# Is Driscoll claiming to be a prophet?



## Pergamum

Pyromaniacs: Pornographic Divination

Is Driscoll now claiming to "see things"?




> Some people actually see things. This may be gift of discernment. On occasion, I see things. I see things. Uh, like I was meeting with one person and they—they didn't know this, but they were abused when they were a child. And I said, "When you were a child you were abused. This person did this to you, physically touched you this way."
> 
> He said, "How do you know?"
> 
> I said, "I don't know. It's like I got a TV right here. I'm seeing it."
> 
> He said, "No that never happened."
> 
> I said, "Go ask him. Go ask him if they actually did what I think they did and I see that they did."
> 
> They went and asked this person, "When I was a little kid did you do this?"
> 
> And the person said, "Yyyyeah, but you were only like a year or two old. How do you remember that?"
> 
> He said, "Well, pastor Mark told me."
> 
> I'm not a guru. I'm not a freak. I don't talk about this. If I did talk about it everybody'd want to meet with me and I'd end up like one of those guys on TV. But some of you have this visual ability to see things


----------



## Bill The Baptist

Driscoll has long claimed to "hear" things, so seeing things is just a natural progression. I am never one to deny that God can do anything, and certainly he could give visions to Mark Driscoll. However it is also possible that he is just full of himself. I don't know the circumstances of this case, but if someone is demonstrating certain behaviors as an adult, it is not all that big of a stretch to conclude that they were abused as a child.


----------



## BobVigneault

Driscoll's creepy factor is just too high for me. I would not trust him with my daughters, my wife, and in fact, I wouldn't touch him with a ten foot cattle prod. There are good teachers we can listen to without having to have the more prurient regions of our wicked imaginations ignited. Philipians 4:8


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian

I cannot understand why Piper does not yank his chain, hard.


----------



## Southern Presbyterian

Interesting that he points out...



Pergamum said:


> I don't talk about this.



Really?! Seems the "news" got out some how.


----------



## kodos

GulfCoast Presbyterian said:


> I cannot understand why Piper does not yank his chain, hard.



Given that Piper is in the 'open but cautious' camp - what basis does he have to deny that Driscoll's revelations are not legit? Don't they all subscribe to the Grudem line of thinking that NT prophecy can be full of errors?


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian

kodos said:


> GulfCoast Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> 
> I cannot understand why Piper does not yank his chain, hard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Given that Piper is in the 'open but cautious' camp - what basis does he have to deny that Driscoll's revelations are not legit? Don't they all subscribe to the Grudem line of thinking that NT prophecy can be full of errors?
Click to expand...


Piper is supposed to be his "mentor." When you look at the totality of Driscol's output, any number of his quotes, the link to "christian nymphos" on his blog, even apart from the "special revelation" nonsense, there is more than enough "public smoke" to merit a serious trip to the theological woodshed, In my humble opinion. your mileage may vary.


----------



## athanatos

... I've heard Driscoll say something to the effect of hearing something audible for his conversion, and he isn't proud of it. He just believed it was clearly God telling him to preach. Aside from that, ... what is all this talk about NT prophecies could be false? Source? I HIGHLY doubt that Grudem would actually claim that.

---------- Post added at 11:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:07 AM ----------




BobVigneault said:


> Driscoll's creepy factor is just too high for me. I would not trust him with my daughters, my wife, and in fact, I wouldn't touch him with a ten foot cattle prod. There are good teachers we can listen to without having to have the more prurient regions of our wicked imaginations ignited. Philipians 4:8


I really don't get what you're talking about. Are you claiming that his sexually perverse imagination got the better of him?


----------



## Pergamum

I was trying to give the guy the benefit of the doubt, and have been for a long time...but after a while it's hard to endure the cumulative evidence that he's headed off the reservation.


----------



## Marrow Man

athanatos said:


> what is all this talk about NT prophecies could be false? Source? I HIGHLY doubt that Grudem would actually claim that.



Here is what Grudem says in _The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today_ (emphasis added):



> In this book I am suggesting an understanding of the gift of prophecy which would require a bit of modification in the views of each of these . . . groups. I am asking that the charismatics go on using the gift of prophecy, but that they stop calling it "a word from the Lord"`simply because that label makes it sound exactly like the Bible in authority, and leads to much misunderstanding. . . . On the other side, I am asking those in the cessationist camp to give serious thought to the possibility that prophecy in ordinary New Testament churches was not equal to Scripture in authority, *but was simply a very human and sometimes partially mistaken report of something the Holy Spirit brought to someone's mind.* And I am asking that they think again about those arguments for the cessation of certain gifts.


