Mark Driscoll at Liberty University by Peter Lumpkins

Reflecting the idea among some of Christianity's earliest Christian philosophers that viewed pagan philosophy primarily as a thoroughly corrupted source and therefore resisted making theological use of pagan wisdom in understanding God, Tertullian famously asks, “What does Athens have to do with Jerusalem, the Academy with the Church?”¹  >>>

I suppose a similarly worded question could be asked of Liberty University officials: What does Lynchburg have to do with Seattle, the Falwells with Driscoll?

Hold onto your eyes as they pop out of their sockets when you read Charles Billingsley's tweet below:

Oh my. Is it true?

According to LU's Spring Convocation schedule for 2012, it is true:

If this doesn't seal it up on demonstrating the broad, thick, murky but altogether undeniable influence Mark Driscoll, Acts 29, and the young, restless, and reformed have on modern evangelicals, nothing will. Beyond the horizon of my personal expectations, I would never have accepted a prediction of this happening a year or at most, two years ago.

So, yes. I am shocked. I am confused...

And, if I am honest, I count this outrageous. Parents, of course, can express their disapproval by kindly yet nonetheless boldly sending their kids to a more healthy environment elsewhere.

If LU cannot resist the trendy urge to be identified with Driscoll's inciting mysogyny, his exclusively "Reformed" church planting network, and/or his less than appealing extremist views on "visions and dreams," what might this suggest about other evangelicals to the left of LU?

Make no mistake: LU's action speaks loudly about the state of modern evangelicalism, especially modern Fundamentalism.    

With that, I am...

Peter

¹De praescr. haeret. 7.9 as quoted in Fahlbusch, E., & Bromiley, G. W. (2005). Vol. 4: The encyclopedia of Christianity (195–196). Grand Rapids, Mich.; Leiden, Netherlands: Wm. B. Eerdmans; Brill.

Comments

[JND]

Maybe if students hear Mark Driscoll in person they will be MORE likely to question his influence?

[Philip Miller]

Let me be the first to congratulate the current generation of leaders at my alma mater for continuing the visionary leadership of this fine institution, by rejecting old stereotypes, and exposing the student body to a variety of views and methodologies. Dr Falwell did it when he rejected the narrowness and separatism of the BBF and aligned with the SBCV. There was Lumpkin style criticism then as well. There were raised eyebrows when Ted Kennedy was invited as a speaker as well. Dr Falwell never allowed his critics to define him, and I'm delighted to see our current leaders aren't either.

[Max]

Oh my! A sad development, indeed. Given the latest controversy on Driscoll, perhaps LU should exercise the footnote at the bottom of their calendar: "This schedule is tentative and subject to change."

LU invite Driscoll?! What's the world comin' to? To the church, that's what!

[peter lumpkins]

Phillip,

I'm glad you made it here as the first. Congrats!

And, I grant you there may have been "Lumpkin [sic] style criticism" in the era you speak. What I cannot grant, however, is for your impression to stand that "Lumpkin [sic] style criticism" falls only to the right of center. The truth is, we all have lines in the proverbial sand over which we will not cross, all including you, Phillip. You and I may draw our lines on different sections of the beach, but you just like I will eventually draw a line.

If I am correct, your commentary reduces to surface slush. You missed the actual point by a full West Georgia mile.

With that, I am...
Peter

[Tommy Mann]

Thanks for taking a stand against Driscoll. For Philip, here is a blog I wrote about him myself.
http://tommycmann.blogspot.com/2011/11/mark-driscoll-leader-we-shouldnt-follow.html

[Max]

If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything. Liberty University, under Dr. Falwell's leadership, used to do just that. Here's an example ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBbcGIrgOds

[Phil Miller]

Peter,I may have missed your actual point, but let me clarify mine. I was at Liberty during the time when Falwell was being heavily criticized, both for having Rick Warren come to Super Conference, and for moving away from the BBF. I learned something from watching these critics. Some of my fellows students, who obviously reflected the views of their home churches and pastors, were so critical of both Warren and the SBC that thhey could see nothing good in either. There was no use in pointing out that the gospel was being preached by both, and that God was obviously working in both. All they could see was the bad, and eventually they basically became broken records, reciting other people's criticisms. They were so consumed by their criticism that several even left the school, and their pursuit of ministy. I see a lot of the same in the incessant criticism of Driscoll, and also of calvinism, for that matter. Sure there are faults and excesses in both, but I don't see a need to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Indeed if any of us were judged to the degree that those two are judged on this blog, we'd all need "throwin". I have no problem in pointing out publically where there are errors and excesses, but there comes a point were people can't see the good in anyone they have disagreements with. I don't see either calvinists, or the infatuations of Driscoll, as our enemies, or as reasons not to hear what they have to say.

