying mentality. What all bullies have in common: They are cowards. I think one thing he’s afraid of is the fact that women are more and more entering fields once dominated by men. And he probably hates the changes brought about by Title IX.

    BTW, doesn’t he have a rather high-pitched voice?

    Muff – Congrats for being a metaphorical old Jew. I’m a literal one.

  66. I’d pay money to see Cate Blanchett reprise her role as Elizabeth I and face Driscoll & his cronies down. She could wither them with one glare.

  67. Muff – Indeed!

    Jeff – yes, MD is a bully, but I think his problems run much deeper than that.

  68. Jeff,

    When I was a grade school kid growing up in the southeast corner of Wisconsin, I had a piano teacher, one Hannah Stern. Her rendition of Fur Elise was and is the most hauntingly beautiful I have ever heard. Most renditions are too fast, clipped, and stacatto. Not hers, her legato was divinely inspired. I will also never forget the faded blue numbers I saw on the inside of her forearm.

  69. Dee,

    I thought your jokes about blogging in designer clothing must have a story behind it. Yes, once again, Driscoll blames women. His tight shirts and teenage boy necklaces are amusing, in light of the fact that he advises women not to let themselves go. Apparently, he thinks he looks cool.

  70. “I’d pay money to see Cate Blanchett reprise her role as Elizabeth I and face Driscoll & his cronies down. She could wither them with one glare.”

    Ha Ha. Driscoll playing John Knox– facing the monsterous regiment of women. E1 gave Knox a run for his money. He thought he could play her. Not a chance.

  71. Wendy
    It started with Driscoll. Then, Perry Noble, another preacher on our bad boy list, described bloggers as men living in their mother’s basements, dressed in bathrobes and eating Cheetos. Then, our more recent brush with another pastor described bloggers as living in their mother’s basements.

    So, we made up an acronym to describes us “BABES” (Bible Answer Babes Explaining Scripture). We also want our readers to know that we will never let them down by blogging ill-kempt in some basement. The joke continues to expand. For example, I refuse to eat Cheetos unless I am on a road trip and then they must be crunchy. However, I am always well dressed whilst consuming them.

    It is us sticking out our tongues at ill-behaved pastors who think far too much about their own cool “dudeness”.

  72. Dee,
    From a point of justice, no relationship is what I am getting at. Wayfaring dads have a direct impact on their sons and daughters, and too often the mother is left holding the fines by a judge and at times they get put in jail when a teenager won’t pay their fines. Dads have their issues in accountability in raising their sons and to not disconnect from their daughters as well. I am so sick of everybody blameshifting in the culture personally, and the one who tries their hardest is the one who gets fined or jailed for trying to provide for her kids. You all do a good job in confronting this “Oh if the women would submit” every thing would work out is a crock. Deacons at one time were the welfare part of the church. Where is that?

    On the other question basically, syncretism is merging pagan elements with Christian faith.

  73. Arce said:
    Mutualism is a natural outcome of egalitarianism. All are equal and all are equally obligated to submission to the Lordship of Christ and to each other. Submission in this context does not infer inferiority, but a willingness to work together with others in love.

    Well put.

  74. “From a point of justice, no relationship is what I am getting at. Wayfaring dads have a direct impact on their sons and daughters, and too often the mother is left holding the fines by a judge and at times they get put in jail when a teenager won’t pay their fines. Dads have their issues in accountability in raising their sons and to not disconnect from their daughters as well. I am so sick of everybody blameshifting in the culture personally, and the one who tries their hardest is the one who gets fined or jailed for trying to provide for her kids. You all do a good job in confronting this “Oh if the women would submit” every thing would work out is a crock. Deacons at one time were the welfare part of the church. Where is that? ”

    Casey, This is a problem of sin not gender. Both parents are responsible for the children they bring into this world. Since most dads in a divorce do not want full custody the brunt of responsibility falls on the mom. (Most men would get custody if they tried. Phyllis Chesler has done some excellent research on this myth about women and custody issues. Her book is “Mothers on Trial”and her findings are shocking.)

    I think you may be on to something, though. I would be interesting if the courts held the dad’s just as responsible….if they could find them.