----------



## kodos

You can do some quick research on this on the Internet (do a search for Grudem prophecy error), but he discusses his view in this book: Amazon.com: The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today (Revised Edition) (9781581342437): Wayne Grudem: Books




athanatos said:


> ... I've heard Driscoll say something to the effect of hearing something audible for his conversion, and he isn't proud of it. He just believed it was clearly God telling him to preach. Aside from that, ... what is all this talk about NT prophecies could be false? Source? I HIGHLY doubt that Grudem would actually claim that.


----------



## Rufus

GulfCoast Presbyterian said:


> Piper is supposed to be his "mentor." When you look at the totality of Driscol's output, any number of his quotes, the link to "christian nymphos" on his blog, even apart from the "special revelation" nonsense, there is more than enough "public smoke" to merit a serious trip to the theological woodshed, In my humble opinion. your mileage may vary.



I would bet that Piper doesn't know that much is happening. 

I'm not going to discredit somebody because they are semi-charismatic, I like Piper (if God didn't lead me to him, I probably wouldn't be here today), Grudem systematic theology is probably great (I haven't read it), Martyn Llloyd Jones took a moderate position and few here would say something negative about him, also I believe Phil Johnson mentioned Matt Chandler in one of his blog posts in a positive light. Phil Johnson also likes them:


> That's not all. I have warm affection and heartfelt respect for most of the best-known Reformed charismatic leaders, including C. J. Mahaney, Wayne Grudem, and Sam Storms.



Now, I'm happy that Seattle has been given a bigger christian influence because of Mr. Driscoll however I would also like to see for greater Christian maturity resulting from it, something better.

Also, If I was getting the types of visions he is getting according to Phil Johnson, I wouldn't say the *Holy* Spirit was giving it to me, in fact, I'd blame it on the exact opposite.

I feel like some of us should write and sign a letter to Dr. Piper, if anybody is going to convince Driscoll otherwise, it's Dr. Piper.


----------



## Contra_Mundum

When a particular church is "about" the pastor, there's a problem. Personality, or Preaching, or Publicity. What we're supposed to be "about" is Christ (eyes on him), and being his bride.

I don't care if its Piper, or JonnyMac, or Driscoll. The church has had issues with "personality" since the days of Corinth (1Cor.1:12) or men like Diotrephes (3Jn.1:9).

I think Christ designed his church to be a plug-and-play kind of organization. The front-men come and go; they move on or they die off. But the church continues. That's how its supposed to be, but when replacing the last guy becomes a matter of recruiting a clone, or maintaining the weekly "draw," the purpose for coming together has been lost.

Trust me, as a man with a normal ego I want people to come to our church, and I wish that my preaching would draw them in. Frankly, it's good that the folks who are at my church aren't there because of me, but because they are parts of the body (1Cor.12:14). THEY are the bride. Being the church is about fulfilling your calling (belonging), and listening to the gospel-Voice of your Good Shepherd. What sort of "voice" is being heard, when the pastor is talking about the TV flickering in his head? "Come and hear me, because I'm a visionary."

What will happen to these "mega" churches when their celebrity-pastors are gone? Will half the body evaporate? Ecclesiology matters.


----------



## kodos

Earns a hearty amen from me. Thank you, Pastor.



Contra_Mundum said:


> When a particular church is "about" the pastor, there's a problem. Personality, or Preaching, or Publicity. What we're supposed to be "about" is Christ (eyes on him), and being his bride.
> 
> I don't care if its Piper, or JonnyMac, or Driscoll. The church has had issues with "personality" since the days of Corinth (1Cor.1:12) or men like Diotrephes (3Jn.1:9).
> 
> I think Christ designed his church to be a plug-and-play kind of organization. The front-men come and go; they move on or they die off. But the church continues. That's how its supposed to be, but when replacing the last guy becomes a matter of recruiting a clone, or maintaining the weekly "draw," the purpose for coming together has been lost.
> 
> Trust me, as a man with a normal ego I want people to come to our church, and I wish that my preaching would draw them in. Frankly, it's good that the folks who are at my church aren't there because of me, but because they are parts of the body (1Cor.12:14). THEY are the bride. Being the church is about fulfilling your calling (belonging), and listening to the gospel-Voice of your Good Shepherd. What sort of "voice" is being heard, when the pastor is talking about the TV flickering in his head? "Come and hear me, because I'm a visionary."
> 
> What will happen to these "mega" churches when their celebrity-pastors are gone? Will half the body evaporate? Ecclesiology matters.


