Mark Driscoll Tickles Ears at Gold Creek Community Church

Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. (link)

https://www.facebook.com/pastormarkFacbook photo

He's B-A-C-K!!!  In recent days there had been much speculation that Mark Driscoll would be preaching at Gold Creek Community Church.  Warren Throckmorton tipped us off last Thursday with this:

Last Sunday, a public announcement was made about a guest speaker who has been called one of the top 25 most popular preachers. The pastor also negatively referred to “sour milk” Christians as those who might not want to see Mr. Popular in the pulpit.

When Throckmorton phoned Gold Creek Community Church for confirmation, he was told they would not reveal the identity of the guest speaker.  He didn't have to wait long to find out.  Mark Driscoll preached during all three services Sunday morning, and the seattle pi reported that he received a standing ovation (see below).

Mark Driscoll hardly caught his breath after quitting as lead pastor at Mars Hill Church, as the Seattle-based mega church imploded in multiple scandals, before launching his own web site and once more appearing at evangelical conferences.

On Sunday, Driscoll delivered his first Seattle-area reappearance since last August at the big, box-like Gold Creek Community Church in Mill Creek.  He was  greeted with a standing ovation, with more than 100 people lining up to greet him after the 9 a.m. service.

According to the seattle pi,

lead pastor Dan Kellogg brought on Driscoll with the words:  “He’s in the middle of re-purposing his life.”  Kellogg claimed Driscoll was “unfairly treated by former staff and the media,” and exclaimed:  “He’s baptized 10,000 people who found Christ.”

To watch Dan Kellogg's remarks on video as well as Mark Driscoll's message, click here

So Mark Driscoll is playing the victim card…  How very predictable!  Those who have been hurt by Driscoll are not being fooled.  In fact, when some of them caught wind of Driscoll's possible appearance at Gold Creek Community Church, they planned a protest which was announced on Warren Throckmorton's website.  Here is a screen shot of what Throckmorton posted:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2015/05/16/former-mars-hill-church-members-protest-mark-driscolls-appearance-at-gold-creek-community-church-this-sunday/?ref_widget=trending&ref_blog=peterenns&ref_post=articles-and-essays

Several news sources revealed that there were a dozen or so protesters outside the Gold Creek Community Church accusing Driscoll of relaunching his ministry without repenting of his conduct and addressing the problems which led to its collapse.

Gold Creek Community Church is non-denominational according to its website.  It is located in Mill Creek, Washington near downtown Seattle.

Mark Driscoll made an appearance earlier this month at the Thrive Conference.  His thirty-four minute talk can be accessed here.

According to the Christian Post:

Driscoll made a public appearance at the Thrive Conference at Bayside Church in California where he spoke about how his family has suffered over the past several months and how he's relying on God to help him forgive those who have wronged him, according to Gospel Herald.

"I don't want to take this opportunity to talk about me — I want spend this time to serve you," he was quoted as telling attendees at the conference. "When sin happens, someone has to pay. Forgiveness is where the offended pays. As shepherds, we can sometimes preach a message of forgiveness without practicing it."

In his resignation letter, Driscoll admitted that "aspects of my personality and leadership style, had proven to be divisive within the Mars Hill context" and that he was resigning because he did not want "to be the source of anything that might detract from our church's mission to lead people to a personal and growing relationship with Jesus Christ."

The Mars Hill Board of Overseers' statement on his resignation affirmed that although "pastor Mark has, at times, been guilty of arrogance, responding to conflict with a quick temper and harsh speech, and leading the staff and elders in a domineering manner," they did not find cause for him "to be disqualified from pastoral ministry."

Dee and I first became acquainted with Mark Driscoll's ministry in February 2009 when he came to our area to speak at several venues — one being my daughter's college.  When I had the opportunity to hear this message online, I knew right away that there was something terribly off about this guy.  The campus ministry must have detected it as well because Mark's message was quickly removed from the website. 

Then there was the Song of Solomon debacle that garnered much attention, not to mention the firing of two beloved Mars Hill elders, Bent Meyer and Paul Petry.  Driscoll was riding high as more and more bodies were piling up behind the Mars Hill bus.  Then we had the Real Marriage book and promotion tour, followed by charges of extensive plagiarism and the payment of $200,000 to Result Source to ensure Real Marriage would be on the New York Times bestseller list (for one week!).  These serious problems and others snowballed and led to the resignation of Mark Driscoll as pastor of Mars Hill Church, and the inevitable closure of all church locations.

It was stunning to hear Dan Kellogg's defense of Mark Driscoll in that video (starting at the 3 minute mark).  To the pastors and congregants of Gold Creek Community Church, we pray God convicts you of turning a blind eye to the destruction Mark Driscoll singlehandedly caused at what used to be known as Mars Hill Church. 

We continue to stand with those who were victimized by Mark Driscoll.  May their faith and lives be restored in God's perfect time.

Comments

Mark Driscoll Tickles Ears at Gold Creek Community Church — 201 Comments

  1. Kellogg's comments really ticked me off, I don't get it. I'd love to hear any more information about Gold Creek Community Church. Is it like Robert Morris outfit? Who has spoken there? What else has transpired there? Now I am curious!

  2. “Almost everything that’s being said (negative about Driscoll) is simply gossip”… pastor Kellogg

  3. Despite all that is KNOWN about Driscoll I still figured it would happen sooner or later but this soon and a standing ovation? What are they thinking?

    The people in this church don’t have their collective heads in the sand but somewhere else just as dark but smells worse.

    So when are the rest of the Glitterati going to join the Driscoll road to recovery bandwagon?

  4. These pastors are number crunchers. They care about their lattes, conference fees, and tithing base, period.

    If Marky Mark can bring them to tears and empty their wallets, then he is a “good” pastor.

  5. @ Bill M:

    i'd say there's no easier place to engineer a standing ovation than church. all it takes is a few people here and there, and in seconds everyone present shuts off their brain & goes into automaton mode for fear of being labeled any number of things.

  6. Well I can honestly say that I am in shock. Gold Creek Community Church is my church. It is a community grown church that is very active in the community and is in service to the many who live in the area. Dan Kellogg is a good man. He is a chaplain for law enforcement, gives his time for others and I have seen him take single mothers with young sons under his wing to provide a male influence for them. He does not live in the clouds but lives in the nitty gritty of life. He started the church with a co-pastor by meeting in homes on the street where my family lived. Theologically speaking I would not put GCCC in the same camp as Robert Morris.

    I have served a long side Dan and his wife, my daughter was baptized there, my husband and I taught Sunday School classes and I and my ministry partner have taught classes to youth leaders and parents many years ago.

    As I said, I am in shock! I am completely blown away at the decision to bring Mark here. And I am angry and disappointed. I could not attend the service and asked my husband to watch it online for the both of us. I am hurt for the hurting and am embarrassed by Dan’s comments and behavior. I have not written or contacted Dan or the church leadership yet. I want to be sure I craft my words and thoughts in a way that he and the team may receive them. Sadly, I am not hopeful based on what I have heard and seen so far.

    For now its all I can say.

  7. In case I was not clear enough in my last post. I am completely, without reservation, against the decision to bring Mark here and am angry and disappointed. I am sadly not hopeful eyes will be opened to the error they have made.

  8. mouseyhair wrote:

    As I said, I am in shock! I am completely blown away at the decision to bring Mark here… I want to be sure I craft my words and thoughts in a way that he and the team may receive them.

    I got to thinking– based on Pastor Kellogg’s description of the decision, it will be difficult for you to question it.
    He had an inner prompting and a spiritual moment. He thought Mr Driscoll would be the best person to introduce re-purposing, and felt God leading him to invite him. I don’t doubt the truth of these statements at all– but they’re so subjective… How can anyone contradict them? This was a rather important decision for your church, and I’d wonder– how informed was it? Did he listen to a controversial Driscoll sermon or two? Did he read the stories of former Mars Hill staffers before accusing them of treating Mr Driscoll unfairly? Contact a couple of them? Did he check out any stories he felt were gossip, just in case there might be some truth behind them? Did he discuss his inner prompting with some of the more disagreeable elders/deacons/staff/leaders, or only agreeable ones? Did he announce to the congregation the direction he felt God was leading and ask for their prayers, or keep it under wraps? I don’t know the answers to any of these things, and don’t know whether it would be helpful for you to ask…. But you and your family are in my prayers. And Dan, of course, if I can be so personal.

  9. mouseyhair wrote:

    I have not written or contacted Dan or the church leadership yet. I want to be sure I craft my words and thoughts in a way that he and the team may receive them. Sadly, I am not hopeful based on what I have heard and seen so far.

    God give you strength and wisdom. My prayers go with you.

  10. “An appalling and horrible thing has happened in the land. The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests rule on their own authority; And My people love it so! But what will you do at the end of it?”
    Jeremiah 5:30-31

  11. Mouseyhair, is there anyone else in your church who feels the same way? If so, I hope you can find lots of likeminded people before confronting the leadership. Greater numbers will help.

  12. @ mouseyhair:

    Thank you for joining our discussion, and welcome to TWW. I am saddened that your congregation has been roped into the restore Mark Driscoll campaign. It was unfair for the pastors to 'surprise' the congregants with such a controversial guest preacher.

    I watched the video on the church website where the members are reaching out to the community in a compassionate way, and I was touched. At this juncture, I believe those like you who disapproved need to let your voices be heard (as you plan to do).

  13. NJ wrote:

    Mouseyhair, is there anyone else in your church who feels the same way? If so, I hope you can find lots of likeminded people before confronting the leadership. Greater numbers will help.

    I absolutely agree! Great recommendation.

  14. Dave A A wrote:

    “Almost everything that’s being said (negative about Driscoll) is simply gossip”… pastor Kellogg

    “A God Can Do No Wrong.”

  15. Dave A A wrote:

    I got to thinking– based on Pastor Kellogg’s description of the decision, it will be difficult for you to question it.
    He had an inner prompting and a spiritual moment. He thought Mr Driscoll would be the best person to introduce re-purposing, and felt God leading him to invite him

    i.e. “GOD TOLD ME TO!”

    “If you question what I say to you
    You rebel against The Father too…”
    — Steve Taylor, “I Manipulate”

  16.   __

    “The Wheels On The Bus Continue To Go Swash, Swash, Swash?

    hmmm…

    Deb,

    Baptize?

    “Heck, didn’t he baptized some 10,000 people with the wheels of his bus?

    🙁

    ATB

    Sopy

  17. “He’s baptized 10,000 people who found Christ.”

    Vs. Paul: “I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius…Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any other.”

    This is nothing but an attempt to manipulate the audience into believing that Driscoll is something because (it seems that) God used him in large measure. We are supposed to be impressed with MARK, then? Or God’s use of Mark? God used Pharaoh too, as Paul reminds us in Romans 9.

    When Paul says he’s glad he didn’t do much baptizing, the reason is because he doesn’t want to be embroiled in the (fleshly/carnal) divisions going on in Corinth. Here Kellogg uses the large number of people baptized by Driscoll to establish him as credible (God used him greatly!) in a way that is divisive and manipulative, and that with authority. He combines that with “I had a prompting” as though GOD were the source of that prompting, so anyone who doesn’t like it is opposing GOD’S repurposing plan for Driscoll.

    This reeks of carnal flesh and I do not doubt the stench of it reaches to heaven.