[Christopher Bullard]

Yep... Welcome to the NEW EVANGELICALISM...We are seeing the sad fruit of the SBC...we have been non theological for YEARS. Remember that Charles B was a REGULAR on TBN.Remember that the Falwells are not very theological men....this is what u get. Peter, we have been putting non theological men on all the major SBC platforms for years.

[Christopher Bullard]

Peter,

It's almost like God has blinded the eyes of some Baptist leaders. Of course we also have SBC men who are VERY quiet these days as well.

[lmalone]

Phillip sees no problem giving a guy who sees porno divinations and teaches abusive strategies concerning wives a platform? I guess anything goes...we would not want to be accused of being "narrow minded". I actually have less of a problem with Ted Kennedy. At least he did not claim every word out of his mouth on stage is from the Holy Spirit.

But considering the past few years, nothing Liberty does surprises me anymore.

I see that Kyle Idleman is also on the list. An up and coming seeker guy, jr pastor of a mega church who wrote, Not a Fan. Yes, I know him. A Billy Hybels, Rick Warren seeker type making a name of himself. Just say Jesus and presto! you are saved. The aim is filling the seats. Not all that different from Driscoll who brags about numbers.

[Norm]

Phillip:
Why not have your wife (if you're married) read Driscoll's views on anal sex? Or, if you're not married, read them to your sister or mother. Those women will care not one whit whatever else MD may have correct. A glass of pure water with 5 percent cyanide is a poison glass of water.

[Tim G]

What Phillip misses is that convo was never used by Dr. Fallwell for guests of a more controversial manner. There may have been a few but not many if any.

As an alumni and former speaker at two convo's at Liberty I am somewhat shocked by this one. And that might be too mild a word to use.

[volfan007]

I am shocked, too. Wow. And, I like and agree with the statement made by Christopher Bullard...a lot of leaders in the SBC are being strangely quiet right now. They're not saying much at all about what's happening in the SBC, one way or the other????

David

[Jeremiah]

What may be more sad than anything in dealing with Driscoll is that we are unwilling to view him for what he is... a fallen human who has been saved by the grace found only in Jesus Christ. He is no different from you or me in that he is human. Though he may have views differing from what many of us may believe, I guarantee that not one person that writes, speaks or blogs agrees with each other completely. I applaud LU for bringing in people with differing views. By hearing and reading those that hold differing views we are better able to defend our own theology by knowing the information that is out there. This was very similar conversation I had with a seminary president a week ago.
Take for example I recently read Terrence Tiessen's "Who can be Saved?" Through reading this book I was challenged to think deeply about what I truly believe from scripture regarding the Issue of salvation.
I was challenged the week to think about something... What good does is help to put someone down and embarrass them? The better question is 'How is this conversation helping the family of God?'
One last question... Does Driscoll proclaim the Truth of the gospel? This is a question that if "no" is the answer I would love to hear criticized. That is an issue that will harm the kingdom.
I am not a LU alum by the way. Just wanted to clear that up :) Still enjoy reading the articles here thought I might not always agree.

[Ron Hale]

I’d rather go to a book burning with Michael Servetus in Geneva than that chapel service ...I'm just sayin'

[Jeff Moore]

I am glad the Bible doesn't say "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them." (Ephesians 5:11) Falwell and Liberty started on the far right and have been traveling left at light speed ever since. I am never surprised by LU's actions, though some of her supporters are a quandary.

[peter lumpkins]

@Jeremiah,

"What may be more sad than anything in dealing with Driscoll is that we are unwilling to view him for what he is... a fallen human who has been saved by the grace found only in Jesus Christ."

This has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not the criticisms raised against Driscoll are valid or not, Jeremiah. Rather like with Phillip, Deakon, and others above, it is a subtle shift from focusing on Driscoll's criticism to condemning those who raise the questions. Consequently, the natural effect is, the critics are condemnable and blamable but Driscoll walks away.