----------



## elnwood

I don't quite understand what the big deal is. Did Driscoll claim to be a prophet?

Even Spurgeon had premonitions that were much more specific than Driscoll's. Shall we throw Spurgeon under the bus too?
Spurgeon and prophecy « A Living Text


----------



## Rufus

And from me, Thank you Pastor.


kodos said:


> Earns a hearty amen from me. Thank you, Pastor.
> 
> 
> 
> Contra_Mundum said:
> 
> 
> 
> When a particular church is "about" the pastor, there's a problem. Personality, or Preaching, or Publicity. What we're supposed to be "about" is Christ (eyes on him), and being his bride.
> 
> I don't care if its Piper, or JonnyMac, or Driscoll. The church has had issues with "personality" since the days of Corinth (1Cor.1:12) or men like Diotrephes (3Jn.1:9).
> 
> I think Christ designed his church to be a plug-and-play kind of organization. The front-men come and go; they move on or they die off. But the church continues. That's how its supposed to be, but when replacing the last guy becomes a matter of recruiting a clone, or maintaining the weekly "draw," the purpose for coming together has been lost.
> 
> Trust me, as a man with a normal ego I want people to come to our church, and I wish that my preaching would draw them in. Frankly, it's good that the folks who are at my church aren't there because of me, but because they are parts of the body (1Cor.12:14). THEY are the bride. Being the church is about fulfilling your calling (belonging), and listening to the gospel-Voice of your Good Shepherd. What sort of "voice" is being heard, when the pastor is talking about the TV flickering in his head? "Come and hear me, because I'm a visionary."
> 
> What will happen to these "mega" churches when their celebrity-pastors are gone? Will half the body evaporate? Ecclesiology matters.
Click to expand...


----------



## Pilgrim

GulfCoast Presbyterian said:


> I cannot understand why Piper does not yank his chain, hard.



Piper never apparently even yanked John Wimber's chain hard, so why would he do that with Driscoll?

---------- Post added at 01:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:43 PM ----------




elnwood said:


> I don't quite understand what the big deal is. Did Driscoll claim to be a prophet?
> 
> Even Spurgeon had premonitions that were much more specific than Driscoll's. Shall we throw Spurgeon under the bus too?
> Spurgeon and prophecy « A Living Text



I think you've failed to listen to the Driscoll message or read the transcript of it if you think that the premonitions Spurgeon spoke of were "much more specific than Driscoll's"


----------



## Jack K

I don't listen to Driscoll all that often, but it seems I've heard him mention this sort of thing a few times, especially the voice telling him to become a pastor. He has taken pains to say he doesn't believe it makes him better or more spiritual than others, and that he himself is at a loss to fully explain it. That allows me to retain respect for him, though I'm still skeptical.

My own dad, a Reformed pastor, heard an audible voice telling him to go into the ministry. He can't explain it either, except to say he does sense that it came from God. But he so seldom mentions it that I started responding to this thread without even remembering it happened.


----------



## Bill The Baptist

Contra_Mundum said:


> When a particular church is "about" the pastor, there's a problem. Personality, or Preaching, or Publicity. What we're supposed to be "about" is Christ (eyes on him), and being his bride.
> 
> I don't care if its Piper, or JonnyMac, or Driscoll. The church has had issues with "personality" since the days of Corinth (1Cor.1:12) or men like Diotrephes (3Jn.1:9).
> 
> I think Christ designed his church to be a plug-and-play kind of organization. The front-men come and go; they move on or they die off. But the church continues. That's how its supposed to be, but when replacing the last guy becomes a matter of recruiting a clone, or maintaining the weekly "draw," the purpose for coming together has been lost.
> 
> Trust me, as a man with a normal ego I want people to come to our church, and I wish that my preaching would draw them in. Frankly, it's good that the folks who are at my church aren't there because of me, but because they are parts of the body (1Cor.12:14). THEY are the bride. Being the church is about fulfilling your calling (belonging), and listening to the gospel-Voice of your Good Shepherd. What sort of "voice" is being heard, when the pastor is talking about the TV flickering in his head? "Come and hear me, because I'm a visionary."
> 
> What will happen to these "mega" churches when their celebrity-pastors are gone? Will half the body evaporate? Ecclesiology matters.



