Scary stuff. The nation is in a spiritual nosedive and these two twits are arguing about the number of angels on the head of a pin. Ea is preaching to a different demographic and as long as there is no compromise of the Gospel in either message I'm okay with it.
XRZ7697
Barnabas, you should check out Mark Driscoll's letter he wrote to Pastor John MacArthur earlier here: http://theresurgence.com/2013/10/25/see-you-in-seattle-pastor-john-macarthur.I actually found his tone very charitable and worthy of emulation.
Robert H
I would think that Ephesians 5: 1-14 would be enough to clear this up. Just what is Mr. Driscoll trying to accomplish?
Rich277
I agree with Mr. Piper's point that more humility and Christlikeness are needed here.
Gregory Bennett
Barnabas,Young Christians such as yourself would do well to familiarize yourself with MacArthur's scholarship. Gty.org provides copious amounts of free resources, so there's really no excuse.You will recognize them by their fruits. ~ Matthew 7:16
Shark Bait
MarmotRidge, can I point out an inconsistency in your criticism? You just publically criticized the author for publically criticizing others. You didn't mention whether or not you followed Matthew 18 in this instance. Maybe you did. Either way, I don't think Matthew 18 applies directly in this case. The controversy revolves around public actions and statements, not private matters which Matthew 18 assumes.
Meg I
How ironic. The writer's father had the courage to invite Mark Driscoll to a Desiring God Conference a few years ago as one of the speakers. John Piper would only do this if he totally trusted the theological leanings and integrity of the man, Mark Driscoll. It was John MacArthur who presented Dr. Piper with a rather arrogant ultimatum, "Mark Driscoll or me." Dr. Piper chose and John MacArthur has never returned to a Desiring God Conference. Those of us who have followed MacArthur's ministry for 30 years or so, are weary of the arrogance and legalism. Have we forgotten that legalism is not just a small issue in the church but sin? The young Calvinists like Driscoll, Chandler, Platt, etc. are teaching truth, being personally transparent and by God's grace will continue to lead a new generation of Christians while the old guys "fade away."
Randy W
Note to self: Don't bring my books to sign and distribute at somebody else's conference unless invited to do so-- Mom and Dad said to be polite and courteous when I'm at somebody else's house. (How am I doing?).
Richard H
The issues are much deeper, more extensive than cessation. I know John MacArthur works from scripture to support his position. It is not an agenda, it is his job as shepherd to protect his flock from false teachings. He builds a good case that Mark Driscoll is a false teacher. There appears there was no confrontation between the two at the conference. Mark Driscoll entered univited from the "back door" to hand out books. Robert H asked a good question about what Mark Driscoll was trying to do by crashing a conference that was addressing doctrine different than his. I agree with Marmotridge, Mr Piper should have presented the theological differences between the two (is the Emergent church legitimate or not, etc?) because that is the difference between the two. But it appears the real issue/timing of this article was due to Mr Driscoll's fanning the flames of his crashing an event.
RockyW
As a fellow young believer looking on at this situation, my response is essentially the of opposite Barnabas's. I am *encouraged* that there are Christian leaders that are willing to stand up for the truth, even in light of our culture's manic devotion to "tolerance". Of course there are areas of Christian liberty that we as believers must bear with each other on, but I believe that in the modern American church we error far more often on the side of ecumenicalism than standing for the truth. I see no evidence that MacArthur says what he does with a lack of love, which is what the Bible condemns when making truth claims.
Keith Crosby
Here we sit in 2014. John Piper, CJ Mahaney (who's got his own problems), and James MacDonald (who definitely has his own problems like Mark Driscoll) who criticized MacArthur's assessment of Mark Driscoll have been (tragically) not only proven wrong but shown to be sadly naive and undiscerning at that, as they almost willfully ignored 1 Tim. 3. In contrast, John MacArthur has been exonerated. Not only was Driscoll immature, crass, and biblically unqualified but a plagiarist, a lover of money and well... you get the picture. Now with Brent Detwiler's publishing of notes from together for the gospel meetings http://www.brentdetwiler.com/brentdetwilercom/mark-driscoll-high-profile-pastors-and-credibility.htm... one wonders if it is not the time for public repentance or at least mea culpas for Piper and Mahaney? Driscoll's problems are more than criticisms by people with an ax to grind. He's a mess.
PuddleJoy
It is sad to see this happen. It has the potential to not only be discouraging for younger believers, but for those of us who have been around a little longer. I understand the importance of standing up for what you believe. My faith, as a young believer, was devastated when I went to a "trusted, Christian" college, where many professors did not hold to the authority of the Word of God. Thankfully, through the faithfulness of God and the ministry of faithful friends, I was able to be restored in my faith in the years that followed. But in the case of these two leaders, I am not sure how this ends up being productive or for the glory of God. And being a godly leader for years does not make someone immune to pride. I pray that God will work in this situation to bring resolution, restoration, and glory to Christ.