  18. Mouseyhair:

    Excellent comment…so sorry that this is happening in your home church…miserable…

    I found these spiritual abuse blogs a few years ago, after experiencing our own church abuse…for a whole year we thought we were alone…had no idea a community of wounded people were standing up to leadership abuses…

    For the past couple of years I’ve been watching the blogs expose more and more outrages…

    Each time, I’m expecting church leaders to speak out against this…like tullian did a bit last year…I keep thinking “this is the abuse that will finally open eyes and the floodgates”….I keep hoping…

    And now this…again, I’ve been hoping…and it seems, the blogs are the only ones speaking out..sadly, I’m becoming less and less shocked….

    Todd-very appropriate verse…thank you…

    Whoa to the church…whoa to these “shepherds”…God is not mocked…

    Thank you, dee and deb (and JA, Todd, Tim, and on) for your willingness to step up and speak out…you are blessing the sheople out here enormously….

    This.is.nuts.

  19. Coincidentally last night my reading brought me through 2nd Peter, specifically concerning false teachers. The way that Driscoll swept aside and ruined good men who stood in his way as he consolidated power, the plagiarism, the corruption of using church funds to buy a spot on the best seller list, the continuing abuse and misuse of people, the foul things said from the podium, the evidence is in.

    So should anyone think comments posted here are too harsh, missing Christ’s love, I encourage you to consult 2nd Peter chapter 2. Then come back and lecture.

  20. Mouseyhair, I’m sorry this is going on at your church. However, I did some quick Googling, and this is not the first time your church has been involved in controversy. Did you know about this? http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/loud-music-at-sheriffs-church-rocks-neighbors/
    I hope the church figured out a way to mitigate the noise problem, but I’m shocked at the quotes from the worship director. And then there was that whole live tattooing during a worship service…..

  21. mouseyhair wrote:

    I am hurt for the hurting and am embarrassed by Dan’s comments and behavior. I have not written or contacted Dan or the church leadership yet. I want to be sure I craft my words and thoughts in a way that he and the team may receive them. Sadly, I am not hopeful based on what I have heard and seen so far.

    Unfortunately Dan has deleted comments made by some of the ex Mars Hill members from his blog and Facebook page. I know of one person who is contacting him and hopes to have a meeting with Dan, this person attended GCCC 11 years ago.

    Not an easy situation for you to be in and I am sorry you are going through this.

  22. @ mouseyhair:

    It comes down to this: either Dan Kellogg is highly ignorant/uninformed or his common sense moral compass is malfunctioning.

    If it’s the former, give him a helping hand with these (especially the first one, where things are well-documented):

    joyfulexiles.com
    musingsfromunderthebus.wordpress.com
    welovemarshill.com
    repentantpastor.com
    thewartburgwatch.com
    patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton

  23. Elizabeth Lee wrote:

    Mouseyhair, I’m sorry this is going on at your church. However, I did some quick Googling, and this is not the first time your church has been involved in controversy. Did you know about this? http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/loud-music-at-sheriffs-church-rocks-neighbors/ I hope the church figured out a way to mitigate the noise problem, but I’m shocked at the quotes from the worship director. And then there was that whole live tattooing during a worship service…..

    Well, we obviously missed some things… Live tattooing during a worship service? Seems wrong on so many levels. 🙄

  24. mouseyhair wrote:

    I have not written or contacted Dan

    The introduction by Kellogg contained a manipulation of both the facts concerning Driscoll and a manipulation of the people present. Don’t rush into this, be very careful.

  25. Elizabeth Lee wrote:

    I hope the church figured out a way to mitigate the noise problem, but I’m shocked at the quotes from the worship director. And then there was that whole live tattooing during a worship service…..

    Mouseyhair,

    Something is going seriously wrong at your church. Very seriously wrong.

  26. mouseyhair wrote:

    I have not written or contacted Dan or the church leadership yet. I want to be sure I craft my words and thoughts in a way that he and the team may receive them. Sadly, I am not hopeful based on what I have heard and seen so far.

    I want to write about Dan Kellogg on Monday at my blog. This deeply bothered me. He committed an epic fail, and I would like to illustrate why. He failed GCCC, he failed Seattle, he failed the former members of MHC, and he failed Mark Driscoll. I’d like to get in the details and explain why. Should I dedicate the Beetles song “I’m a Loser ” to Dan Kellogg?

  27. I’m not Catholic, but I love the NABRE-St Joseph’s study Bible. In my readings yesterday I came across the comment that when someone preachers, the goal is to have them see through the preacher and see Jesus. Clearly that is not happening with MD. Instead, seems the whole goal is to see and revere Mark.

  28. Having been functionally excommunicated from one church and one parachurch organization, it is imperative for anyone who believes it necessary to confront the leadership to do so with this in mind. First, it is doubtful that honest conversation will ensue–from the church leadership point of view, winning the confrontation is everything. In my experience, anything verbal spoken will not be reported by the leadership to others faithfully and truthfully. You will be sledgehammered with Matthew 18 (out of context and wrongfully) and marked as one seeking to bring about division. Then worse will be spoken to others about you–and you will not be spoken to in any type of respectful manner thereafter.

    I would recommend that your concerns be laid out in writing along with your letter of farewell to the church. The subjective obtuseness of the leadership at the church in question does not bode well for a favorable outcome. Run for your life after your honest, direct letter of concern.

    The church is dying for lack of 10 minutes of honest conversation–

  29.   __

    As long as Driscoll keeps it below 55db he’s not considered a 
    ‘nuisance’…

    🙂

  30. “Mark Driscoll preached during all three services Sunday morning, and the seattle pi reported that he received a standing ovation”
    This supports our theory that certain kinds of charisma can overtake people – almost like a spell. It’s certainly some form of enchantment. You can feel it when they speak when you are on site. Not sure if video can capture it. So the rest of the world looking in can’t figure out why people are being taken in. It depends on the spiritual state of the person who is watching/listening; and whether he/she knows enough to be on guard. It’s just something we’ve discussed bcz our former pastor had an odd form of it. Without it we wouldn’t have been naturally drawn to him. Now that we are out from under the ‘spell’ or charisma factor, we shutter to think how we were overtaken by it.

    “So Mark Driscoll is playing the victim card… How very predictable! Those who have been hurt by Driscoll are not being fooled. In fact, when some of them caught wind of Driscoll’s possible appearance at Gold Creek Community Church, they planned a protest which was announced on Warren Throckmorton’s website.”

    I hope Warren and friends have started a new precedent. We were impressed when they protested outside Mars Hill last August and our hats are off to them once again! Hope to see more and more of this all around the nation. We’ve often ranted about protesting our former church over the years but didn’t think to actually DO that. We had a lot of fun dreaming up what kinds of signs we’d use. “Shame on you ____________”(insert pastor name or church name)

  31. nkelly wrote:

    we shutter to think how we were overtaken by it.

    shudder. I really need to proof before posting instead of after.

  32. Mouseyhair, I’m sorry for what you’re going through right now — but I gotta tell you, based on the similarities to many, many fallen pastors over the years, this sentence really concerns me:

    “He is a chaplain for law enforcement, gives his time for others and I have seen him take single mothers with young sons under his wing to provide a male influence for them. “

  33. I just wanted to see Kellogg’s rhinestoned shirt mentioned in the loud music article, but I found this. I don’t endorse this bizarre Infowars style blog, but it does document Kellogg wearing a generalissimo-style military commander costume for a sermon.

    freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2015/02/wolves-sheepdogs-and-gospel-of-leviathan.html

  34. Final Anonymous wrote:

    Mouseyhair, I’m sorry for what you’re going through right now — but I gotta tell you, based on the similarities to many, many fallen pastors over the years, this sentence really concerns me:

    “He is a chaplain for law enforcement, gives his time for others and I have seen him take single mothers with young sons under his wing to provide a male influence for them. “

    Concerned as in:
    “Chaplain for Law Enforcement” as in Invoking Code of Blue a la ToJo & Bob Greiner?
    or
    “Taking single mothers with young sons under his wing to provide a male influence for them” as in Pedo Grooming Prey?

  35. Just read the article… 75 db OUTSIDE??? No way they were set for 90 db.

    And yes, easiest way to mitigate this would have been to turn down the bass. 90% of the congregation would not have even noticed.

  36. Stan wrote:

    I just wanted to see Kellogg’s rhinestoned shirt mentioned in the loud music article, but I found this. I don’t endorse this bizarre Infowars style blog, but it does document Kellogg wearing a generalissimo-style military commander costume for a sermon.

    So it’s not only Douggie ESQUIRE who likes to cosplay in the pulpit.

  37. Maze wrote:

    Each time, I’m expecting church leaders to speak out against this…like tullian did a bit last year…I keep thinking “this is the abuse that will finally open eyes and the floodgates”….I keep hoping…
    And now this…again, I’ve been hoping…and it seems, the blogs are the only ones speaking out..sadly, I’m becoming less and less shocked….

    Like the Code of Blue.
    Just like Cop will NEVER go against Cop, so Pastor will NEVER go against Pastor.

    “These five Kings said one to another,
    KING UNTO KING O’ER THE WORLD IS BROTHER…”

  38. Bob M wrote:

    Unbelievable. Totally Un-freaking-believable.

    “Under cover of Heaven’s gate —
    I. MANIPULATE.”
    — Steve Taylor

  39. Dave A A wrote:

    “Almost everything that’s being said (negative about Driscoll) is simply gossip”… pastor Kellogg

    Realize how deceptive this sort of statement can be. In many leader-centric church models, “gossip” is defined as any discussion about a leader not specifically taken directly to the leader first (even if said leader regularly rejects any attempts by laity to correct him anyway) and/or not approved by the leadership, supported by two or three witnesses, etc. More or less, “gossip” as applied to leaders means any discussion by laity of which said leaders have not controlled and would not approve. So by that definition, most of the talk about Driscoll is “gossip”.

    For example, if a woman had been sexually harassed by a hypothetical leader with no witness present, and she later told a friend about what had happened, that would be “gossip”, even though quite true. She would be considered by many leaders to be engaging in sinful divisive behavior.

    “Gossip” may not necessarily mean “untruth” to a leader like Kellogg if he’s coming from this paradigm, even though most people hearing this would almost certainly think he’s claiming that statements about Driscoll are lies.

  40. Do you know what people need to do with most of these abusive leaders? They need to stop listening to tone of voice and throw away mannerisms and start paying attention purely to what’s being said. That’s where the rubber hits the road. When I listened to Kellogg, at least at first, he was using the “I’m such a good guy” voice, and given the proper sort of inflection and style and meaningful looks and profound and seemingly-humble style, a lot of people can be swept away by a lot of ugliness.

    This is what I noticed in the multiple cultic Christian churches I’ve unfortunately been a part of: the true believer-types tended to focus on the rhythms of the speaker, the smiles, chuckles, “aw shucks” grins, self-effacing stories–and of course, the lowered, slightly quivering, deeply meaningful, profound voice at the end. But they didn’t get what was being said very well, they didn’t hear the inconsistencies and flat out absurdities, they wouldn’t consider the implications of what was being said–would sometimes get downright mad at you for pointing them out. Some people get hypnotized by style.