Thank you Rev. Buchanan, excellent comment as always and I think that you have hit on the real issue, ego. There is a video on the Gospel Coalition website where Mark Dever sits down with Mark Driscoll and James Macdonald and discusses their churches. Driscoll and Macdonald both have a central location where they preach, along with several satellite locations where their message is delivered via video. Dever asks to obvious question, why not just raise up elders and pastors and plant new churches with pastors who preach their own sermons instead of insisting on being the pastor of all these churches. The answer they gave, not is so many words, was that these satellite locations would not be nearly as successful if someone else was preaching in person rather than themselves via video. I can't decide which is more distressing, the level of arrogance portrayed in their attitude, or the sad fact that they are probably right.


----------



## christiana

He is such a disgrace that I cannot believe a true believer would belong and attend his church! He is in dire need of prayer and repentance.


----------



## raekwon

This clip is over five years old, if that matters to anyone.


----------



## MightyManfred

The Driscoll clip is from 2008, according to his defenders on Pyro - not quite 5 years old. As has been noted, the cumulative effect of Driscoll's teaching and behavior warrants corrective action from some and avoidance for the rest of us. I join with hearty "Amen!" the notion that celebrity "pastors" are problematic, regardless of agenda or motives (both of which can make things much worse).


----------



## raekwon

MightyManfred said:


> The Driscoll clip is from 2008, according to his defenders on Pyro - not quite 5 years old. As has been noted, the cumulative effect of Driscoll's teaching and behavior warrants corrective action from some and avoidance for the rest of us. I join with hearty "Amen!" the notion that celebrity "pastors" are problematic, regardless of agenda or motives (both of which can make things much worse).



Pardon me, then. Three years old.


----------



## Marrow Man

Three years old explains the Mickey Mouse shirt. That's when he was going through that phase, I guess. Or preparing to expand to Orange County.


----------



## AThornquist

This isn't a new thing, but it _is_ disturbing. I appreciate that Driscoll preaches the Gospel, but on this particular point I definitely would not defend his practice or behavior.


----------



## Sviata Nich

Is he charging people money for his "visions"? Is it the focus of his ministry? Is he using it to promote his own "greatness" or Christ's glory? Is he just lying about the visions? Do the stories he tells check out? Can he support his claim by scripture? are some questions that pop into my mind after listening to and reading it. 

I'm sure Mr. Driscoll struggles with pride, a lot, and I'm sure there are lots of things that could be tweaked to make his ministry more God glorifying. However, last time I checked, there has only ever been one Shepard who did have perfect life and ministry. I'm not a huge fan of him but to through him under the bus over this, in my opinion, is a shame.


----------



## Tripel

Why is this thread in the "Cults & World Religion" forum?

I realize Driscoll is generally not thought well of in these parts, but is this quote seriously considered cultish?


----------



## Gloria

BobVigneault said:


> Driscoll's creepy factor is just too high for me. I would not trust him with my daughters, my wife, and in fact, I wouldn't touch him with a ten foot cattle prod. There are good teachers we can listen to without having to have the more prurient regions of our wicked imaginations ignited. Philipians 4:8



Perfect.


----------



## Sviata Nich

Joshua said:


> It's been mentioned twice thus far, but I've not seen any buses driving through nor any folks being thrown under said unseen buses. What I _have_ seen is a man with a very public ministry receiving public criticism.


 
The "throwing under the bus" is in part reference to the article attached. If the writer does not throw him, then he comes about as close as one can without doing so. Criticism can be done with love (I do not mean to imply all criticism in this thread is without love), especially when it is a brother in Christ. And I agree, when one is in public ministry, one should expect this to happen. 

And I have to say, I really enjoy your avatar.