ONK1277
I have never heard of Mark Driscoll before. Although I am also a young person, from what is said above I seriously doubt that I would share Barnabas Piper's respect for him. He sounds like he is off-base to me. However, even if that is not the case, he was being disrespectful to show up at someone else's church and start handing out literature that he knew the church disagreed with. I think any responsible pastor would take measures to stop someone who did that. A pastor has a Biblical responsibility to teach truth and stand against error. If Mark Driscoll had really wanted to have a meaningful dialog with John MacArthur, he could have requested to meet in person and talk. The blame for this fracas is clearly his, not MacArthur's.
pastorjamesmiller
Just curious, when Jesus overturned the tables in the Temple, did he leave no room for discourse, reasonableness, or humble dialogue?
Rich277
Here's a question: Picture a forum where opposing points of view could be expressed in a humble and Christ-like manner. What would it look like? Could you set aside pre-conceived notions and listen with an open mind? Could we follow in the example of the Bereans?
"It's discouraging to young Christians like me"" It should be encouraging to you to dive into the scriptures and be like the Bereans and search the scriptures for yourselves.
justhinking
I have little respect for either. Where has humility gone? One man is conceited enough to pass out his own materials at another's conference? Then we have one marketing his commentaries (granted he is not the only modern pulpit minister to do so) and study Bibles in mass. Generations have found the truth without Mr. MacArthur's opinions and comments attached. I do believe both are hindering the gospel not helping.
Rick Witmer
"I can't determine the heart of either of these men, but the results of their actions are discouraging. When younger Christians look to these prominent leaders, what do we see? We see discord between our shepherds and wedges being driven into the church over personal agendas and theological points that, while important, aren't the heart of orthodoxy."While I appreciate the heart for unity and peace in the Church - Jesus prayed for it and it is essential to the Gospel's propagation to a watching world - I find this article unfairly lumping Dr. MacArthur in with Pastor Driscoll, which is wrong. As a co-pastor with one of Dr. MacArthur's close relatives, I can tell you that these men belong nowhere in the same camp. Pastor Driscoll sought out the Strange Fire Conference with the intention of making waves, and then was caught in deceit regarding what happened. Dr. MacArthur, to my knowledge, did nothing to engage him, so I hardly see how he has acted in a way so as to discourage younger believers like us. Are Driscoll's actions discouraging? To say the least. Has Dr. MacArthur done anything untoward or out of line in the entire exchange? You'd be hard pressed to make a case. By all means, let's talk about what happened, but let's be rigorous in our honesty regarding all involved, please. (Thank you, iron man [above], for recognizing this.)
Scary stuff. The nation is in a spiritual nosedive and these two twits are arguing about the number of angels on the head of a pin. Ea is preaching to a different demographic and as long as there is no compromise of the Gospel in either message I'm okay with it.
Barnabas, you should check out Mark Driscoll's letter he wrote to Pastor John MacArthur earlier here: http://theresurgence.com/2013/10/25/see-you-in-seattle-pastor-john-macarthur.I actually found his tone very charitable and worthy of emulation.
I would think that Ephesians 5: 1-14 would be enough to clear this up. Just what is Mr. Driscoll trying to accomplish?
I agree with Mr. Piper's point that more humility and Christlikeness are needed here.
Barnabas,Young Christians such as yourself would do well to familiarize yourself with MacArthur's scholarship. Gty.org provides copious amounts of free resources, so there's really no excuse.You will recognize them by their fruits. ~ Matthew 7:16
MarmotRidge, can I point out an inconsistency in your criticism? You just publically criticized the author for publically criticizing others. You didn't mention whether or not you followed Matthew 18 in this instance. Maybe you did. Either way, I don't think Matthew 18 applies directly in this case. The controversy revolves around public actions and statements, not private matters which Matthew 18 assumes.
How ironic. The writer's father had the courage to invite Mark Driscoll to a Desiring God Conference a few years ago as one of the speakers. John Piper would only do this if he totally trusted the theological leanings and integrity of the man, Mark Driscoll. It was John MacArthur who presented Dr. Piper with a rather arrogant ultimatum, "Mark Driscoll or me." Dr. Piper chose and John MacArthur has never returned to a Desiring God Conference. Those of us who have followed MacArthur's ministry for 30 years or so, are weary of the arrogance and legalism. Have we forgotten that legalism is not just a small issue in the church but sin? The young Calvinists like Driscoll, Chandler, Platt, etc. are teaching truth, being personally transparent and by God's grace will continue to lead a new generation of Christians while the old guys "fade away."
Note to self: Don't bring my books to sign and distribute at somebody else's conference unless invited to do so-- Mom and Dad said to be polite and courteous when I'm at somebody else's house. (How am I doing?).