  41. mouseyhair wrote:

    Well I can honestly say that I am in shock. Gold Creek Community Church is my church. It is a community grown church that is very active in the community and is in service to the many who live in the area. Dan Kellogg is a good man. He is a chaplain for law enforcement, gives his time for others and I have seen him take single mothers with young sons under his wing to provide a male influence for them. He does not live in the clouds but lives in the nitty gritty of life. He started the church with a co-pastor by meeting in homes on the street where my family lived. Theologically speaking I would not put GCCC in the same camp as Robert Morris.
    I have served a long side Dan and his wife, my daughter was baptized there, my husband and I taught Sunday School classes and I and my ministry partner have taught classes to youth leaders and parents many years ago.
    As I said, I am in shock! I am completely blown away at the decision to bring Mark here. And I am angry and disappointed. I could not attend the service and asked my husband to watch it online for the both of us. I am hurt for the hurting and am embarrassed by Dan’s comments and behavior. I have not written or contacted Dan or the church leadership yet. I want to be sure I craft my words and thoughts in a way that he and the team may receive them. Sadly, I am not hopeful based on what I have heard and seen so far.
    For now its all I can say.

    Of course, there is no good man–save One. But aside from that possibly pedantic point, it may be necessary to be involved in the community, the nitty gritty of life, helping out single moms and wayward teens and people in distress to be “good man”–but it is not sufficient.

  42. Deb wrote:

    @ mouseyhair:
    Thank you for joining our discussion, and welcome to TWW. I am saddened that your congregation has been roped into the restore Mark Driscoll campaign. It was unfair for the pastors to ‘surprise’ the congregants with such a controversial guest preacher.
    I watched the video on the church website where the members are reaching out to the community in a compassionate way, and I was touched. At this juncture, I believe those like you who disapproved need to let your voices be heard (as you plan to do).

    I think mouseyhair will be far more likely to be able to take the measure of the man Mr. Kellogg, and determine just how good a man he is, when she confronts him on this. One 60-something lady who’s known the Lord a lot longer than me once said “You don’t really find out about a person til you scratch them a little and see what they do.”

  43. I’ve already mentioned some weeks earlier that Driscoll is a marker in my life. Late last year I had left a church I’d attended for many decades after increasingly authoritarian leadership had treated badly some people I knew and cared abut. It was in the early process of working though the many things I saw and felt that I was introduced to the story of the Petrys. It came during a phone call about used network equipment of all things. That call began a journey of learning for me.

    I’ve learned that if you begin wondering if there is something wrong, that may be the Spirit warning you. Be attentive, don’t dismiss it, don’t let that small flame die out. Do not be persuaded to use Matthew 18 to confront someone “in charge” “as a brother” in an authoritarian church, Matthew 18 is not applicable. The apostles, the new testament writers, provide little or no instruction for dealing with those “in charge” because that is not the church model they envisioned. They envisioned servantship, not leadership, the greatest among you would be the servant, not someone who lords it over you.

    Don’t wait for a groundswell who believe as you, it won’t happen. If anything this story of Driscoll tells us is that a majority, if not almost everyone, is unable to detect corruption in their midst.

    As you followup on your misgivings be very careful, do not stir up strife and division. Do seek out someone trustworthy outside the church to confide in, even a co-worker. Sharing negative information is NOT gossip, if it were then most of the new testament letter would be gossip. Scuttlebutt was alive an well in the early church, how else did Paul and other writers come to know about the errors they so often wrote against? Having someone clearheaded to confide in will be crucial.

    Think carefully, is there someone you thought well of that you haven’t seen for months, someone who recently left quietly? Give them a call. Don’t dump everything out there, just say you are troubled by something and ask if they have a story, you may find a friend.

    If you find that your fears are consequential and well founded, leave. While I caution against it, if you feel it is important to go to the leadership, take several people you trust with you. Be careful, those “in charge” have many tools at their disposal to manipulate you, be on guard. Again, don’t stir up dissension, even if you win you lose.

    When you leave it will be hard, even if your church doesn’t formally practice shunning, many will shun you, even those who’ve know you for decades. At first there will be lots of self doubt, did I do the right thing? It can be especially difficult if you have few friends outside the church. While there may be a lack of friends, hopefully there will be at least one person who you can confide in and be your support.

    After leaving you can then find the freedom to re-dedicate yourself to a relationship with the Lord you first found so attractive. You will also have the opportunity to find some fellow believers who can ease the burden and bring joy to your life, rather than stay in an authoritarian church that sucks the life out of you.

  44. Pingback: Linkathon! » PhoenixPreacher

  45. elastigirl wrote:

    i’d say there’s no easier place to engineer a standing ovation than church.

    I keep my seat. I am a man of great fortitude that way. And if anyone gives me grief I just tell them, “Sorry, did I miss something? Must have dozed off.”

  46. When Mr. Kellogg says those opposing Mr. Driscoll are relying on gossip, what does he call what he's relying on? It's certainly not first-hand knowledge.

    And as for preemptively calling protestors sour milk Christians, what he should have done instead is organized coffee and donuts for his deacons to take across the street for the people with the signs. That's the way to show love in disagreement.

  47. Tim wrote:

    When Mr. Kellogg says those opposing Mr. Driscoll are relying on gossip, what does he call what he’s relying on? It’s certainly not first-hand knowledge.
    And as for preemptively calling protestors sour milk Christians, what he should have don e instead is organized coffee and donuts for his deacons to take across the street for the people with the signs. That’s the way to show love in disagreement.

    There’s your hang up, perhaps: love.

  48. From Pastor Dan’s blog:

    Today though Gold Creek will be about grace. God’s grace allows us a fresh start. Mark needs that Grace today. We need to give that grace today because everyone of us wants that grace for ourselves. I may receive more than my fair share of criticism for allowing Mark to preach.

    http://pastordansblog.com/protesting-grace/

    Wow! A prime example of Cheap Grace! Funny how evangelical leaders reserve this kind of grace only for themselves, and those who attempt to call them to account get ignored at best, abused, persecuted and oppressed at worst.

  49. JeffT wrote:

    From Pastor Dan’s blog: …. I may receive more than my fair share of criticism for allowing Mark to preach.

    I doubt that, his fair share is going to be pretty big.

  50. mouseyhair wrote:

    Dan Kellogg … is a chaplain for law enforcement

    Like Tony Jones?

    I am happy to see you are at least opposed to your church giving Driscoll a platform. 🙂

  51. Does this mean that Mr. Driscoll will still try and plant a new ‘plantation’ in Orange County (the fabled Cibola of Southern Calif.)?

  52. @ Bill M:
    Every single word of what you wrote is so very true and wise.

    My experience tells me that the authoritarian leaders will not hear what anyone has to say. They will double down because they can and because they know that they can cause more trouble for you than you care to cause for them. I have never seen it otherwise. When confronting authoritarian leaders, people should be aware that those leaders do not care what the sheep think. They simply do not care.

  53. JeffT wrote:

    Funny how evangelical leaders reserve this kind of grace only for themselves, and those who attempt to call them to account get ignored at best, abused, persecuted and oppressed at worst.

    Rank Hath Its Privileges.

  54. Stan wrote:

    I just wanted to see Kellogg’s rhinestoned shirt mentioned in the loud music article, but I found this. I don’t endorse this bizarre Infowars style blog, but it does document Kellogg wearing a generalissimo-style military commander costume for a sermon.

    I think that was some sort of police uniform.

  55. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Final Anonymous wrote:

    Mouseyhair, I’m sorry for what you’re going through right now — but I gotta tell you, based on the similarities to many, many fallen pastors over the years, this sentence really concerns me:

    “He is a chaplain for law enforcement, gives his time for others and I have seen him take single mothers with young sons under his wing to provide a male influence for them. “

    Concerned as in:
    “Chaplain for Law Enforcement” as in Invoking Code of Blue a la ToJo & Bob Greiner?
    or
    “Taking single mothers with young sons under his wing to provide a male influence for them” as in Pedo Grooming Prey?

    Both

  56. @ mouseyhair:

    Here’s part of the problem with evangelicalism which you will discover I’m afraid. Many evangelicals are tribalistic, meaning they will only love you provided you are part of their church, network, or under the spell of a certain celebrity pastor. So a situation like this happens and it causes needless division. It forces people to choose sides, and you know darn well that its going to put some people to choose between GCCC and leaving. Many will stay because of friends and involvement. Its will be too hard to leave… that was the problem with SGM. People were too invested and decided to stay no matter how corrupt the system became and how many people were getting hurt. When you leave GCCC you will be cut off and your friends will let you go. They will want nothing to do with you. Its a painful and frustrating experience that is profoundly sad. Because you will understand that many people who you look upon as friends will kick you to the door as soon as you depart. And the community you thought exists? Guess what? It was a façade.

    Sorry to break that but that’s what you have to expect.

  57. @ mouseyhair:

    Another thing to say is that Kellogg blessed his competition to leave, and leave well. I’m willing to bet that Kellogg looked at Mars Hill when it was in operation as its business competitor. In Kellogg’s eyes the church was a threat. So now that it is gone, Driscoll shows up and gives his stamp of approval. Those kool-aide drinkers (lets be honest they will always have kool-aide drinkers. Heck in the end of April 1945 even Germany had some people who still believed in the leader’s vision as Berlin was collapsing) will now come to GCCC. Kellogg who just published a book now has support for his industrial complex. In the end both win. Kellogg gets former MH attenders, Driscoll gets to re-launch. Kellogg treats the pulpit and the scripture like a cheap Nevada brothel in this transaction but hell what’s to be expected? I wonder what Kellogg is going to preach on next? the Biblical basis for oral sex especially if Driscoll’s fan boys will be attending.

  58. I’m looking at the website but the church doesn’t seem to have an email address for its Pastors. It seems insulated from outside thinking. You go to most church webpages and you can see the Pastor’s page and his contact email. You don’t see that with GCCC.

  59. Law Prof wrote:

    Gossip” may not necessarily mean “untruth” to a leader like Kellogg if he’s coming from this paradigm, even though most people hearing this would almost certainly think he’s claiming that statements about Driscoll are lies.

    So leaders can use this to advantage. Pewsitter: “But it’s true! I saw it with my own eyes!” Leader: “Inadmissible hearsay! The clerk will strike that remark from the record.”

  60. Eagle wrote:

    I wonder what Kellogg is going to preach on next? the Biblical basis for oral sex especially if Driscoll’s fanboys will be attending.

    Maybe with an on-stage demonstration?

    Bee Jay Driscoll only taught about it from the pulpit.
    Grinning Ed Young only called for a Seven Day Sex Challenge from a bed onstage
    (nudge nudge wink wink know what I mean know what I mean?).
    What else would the next step be?
    They’ve already got pudgy middle-aged guys twerking in their “Go to Church!” rap video…

  61. Dee, Deb, off topic but ya’ll might want to nose around SBCVoices today re the article about “complimentarians win.” Kind of nauseating (ok, very nauseating) but it does expose a mentality of trying to use the Trinity to force those pesky women to submit. Or at least that was how it came across to me.

    Let’s see–we have the Second Person of the Trinity telling us true greatness lies in the path of service and sacrifice. And then we have these guys sounding almost gleeful as they seem to seek “I’m better than you because God says so!”

    Ick. Ugh. And shoot, I’m not necessarily an egalitarian either.

  62. Deb wrote:

    Well, we obviously missed some things… Live tattooing during a worship service? Seems wrong on so many levels.

    Deb, that is old news and was not just at this church. This "sermon" idea made the rounds of all the hip, progressive young churches. It was kinda like dominoes. I never really figured out what the exact point was but it seemed the idea was to compare the permanency of Christ/salvation/faith the permanency of a tattoo. A slight twist on the idea was the commitment of the tattoo and the commitment to Christ or Christ to his bride.

