I am not a blogger - by evidence that I never post, so most will never read this, but I should write this just the same - it is the right thing to do. I am posting in defense of Mark Driscoll.
There is recent discussion/posting about Driscoll’s cussing, in part due to the NYTimes Magazine piece that labeled him the “cussing pastor” and dust-ups at evan-fundy conferences like the Shepherds conference and some Southern Baptist stuff where Mark is on the line-up; but also in part to Tony’s Book, The New Christians, about Mark’s behavior at Axxess in Arlington, TX over a decade ago.
Mark contacted me when the book came out to apologize and ask for forgiveness. I forgave him with no hesitation and passed on his thoughts to the people in our community. I have accepted his apology and forgiven him and have no problem with Mark regarding the language he uses. Mark is a good man - IMHO
My problem with Mark is his theology. I think neo-calvinism is cowardly and weak! It is just cuddling up with thought leaders that were brilliant/forward thinking/thought provoking theologians for their time - but today - not so much.
My opinion is that the failure of modern philosophical/theological assumptions caused this return to “calvinism” as people grasp to the comfort of the convoluted evangelical concept of “sovereignty” that exists in that circle. neo-calvinism is such a waste - classic calvinism was built on a covenant hermeneutic and, at least, held a “cultural mandate”; neo-calvinism is built on a dispensational hermeneutic and has no mandate at all. neo-calvinism is cheap, easy and good-for-nothing and it is not at all “true to scripture” as is often claimed.
let me say again: Mark “manned-up” and ask for forgiveness regarding his cussing. His neo-calvinism that is another matter.
[...] Driscoll now disagrees with the way he used language at that time, early in his ministry. He’s repented and apologized to Brad Cecil. This demonstrates that there are times when certain words that work in one situation are not [...]