The issues are much deeper, more extensive than cessation. I know John MacArthur works from scripture to support his position. It is not an agenda, it is his job as shepherd to protect his flock from false teachings. He builds a good case that Mark Driscoll is a false teacher. There appears there was no confrontation between the two at the conference. Mark Driscoll entered univited from the "back door" to hand out books. Robert H asked a good question about what Mark Driscoll was trying to do by crashing a conference that was addressing doctrine different than his. I agree with Marmotridge, Mr Piper should have presented the theological differences between the two (is the Emergent church legitimate or not, etc?) because that is the difference between the two. But it appears the real issue/timing of this article was due to Mr Driscoll's fanning the flames of his crashing an event.
As a fellow young believer looking on at this situation, my response is essentially the of opposite Barnabas's. I am *encouraged* that there are Christian leaders that are willing to stand up for the truth, even in light of our culture's manic devotion to "tolerance". Of course there are areas of Christian liberty that we as believers must bear with each other on, but I believe that in the modern American church we error far more often on the side of ecumenicalism than standing for the truth. I see no evidence that MacArthur says what he does with a lack of love, which is what the Bible condemns when making truth claims.
Here we sit in 2014. John Piper, CJ Mahaney (who's got his own problems), and James MacDonald (who definitely has his own problems like Mark Driscoll) who criticized MacArthur's assessment of Mark Driscoll have been (tragically) not only proven wrong but shown to be sadly naive and undiscerning at that, as they almost willfully ignored 1 Tim. 3. In contrast, John MacArthur has been exonerated. Not only was Driscoll immature, crass, and biblically unqualified but a plagiarist, a lover of money and well... you get the picture. Now with Brent Detwiler's publishing of notes from together for the gospel meetings http://www.brentdetwiler.com/brentdetwilercom/mark-driscoll-high-profile-pastors-and-credibility.htm... one wonders if it is not the time for public repentance or at least mea culpas for Piper and Mahaney? Driscoll's problems are more than criticisms by people with an ax to grind. He's a mess.
It is sad to see this happen. It has the potential to not only be discouraging for younger believers, but for those of us who have been around a little longer. I understand the importance of standing up for what you believe. My faith, as a young believer, was devastated when I went to a "trusted, Christian" college, where many professors did not hold to the authority of the Word of God. Thankfully, through the faithfulness of God and the ministry of faithful friends, I was able to be restored in my faith in the years that followed. But in the case of these two leaders, I am not sure how this ends up being productive or for the glory of God. And being a godly leader for years does not make someone immune to pride. I pray that God will work in this situation to bring resolution, restoration, and glory to Christ.
I have never heard of Mark Driscoll before. Although I am also a young person, from what is said above I seriously doubt that I would share Barnabas Piper's respect for him. He sounds like he is off-base to me. However, even if that is not the case, he was being disrespectful to show up at someone else's church and start handing out literature that he knew the church disagreed with. I think any responsible pastor would take measures to stop someone who did that. A pastor has a Biblical responsibility to teach truth and stand against error. If Mark Driscoll had really wanted to have a meaningful dialog with John MacArthur, he could have requested to meet in person and talk. The blame for this fracas is clearly his, not MacArthur's.
Just curious, when Jesus overturned the tables in the Temple, did he leave no room for discourse, reasonableness, or humble dialogue?
Here's a question: Picture a forum where opposing points of view could be expressed in a humble and Christ-like manner. What would it look like? Could you set aside pre-conceived notions and listen with an open mind? Could we follow in the example of the Bereans?
http://www.challies.com/interviews/lets-ask-john-macarthur-some-hard-questions
"It's discouraging to young Christians like me"" It should be encouraging to you to dive into the scriptures and be like the Bereans and search the scriptures for yourselves.
I have little respect for either. Where has humility gone? One man is conceited enough to pass out his own materials at another's conference? Then we have one marketing his commentaries (granted he is not the only modern pulpit minister to do so) and study Bibles in mass. Generations have found the truth without Mr. MacArthur's opinions and comments attached. I do believe both are hindering the gospel not helping.
"I can't determine the heart of either of these men, but the results of their actions are discouraging. When younger Christians look to these prominent leaders, what do we see? We see discord between our shepherds and wedges being driven into the church over personal agendas and theological points that, while important, aren't the heart of orthodoxy."While I appreciate the heart for unity and peace in the Church - Jesus prayed for it and it is essential to the Gospel's propagation to a watching world - I find this article unfairly lumping Dr. MacArthur in with Pastor Driscoll, which is wrong. As a co-pastor with one of Dr. MacArthur's close relatives, I can tell you that these men belong nowhere in the same camp. Pastor Driscoll sought out the Strange Fire Conference with the intention of making waves, and then was caught in deceit regarding what happened. Dr. MacArthur, to my knowledge, did nothing to engage him, so I hardly see how he has acted in a way so as to discourage younger believers like us. Are Driscoll's actions discouraging? To say the least. Has Dr. MacArthur done anything untoward or out of line in the entire exchange? You'd be hard pressed to make a case. By all means, let's talk about what happened, but let's be rigorous in our honesty regarding all involved, please. (Thank you, iron man [above], for recognizing this.)
Be discerning.