Calling them Out
October 17, 2007
If you haven’t heard this yet you need to. It’s Mark Driscoll at the Southern Baptist Convention .
He’s called out some of the top guns of the emergent movement.
Rod Pearcy….yeah, yeah, yeah.
Dynamic Dad, Happy Husband, Football Fanatic
Recent Comments
bryonm on IKE! bryonm on Fay? No Way! Rod on Upon Futher Review Jason McKelvey on Upon Futher Review 
Unknown Feed- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
Rod Pearcy....yeah, yeah, yeah. 
October 18, 2007 at 3:17 pm
Rod: Thanks for uploading this message! It was beneficial to hear this man speak about a cont. topic. I, for one, have often thought that he was not worth listening to b/c of his reported “potty mouth” syndrome. But it is nice to hear that he is pulling out the roach spray to identify camps that the apostle Paul rebuked in Galatians 3.
Have you ever thought of a nickname and wondered about the right personality to apply it to? I would reward Mr. Driscoll with the unofficial title of “Duke Rebukem” and that is a very good thing. He has a talent and a passion–watch out!
Question: What happens @ “Cowboy Church” when the Indian shows up?
October 19, 2007 at 3:38 pm
Here’s the link to download it as a podcast through iTunes…
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=132458157&s=143441&i=19244245
October 24, 2007 at 10:22 pm
Rod,
I thought Driscoll’s message was good, but I thought his take on Rob Bell was off. First, he didn’t really have as much data as he did on the other guys. Secondly, one of his big problems was that he reads rabbinic scholars. Good night! What person who really wants to understand the OT doesn’t? And if they say they don’t read the rabbinic stuff and read someone else, that other author has read it. Some of the Rabbinic stuff I know, I learned from Jon Courson (I hope he’s not considered a heretic yet) 🙂 He’s the one who got me interested in reading Rabbinic literature.
The women-elders thing I would disagree with Rob, but there’s a lot of people that hold that position which we wouldn’t call heretics.
I agreed with much of Mark’s message. I just thought his critique of Rob was weak.
October 25, 2007 at 3:23 am
I was wondering, isn’t Mark Driscoll the guy that Don Miller refers to as the “cussing pastor” in his book Blue Like Jazz? And isn’t that a book that has been banned from the CCFL bookstore? And if Mark Driscoll and Don Miller are good friends, and Don’s book was pulled from the bookstore, why are we standing in support of what the “cussing pastor” says? Doesn’t Mark Driscoll say that Don Miller is ok? It seems strange to support Mark’s opinions about one “emergent leader” (Rob Bell) but disregard his opinions of another (Don Miller) when they serve our purposes? Maybe a bit more consistancy would be considered helpful.
October 25, 2007 at 1:39 pm
Just Wondering,
1. Yes-
2. Yes
3. I never said that we were supporting everything that he says. I merely suggested listening to it. I too found it interesting that he condemned Rob Bell over Donald Miller. I also found it interesting that Driscoll, one of the former proponents of the emerging movement, would repent of his former theology, and move towards a more orthodox theology and away from a “generous theology”…..but isnt repentance a good thing?
4. I dont believe that I would ever take ALL of a MANS opinions and consider them to be doctrine. (which I think is the argument that you are attempting to make).
Our consistancy is only in the WORD.
Are you really trying to make the point that we shouldnt exclude Rob Bell from the bookstore? Thats what it sounds like to me. And if so…just say it.
October 25, 2007 at 1:58 pm
Bob,
The reading of the rabbinic scholars didnt bother me as much, it was his use of Tragectory Hermeneutic-(sets into motion a direction that over time seems to contradict the bible, but ultimately is the logical conclusion that the bible would go to.)
I call this type of hermeneutic a “fluid” interpretation. Which means that parts of the Bible can have progressive, different meanings as a culture unfolds, advances, and matures.
If you take that along the Rob Bell path, its ok to have female eldership, freedom to be homosexual….and what is next? Everything is up for debate depending on how the culture “evolves”.
Its basically good old fashion liberalism. And eventually questions everything.
I really dont like the whole “Whos a Heretic?” debate. (so I think Coursen is still cool) I have however a newfound concern for those in our midst that would begin to embrace such liberal theology that would draw away those that are less informed.
I run everything through the Skylar test.(my 7 yr. old son). Do I want him thinking that its ok to be gay? Its ok to question the authority of scripture? Its ok to have women pastors? The answer has to be a resounding NO. And I dont really want him listening to guys that think that all of that is OK. Maybe when he’s old enough to descern for himself…but not now. So thats where I have to draw the line.