    Now I am not anti tattoo, as a matter of fact I think there are some very talented and creative artists in that field and that there are many people walking around with real art on their skin. My issue is more with the idea that we come to church to worship and give glory and honor to God. I watched several of these tattoo sermons and have to say it was just a show and a bad one at that. I found ink master to be much more entertaining and at least they don't try to pass it off as a worship service.

  63. Bridget wrote:

    It is written by Jarred Moore. That name is familiar.

    Yes Jared is a familiar voice and if he has declared a winner then he must be correct. The funniest part of the article for me was this quote of Grudum
    “Grudem was extremely helpful in Chapter 1. I appreciated his honesty in pointing out the reality that evangelical-feminists reject Scripture that disagrees with them or they ignore Scripture altogether. If we are really after a study of God that comes from His revelation, and not after a God that reflects what we sinfully want in our human relationships, then we must believe all that the Bible says instead of merely picking and choosing what we want.” I mean really? As if every Comp apologist is not just as guilty of these same actions, first ignoring scripture that doesn’t support the agenda, second creating a god that lines up with exactly the lifestyle they would live without Christ living in them. Mind Boggling. And sadly, since he is a PHD student at Southern, I imagine this was actually an assignment for a seminar or class and he will receive high marks for his “scholarship” and “critical thinking skills”. Give me a break, I must need to go fishing!

  64. One more comment on the article by JM on Voices. He is already getting push back from readers, so if the past is an indicator of future actions, once he gets a few more negative comments the article will be taken down. He seems to only like when people agree with his articles.

  65. From the article about load music at Gold Creek: “Gold Creek is a Christian Church and we believe our First Amendment right is freedom of religion,” Ehoff wrote to Ronglien. “You have said ‘just turn it down,’ but I want to worship in the way I want to worship and I don’t want someone else to tell me how I can do it.” This should be embarrassing to any and all American believers in Christ. I mean really, is that what Jesus died for, so we could worship in ways that bother the whole community we are trying to reach. I also dont think that is what the framers of the constitution had in mind when they wrote the first amendment. I am flabbergasted at the complete lack of understanding and critical thinking. If this is how he handles the law of his city and the constitution of the USA can you just imagine what he can do with a few well chosen verses from the Bible?

  66. @ Bridget:
    Whoa-the one at SBC Voices is the Jared Moore with which we are familiar. Too many posts, too many similar names. I need another good night of sleep.

  67. Mitch wrote:

    One more comment on the article by JM on Voices. He is already getting push back from readers, so if the past is an indicator of future actions, once he gets a few more negative comments the article will be taken down. He seems to only like when people agree with his articles.

    Sounds like the type of pointy-haired boss who can only tolerate being surrounded by yes-men and basking in their flattery. Not a management style conducive to long-term survival — just ask Baba Saddam.

  68. Bill M wrote:

    Don’t wait for a groundswell who believe as you, it won’t happen. If anything this story of Driscoll tells us is that a majority, if not almost everyone, is unable to detect corruption in their midst.

    Your whole comment is very wise advice. The above is so true I cannot emphasize it enough.

    You talked about the inner “warning” and to listen to it. I think one of the hardest things for many who have been actively involved in these sorts of churches is to admit to themselves they might just be right and the other 10,000 people in the pew are wrong. It feels arrogant to think that way.

    And one thing for people to remember is that the more you try to convince some of them how wrong it is,the more they are into defending. (My favorite, btw, is “there is no perfect church”)

    The fact is, Kellog’s conscience is so seared and he is so far down the celebrity road, it would be a waste of time to even approach it with him.

    In fact, my view is that in a mega like this, it is better to leave and tell your story elsewhere. When folks do that they are shocked at how few miss them no matter how active they were.

    One thing it took me a long time to realize is how blessed I am that it all happened even though it has been grueling in many ways. I have been reunited with my first Love. The other advice I would give someone in a situation where they ahve been in a church like this for a while is to stop going to church for a long while. Focus only on the Gospels, prayer and study. I had to leave off Paul for quite a while because he had been so twisted. Then interpret Paul through Christ. I did this for about 3 years. ONce one does this, when they are exposed to this stuff up close again, it is so that it has nothing to do with Jesus Christ or His intention for us, that it is shocking. It is very hard to explain. But it is worth it.

  69. Mitch wrote:

    Mind Boggling. And sadly, since he is a PHD student at Southern, I imagine this was actually an assignment for a seminar or class and he will receive high marks for his “scholarship” and “critical thinking skills”.

    And a Hero of The Party Honorary Doctorate for his Purity of Ideology.

  70. linda wrote:

    Kind of nauseating (ok, very nauseating) but it does expose a mentality of trying to use the Trinity to force those pesky women to submit. Or at least that was how it came across to me.

    Anyone got a statement from God how He feels about being used as The Enforcer for abusive men stomping women down?

  71. @ Law Prof:

    This is very true. And our culture actively promotes this shallow view of leaders. If the pew sitters knew what went into image management for these preachers, they might be shocked. Or, they might be impressed. I was always disgusted by those who thought the PR/Image management side was a good thing.

    bradfuturistguy writes a lot about this stuff but he is right about these places really becoming closed systems as they grow. Yes, they look open but they really are not. Cult of personality.

    When I was growing up, we were in and out of our pastors home all the time and they were in ours a lot. Not because we were inner ring but because that is how it worked. People at church really knew one another. But they were not stars on a stage, either. They were more like an employee and family member rolled into one because most of the members felt themselves to be mature Christians who had a say in how the Body operates. But church goers now don’t really view it like that anymore. The pastor is their great leader they pay to be their great leader. It is a direction I hate to see because it stifles individual growth.

  72. Tim wrote:

    And as for preemptively calling protestors sour milk Christians, what he should have done instead is organized coffee and donuts for his deacons to take across the street for the people with the signs. That’s the way to show love in disagreement.

    I have to disagree with this one. We used to do that but first called the media to film it. Often local media figures attended so all we had to do was ask them to quickly arrange it. It can be turned into a quick phoney photo op in no time.

  73. @ Mitch:

    What is really weird is some of that push back is from guys who would have been mostly on board a few years back if a less divisive person wrote it. I have read over there for a long time. Jarrod is very dogmatic and gets a lot of pushback over there, anyway. so his writing style might have something to do with it.

  74. Thank you everyone for your support and concern. I have quickly read through the comments so far and I want to address a couple of things.

    First I want to say that my attempt to describe Dan’s activities in the community in law enforcement or working with single moms was a general example of the type of involvment he and our church participates in in the community and in the lives of the families and homes around us. Please do not read into those examples as exclusive or highly focused in one area, as in singles mothers and young boys without fathers. There are many other examples of service that would not have made my points any more salient. I wanted only to give some real life examples of Dan as a person. And PLEASE lets not make assessments of someone’s theology or personal belief based on their attire. You could just as easily see Dan preach in a plaid shirt and jeans or a suit and tie as you would a rhinestoned black shirt.

    I have been at GCCC for over 15 years and like any church or gathering of believers there will be disagreeements, differences and decisions made that not ALL those who call it there church home will agree. But that is not always a reason to run for the hills. Until…….now! This is a whole new level of “disagreement!” This is hurtful, harmful and grevious. And this will require a different approach to how those who disagree handle the situation.

    Finally, I am not a shreiking violet. I have worked extensively inside the church as well as para church organizations. And have read extensively on church abuse and have experienced severe mistreatment at the hands of a disfunctional and highy damaged pastor. My heart is always for the hurting and am MOST concerned for those who may be attending our church who have come from the MH/Driscoll debacle and abuse. I am pleased that others with first hand expereimce with Driscoll would contact Dan and the leadership of the church.

    In all honesty, based on what I have read about statements Dan has made and the general handling of the service, I am not hopeful. I believe my family may have to find another congregation to call home. I will not support this type of cooperation with a man as abusive and nonrepentant as Mark Driscoll.

    I sincerely believe Dan was mislead and shortsighted in his motivation to invite Driscoll. I do not intend to know his heart until I have communicated to him. I can only go on what I have seen and heard so far. And for now all I can say is that I am grieved. Deeply.

    Blessings.

  75. And quickly I also want to address the comments about the tattoo in service issue. The sermon series was about who we are in Christ and our personal stories. The service you speak about was about reasons why people get tattoos, their personal stories, their life experiences and their regrets. The week prior the focus had been on those who want to “remove” and forget things that they have “tattooed” on their heart or body. They went with a couple people to walk through the decision to have tattoos removed medically and showed the process of doing just that by video. It was a very moving service. They interviewed both sets of people on both Sundays. You may agree or disagree I just wanted to give some context.

  76. If Driscoll wants back in the pulpit, he should start by getting on his stomach and slithering to all of those to whom he gave the left boot of unChristian discipline, repent and apologize to them for the treatment he gave them, beg their forgiveness, make his statements non-defensive and non-arrogant (fat chance), and then do the same to all of those who formerly attended Mars Hill. Then go be a hermit for five or six years during which he reads the Bible through a few dozen times. And finally, beg Jesus for forgiveness for the mistreatment of His children and his misrepresentation of the character of Jesus and His message. And turn over to a permanent crew of people who were booted out of Mars Hill — unremoveable by Driscoll or anyone else, who will be his supervisors and superiors in whatever place he preaches. If he remains humble, then perhaps he can preach again. But I would not bet my next soda that he could do it.

  77. Lydia wrote:

    We used to do that but first called the media to film it

    Then that’s not what I was encouraging them to do, since it’s not born of love for the protestors with whom they disagree.

  78. @ Tim:

    If I were a protestor I would nicely decline the donuts and ask them to do the right thing by Mars Hill victims.

    I think my problem is I have seen this sort of thing not only used in that way but also used as image management for churches. Giving out water at K runs, targeting parents in school pickup lines with water/candy and so on. They think it communicates how “nice” they are (and come be a part of us) when all we want is for them to do the right things in the first place. That is what “love” would look like for me these days.

    I did not mean to disparage your intent at all. It is just that I have seen that tactic very misused and how can anyone judge the motive for doing it? In so many ways, these sorts of tactics help cover over the bad stuff.

  79. @ anonbychoice:

    This! The arrogance of the man is disgusting. Playing the ‘I am the victim’ card at this stage of the game is despicable. And yet, he gets a standing O at this church. What is wrong with people?

    MD needs a long, long time in the wilderness…

  80. linda wrote:

    Ick. Ugh. And shoot, I’m not necessarily an egalitarian either.

    What is your understanding of what “egalitarian” means? And how might your understanding of the word be different from that of people who do call themselves egalitarian?

  81. Lydia wrote:

    (My favorite, btw, is “there is no perfect church”)

    A variation on this, that I believed for a time was “its just as bad everywhere else”. I probably made that one up to convince myself to stay.

  82. @ Daisy:

    A lot of people tend to define it as Matriarchy (women having power over men) without realizing it. I personally don’t like the word as it tends to have a French Revolution ring to it. But it really meanes equal and in a spiritual sense: Mutuality. For example, Christians for Biblical Equality focus on “giftedness” not gender.

  83. I really appreciate your balanced, unbiased and honest post. If there were more level headed people like you, this would not even be an issue. We are called to rightly divide the word of truth. You are doing that well.bbbb@ mouseyhair:

  84. linda wrote:

    Dee, Deb, off topic but ya’ll might want to nose around SBCVoices today re the article about “complimentarians win.”