  75. His tight shirts and teenage boy necklaces are amusing, in light of the fact that he advises women not to let themselves go. Apparently, he thinks he looks cool.

    More like a joke figure from the Seventies — the sixty-something guy hanging out at a disco with his hair dyed, shirt open down to his belly button, and a coke spoon dangling amid silver chest plumage.

    Not much of a stretch to the image of a seventy-something Michael Jackson dressed in his footie-jammies screaming into a mirror “I’M YOUNG! I’M YOUNG! I’M YOUNG! REALLY! I AM!”

  76. “They’re gonna get married, make money, make babies, build companies, buy real estate – they’re gonna make the culture of the future. If you get the young men, you get everything – the families, the women, the children, the business, everything. If you don’t get the young men you get nothing.”

    You don’t get it Deb.
    It’s all about gettin’ everything.

    Wasn’t one of Calvinism’s de facto signs of being the Elect was God would predestine you to be Rich? And if you weren’t Rich and Successful you weren’t Really Saved?

  77. Casey
    I am saddened at the shift in the pastoral roles for various leadership folks-pastors, deacons, elders. They actually used to serve the people in the church. So many of them now have taken on the role of admirals in rowboats, spending more time dictating secondary doctrines than in true service.

  78. Casey
    i am aware of the syncretic practices of the Israelites in the OT. Bu,t today, condemnation comes towards those who disagree with secondary issues. In the OT, God was miffed with the people building golden calf idols and Asherah poles. Today, we have Mohler condemning anything but YE creationism, non-Calvinists, etc. Those issues do not fall under syncretism although Mohler and Ham try to do so.

  79. Headless

    Your comment made me laugh! “I’m young” Take a look at Ed Young Jr recently. he has dyed his hair a distinct blond. His hair is dark. It is scary to see people trying to pretend that they are something that they are not. Makes you wonder if they do the same in other aspects of their life?

  80. Headless

    YOu know, I think there was something of this in certain Calvinist circles. “Wasn’t one of Calvinism’s de facto signs of being the Elect was God would predestine you to be Rich? And if you weren’t Rich and Successful you weren’t Really Saved?”

    Question to readers-have you heard this preached recently in any Reformed churches? I’m curious.

  81. I’ve never heard any Calvinists claiming one has to be rich to be saved. I’ve never even heard that from TBN preachers, for that matter.

    Citing Calvin as a despot because of Servetus’ execution is a little problematic because Servetus would have been executed if the Catholics or any of the other Protestant groups had gotten a hold of him, too. Calvin recommended decapitation rather than burning as the faster and more merciful way to go and got rebuffed for picking the overly lenient form of capital punishment. That Calvin had an autocratic streak can be established by other case histories but with Servetus the problem is that any trinitarian Chrsitians would have had Servetus killed at that point in history. That’s how the conflation of church and state generally worked.

  82. “Citing Calvin as a despot because of Servetus’ execution is a little problematic because Servetus would have been executed if the Catholics or any of the other Protestant groups had gotten a hold of him, too.”

    This is a defense? Did this work with your mom? Hey mom, the other guys would have killed him anyway. And I beg to differ about other “protestant” groups. The anabaptists would not have burned him over doctrine. There are even nobles who would have protected him if he had gone to their lands.

    “Calvin recommended decapitation rather than burning as the faster and more merciful way to go and got rebuffed for picking the overly lenient form of capital punishment.”

    Many Scholars do not agree with this only Calvinist scholars. :o). For example Leonard Verduin wrote about this in Stepchildren of the Reformation quoting from letters Calvin wrote. Calvin wanted beheading because that was the punishment for a civil crime. The reason is because there was already grumbling around Geneva about some of the excesses of the church and he wanted cover from the civil council. They turned him down. And the burning did cause Calvin some problems. He lamented in one letter how persecuted he was by people over it. (The persecuter being persecuted) Read around the subject and not only reformed history. Verduin went to Europe when church archives were opened after WW2. Many letters and documents had not been made public to researchers before that.

    ” That Calvin had an autocratic streak can be established by other case histories but with Servetus the problem is that any trinitarian Chrsitians would have had Servetus killed at that point in history. That’s how the conflation of church and state generally worked.”