October 25, 2007 at 7:53 pm
Rod,
I hear you. Although, I don’t believe Rob endorses homosexuality. I could be wrong (it’s been known to happen now and again) 🙂 but I don’t think that’s Rob position.
It seems as though Driscoll’s problem is more with William Webb’s book than with Rob. I just thought that part of his presentation was weak.
I totally agree with the Skylar test. Good word…
October 26, 2007 at 10:48 pm
Rod,
No, my statements were not questioning why Rob Bell’s books are no longer in the bookstore. Just wondering why the teachings of Mark Driscoll were the catalyst to making such decisions. Considering Mark Driscoll is not someone that Calvary holds up as a recommended leader/pastor, why has so much weight been given to his recent teaching? I would like to know who at CCFL has investigated his claims about Rob Bell, who may have spoken with leaders at Rob Bell’s church, who has done research on the Mark’s explaination of “trajectory hermeneutics” from within our leadership to agree in such a manner as to decide to no longer carry Rob Bell’s books or even use the Nooma videos as part of the church classes. That is really my question.
October 26, 2007 at 11:15 pm
Just Wondering,
Im sorry if I was unclear. Mark Driscolls teaching was not the catalyst to making this decision. We have done a lot of research, including Pastor Bob himself attempting to speak to someone at Robs church….to no avail. We would not place all the weight on one mans thought. I dont believe that Pastor Bob has listened to this himself, and he asked me to remove it from the bookstore. If you would like to talk to me in person, I will make myself available.
Again, Driscolls message was NOT the only catalyst in making this decision. If you would like to see more research and references, call me at Calvary.
October 31, 2007 at 4:56 pm
I’m glad that someone has presented more of a defining position to some of these guys. They can be very chameleonesque (new word i founded). I too like rabbinical literature, but if Mark Driscoll is correct when he says that Rob holds to rabbinical interpretation as the BASIS of interpreting scripture correctly, I would have to disagree.But hey…Who am I??
November 1, 2007 at 2:03 pm
This is the first emergent talk I’ve heard that mixes truth with love. I love it as Mark is somone who has done his homework…He has a Biblical basis, relationship, history, and loves the guys he is talking about. Rod, great find! THANKX
November 1, 2007 at 9:11 pm
Billyv said “but if Mark Driscoll is correct when he says that Rob holds to rabbinical interpretation as the BASIS of interpreting scripture correctly, I would have to disagree.”
Wouldn’t it be better to check out IF he is correct before we accept it as truth? Even Mark Driscoll himself says he does not know Rob, so maybe he should have contacted him before making such publically critical statements. I think that’s what gossip is…sharing information with others that we have yet to verify as truth.
November 2, 2007 at 2:53 am
Karen,
Its not a secret that Rob Bell uses rabbinical interpretation. He spoke about it in a Christianity Today article a few years ago.
http://www.ctlibrary.com/le/2004/spring/1.24.html
Its also not a secret that he embraces the social gospel,(making the earth a better place for God to come back to) and the teachings of Brian McLaren. Its all over his website.
Doug Padgitt is a guest teacher at his church. Those two guys are the major proponents of the emergent church. If those are the influences that he bases his doctrine on, (again…its all over his site…Im not just guessing), then I have to assume that he believes what they believe.
http://www.ctlibrary.com/le/2004/spring/1.24.html
November 2, 2007 at 5:06 am
Rod,
I think it’s just terribly sad that as believers we have become so quick to judge a man by what is posted on his website, what is posted on others websites or what we hear others say about him instead of actually getting to know him before we decide to share it with others. If that were the standard, I know many a pastor and church staff/leader that would be judged the same based on what books they post on their blogsites or myspace, what events they attend, or what they download on their ipods. Anyone who has been to Israel has learned from rabbinical teachings. And if a rabbi comes to know Jesus as messiah, is all that he learned before that time of no value? I wish the christian church would stop trying to find so much fault with what they do not understand so they can feel safe about what they do understand. I am looking forward to a day when “they will know we are His disciples by the love we have one for another” becomes more true among all of us who call ourselves disciples. That’s when the watching world will see Jesus.
November 2, 2007 at 2:40 pm
Normally, I would not interject the debate, but considering that the above is based on the podcast I would humbly conclude:
Proverbs 27:5 An open rebuke is better than hidden love!
IMO, the Church would benefit substantially by better understanding this passage; we show the world our love by our integrity.
November 30, 2007 at 4:25 pm
Unfortunately, throughout this discussion we’ve had some double standards. I’d love to see some of you go back and clarify your position further. Some questions I would have:
1. How can Mark Driscoll state that Rob Bell is bad for having McClaren in his pulpit, state that Don Miller is solid in his theology, and then miss the fact that Don Miller also fills Rob’s pulpit when he’s gone?