    Actually, I think it is right on topic. Driscoll was the poster boy for Complementarianism and “masculinity” as “leadership” and power and dominance. Dr. McCall is no idiot, and neither is Erickson. Bruce Ware, one of Driscoll’s mentors, along with Wayne Grudem, has already made the case for the Eternal Subordination of the Son in his book Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Reading between the lines of desperation in Jared’s post, I guess things are not going well for the Complementarian system in the ETS. So they ramp up the rhetoric to ever more hysterical levels.

    These guys in the SBC need to wake up and see where Grudem and Ware and the entire faculty at SBTS/Boyce and the other Gospel Glitterati are going with their Theology proper which has been placed in the service of their overarching doctrine which is Power and Hierarchy. Everything is read through that grid. Everything.

  85. @ Mitch:

    If we are really after a study of God that comes from His revelation, and not after a God that reflects what we sinfully want in our human relationships

    Yes, that sinful, sinful desire I have to be seen as an individual person and not an interchangeable cog in a gender role slot…

  86. mouseyhair thanks for sharing I will reiterate several things spoken about, be very very very very careful how you word things and expect blowback. In my 31+ years in the “faith” retaliation is not the exception it is the rule when someone challenges some leadership. Not all leadership but some and if a leader has bellied up to the bar and plunk down some cards they most likely are in the game for the long hall. When someone who was in middle to upper management in the machine gets bounced for whatever reason it becomes a race to get back up in the catbird seat of another boat. As your pastor worded it MD is repurposing his life, allow me to translate rebranding his gimmick.

    In the “Protesting ‘grace'(TM)” article I was a bit sad that it was not mentioned why those people were “protesting” / trying to get some justice for the many hundreds if not thousands hurt by the actions of MD. I remember when I got the left foot of fellowship from a parachurch group for raising some concerns I was basically told I was not worthy of grace. I sort of had to chuckle through the tears on that one. Your pastor seems like a nice guy overall and I am sure he has some sincere reasons for helping MD bet back in the saddle / Seattle (sorry) :). Maybe even MD is sincere in his motives I dont know.

    That place I was given the left foot of fellowship, I spent ten years in prayer and even fasting to finally be restored, when I brought it up one time at a bible group I was basically reminded what an utter waste of time it was to restore with other Christians you are not directly involved in right now. Yes, many have become members of the first church of utilitarianism. I do wish you the very best, and no it was not a waste of time to be restored to that group of people. It was the right thing to do.

  87. Gram3 wrote:

    Dr. McCall is no idiot, and neither is Erickson. Bruce Ware, one of Driscoll’s mentors, along with Wayne Grudem, has already made the case for the Eternal Subordination of the Son in his book Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Reading between the lines of desperation in Jared’s post,

    I have a very hard time comprehending the audacity it takes to twist scripture to diminish Jesus in order to maintain their agenda of subordination of women. It’s an unbelievable heresy imo. Jesus told Philip, ” He who has seen Me has seen the Father.” Frankly, I would be fearful of promoting such a hierarchy.

  88. @ Victorious:
    Well, without an appeal to the Trinity–a ridiculous move in itself–they have nothing to refute the people who ask how a role which is assigned purely and only because of sex can be merely functional. That is why they focus so very much on the non-reversibility of the Roles of Father and Son and why they insist that the only differentiation among the Persons is one of hierarchy. How desperate they are to preserve their weird definition of Biblical Manhood. Before the CBMW crew, who had ever heard of “Biblical Manhood” and “Biblical Womanhood” or ever imagined that Gender Roles would be proclaimed a gospel issue?

    I have no idea what it even means for a Person of the Triune God to have a “role.” I am not the same as any particular role or function. Male and Female are not functions. The Gospel Glitterati and their Fawning Fanboys cannot have a Trinity without Tiers, as Erickson puts it, or they are left with sexes without tiers and a church without tiers. They would be undone! And that is something that is more unacceptable than re-writing church history and defining the Son as a subordinate Person.

  89. Daisy wrote:

    @ linda:
    And, here is a link to the article you were referring to:
    “The Complementarians Win: A Review of One God in Three Persons”
    http://sbcvoices.com/the-complementarians-win-a-review-of-one-god-in-three-persons/

    Suggesting that a binary human relationship is somehow put under ethical obligation for function by a trinitarian (not trinary, although Ware’s description could be legitimately accused of such) God is ridiculous. It is called a “missing major premise” fallacy. Of course this book lacks any prolegomena. It is so disappointing, because Baptists have a rich history of solid theologians, but the new fundamentalism seems to e stifling careful thinking and replacing it with “correct” thinking.

  90. @ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:
    I am convinced that they dare not think about what they are saying because it is so illogical and exegetically faulty but they have already committed to the system. The relationship between the Father and the Son is presumed to mirror the relationship between human fathers and sons. That would be weird enough in itself, and authority is presumed to be the primary definer of the Father/Son relationship rather than love or equality/representation. But then they take that *presumed* human authority relationship and transfer that to husbands and wives via the magic of eisigesis of 1 Corinthians 11. And whatever happened to the Holy Spirit? Who does he correspond to? It is insane.

  91. @ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:
    Another weird thing is that the self-proclaimed gospel-centered and cross-centered people are the same ones promoting this system of gender roles as the cure for what ails us. Not the Gospel of Jesus Christ and what he accomplished on the cross, but the gospel of Observing Gender Roles. That sounds like another gospel to me.

  92. Gram3 wrote:

    Another weird thing is that the self-proclaimed gospel-centered and cross-centered people are the same ones promoting this system of gender roles as the cure for what ails us. Not the Gospel of Jesus Christ and what he accomplished on the cross, but the gospel of Observing Gender Roles. That sounds like another gospel to me.

    Yeah, me too. For all their adjectivalization of “gospel”, they sure seem to part with it cheaply.

  93. @ brian:

    Brian,

    Thanks for the wise counsel. Having been on staff at a major “mega-church” in the Seattle area back in the 1990’s I have seen the things we are seeing now with Mark Driscoll. The hero worship, the books, the conferences, the speaking for another generation and a gifted speaker. Sadly that ministry also walked a fine line of implosion. I watched the hurt and struggle of many when it was obvious he needed to walk away/retire for the benefit of the church. He went after much damage was done. I was one of the very few who made it through the transition to a new pastor and new direction for the church. And might I just say, the grass is NOT always greener on the other side!

    Because of these experiences I know how easy it is to overlook and dismiss one voice when there are hundreds, thousands or even tens of thousands that are singing your praise. It is the very reason I do not have a lot of hope that my words won’t be easily forgotten. I have been down this road…….and sadly have seen the future.

    Thanks again.

  94. Gram3 wrote:

    The Gospel Glitterati and their Fawning Fanboys cannot have a Trinity without Tiers, as Erickson puts it, or they are left with sexes without tiers and a church without tiers. They would be undone! And that is something that is more unacceptable than re-writing church history and defining the Son as a subordinate Person.

    That is it exactly. They start from the idea that some person needs to be in charge of every relationship and go from there to the relationship of the trinity. They completely miss the idea that husbands are not god and wives are not the Jesus. I can never figure out who the holy spirit iis in these marriages they envision.

    They cannot stand the idea that no person iis in charge of the real church rather the Holy Spirit is in charge, leading and guiding the children of God. This means the pastor is not in charge no matter what his great big vision filled ego might make him think. I keep hoping we are seeing the during gasps of this silly comp doctrine.

  95. Deb wrote:

    @ mouseyhair:
    I am grateful for your presence in this discussion. Please know that I will be praying for you as you sort this out.

    Deb,

    Thanks for the welcome. I have been reading for over a year and never EVER thought I would be reading about my own church mixed up in this Driscoll mess! Talk about shock!

    Thanks again. Your work is very important to many! Myself included. Blessings!

  96. Mitch wrote:

    From the article about load music at Gold Creek: “Gold Creek is a Christian Church and we believe our First Amendment right is freedom of religion,” Ehoff wrote to Ronglien. “You have said ‘just turn it down,’ but I want to worship in the way I want to worship and I don’t want someone else to tell me how I can do it.”

    Perhaps Mr. Ehoff should stick with composing trendy, not-quite-ready-for-big-time-air-play music and let judges, lawyers and legal scholars grapple with the First Amendment.

    The common law jurisprudence on the First Amendment certainly establishes our rights to free religious expression, but it also establishes that the government can promulgate reasonable restrictions on the time, place and manner of our speech. Nuisance laws limiting noise, particularly near residential areas, fit clearly within this TPM category.

    But assume the federal courts had never established such standards in the common law? Would the moral law still not be incumbent upon all Christians to share their faith with gentleness and RESPECT as the Bible clearly indicates?

    Mr. Ehoff has shown his utter ignorance of both the laws of the nation who’s Constitution he claims and the moral standards of the faith that he claims.

  97. Tim wrote:

    And as for preemptively calling protestors sour milk Christians, what he should have done instead is organized coffee and donuts for his deacons to take across the street for the people with the signs. That’s the way to show love in disagreement.

    One of the protesters wrote
    The thing that probably amazed me the most was the way the one pastor acted when he came out. He wandered about, looking at us and reading all the signs. When we tried to engage him in conversation he’d just raise up his hands (attempting to ward off demons?) I believe Van and Carolyn recognized him as being someone on staff. He then spoke, acknowledging that he was a pastor there. Several asked him if he wanted the flyer. Every time he was asked, up went those hands again. “Don’t you want to know why we’re here?” Hands up again. As he walked away with us still trying to engage him he said, “I can’t talk to you.” They did have a table set up across the driveway from where we set up. Offered us coffee and cookies. (The deputies told us that was for us, not something they do every Sunday.)

  98. Margaret wrote:

    One of the protesters wrote The thing that probably amazed me the most was the way the one pastor acted when he came out. He wandered about, looking at us and reading all the signs. When we tried to engage him in conversation he’d just raise up his hands (attempting to ward off demons?) I believe Van and Carolyn recognized him as being someone on staff. He then spoke, acknowledging that he was a pastor there. Several asked him if he wanted the flyer. Every time he was asked, up went those hands again. “Don’t you want to know why we’re here?” Hands up again. As he walked away with us still trying to engage him he said, “I can’t talk to you.” They did have a table set up across the driveway from where we set up. Offered us coffee and cookies. (The deputies told us that was for us, not something they do every Sunday.)

    Disgusting! I am so very sorry they were treated that way! Heartbroken.

     

  99. Pingback: Wednesday Link List | Thinking Out Loud

  100. On the topic of the Jared Moore review of ‘Complementarian Wins So There!’ I liked this comment, which points out that the whole approach of these guys is wrong:

    We are coming on issues that will rip us to shreds, if we do not get away from that idiotic analytic method; we must have a more synthetical method of evaluation, one that can grasp apparently contradictory ideas and find them to have a different approach and effect than our other methods of study have permitted. The depths of Holy Scripture demand such an understanding.

  101. Another quote from the same guy, Dr James Willingham (I hope he doesn’t mind me quoting him):

    “Everything deserves to be looked at from other angles rather than the one demanded by theological filters that have been put in place by people with an agenda. Thinking outside the box is demanded by Holy Scripture as it is Holy Writ constitutes the most intellectual book the world has ever seen or will seen.”