    Again wrong. There were Christian groups outside the state church who would not burn a heretic at the stake. In other words, there were REAL believers back then too. Not just the “elect” who were forced to attend the state church or face the magistrate. (wink) There were groups who refused to bow to the state church and were hunted. The fact that Servetus felt free to attend Calvin’s church even though he knew the Catholics were hunting him…. that should tell you something. He really thought there would be more liberty in Geneva most likely because of events of Strausberg earlier. But Calvin had him arrested in church. Oh and there is documentation that Calvin ordered “green wood” when the beheading request was denied.

    Events leading up to this….Calvin was furious that Servetus had the nerve to markup one of his writings and send it to him with edits and questions. This is also documented in letters. Calvin’s ego by that time and his tyranny are unsurpassed. By that time, the petite council of his were even regulating how many courses people could eat at meals.

    Perhaps you might want to read up on the punishment for Anabaptists. The “third” baptism they called it where they took them out and drowned them. Even women. Nice guy, your Calvin.

  83. “Wasn’t one of Calvinism’s de facto signs of being the Elect was God would predestine you to be Rich? And if you weren’t Rich and Successful you weren’t Really Saved?”

    I have not heard that but I do know that every single person in Geneva was elect because the magistrates forced them to attend church. :o) So they had to be. Right?

  84. Eagle,

    I lived my childhood in the town of Racine. It was back far enough to where you could still hear the old people speaking Polish on the porches. I’m an old dude.

  85. Anonymous, the treatment of Anabaptists by Reformed, Catholic, and Lutheran advocates proves my point that there were plenty of other people besides Calvin that would have been happy to see Servetus dead. Calvin was worse than average but the average was still cruel.

    You wouldn’t be in a position to know whether or not I’ve studied the work of Anabaptists (or have known any Mennonites), so it’s understandable you would simply assume the worst about what level of knowledge I have about that tradition. I agree with the necessity of church-state separation and don’t endorse the death penalty but one does not actually need to be Anabaptist to arrive at those positions. I’m not interested in defending Calvin as such. I don’t think there are any Christian groups that are completely above reproach in any age. There never will be, either. In this respect I pretty much agree with atheists, though am not an atheist myself.

  86. “You wouldn’t be in a position to know whether or not I’ve studied the work of Anabaptists (or have known any Mennonites)”

    Anabaptists were not monolithic. Menno Simons was only one sect.

  87. Anonymous – are you Mennonite? (Just curious; I live in an area that has a strong Anabaptist presence going back about 250+ years.)

  88. Perhaps you might want to read up on the punishment for Anabaptists. The “third” baptism they called it where they took them out and drowned them. Even women. Nice guy, your Calvin.

    The more I hear about Calvin when he ran Geneva, the more I’m reminded of Ayatollah Khomeini.

    Even to the point of “whitewashing the churches” — sledgehammering off ALL the artwork, painting over what couldn’t be sledgehammered off with whitewash, then calligraphing verses from the Bible over the resulting plain white walls. Exactly the same as Wahabi Islam (the Pure Islam of the Saudis and Talibani) does to mosques that come under their control.

  89. Oh and there is documentation that Calvin ordered “green wood” when the beheading request was denied.

    “They shall be stoned with Small stones, so that they die SLOWLY.”
    — Ayatollah Khomeini

  90. … and “Jehan Calvin” was working with the French Inqusition re. Servetus’ arrest, trial, etc. Looks like he “conveniently” sent them some documents that helped them to make their case (to themselves, at least).

    HUG – removal of art in churches wasn’t restricted to Geneva. Look at some 17th-c. Dutch paintings of church interiors. All whitewash, no art… and yet, the Netherlands was just about the best place to live at the time if you were either Jewish or Protestant. (Art was OK, too, and painters were thriving, selling work to the new merchant class…)

    Geneva is a nice city today, but I can’t help wishing that its cathedral hadn’t been stripped by Calvin’s followers.

  91. Let’s not forget Savonarola’s purge of wicked and humanist art in old Florence. If I remember correctly, Tim LaHaye hinted at an endorsement of Savonarola because the art was after all pornographic (in LaHaye’s estimation).

    The point is, it matters not what brand of religious zealotry holds sway, they all hate and despise human freedom.