----------



## Rufus

Jack K said:


> My own dad, a Reformed pastor, heard an audible voice telling him to go into the ministry. He can't explain it either, except to say he does sense that it came from God. But he so seldom mentions it that I started responding to this thread without even remembering it happened.



That's why issues like this tear my mind apart. Some godly pastors greatly used by God have had experiences like that, I don't want to throw anybody out because there a continoulist (unless of course they are like anything we see on the television or in many other circles).

I still think his (Driscolls) "visions" where a bit weird for something supposedly coming from the *Holy* Spirit.

I've also unliked Mark Driscoll and Mars Hill Church on Facebook for the meantime.


----------



## Bill The Baptist

I am not trying to say that Driscoll is lying, but after watching the video it does ring a little false. If you had molested someone when they were very young and they didn't remember it and you had gotten away with it for so long, and then suddenly they came to you and said "Hey, my pastor says he had a vision that you molested me when I was two. Is this true?" You would never admit it to it as if it was no big deal. You would insist that the pastor was insane. And yet all of the people whom Driscoll had a "vision" about admitted it immediately when confronted.


----------



## Marrow Man

Tripel said:


> I realize Driscoll is generally not thought well of in these parts, but is this quote seriously considered cultish?



"Cultish" is actually one of the first words that came to my mind, and I didn't even notice the forum this had been placed in. But cultish in the personality cult sense. If you pastor is now receiving direct messages from God on an imaginary TV, what do you think that is going to do to the members of the congregation who trust in this man. If he now sees secret sins on the TV screen, then that gives him huge power/control over the people. And if that's not cultish, I don't know what is. No, nobody's being abducted in unmarked vans and taken to a gated compound, but this is the kind of thing that you see the exalted leaders of true cults of the past doing, except maybe on a smaller scale. And it's a very dangerous thing.


----------



## SolaScriptura

This quote is pretty dorky. Does he claim - specifically and emphatically that what he "sees" is of Divine origin?

Interestingly, I don't doubt his ability to read people - particularly people from abused pasts. The trauma of abuse often creates a "profile" of behaviors and lifestyle choices that someone with enough experience can read like an open book - or in this case, "watch like a tv program." Incidentally his church has a very large ministry to people coming from various types of broken backgrounds. In fact, hands down the best book I've read this year was written by his associate pastor who heads up that ministry.

So I really do trust his ability to discern someone who has emerged from an abusive past.


----------



## Parker234

A friend of mine read Driscoll's earlier book _Confessions of a Reformission Reverend _and said that in that book he discusses his children levitating off of their beds. Granted, I don't know the context and haven't read it myself. At the least it shows those strongly charismatic tendencies are nothing new to Driscoll's ministry.


----------



## Gage Browning

GulfCoast Presbyterian said:


> I cannot understand why Piper does not yank his chain, hard.


Seriously....(Megaditto)...


----------



## elnwood

Pilgrim said:


> elnwood said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't quite understand what the big deal is. Did Driscoll claim to be a prophet?
> 
> Even Spurgeon had premonitions that were much more specific than Driscoll's. Shall we throw Spurgeon under the bus too?
> Spurgeon and prophecy « A Living Text
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you've failed to listen to the Driscoll message or read the transcript of it if you think that the premonitions Spurgeon spoke of were "much more specific than Driscoll's"
Click to expand...


I meant more what Ben was saying. Recognizing the tell-tale signs of abuse is something that many counselors and pastors can do. Now, being led by the Spirit to point at someone in the congregation a dozen or more times, and discerning things like that someone stole the gloves he was wearing, or opened his shoemaker shop on the Sabbath and took four pence profit ... that seems to be much more difficult.

For those critiquing Driscoll ... are you also critical of Spurgeon's leadings of the spirit?


----------



## Pilgrim

elnwood said:


> Pilgrim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elnwood said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't quite understand what the big deal is. Did Driscoll claim to be a prophet?
> 
> Even Spurgeon had premonitions that were much more specific than Driscoll's. Shall we throw Spurgeon under the bus too?
> Spurgeon and prophecy « A Living Text
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you've failed to listen to the Driscoll message or read the transcript of it if you think that the premonitions Spurgeon spoke of were "much more specific than Driscoll's"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I meant more what Ben was saying. Recognizing the tell-tale signs of abuse is something that many counselors and pastors can do. Now, being led by the Spirit to point at someone in the congregation a dozen or more times, and discerning things like that someone stole the gloves he was wearing, or opened his shoemaker shop on the Sabbath and took four pence profit ... that seems to be much more difficult.
> 
> For those critiquing Driscoll ... are you also critical of Spurgeon's leadings of the spirit?
Click to expand...