  102. @ anonbychoice:

    There is a religious term for what you are saying: penance. A quick google check will show some slight variations in what penance might entail, but there is no significant difference in the understanding of what the word means. However, evangelicals do not believe in or practice penance. Yet quite a few want to see that very thing from MD and other clerical transgressors I don’t know what to make of all that.

  103. mouseyhair wrote:

    Because of these experiences I know how easy it is to overlook and dismiss one voice when there are hundreds, thousands or even tens of thousands that are singing your praise.

    “THE VOICE OF A GOD, NOT OF A MAN!
    THE VOICE OF A GOD, NOT OF A MAN!”

  104. Muff Potter wrote:

    Does this mean that Mr. Driscoll will still try and plant a new ‘plantation’ in Orange County (the fabled Cibola of Southern Calif.)?

    On that Spiritual Sounding Board article, a comment was reproduced saying Driscoll had gotten compassion from Kellogg because Driscoll’s moving off to Arizona. OMG I hope not!

  105. Mitch wrote:

    Yes Jared is a familiar voice and if he has declared a winner then he must be correct. The funniest part of the article for me was this quote of Grudum
    “Grudem was extremely helpful in Chapter 1. I appreciated his honesty in pointing out the reality that evangelical-feminists reject Scripture that disagrees with them or they ignore Scripture altogether. If we are really after a study of God that comes from His revelation, and not after a God that reflects what we sinfully want in our human relationships, then we must believe all that the Bible says instead of merely picking and choosing what we want.” I mean really? As if every Comp apologist is not just as guilty of these same actions, first ignoring scripture that doesn’t support the agenda, second creating a god that lines up with exactly the lifestyle they would live without Christ living in them. Mind Boggling. And sadly, since he is a PHD student at Southern, I imagine this was actually an assignment for a seminar or class and he will receive high marks for his “scholarship” and “critical thinking skills”. Give me a break, I must need to go fishing!

    When will these comps figure out that their theology does absolutely nothing for those of us who happen to be single? Are they telling us that to get the best salvation possible, you have to be married? Inquiring minds and all that…

  106. Victorious wrote:

    I have a very hard time comprehending the audacity it takes to twist scripture to diminish Jesus in order to maintain their agenda of subordination of women. It’s an unbelievable heresy imo. Jesus told Philip, ” He who has seen Me has seen the Father.” Frankly, I would be fearful of promoting such a hierarchy.

    This. I don’t understand how these guys don’t get that they’re embracing a form of Arianism, which was a huge heresy in the 300s. *shakes head* And all because they want to make sure that us women are definitely in second place! I still think all these theologians and divinity students should take six months and get a job out here in the world–except they’d displace people who really need the work.

  107. Gram3 wrote:

    Another weird thing is that the self-proclaimed gospel-centered and cross-centered people are the same ones promoting this system of gender roles as the cure for what ails us. Not the Gospel of Jesus Christ and what he accomplished on the cross, but the gospel of Observing Gender Roles. That sounds like another gospel to me.

    “For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.” — 1 Corinthians 2:2. I don’t see the gospel of gender roles in that!

  108. Law Prof wrote:

    This is what I noticed in the multiple cultic Christian churches I’ve unfortunately been a part of: the true believer-types tended to focus on the rhythms of the speaker, the smiles, chuckles, “aw shucks” grins, self-effacing stories–and of course, the lowered, slightly quivering, deeply meaningful, profound voice at the end. But they didn’t get what was being said very well, they didn’t hear the inconsistencies and flat out absurdities, they wouldn’t consider the implications of what was being said–would sometimes get downright mad at you for pointing them out. Some people get hypnotized by style.

    I almost commented on Driscoll’s GCCC speech…the engineered stuttering was almost laughable. Sincerity is something you don’t have to fake.

  109. @ May:
    May,

    Dr James, the commenter, is much older. I think he is in his 80’s. He is an interesting man with quite a story. He is an egalitarian Calvinist. I have always wondered what this new resurgence would do with old educated saints like him, Roger Nicole and RK McGregor Wright.

    These gentleman scholars from a previous Reformed tradition have not much in common with the resurgence.

  110. ESS and SBC Voices…
    I read the thread and it is the same proof texting rehash when this issue was all the internet rage from 2009.

    Cheryl Schatz was so appalled she did an in depth research video on the subject. The Trinity Past and Future. (I might have the title off). It is excellent. I highly recommend it. She recognized the problem right away because of her ministry to cults like Mormonism and Jehovah Witnesses who do similar things to the Trinity.

    If we are going to proof text this issue then I will point to John 5. they totally ignore the cultural context of Hebrew thinking in that day and time. Jesus claiming to be sent by His Father was the same thing as claiming to BE his Father in dealings with them –in the Hebrew mindset. That is why they wanted to kill him. To them, He was claiming to be God.

  111. Gram3 wrote:

    @ Bill M:
    Every single word of what you wrote is so very true and wise.
    My experience tells me that the authoritarian leaders will not hear what anyone has to say. They will double down because they can and because they know that they can cause more trouble for you than you care to cause for them. I have never seen it otherwise. When confronting authoritarian leaders, people should be aware that those leaders do not care what the sheep think. They simply do not care.

    That’s because They’re Right.
    (and everyone else is wrong. Unless they agree with the leaders, in which case they’re right, too. Only they can never be as Right as the leaders are…)

  112. Law Prof wrote:

    “Gossip” may not necessarily mean “untruth” to a leader like Kellogg if he’s coming from this paradigm, even though most people hearing this would almost certainly think he’s claiming that statements about Driscoll are lies.

    In that case, Kellogg is using “gossip” in much the same sense as “entheta”. That’s a term invented by L. Ron Hubbard. It means any words (spoken or written) that could cause people to doubt or feel badly about Hubbard, his teachings or his organization. By this definition, even a true statement can be labelled as “entheta” — and thereby summarily rejected and ignored.

    When your church starts to look like Scientology…

  113. refugee wrote:

    That’s because They’re Right.
    (and everyone else is wrong. Unless they agree with the leaders, in which case they’re right, too. Only they can never be as Right as the leaders are…)

    Gods Can Do No Wrong.

  114. lydia wrote:

    Jesus claiming to be sent by His Father was the same thing as claiming to BE his Father in dealings with them –in the Hebrew mindset. That is why they wanted to kill him. To them, He was claiming to be God.

    Exactly. But this does not fit their narrative of hierarchy, so it is ignored. They still will insist that the Father and the Son are equal in power but not in authority! They nuance things until they don’t mean anything at all, but it keeps them just close enough to orthodoxy that they can stay within the doctrinal statement of the ETS. I have no idea how “equal in power” but “unequal in authority” go together when speaking of the Triune God. IMO they launder their illogical thinking through the mystery of the Trinity and say that makes it reasonable.

  115. Hester wrote:

    @ Mitch:
    If we are really after a study of God that comes from His revelation, and not after a God that reflects what we sinfully want in our human relationships
    Yes, that sinful, sinful desire I have to be seen as an individual person and not an interchangeable cog in a gender role slot…

    I was hearing children’s voices in my head as I read that part you quoted. “I am rubber, you are glue. Everything you say bounces off me and sticks to you.”

    (for them, a sinful desire to be in charge, in control, and calling all the shots, while slotting people into what they perceive as their “proper” places)

  116. Gram3 wrote:

    @ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:
    I am convinced that they dare not think about what they are saying because it is so illogical and exegetically faulty but they have already committed to the system. The relationship between the Father and the Son is presumed to mirror the relationship between human fathers and sons. That would be weird enough in itself, and authority is presumed to be the primary definer of the Father/Son relationship rather than love or equality/representation. But then they take that *presumed* human authority relationship and transfer that to husbands and wives via the magic of eisigesis of 1 Corinthians 11. And whatever happened to the Holy Spirit? Who does he correspond to? It is insane.

    Perhaps the Holy Spirit is the third person of the Husband-Wife trinity. Um. That doesn’t make much sense. Better make it the pastor/authority figure over the family.

  117. Margaret wrote:

    They did have a table set up across the driveway from where we set up. Offered us coffee and cookies.

    I’d have eaten their cookies and drank their coffee, and poured a cup for the pastor and asked him to accept my thanks for his hospitality as we shared a cup of joe.

  118. mitch wrote:

    I keep hoping we are seeing the during gasps of this silly comp doctrine.

    Nope; from what I’ve seen, it’s alive and well in the churches that hold to it a little more loosely. Sort of the difference between a tyrant and a benevolent dictator.

  119. @ lydia:

    Ah, yes, well good to hear some words of sanity from an older and wiser voice. I always love to see Christians grow more tolerant as they get older – as my grandparents did.

    Age does not always lead to wisdom and tolerance, however, see John Piper.

    I replied to his comment on the SBC voices page but it went into moderation and seems to have disappeared :/

  120. May wrote:

    @ lydia:
    Ah, yes, well good to hear some words of sanity from an older and wiser voice. I always love to see Christians grow more tolerant as they get older – as my grandparents did.
    Age does not always lead to wisdom and tolerance, however, see John Piper.
    I replied to his comment on the SBC voices page but it went into moderation and seems to have disappeared :/

    That’s only with those who have persistently insulated themselves from the consequences of their own actions, beliefs, and teachings. Piper is a rare and unfortunate case.

  121. refugee wrote:

    Sort of the difference between a tyrant and a benevolent dictator.

    boy is that a great way to put it. I am seeing the subtle turning to benevolent dictator in my former church since they now have a YRR pastor. It would be foolish to come in as a tyrant on that issue as that church has a long history of women teaching men, women as deacons, women speaking from stage etc. It was just no big deal. but things are changing subtly to where it is almost unnoticeable. More gender specific teaching, separating of the teen genders, etc. They are being groomed.

  122. @ Lydia:

    So it is. I’m glad most commenters have questioned the whole premise of the book and the uncritical, triumphalist ‘critique’.

  123. __

    “Sheep Stnk, The Almighty Blinks The Pastors Think?”

    hmmm…

    @ Gram3,

      I respctfully and strongly disagree with your following statement:

    “…they know that they can cause more trouble for you than you care to cause for them…”

    hahahahaha

    …the fervent prayer of a righteous man avails mucho…”

    (as the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart?)

    hmmm…

    We shall sêê…

    ‘Glory ta God!’

    Sopy

  124. @ Sopwith:
    Can I agree with you while also disagreeing? 🙂

    I agree that God’s power exceeds the power of the authoritarian pastors. And I agree about the power of prayer. But an authoritarian pastor is willing to do things that a pewpeon who is concerned with the peace and welfare of the sheep is not willing to do. What God does about that and when is God’s business. Experience has taught me that men who are obsessed with power and authority will not hesitate to use it in order to protect their position.

  125. May wrote:

    I replied to his comment on the SBC voices page but it went into moderation and seems to have disappeared :/

    I received an email from another woman who claimed she had commented but her comment in in moderation as well.

  126. Gram3 wrote:

    But an authoritarian pastor is willing to do things that a pewpeon who is concerned with the peace and welfare of the sheep is not willing to do.

    Just as a cheater has an advantage over an opponent who follows the rules of the game. And so the scum rises to the top.

    P.S. “Authoritarian Pastor” is quite a mouthful. I coined the name “Pastor-Dictator” to describe the same. More impact.

  127. Lydia wrote:

    I am seeing the subtle turning to benevolent dictator in my former church since they now have a YRR pastor. It would be foolish to come in as a tyrant on that issue as that church has a long history of women teaching men, women as deacons, women speaking from stage etc. It was just no big deal. but things are changing subtly to where it is almost unnoticeable.

