Johnny Mac on Mark Driscoll

January 29, 2007

Joe,

I can remember a day when your theological world revolved around John MacArthur (and the Bible of course!). But we don’t mention him too much anymore. I’m wondering what you think about this article in which MacArthur says some pretty challenging things about Mark Driscoll’s ministry philosophy of cultural engagement. Plus, I have to say it was a bit humorous to hear (or read, I suppose) MacArthur use the phrase, ‘Gangsta Rap’! Here’s a nugget from Johnny Mac:

“Even when you marry such worldliness with good systematic theology and a vigorous defense of substitutionary atonement, the soundness of the theoretical doctrine doesn’t sanctify the wickedness of the practical lifestyle. The opposite happens. Solid biblical doctrine is trivialized and mocked if we’re not doers of the Word as well as teachers of it.”

And I thought these words were especially tough:

“His defense of substitutionary atonement might help his disciples gain a good grasp of the doctrine of justification by faith; but the lifestyle he models—especially his easygoing familiarity with all this world’s filthy fads—practically guarantees that they will make little progress toward authentic sanctification.”

Check the whole article out. MacArthur, as always, is not shy about telling us how he feels! And I think he makes some legitimate points. I trust you know I’m not posting these quotes as a way of bashing Driscoll. As we have discussed earlier, he is an interesting character. I can certainly learn some things from him. But I think MacArthur is right in saying that his level of cultural engagement is a bit perplexing. Let me know what you think; I’d love to go back and forth a bit on this one.  And of course the rest of the bloggers are welcome to join in too!

Larry

Posted by Larry | Filed Under Links 

Comments

3 Responses to “Johnny Mac on Mark Driscoll”

  1. on January 30th, 2007 9:02 am

    Lar,
    Thanks for posting that article. That was a good read. I think MacArthur made some great points about the vulgarity and especially about being familiar with so many trends and fads. I will say though that I think Driscoll is strong in speaking to the unchurched in language they will understand, which I think is a weakness of many of the reformed men of our day. Even in reading that article, MacArthur used the word ” soteriology”, which I had no idea what it mean (sorry Joe…guess that is why I am enrolled in SHDS). So I think that although it was a good critique, MacArthur could have also looked at some of the things that Driscoll may be exposing in those who just sit in their offices with their noses stuck in a book all day. I think that Joe has made the point often that there are still things we can learn from him. Looking forward to some good conversation on this one,
    Erin

  2. on January 30th, 2007 9:18 am

    Erin,

    I am hoping to get some good conversation on this one, you’re right. Thanks for being the first! I agree that MacArthur may have gone a bit far in some of what he said. While I think he made good points about the dangers of contextualizing, he did not talk about the necessity of contextualizing, which is pretty clear from 1 Corinthians 9:19-23. Driscoll actually has a pretty good sermon on that text, I’m sure Joe can find it for you.

    A question for you: Can Driscoll be as effective in speaking to the unchurched at their level without being as “crude” as he often is? My opinion is that he can, and I would like to see him be just as relevant and “hip” without being vulgar and stooping to their level, so to speak. It is a tough balance, but I think it can happen.

    I’ll pray that it won’t be too big of a quarrel in the Crispin household when Joe find out you didn’t know what ’soteriology’ meant!! Better than knowing what the word means, you know what yours is, and that’s really more important!

    Larry

  3. on January 30th, 2007 1:11 pm

    Lar,
    Great question for people to think about. My first thought was that Paul was speaking of the neutral things in life. So for example, sports. I bounced this off Joe and he was able to expound more on it with some insight from Tim Keller and I think he is going to go into it more in a post tomorrow. So I will let him expound more on it!
    Erin

Got something to say?