  92. Art is viewed – has historically been viewed – by many as frivolous. Which actually does make sense if you keep in mind that for the most part, only the wealthy and powerful have been able to afford commissions purchases, in the West at least. (The Dutch 17th-c. art boom is one of the big exceptions, but even then, it had a great deal to do with a new group of people who had expendable income.)

    We have tended to reserve the “best” in art for that which is believed to be sacred – no matter what civilization, in which part of the globe. That’s often involved the use of gold, silver and precious stones… which is one of the not-so-religious reasons for the destruction of art in many Roman Catholic churches at various points during the Reformation. The gems could be sold, the precious metals could be melted down…

  93. Wasn’t Savonarola’s public art burning called The Bonfire of the Vanities? (Must check some sources…)

  94. Wasn’t Savonarola’s public art burning called The Bonfire of the Vanities?

    As far as I can remember, it was.

    And check out the aftermath — the Florentines lynched Savonarola a few years later.

  95. Indeed it was numo. The irony here is also rich in that like LaHaye, Savonarola too was obsessed with end-times prophecy & homosexuality.

  96. I thought your jokes about blogging in designer clothing must have a story behind it. Yes, once again, Driscoll blames women.

    I wonder if this is one of Driscoll’s sexual-fantasy projection “visions” coming into play?

  97. Somewhat curiously Church repression of art was pretty much the same as Sociali-st Realism not just in the Soviet Union but, in a less obvious way, here in the West. Consider the abjection of “genre” fiction by “serious” literary critics in the 20th century. It’s something that just struck me considering the history of formal and informal attacks on certain genres of art.

    To tie it back to Driscoll stuff, he can think it’s goofy that people like superhero stories but isn’t Jack Bauer from 24 basically a kind of Batman without a cape? 🙂

  98. ironically I had to edit my post because I didn’t realize there’s a word blacklisted on this blog embedded in a word I used. ha!

  99. WtH/Guy Behind the Curtain
    I’m confused. We do not have a blacklist as far as I know. Guy-am I wrong???

  100. Seems like Driscoll has a real “thing” for masculine men. He likes those big big muscles doesn’t he?

  101. Numo, Not a mennonite. Just love history. And if people would scour the historical record of Geneva during Calvin they would never ever refer to themselves as Calvinists unless they are dominionists or something similar. They would be too ashamed.

    They will blow it off as he was just a man of his time….but how does one explain someone like Menno Simons? Was he not a man of his time, too? Jan Hus? Felix Mann? They all defied the state church loving truth more than life itself or comfort.

    People have a choice. You can be a Driscoll wannabe and the defense is how lost Seattle is so he has to be like that. Or, they can choose to be a serious nobody laboring in the vineyard with calloused knees. It really is a choice.

  102. dee, a word has been blacklisted because it’s a product name. Go check out where I hyphenated a word in an abnormal spot and that should clear things up.

  103. Seems like Driscoll has a real “thing” for masculine men. He likes those big big muscles doesn’t he?

    I believe I have already included a link to those Masculine Men with Big Big Muscles (and an additional Masculine Love angle), The Village People.

    Can’t Stop the Music, y’know!

  104. Consider the abjection of “genre” fiction by “serious” literary critics in the 20th century. It’s something that just struck me considering the history of formal and informal attacks on certain genres of art.

    Tell me about it. I’m an SF litfan since ’75. When the “New Age SF” movement tried to make SF more Literary and ended up only acquiring all of High Literature’s Lit-fag bad habits. Grinning Nihilism, the Cult of Ugliness, and “Darker and Edgier”.

    The most obvious symptom was the sea change from Bright Futures you wanted to live to see to Grimdark Futures whose crapsack nihilism would drive you to suicide. From Boldly Going Where No Man Has Gone Before to Grimdark/Crapsack Dystopias where We’re All Gonna Die, It’s All Over But The Screaming, breathe shallow to minimize your carbon footprint while watching documentaries on how The Planet Will Heal Herself Once the Cancer of Humanity is Extinguished, and remember the Appropriate Ironic Quip when you leap into the grave.

    Then around Y2K things got worse. Dystopias gave way to Alternate History and One-Way Time Travel Into The Past, from Bright Future to Dark Future to NO Future. (Exactly the same progression as Rapture/Trib/Antichrist end-of-the-world choreography — seven years of Antichrist Dystopia Dark Future followed by The End.)