To believe some, what we do when we offer what we believe to be legitimate criticisms of one whom we believe to be an out-of-control-rogue-celebrity-pastor is far worse than anything Driscoll has ever said. Even more, Driscoll repeatedly slams the views of traditionally-oriented believers as some type of 'red-neck' Christianity but when we criticize Driscoll, we're told to think of him as a fellow fallen human being. A skewed rationale like this justifies the worst immoral habits imaginable, I'm afraid.

I'm thankful for your readership, Jeremiah.

With that, I am...
Peter

[lmalone]

Jeremiah, I don't get it. So, when I am vulgar, crass, promote a*** s***, claim porno divinations AND make a living doing it, people should just say I am a fallen human and that makes it ok?

Isn't this the Clinton defense reworked for Christendom?

[Mary]

So basically, if a man preaches the gospel, nothing else matters. There is not line he can cross. There is no depth to which he can sink that disqualifies him for leadership. How is that idea even Biblical?

Let's see how that works shall we?

Ergun Caner preached the Gospel and he lost his job. Peter Lumpkins preaches the Gospel and right now on SBC Voices there is a blog post about looking for nonCalvinist blogs and there are people who are screaming against Peter Lumpkins, gospel preacher, with hatred - you should have nothing to do with his "anti" Calvinist blog. And no one is over there talking about Peter being a sinner like everyone else and pointing out that he teaches the gospel. It's amazing how a misgynistic narcissistic, porn vision, bully, gets defenders.

It ain't the gospel being defended here.

So as long as the gospel is in it a porn flick is ok. there is no depth, no depravity too serious as long as the gospel is involved.

[lmalone]

Has Mohler done a blog post of the book or the interview? Has our resident culture warrior/SBC seminary prez said anything at all? Or is he too busy these days protecting and promoting CJ Mahaney?

[dr. james willingham]

I do declare, Peter, you are just full of your self, just as full as Driscoll is of himself. It would be funny, if it were not hilarious.

[lmalone]

Dr. Willingham, I always respect your comments over at voices and learn a lot from them. What I am confused about is your comparing Peter to Driscoll as being full of themselves. I do not believe it is a just comparison. Peter has one blog. Driscoll has stages all over the US, Canada and even GB, written many books and is a shock jock preacher.

Peter has simply analyzed his words and actions as a public figure. Driscoll seeks publicity but then gets upset with disagreement or questioning. In fact, he once told his congregation that "questioning is sinning".

And I say this as one who vehemetly disagreed with Peter back during the Caner scandal. We have to stop taking sides and call out shock jocks celebrities who make merchandise of God's people.

I hope you listened to the interview between Justin Brierly and Driscoll before you made this comment. It might give you some insight in your unjust comparison.

[lmalone]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/alisaharris/2011/09/to-the-child-star-of-pastormark-tv/

You guys might find this interesting about Mark Driscoll featuring his 14 year old daughter blogging on pastormarktv... about balancing the pressures of high school and ways to grow spiritually as a teenage girl.

Again, shouldn't this be long after the fact? What is Mark thinking!

[peter]

Imalone

Thanks for the words. I truly wish those we know are capable of genuine contributions to threads like these—concerning which we know Dr. Willingham is one who is very capable--would log on and interact rather than leave the quintessential ‘drive-by’ as our brother has done.  Even so, I find Dr. Willingham’s words, shall we just say, entertaining, especially in light of his own bio profile at his site. Included about Dr. Willingham are:

• Pastored 4 churches for total 28 yrs
• five degrees (B.S.; M.A.; M.Div,; D.Min; 2nd M.A.;18 hrs toward Ph.D; post graduate @ two universities
• taught American History, Philosophy, Political Science in College
• taught 7 subjects in seminary extension
• Counselor in High School

Now, don ‘t get me wrong. I think the above is both legitimate if one desires to publicize it or if one feels the need to publicize it as well as impressive if one actually publicizes it. Nonetheless, to go around accusing others of being “full of themselves” when one continually advertises a detailed vita as does Dr. Willingham, sorta, kinda lets the air out of his own tires.

Now if we only knew what he could contribute about the original post rather than how he feels about Driscoll, me, or even himself to be “full of ourselves.”

With that, I am…

Peter