Seems inconsistent, although I understand that a pastor IS responsible for what is taught from his pulpit.
2. Karen, please explain your defense of Rob Bell’s website. You chose to defend him by attacking other Christian’s websites and myspaces, which isn’t a very good defense. Since when is someone not responsible or accountable for what’s on their website?
In a world where these guys are claiming to be on the cutting edge of relevance to culture, we all know that the internet is the “gateway” to ourselves and our churches. We put on the internet what we want other people to see or know about us. How is Rob, as the pastor of his church, not responsible for what that church does? Scripturally, he is the overseer. Please help me see your logic in his defense.
December 7, 2007 at 2:17 am
Andrew,
I’m not saying that Rob is not responsible for what’s on his website. I think he should be, is, and does not have any issue with where he stands. I’m just pointing out that there are people who are throwing stones his way in disagreement with him that still have his books listed on their own websites, blogs and social network sites. Seems like a double standard. From what I’m gathering from the latest talk around town, since Rob encourages people to read certain books that he has on his website, it must be concluded that he beleives everything in those books. That standard should be the same for everyone throwing stones his way. If people out there consider him to be off base, they should proudly remove his books from their own websites, stop attending his events, and stop downloading his podscasts. I applaud anyone who takes a stand for what they beleive, but never applaud a double standard. Make sense?
December 7, 2007 at 2:49 pm
Karen,
I understand what you are saying about the book. I have bought both his books, read them, I listen to his podcasts, and I attended his tour. I’m trying to give Rob as much benefit of the doubt as I can right now. Here’s the thing-I believe that you can disagree with someone on a point or two, and still recommend the book for reading. It just depends on what the content of that point is.
No one agrees with any pastor (like you mentioned) 100%, and you can’t find a church that is 100% right on everything (if you can, let me know). So following your logic, if you disagree on one point with a church, do you disagree with it all? That’s what you seem to be suggesting with the book thing.
I think the most important thing that we can’t lose in the muddy waters is that no matter who says what (bob coy, rob bell, donald miller, billy graham), we must compare it to what the whole of scripture says. And if it doesn’t line up, no matter how much we like the man, we must conform to the Word, not the person.
That’s what I’m trying to do, and I know that I am so far from 100% right that it’s scary. Does that mean no one should read what I write because I’m selfish or sinful? I hope not.
That’s not a double standard, I think. I understand that you really enjoy Rob, and he makes you think. But if you find yourself agreeing with him 100%, then I would say that you aren’t thinking enough.
For example, one of the things your church EPIC-Remix is trying to accomplish is to not have a paid staff, and give as much money as they can away to bring good into the world, right? And you want to give a majority away-that’s your philosophy. (I’m still hoping a majority is greater than 50%!)
Well, if you listen to Rob’s podcast called “I was a Wandering Aramean part 2,” they tell their own church that 18% of the money pays for the building, and 57% pays for the staff and benefits. That’s 3/4 of their income, and its not going to the poor or missions or bringing good into the world.
You guys seem to disagree with them on that point. Should you now take down the links to their church on your church’s website?
By your own logic of the “double standard,” I think you should. Or maybe we should rethink the “double standard” logic.
April 6, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Snap! i think i liked my ignorant, simple, aussie faith. i happened upon mark driscolls podcast and a whole lot of ‘i dont know what’ was unleashed in my head! My church has played a couple of nooma clips so i cant just forget what i have heard and read and hope it all pans out on the otherside of the planet before we become infected by doctrine dilemas, not to say we dont have our debates but heresy and paganism are a little strong for us. i guess that the benefit (or disadvantage) of residingin a county that is only a couple hundred years old and has like… 3 mega churches!!! how primitive! how simple! 🙂 i mean, the bible has been around for a while now, do we really think we can get a new spin on it every decade or century or whenevr it seems irrelevant and needs ‘spiceing up’. i get that we are to love god with all our being, love each other, and then there was like another 8, maybe if we just adhered to those we could all get on with the important issues. I dont know Rob bells intentions but i do know that if he truly loved God he would not question the words God spoke and the inspired scripture that is our manual for a life eternal. (the virgin birth, and his nooma clip on faith in ones self and our own abilities) I guess i am ignorant for taking the bible literally and i need to think more….well, actually, i’m not sure how it is exactly that i am supposed to interperet the word? its all a little ambiguous in rob bells camp and a liitle cut throat and quick to judge in marks! think i’ll go back to just reading my bible and asking God for the wisdom he promises to give us if we ask and believe for!