Don,

Have you watched the video or read the transcript of Driscoll's message? I ask because if you had I don't think you'd keep asking this question in comparing him to Spurgeon.


----------



## elnwood

Pilgrim said:


> Have you watched the video or read the transcript of Driscoll's message? I ask because if you had I don't think you'd keep asking this question in comparing him to Spurgeon.



I read the transcript. Why do you not think that Driscoll and Spurgeon are comparable?


----------



## ericfromcowtown

Parker234 said:


> A friend of mine read Driscoll's earlier book _Confessions of a Reformission Reverend _and said that in that book he discusses his children levitating off of their beds. Granted, I don't know the context and haven't read it myself. At the least it shows those strongly charismatic tendencies are nothing new to Driscoll's ministry.



I've heard him say some odd things in the past too. I listened to a sermon (or conference, can't remember) talk he did on demons. Some good stuff in there, but he recounted the story about how he had been
attacked by a demon once, and that the attack had left him bruised and battered. 

My inlaws used to attend a pentacostal church, so this sort of talk doesn't shock me, per se, but "reformed" and "charismatic" just seems like such an odd combination.


----------



## VictorBravo

elnwood said:


> Pilgrim said:
> 
> 
> 
> Have you watched the video or read the transcript of Driscoll's message? I ask because if you had I don't think you'd keep asking this question in comparing him to Spurgeon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I read the transcript. Why do you not think that Driscoll and Spurgeon are comparable?
Click to expand...


As far as I can tell, Spurgeon never boasted that he used his "gifts" to expose sin to third parties. He never accused a wife of adultery in front of her husband without confronting her privately. And I am pretty sure he never told a person that he was a victim of a felony based only upon his visions.

In fact, Spurgeon did what he did in the course of preaching, and I'm not quite convinced that he singled people out as that account said. People recall being singled out, but that is how God's word often convicts.


----------



## Andres

raekwon said:


> This clip is over five years old, if that matters to anyone.



Why would that matter? Has Driscoll recanted or at least attempted to explain any of the video since then? If not, then I presume he still holds to the same views.


----------



## raekwon

Andres said:


> raekwon said:
> 
> 
> 
> This clip is over five years old, if that matters to anyone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why would that matter? Has Driscoll recanted or at least attempted to explain any of the video since then? If not, then I presume he still holds to the same views.
Click to expand...


I don't know. I don't watch or listen to him much anymore. But since it's been a little while, it'd probably be worth investigating instead of acting like he said it yesterday.


----------



## Peairtach

*Adam*


> A friend of mine read Driscoll's earlier book Confessions of a Reformission Reverend and said that in that book he discusses his children levitating off of their beds. Granted, I don't know the context and haven't read it myself. At the least it shows those strongly charismatic tendencies are nothing new to Driscoll's ministry.



Is that not when young children get full of orange squash and start using their bed as a trampoline


----------



## Pilgrim

elnwood said:


> Pilgrim said:
> 
> 
> 
> Have you watched the video or read the transcript of Driscoll's message? I ask because if you had I don't think you'd keep asking this question in comparing him to Spurgeon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I read the transcript. Why do you not think that Driscoll and Spurgeon are comparable?
Click to expand...


You posted that you meant more like what Ben was saying with regard to recognizing tell-tale signs of abuse. MD goes way beyond that and says he can view things as clearly as you would on a TV screen. I asked if you read the transcript because I don't see how someone can read it and then say that Spurgeon's impressions were "much more difficult." 

One difference is that Spurgeon apparently only had it happen a handful of times and he didn't denounce cessationists as being practical deists the way that Driscoll recently did. (Cessationism is likely an anachronistic term when applied to Spurgeon's era, but he would have been familiar with the argument.) Spurgeon had great admiration for Old Princeton, for example, which was arguably the fountainhead of cessationism as it is usually articulated today. Spurgeon used A.H. Hodge's _Outlines of Theology_ in his pastor's college, stating that he only disagreed with it on ecclesiology. Yet Driscoll derides that as "Old Calvinism" and says it's basically modernist and deist.