    Salami Tactics — Coup From Within, one baby step at a time, one tiny concession at a time, just one more teeny-tiny bite until you have eaten it all.

    “Is there no steepness in the stairs of Hell?”
    — a Chesterton poem whose title I can’t remember

    Just like how Stalin’s minions took over Eastern Europe in the aftermath of WW2.

  128. Off-topic, but something that struck me last Sunday night when following Game of Thrones on HBO:

    Remember Douggie Wilson and his “kirk” in Moscow, Idaho?

    As in “The woman lies back and accepts; the man Penetrates, Colonizes, Conquers, Plants”? Well, here’s your type example image in three words:

    Ramsey & Sansa.

  129. Stan wrote:

    Kellogg wearing a generalissimo-style military commander costume for a sermon.

    And a militarised styled church is just what American society needs… (sarcasm font). I read the context, but he looks like a tin pot dictator. I can smell hyper-masculinity all over, a good fit for Driscoll.
    re: the live tattooing. I’ve been working with primary documents doing some WW2 research. I read of a Company who had to remove all identifying features before their sortie. Unfortunately they discovered one chap who had recently had his Company’s number tattooed on his arm. So they removed it (I read this through squizzed up eyes and gritted teeth – I reckon it would have hurt).

  130. mirele wrote:

    When will these comps figure out that their theology does absolutely nothing for those of us who happen to be single? Are they telling us that to get the best salvation possible, you have to be married?

    So not only are you a socially/theologically inferior being because you are female and single, it gets better Mirele, they also believe the female to male submission continues in the next life also! You can’t make this stuff up…

  131. @ Lydia:

    I would suspect (based on other things she has said on posts in the past about the subject) that she misunderstands the term “egalitarianism” or what egalitarians believe.

    She seems to think egalitarianism is all about women wanting a power grab, when it’s partially about Christian women wanting to have a seat at the table, too (to be equals with men in decision making, not to lord it over them).

    Even if egalitarians were about trying to grab power:
    I don’t understand why she’s OK with the status quo: the men get to hold all power, authority, and decision making, but women just have to go along with that.

  132. Daisy–what I meant is I understand both those churches who ordain women, and those who do not, and see where each is coming from Biblically. In marriage, on the one hand I do believe biology is destiny to a point–men not carrying babies and nursing them, for example–and that can appear pretty traditional at times. But then again, I absolutely reject the reasoning of the neo cal comps. So I consider myself non egal, non comp, just plain old me.

  133. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    Suggesting that a binary human relationship is somehow put under ethical obligation for function by a trinitarian

    You’ll notice also that the gender complementarian view seems to hinge a lot on marriage, with the assumption that everyone they are addressing is married, about how, why, and should a wife submit to the husband, the husband is supposedly the authoritative head of the wife and so on.

    Complementarians keep on ignoring that there are more and more single adults in the United States (there are now more singles than married couples).

    Other than the “women should not be preachers” thing, what would complementarians do if suddenly, every person in the United States right now were single, say, I don’t know, God raptured all the married couples (except for the ones at places like CBMW) out of the world what would they have to lord over women?

  134. linda wrote:

    In marriage, on the one hand I do believe biology is destiny to a point–men not carrying babies and nursing them, for example–and that can appear pretty traditional at times

    I’ve never been married or had sex (hence, no kids), so I don’t know what to make of that.

    What I gather from reading egalitarian sites is that they believe about gender, marriage and men and women what Jesus did – they are not advocating Christian women rule over men with whips and chains, nor are they into secular feminism.

  135. linda wrote:

    So I consider myself non egal, non comp, just plain old me.

    Evangelical egalitarians do not deny the differences between males and females. That is a straw man by the hierarchicalists. Who takes a place behind the pulpit is at most a secondary matter. The real issue is whether or not God has ordained as part of the original creation that one sex is the ruling sex. That’s it. The rest is fireworks, smoke, and mirrors.

    The question is framed by the Complementarians as a power grab by “feminists” where the “feminists” are desiring to usurp the male’s position of dominance. What they will never, ever, acknowledge is that they are merely assuming and presuming God’s ordination of male pre-eminence and dominance. They cannot demonstrate that claim from the texts. Hence the red herring of “Feminism” that they shriek about. It is much more plausible from the actual texts to say that females are only recently and only in the West now re-claiming their own personal power which God gave them and which certain males have taken from them.

  136. Gram3 wrote:

    The relationship between the Father and the Son is presumed to mirror the relationship between human fathers and sons. That would be weird enough in itself, and authority is presumed to be the primary definer of the Father/Son relationship rather than love or equality/representation.

    One other thing or two I can’t make sense of in their views:

    The gender complementarians say that Jesus should be the example to married women, that Jesus gave up his authority, or whatever you want to call it, to the Father, so wives should do the same for their husbands.

    The Bible says that Jesus is to be a role model for men and women, not just men (and not just married people, but for singles too).

    The Bible paints a picture that Jesus voluntarily laying aside some of his status or power during the incarnation is supposed to be an example for married men to follow. Jesus washed the feet of the 12.

    Married Christian men are to voluntarily give up their power and authority to their wives, and submit to their wives, like Jesus did with the Father, and the washing of the 12, but comps get get it the other way around, and demand it in the reverse (that women submit to men, it’s a one way thing).

    Also:

    How can gender comps argue that women should not be preachers or in leadership positions because Jesus and his first disciples had male bodies, but then turn around and tell wives that Jesus (despite his male body) is to be their example in submitting to their spouse?

    I don’t know how to explain what I’m getting at here. It just seems to me that gender comps have some kind of contradictions in some of their views.

    I don’t know how they can tell women that Jesus is NOT their role model (women should not be preachers, Jesus didn’t pick ladies for the 12!) but he IS their role model (be like Jesus and submit to men as Jesus submitted to the Father!) – at the same time.

    Either Jesus is to be my role model across the board on every topic, or he is not, but the complementarians send mixed messages.

  137. Daisy wrote:

    Either Jesus is to be my role model across the board on every topic, or he is not, but the complementarians send mixed messages.

    To clarify: on most topics, at least, maybe not all? Nobody else is a sinless person who was foretold to be sacrificed for the sins of everyone.

  138. Gram3 wrote:

    @ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:
    Another weird thing is that the self-proclaimed gospel-centered and cross-centered people are the same ones promoting this system of gender roles as the cure for what ails us. Not the Gospel of Jesus Christ and what he accomplished on the cross, but the gospel of Observing Gender Roles. That sounds like another gospel to me.

    I agree. And they can’t really fully explain how never married, childless people are supposed to live out the gender roles they create.

  139. Margaret wrote:

    Offered us coffee and cookies. (The deputies told us that was for us, not something they do every Sunday.)

    Well. Hold on then. Were they good cookies? Or stale, or flavors nobody likes? (I assume nobody here likes raisin oatmeal, I would say raisin oatmeal cookies are bad).

    Acceptable cookie bribes in my book: home made choco chip, Famous Amos choco chip, Keebler choco chip, Keebler fudge stripes, and maybe, if I’m in the mood, ginger snaps.

  140. mirele wrote:

    saying Driscoll had gotten compassion from Kellogg because Driscoll’s moving off to Arizona.

    I think Throckmorton reported that Driscoll is going to Arizona, or may be headed there.

    Is Phoenix Next for Mark Driscoll?
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2015/05/04/is-phoenix-next-for-mark-driscoll/

    The latest entry at his blog for Driscoll’s name is this:
    Protest of Mark Driscoll Planned at Hillsong Church in Sydney on May 31

  141. Daisy wrote:

    I would say raisin oatmeal cookies are bad

    That’s crazy talk! The bakery nearby does the best oatmeal raisin cookies ever.

  142. @ lydia:
    I found several pages about her and that book/ paper or whatever it is (one page says it’s a DVD). I’m not sure which one I should link to.

    She mentions it here:
    The unorthodox view of the Trinity related to women in ministry by Cheryl Schatz
    http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/09/26/unorthodox-view-trinity/

    I may be confusing her with another person, but I believe she is the person who was stalked by a woman moderator from CARM’s forum for a long time, over her egalitarian views. She tried to get the matter settled with CARM’s head guy, but he wasn’t helpful, IIRC.

  143. Daisy wrote:

    I agree. And they can’t really fully explain how never married, childless people are supposed to live out the gender roles they create.

    The lack of logic and careful thinking is apparent at every level of the system. To be entirely frank, the CBMW version of “complementarianism” is exactly like the SBC position on slavery 150 years ago. Champion a social position, and then spend inordinate energy on defending it “biblically”.

  144. Haitch wrote:

    I can smell hyper-masculinity all over, a good fit for Driscoll.

    Heath Mooneyham is another Driscoll.

    “Do You Have the Balls to Worship at America’s Manliest Church?”
    http://www.vocativ.com/culture/religion/heath-mooneyham-ignite/

    This headline is from 2014:
    Pastor of ‘America’s manliest church’ which once gave away assault rifles to members steps down after being busted for DWI

    “Heath Mooneyham relinquished control of Ignite Church on Sunday after saying in a statement that he had ‘let his family down'”

    I don’t know if he’s still out or has returned.

  145. Daisy wrote:

    I don’t know how to explain what I’m getting at here. It just seems to me that gender comps have some kind of contradictions in some of their views.

    It’s not your comprehension problem. It is that their system is entirely ad hoc and designed to produce the result which it produces. That is why they all disagree with the implications of the system and the proper application of it.
    The entire system is one giant circular argument.

    They start with the presumption that the most important aspect of our humanity is our sex at birth. A further primary presumption is that authority is the most important difference between the sexes. Who is the ruler and who is the ruled. That is the Order of God’s Good and Beautiful Plan at Creation. Rather than being united in One Humanity, we are divided along gender lines.

    With that important presumption in mind, they then move to the effects of the Fall which they take not as descriptive but rather as prescriptive in that they determine the Way Men Are and the Way Women Are. The way they talk about the Fall is strictly in terms of gender Roles. We each had a Role and we either Usurped or we Shirked, depending on which sex we happen to be. Note that again, everything is built on the presumption of Male Pre-eminence. So they say that Fallen Humanity is divided along gender lines.

    They presume that therefore the New Humanity in Christ is also divided along gender lines. Not only in the Now but also in the Not Yet. Because Jesus is the New Adam/Humanity in the New Creation, then his example must be lived out now according to the presumed gender lines established at Creation. Females imitate his Suffering Servant humility and males imitate the rule of the Coming King. Women serve by serving/submitting and men serve by leading/ruling.

    The ad hoc nature of the system is the reason they are so obviously ridiculous when their arguments are examined. Whenever they sound outrageous or ridiculous, you can be pretty sure they are being consistent with their system. The only time they sound reasonable is when they are being illogical or inconsistent with the system. That explains things like Eternal Submission of Females to Males, Females being created in the derivative image of God, and single or childless people being considered “less than.” Once you make sexual function the purpose and end of Creation and Redemption, you get to very troubling places.

    It is circular arguments all the way down.

  146. Tim wrote:

    That’s crazy talk! The bakery nearby does the best oatmeal raisin cookies ever.

    Oh no. This is going to start a Great Cookie Schism. 🙂

    Some of the most disappointing times in my life have been reaching for what I thought was a choco chip cookie, but it turned out to be raisin oatmeal 🙁

    I like plain oatmeal cookies, though.