    To tie it back to Driscoll stuff, he can think it’s goofy that people like superhero stories but isn’t Jack Bauer from 24 basically a kind of Batman without a cape?

    Actually, Jack Bauer harks back to those predecessors of costumed superheroes, the Pulp Heroes of the Thirties. And funny you should mention Batman; Batman was actually the transition between Pulp Hero and Costumed Superhero, specifically the “Ubermensch” and “Gadgeteer” types of superheroes whose powers are not intrinsic, but a product of top-end natural physical development (the Ubermensch) and carried gadgets (the Gadgeteer).

  105. Driscoll is a total basketcase. He is emotionally unhinged, and I think his warped view of masculinity doesn’t help.

    His problem is that he buys into the secular world’s definition of masculinity – which amounts to nothing but shallow, vapid, superficial posturings of dominance (also, dressing like a moron). It caricatures grown men as ego-driven, self-serving, and immature. Worst of all, it pits masculinity (good) against femininity (bad), and by its very nature views women as a threat that must be strongly controlled, if not outright attacked.

    There’s nothing in his theology about character, honor, morals, or inner strength. Sad. I find nothing “manly” or admirable about him at all. I most certainly find nothing Christian about him.

    It’s obvious he has issues – either he felt powerless growing up and is trying to compensate by dominating and degrading women. That, or he’s a closet homosexual desperately overcompensating for it. The way he reads homosexual undertones into totally innocuous situations is creepy.

  106. Kat
    I do not understand why the leading Calvinistas cannot see the problems with Driscoll. They are readily apparent to most people. I continue to say that there will be a problem someday and i intend to write a post, wagging my finger at his apologists. I have been reading reviews for his new book on sex coming out in January. They are so funny. Most give some sort of caveat “While I don’t agree with everything he says I still like the book.”

  107. His problem is that he buys into the secular world’s definition of masculinity – which amounts to nothing but shallow, vapid, superficial posturings of dominance (also, dressing like a moron). It caricatures grown men as ego-driven, self-serving, and immature. Worst of all, it pits masculinity (good) against femininity (bad), and by its very nature views women as a threat that must be strongly controlled, if not outright attacked.

    There’s actually a technical psych term for this — “Hypermasculinity”. I first came across it in a 1943 OSS psych profile of one A.Hitler. Basically, Hypermasculinity involves defining “masculine” only in terms of power and aggression and domination, excluding all else, and firewalling this to the max.

    There’s nothing in his theology about character, honor, morals, or inner strength.

    Only “I CAN BEAT YOU UP! BOW TO ME AND AGREE WITH ME ON EVERYTHING OR I’M GONNA BEAT YOU UP! I’M CAN BEAT YOU UP! I CAN BEAT YOU UP!”

  108. The irony here is also rich in that like LaHaye, Savonarola too was obsessed with end-times prophecy & homosexuality. — Muff

    End-Time Prophecy can easily get spun as The Ultimate Revenge Fantasy, where God Ends The World and you watch everyone you don’t like Burn in Hell for All Eternity from your catered box seats in Heaven. (This is the real secret of Jerry Jenkins’ success, stroking his readers’ egos with this oh-so-delicious imagery.)

    And as for homosexuality, any individual or culture who is into Hypermasculinity will always be conflicted. Homosexuality is about as UN-Manly as you can get, yet it promises sex and relationships without the contamination of the hated female. Hypermasculine types will always be drawn to it, yet at the same time hate it with all their being. There’s not much difference between the hypermasculine hetero stud and the leather boy with his bathouse conquests.

  109. Dee –

    They are so funny. Most give some sort of caveat “While I don’t agree with everything he says I still like the book.”

    If the book is anything like his SOS teaching it might be considered “legalized (i.e., justified) porn” for the Calvanista crowd!

  110. Pingback: Linkathon 12/7 | Phoenix Preacher

  111. RE: Headless Unicorn Guy on Tue, Dec 06 2011 at 02:12 pm:

    I remember arguing on a certain blog that the concept of a literal hell (in my opinion anyway) is largely a medieval construct spun at a time when horrific forms of torture and execution were common place and no big deal. Of course the blog owner maintained that this is what the Bible teaches & to disagree with it is to doubt the inerrancy & sufficiency of Scripture.