---------- Post added at 12:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:17 PM ----------




raekwon said:


> Andres said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> raekwon said:
> 
> 
> 
> This clip is over five years old, if that matters to anyone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why would that matter? Has Driscoll recanted or at least attempted to explain any of the video since then? If not, then I presume he still holds to the same views.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't know. I don't watch or listen to him much anymore. But since it's been a little while, it'd probably be worth investigating instead of acting like he said it yesterday.
Click to expand...


Very recently he has said "_cessationism is worldliness" _and “_So it goes to Atheism, Deism and this will be controversial, cessationism_.” He falsely claimed that cessationism was a post-enlightenment idea when in fact it goes back to the Church Fathers. While he doesn't say it in so many words, his denouncement of cessationism essentially equated it with the antisupernaturalism of the liberals. So I think it's fair to assume he is still in large agreement with his statements based on that as well as the fact that the message linked in the OP is still on his website. 

I ask, with all due respect, would this perpetual apology of "_How old is that message?_" be employed with regard to *any other* _*leader*_? Unfortunately over the past several years I have spent way too much time on the internet. Yet, I haven't seen "how old was that message" applied to anyone else, especially in this kind of context. 

It was continually brought up a couple of years ago when there was the controversy over the linkage to "Christian Nymphos," the Song of Solomon, etc. (which is still linked at MH from what I understand, with the exception of the Scotland message.) The concerns over the propriety of these actions were widely (and wrongly) dismissed by his admirers as just a rehash of the old cussing controversy. A lot of that is because many of the young guys simply don't like those who would dare to criticize them or their hero, typically viewing such criticism or concern as the raving of suited fundamentalists, prejudiced rednecks, rabid anti-Calvinists or "frozen chosen" TR's. While some of that may be true, broad brushing everyone in that manner is no more accurate than the Arminian-moralistic types are of stereotyping all Calvinists as being either the frozen chosen or Driscoll fanboys.


----------



## timmopussycat

Marrow Man said:


> athanatos said:
> 
> 
> 
> what is all this talk about NT prophecies could be false? Source? I HIGHLY doubt that Grudem would actually claim that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is what Grudem says in _The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today_ (emphasis added):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In this book I am suggesting an understanding of the gift of prophecy which would require a bit of modification in the views of each of these . . . groups. I am asking that the charismatics go on using the gift of prophecy, but that they stop calling it "a word from the Lord"`simply because that label makes it sound exactly like the Bible in authority, and leads to much misunderstanding. . . . On the other side, I am asking those in the cessationist camp to give serious thought to the possibility that prophecy in ordinary New Testament churches was not equal to Scripture in authority, *but was simply a very human and sometimes partially mistaken report of something the Holy Spirit brought to someone's mind.* And I am asking that they think again about those arguments for the cessation of certain gifts.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Speaking as a former charismatic, how someone within charismatic circles responds to Grudem's view here is a major marker of whether they have passed beyond charismatic to charismaniac. Those who accept Grudem's view, have rejected the biblical testimony that a prediction must be provably accurate before it can be accepted either as prophecy or divine testing. Those who reject Grudem's view but accept contemporary occasional situational (NOT canonical) prophecy are best dealt with in a way that recognizes their difference from Grudem's view.


----------



## J. Dean

As somebody who was once involved in the charismatic movement, let me say this clearly and concisely, with all due respect to Mark Driscoll and others who flirt with charismaticism/pentecostalism:

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE be careful about this!!! I can tell you that, more often than not, people who claimed to have "visions" or other supernatural interventions of the Spirit were in truth often giving in to their own imaginations or emotionalism. 

I, like others here, have no doubt that God in His sovereignty can interact in a divine way. The problem comes when that becomes the expected norm of operation, when the expected norm should be running to the written word of God and realizing that God's working out of His will more often than not happens through natural means rather than through miraculous means.

It's very easy to start chasing after the supernatural and forsake the natural in the pentecostal movement, and exalting tongues, signs, and wonders over the written Word of God is a real temptation to those in this area. 

I don't know whether or not Driscoll actively "seeks" after these things, or whether or not these are legitamate visions from God or conjurings from his own imagination. I do know this: to focus upon those things and make them the center of faith is a step in the direction of being tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine.