  147. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    To be entirely frank, the CBMW version of “complementarianism” is exactly like the SBC position on slavery 150 years ago. Champion a social position, and then spend inordinate energy on defending it “biblically”.

    Yes, I have noticed the similarities.

  148. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    The lack of logic and careful thinking is apparent at every level of the system

    The Danvers Statement is a prime example of how not to do logic and exegesis. They start with their rationale which is a non-sequitur. The non-sequitur of the rationale is followed by stellar examples of how to proof-text. So Danvers is an exercise in proof-texting that is occasioned by a non-sequitur.

    These men are neither uneducated nor stupid. There is something else going on. With slavery, economics drove the arguments rather than exegesis. And there were the same accusations of abandoning the “plain teaching” of the Bible.

  149. Gram3 wrote:

    That explains things like Eternal Submission of Females to Males, Females being created in the derivative image of God, and single or childless people being considered “less than.”

    They seldom address 1 Corinthians 7:
    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%207

    The few times I hear some of the complementarians discuss that passage is to say God doesn’t intend singleness for most people – but the Bible doesn’t say anything about that either way. The text never says if God intends for whatever percentage of people to be married or single.

    Complementarians try to argue that passage away, or say it doesn’t really apply to anyone, or not to most people, but that’s not what the text says.

    When I have heard gender comps discuss that passage, they assume, just totally make up, that God must want most people to marry, because most people in America are married (that is their “proof,” their observation about American demographics, not what the biblical text says).

    Well, that used to be true (that married people were greater in number), but in 2014, single adults out-numbered married couples.

    When can I expect gender comps to then start saying, “Since most people are single in America now, it must be in God’s will for everyone to be single.”

    (I’m not holding my breath for that.)

  150. Daisy–women’s ordination is not an issue for me since I don’t believe anyone should be ordained. I just mean I “get” the thinking of churches that do–and of those that don’t. I can understand their reasoning whether I agree with it or not.

    And all I meant about gender roles was that yep, when a woman has just had a baby, it is a real blessing if she can focus for a time on her own healing and on the baby, and if the father can focus on providing for a taking care of her and the baby. Which will FOR A TIME probably look like the traditional gender roles in a marriage. I also believe most (not all!) men have more upper body strength than most (not all!) women. So that can appear very traditional when the wife needs help with something heavy and very physical. Those are the sort of things some guys make a good living being hired to do for many single women, and for both women and men who are older, physically not as strong, too busy doing something else, etc.

    I can guarantee you there are some plumbing jobs I physically cannot do. Not because I am too stupid or “just a woman” but because God put my strengths in places other than my forearms.

    Where we get in trouble is in taking these very true and fair generalizations and trying first to apply them in all situations, and then deciding to enforce them upon everyone.

    If my plumber is a burly gal or if she is a very petite and dainty one that understands mechanics, plumbing, and has some really cool tools to make up for her lack of upper body strength, cool!

    Just don’t ask me to lift a toilet and install a wax ring.

  151. Daisy wrote:

    When can I expect gender comps to then start saying, “Since most people are single in America now, it must be in God’s will for everyone to be single.”

    That won’t happen because it would be self-defeating theologically and economically. They have defined our humanity not by our commonality as human beings with sexual differences but rather as sexual beings with differences arising from the sex that we are. I believe that this is one of their fundamental errors. We are more alike as human beings than we are different, IMO. I love the differences, but they are trivial compared to our commonalities as humans. And certainly as brothers and sisters in the Father’s house.

  152. Gram3 wrote:

    We are more alike as human beings than we are different, IMO. I love the differences, but they are trivial compared to our commonalities as humans.

    Amen! And we shouldn’t really stereotype the differences or the commonalities and assign them to either gender. After all, where would we be if all males should be assigned characteristics of Piper or Driscoll for example. Ugh! Perish the thought!

  153. Daisy wrote:

    Some of the most disappointing times in my life have been reaching for what I thought was a choco chip cookie, but it turned out to be raisin oatmeal
    I like plain oatmeal cookies, though.

    Albuquerque Blue wrote:

    I’m with you there. Never more disappointed then when I get a oatmeal raisin cookie.

    I agree. BUT have you put the chocolate chips in the oatmeal batter? 🙂 Now that IS a good cookie.

  154. @ Bridget:

    Right off hand, I can’t recall if I’ve ever had choco chip oatmeal, but I think they would be good.

    I’ve had plain oatmeal cookies, and those are okay, I am just not fond of raisins in the oatmeal cookies.

  155. Of course he won’t apologize, narcissists never do. Prisons are full of psychopaths who’ve done terrible things who then play the “poor me” card and talk about their messed up family, their hard childhood, etc. Entirely dismissing or minimizing or even blaming their victims.

    Now, Driscoll isn’t a psychopath afaik, but shows the signs for one of those borderline narcissistic personality disorders – acting like he’s been hard done by – not giving the slightest admission of guilt, not acknowledging the victims. For pete sakes this guy plagiarized oodles of books and bought his way onto the bestseller list with other people’s donated money. And this lovely claim of baptizing 10,000 people he saved. Doubt it. Too many people are baptized multiple times, claiming this time is the real deal. Little is done to make sure they have never been baptized. Then there is the fact Driscoll targeted young people, how many church kids just never got around to being baptized? They kind of nominally go to church in college, only get involved in campus style bible studies and ministries and then follow 200 peers into a pool at some youth event or college camp? Are those 200 saved by the ministry or are they just getting around to getting baptized, but have been Christians since before they began Preschool?

    So tired of preachers, ministry leaders, etc. equating baptism with being saved.

  156. @ mouseyhair:

    I’m sorry mouseyhair. We are local to GCCC and have attended there in the past- once about 10 years ago for a few months and then last year twice. I couldn’t get past Dan’s arrogant attitude. Arrogance has no place in leadership-especially from the pulpit.

    We’ve been watching the evolution of the church there from afar, and through friends that are members. It’s been clear to me for a while, as an outside observer that GCCC was quickly becoming the next Mars Hill, with their multiple campuses and showmanship. I don’t know Dan, and I don’t know his heart, but there is a part of me that thinks he knew exactly what he was doing allowing Driscoll to speak there. Just look at all the press.

  157. __

    “Boom, Chucka, Boom?”

    hmmm…

    Deb,

    Christian rock music has ‘evolved’ into the single most powerful church tool by which a 501(c)3 church leadership team communicates it’s message to the youth.

  158. __

    Is Mark Driscoll ‘Playing’ Da Church Falsly?

    What?

    …a false teacher?

    hmmm…

    Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them (Matthew 7.20).    

    For the tree is  known by his fruit (Matthew 12.33)

    Here we go again?

    🙁

  159. Ahh, I see, Mark Driscoll is the victim.

    Those who believe that please contact me, I’m selling waterfront property in Arizona.

  160. __

    “Ministry Mushrooms?”

    hmmm…

    ..put um in dark black rooms and feed um loud music?

    They’ll fall for anything?

    hmmm…

    Could b.

    (sadface)

    Sopy

  161. Daisy wrote:

    I like plain oatmeal cookies

    They make awesome ones of those too, Daisy. If you come by the courthouse, I’ll take you to the cookie place and we can sample every single variety in the case. Usually they have 20 or so, but what the varieties are can change from day to day. Molasses cookies are on Fridays, and they’re one of my favorites.

  162. Gram3 wrote:

    Daisy wrote:
    I don’t know how to explain what I’m getting at here. It just seems to me that gender comps have some kind of contradictions in some of their views.
    It’s not your comprehension problem. It is that their system is entirely ad hoc and designed to produce the result which it produces. That is why they all disagree with the implications of the system and the proper application of it.
    The entire system is one giant circular argument.
    They start with the presumption that the most important aspect of our humanity is our sex at birth. A further primary presumption is that authority is the most important difference between the sexes. Who is the ruler and who is the ruled. That is the Order of God’s Good and Beautiful Plan at Creation. Rather than being united in One Humanity, we are divided along gender lines.
    With that important presumption in mind, they then move to the effects of the Fall which they take not as descriptive but rather as prescriptive in that they determine the Way Men Are and the Way Women Are. The way they talk about the Fall is strictly in terms of gender Roles. We each had a Role and we either Usurped or we Shirked, depending on which sex we happen to be. Note that again, everything is built on the presumption of Male Pre-eminence. So they say that Fallen Humanity is divided along gender lines.
    They presume that therefore the New Humanity in Christ is also divided along gender lines. Not only in the Now but also in the Not Yet. Because Jesus is the New Adam/Humanity in the New Creation, then his example must be lived out now according to the presumed gender lines established at Creation. Females imitate his Suffering Servant humility and males imitate the rule of the Coming King. Women serve by serving/submitting and men serve by leading/ruling.
    The ad hoc nature of the system is the reason they are so obviously ridiculous when their arguments are examined. Whenever they sound outrageous or ridiculous, you can be pretty sure they are being consistent with their system. The only time they sound reasonable is when they are being illogical or inconsistent with the system. That explains things like Eternal Submission of Females to Males, Females being created in the derivative image of God, and single or childless people being considered “less than.” Once you make sexual function the purpose and end of Creation and Redemption, you get to very troubling places.
    It is circular arguments all the way down.

    All true. The essential problem with the whole works, though, is that they seem to be worshiping something other than the Lord, they are worshiping their system. I said in another post a couple weeks ago: “How many people are in idolatry of church polity systems, really?” Of course, the implication was precious few make polity an idol. But many, many make their manhood, power, control and authority an idol. And therein lies the problem with the whole crowd.

    It’s not about Jesus, they’ve already eternally diminished Him in their system, in a sense it could be said that they make Him less than them, because He is in the subordinate female role in the Godhead, they represent the Father, the male.

    They are almost inconceivably stupid.

  163. Mother wrote:

    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Final Anonymous wrote:

    Mouseyhair, I’m sorry for what you’re going through right now — but I gotta tell you, based on the similarities to many, many fallen pastors over the years, this sentence really concerns me:

    “He is a chaplain for law enforcement, gives his time for others and I have seen him take single mothers with young sons under his wing to provide a male influence for them. “

    Concerned as in:
    “Chaplain for Law Enforcement” as in Invoking Code of Blue a la ToJo & Bob Greiner?
    or
    “Taking single mothers with young sons under his wing to provide a male influence for them” as in Pedo Grooming Prey?

    Both

    My thoughts as well……

  164. Leslie wrote:

    I really appreciate your balanced, unbiased and honest post. If there were more level headed people like you, this would not even be an issue. We are called to rightly divide the word of truth. You are doing that well.bbbb@ mouseyhair:

    Absolutely true.

  165. Tim wrote:

    Molasses cookies are on Fridays, and they’re one of my favorites.

    I once made a batch of my grandmother’s recipe for molasses cookies, & they turned me into the belle of the ball, as it were; every man there exclaimed: “Molasses cookies!! I LOVE molasses cookies! Who made these? Zooey? Oh, I haven’t had molasses cookies in YEARS!!!” (The pie & cake ladies were Not Amused).

  166. Pingback: Mark Driscoll is Baaaaaaccckkkk | 1st Feline Battalion

  167. @ mouseyhair:Dan Kellogg blew it period. I am glad I missed that day, but my wife and daughter went not knowing this clown would be there. It shows you that Dan’s just not educated about the Bible. I feel sorry for him, I attend the church, but just have never felt that he’s knowledgeable about biblical topics and would stoop this low.