    Never at any point can God be bigger than the Bible. His word can never be any more or any less than a legal contract binding. The circle (or so they say) must always come round and land on the same spot no matter what.

    When I asked the blog owner if she’d be disappointed if it turned out there’s no hell, she had no reply but yet another circuit on the reason circle. It would appear that I’m now banned from further commenting and cast into the lake of fire along with the beast and false prophet.

  112. Muff, did you quote anything from Jeffrey Burton Russell, or was this the sort of blog that would have dismissed Russell as some apostate Papist? 🙂

  113. RE: Wenatchee The Hatchet on Wed, Dec 07 2011 at 12:46 pm:

    Thanks for the name, I will have to check out Russell’s writings. Whether Papist, Protestant, Jew or Muslim, if they have something constructive to say, I’m all ears. The one thing all toltalitarian systems (religious or secular) fear is inquiry.

  114. I really think this whole idea of masculine love is so ingrained in certain quarters it is impossible for them to see how they sound.

    Check out this thread (this blog was supporting Driscoll earlier in “Thank God for Mark Driscoll”) and tell me if you see any wording or phrasing that sounds like the objectification of women (wives)in the comments. The are, for the most part, pastors. one commenter who pointed it out (a woman) got every single comment deleted! The men who also saw it did not get deleted.

    http://sbcvoices.com/walmart-and-the-rape-culture/

  115. So, does “masculine love” only involve love that exploits “masculine anatomy”, or can it be the kind of love that does not involve thinking and acting as if one’s brain consists of two orbs hung below 6-8 inches below the waist? Can it include a father babysitting his daughter’s child? A man defending a child from assault? A man tutoring an elementary school child? What is it about love that makes it “masculine” and therefore different from other kinds of love?

  116. Russell’s work is considered the academic standard on Hell and diabology by pretty much everyone, including atheists who wish he’d have talked about religion less and the devil more. They just don’t realize you can’t speak about a non-religious devil (unless you continually insert your least favorite politician into the mix).

    Russell’s books lay out the process of Western Christian thought on Hell and the devil and digs up all the folkloric elements, the parts that connect to biblical texts, but importantly the intertestamental literature and concepts that were taken up by the NT authors. I have quite a bit more to write about the relationship between NT literature and intertestamental literature in light of certain lockstep interpretations of segments of Deuteronomy but I’m going to have to save that for a much later time (maybe next year). All five of Russell’s books should be accessible on-line or at bigger-than-average city or county library systems.

    Another author to check out would be Susan R. Garrett who wrote a book called The Temptation of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark, and another book called The Demise of the Devil: the devil and diabology in the writings of Luke. Garrett’s work is pretty good and she’s one of the only NT scholars I’ve ever come across who, as a modern textual scholar, has decided to take diabology seriously as a field for contemporary NT studies.

    If you want to be even more thorough you might want to pick up Richard Bauckham’s commentary on Jude & 2 Peter for his discussion on the books of Enoch and the Testament of Moses as important documents/traditions to be aware of in properly exegeting Jude. Most Protestant preachers avoid Jude not so much because it’s short but because it’s easier to skip Jude than to engage with the subject of Jude so extensively alluding to or quoting books that weren’t canonized. Driscoll and company included Bauckham’s commentary as a scholarly reference in their 1 & 2 Peter series and for good reason, it’s one of the better-known monographs on Jude/2 Peter and Bauckham is a respected authority on intertestamental literature. So if that’s not too much of an info dump I hope that can help you with continuing research.

  117. Arce
    Good questions. How does one define sacrificial love-masculine or feminine? I know of many men and women who have laid down their lives for our country, for a loved one or for Jesus. Dos it matter what gender they were? Does gender make a difference in this area? i think not. If one of my children were in harm’s way, I think both my husband and I would move to help them with equal dispatch albeit I would be better dressed (Sorry- I couldn’t resist. That one was for Mark Driscoll).

  118. RE: Wenatchee The Hatchet on Wed, Dec 07 2011 at 08:58 pm:

    Quick question: Do Russell and the others you’ve cited deny the supernatural as a real agency of both good & evil? In my opinion, the Enlightenment had a tendency to deny the supernatural & the concept of God when the momentum of its pendulum swung too far in that direction from the medieval extreme.