----------



## Theoretical

SolaScriptura said:


> This quote is pretty dorky. Does he claim - specifically and emphatically that what he "sees" is of Divine origin?
> 
> Interestingly, I don't doubt his ability to read people - particularly people from abused pasts. The trauma of abuse often creates a "profile" of behaviors and lifestyle choices that someone with enough experience can read like an open book - or in this case, "watch like a tv program." Incidentally his church has a very large ministry to people coming from various types of broken backgrounds. In fact, hands down the best book I've read this year was written by his associate pastor who heads up that ministry.
> 
> So I really do trust his ability to discern someone who has emerged from an abusive past.



Ben, I've found this to be quite true, having had several friends who've been abused. One of the most tragic things about abuse, particularly sexual abuse, is that it leaves a pretty distinct profile of wreckage. In fact, it's like a large portion of their humanity is stripped away and every inch of it they get back is a major victory. This means that they're easily identifiable if you know what to look for, which of course tends to attract other predatory types but can also be key to a Christian identifying and helping these people. And yes, if you're talking about _Rid of My Disgrace_, it's an excellent and badly needed book on the subject.

However, his quote is the WRONG approach to take towards someone exhibiting signs of abuse. The last thing a counselor should do is to project specifics like this onto some person or another. It's not unreasonable to ask if someone exhibiting the major characteristics of abuse was abused and if so who did it, but telling these people about your visions is unconscionably cruel,* especially if you think these prophetic visions can be fallible.* (Now I don't believe either fallible or infallible visions from God occur post-apostolic era, but this is an example of how fallible visions are in some ways even more cruel than the "infallible" ones) It's how you create false memories that shield either real abuse or psychological cries for help. And it also opens the door to false accusations, which erodes the credibility of rape or abuse to a public who would much prefer for this to only be an issue for a tiny group of people.


----------



## FenderPriest

Of interest to the OP:
Toby Sumpter gave some helpful, Presbyterian thoughts.
Douglas Wilson affirmed and amplified a few things from Toby.
Team Pyro replied to Wilson. Called him a tap-dancer.
Wilson comments on being a Tricksy Dancer.


----------



## JoannaV

There needs to be greater accountability and discipleship amongst some of these pastors. And honestly, some advice on speaking style. Sometimes one hears things that just sound so silly and wrong that it is hard to evaluate what was actually meant. You shouldn't have to interpret a pastor's words before other believers can see that they are ok.


----------



## JWY

Any thoughts on Driscoll's recent vodcast '4 Points of the Movement Revisited' his second talk at the Orlando Resurgence conference? It's recent, ecumenical, somewhat 'prophetic,' and he names lots of names and gives out lots of labels. Anyway, I think it's relevant to the discussion. Here's the link: http://feeds.theresurgence.com/~r/TheResurgence/~5/cYjbcZ6iUHE/20110818_part-2_vodcast.m4v


----------



## Reformed Roman

This is very interesting. The fact that it was 3 years ago though also makes a difference. I'm not sure what to think honestly.


----------



## Pilgrim

Zach Rohman said:


> The fact that it was 3 years ago though also makes a difference.



Why? Just the other week he slammed cessationists as being little better than liberals and deists. That certainly doesn't indicate any change of position on the issue.


----------



## Scottish Lass

Zach Rohman said:


> The fact that it was 3 years ago though also makes a difference.


Only if he's changed his position.


----------



## athanatos

Pilgrim said:


> Zach Rohman said:
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that it was 3 years ago though also makes a difference.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why? Just the other week he slammed cessationists as being little better than liberals and deists. That certainly doesn't indicate any change of position on the issue.
Click to expand...

Cite?


----------



## Pilgrim

athanatos said:


> Pilgrim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zach Rohman said:
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that it was 3 years ago though also makes a difference.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why? Just the other week he slammed cessationists as being little better than liberals and deists. That certainly doesn't indicate any change of position on the issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cite?
Click to expand...


I think it is in the Orlando message linked in post #53, starting about halfway through. 

If not, you can Google Driscoll and cessationism is worldliness or something similar and a bunch of links will come up. The video and a transcript are available in Frank Turk's recent Open Letter to Driscoll. The cessationism is worldliness message is what caused this blogger (who was a poster here in the early days) to recall the message that is the subject of this thread.


----------