  119. Garrett teaches at Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary

    Bauckham is an Anglican (if memory serves)and is a practicing believer and teacher in addition to being a scholar on intertestamental literature.

    Russell is Catholic and moderately liberal but lays out a case near the end of the book for why he believes that there is some value to diabology as a field for more than purely academic speculation. So, no, none of them are scholars who are trying to swing over entirely to a rationalistic/materialist approach. You may not agree with where they land on some issues but they’re the best scholarly options I’ve happened to come across on these topics in the last twenty years.

  120. Oh that whole “pastor’s wives letting themselves go” is easy to explain with his own fashion sense. Everybody ‘knows’ that men are visual (and women aren’t), ergo, when women dress sloppy, it is a major downer to men everywhere (but their own husbands in particular). This is clearly why it is women’s job to make sure they are dressed in a way that men like looking at, while making sure they aren’t dressing in a way that make men look at them. {/endsarcasm}

  121. Amanda
    Driscoll is quite demeaning to women. He is self centered and self absorbed. He shows little understanding of the effects of his words on women. He has Grace cowed and she nods along. Have you ever watched her when he does one of his talks or interviews and includes her? It is strangely disconcerting. Someday, the full story will be told.

  122. 1. I believe the love Christ shows is neither masculine nor feminine. It is LOVE…the nature of God. Who is spriti, and therefore without gender.

    2. Women should show love in whatever way is available, appropriate, and godly in a given situation.

    3. Harmful, because it is ERROR. A little error soon becomes a big problem.

    And Driscoll is a bully. And probably something else too, but I’ll leave that alone for now. Someday all things will be revealed. To be really honest, this little video snippet makes my skin crawl. Cannot imagine sitting under his preaching….wow.

    And I’m wondering about those sage/burgundy colored walls in churches being femiine. What would be a masculine color for a church wall, one is compelled to wonder…blaze orange?

    Or, if in Green Bay, green and gold?

  123. “Did you know that in order to become a part of the Acts 29 Network, founded by Mark Driscoll, pastors are required to lead their churches with “masculine love like Jesus Christ”? Here is how this is spelled out under Doctrine on the Acts 29 website:

    “We are not egalitarians and do believe that men should head their homes and male elders/pastors should lead their churches with masculine love like Jesus Christ.”

    A ‘masculine love’ like Jesus Christ’? “

    Let’s see now…
    1) Jesus was male
    2) Jesus’ love is Agape love
    3) Agape Love is masculine

    Hmmmm…
    Statements 1 and 2 are true.
    Statement 3 is an absurdity drawn from statements 1 and 2.
    Great example of a “Type 2” logic error.

    It’s the type of fallacy that a pharisee would love (with masculine love).
    Fortunately most Christian men do not love as do these ACTS 29 folks.
    Could they be, as a local pastor calls himself, “just a bunch of dumb (male) sheep”? Could they have “Driscollitis” (control issues).

    My Bible talks about “faith, hope and love”..but does it say that the greatest of these is “male” love?

    Biblical Agape love has no gender.

  124. Dr. Jon,

    What an excellent comment! And I love the term “Driscollitis”. It is a very serious condition! Those who suffer from it seem to forget about Genesis 1:27

    “God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.” (NASB)

  125. I am unsure whether Driscollitis is an eternally fatal disease for the sufferor or not, but it clearly has public health consequences of causing injury to the beliefs and spiritual health of congregants when the pastor has contracted it, and at least some of those who are secondarily affected may suffer eternal fatality. What a terrible outcome!

  126. Thanks Deb and Arce. Driscollitis is indeed serious business. But the treatment may be similar to that of most fungi. Simple exposure to Light should stop it in its tracks.

  127. Driscollitis, that’s a new one. I noticed that Markulinity was temporarily in circulation in small segments of Seattle a few years ago. The pun was an interesting play on the distinction between actual masculinity and Mark Driscoll’s much narrower take on masculinity.

  128. Don,

    I just finished reading some reviews of Driscoll’s book over at Amazon. Thanks for the link. I’ll check it out.