Anderson Cooper, Rachel Maddow, Mark Driscoll and a Frat Party
I saw a striking parallel in my rss reader today. It is somewhat ironic and indicting.
You might have seen (or even attended) on of the various ‘tea parties’ that were hosted all over the US yesterday in protest of taxes. Last night on the various news networks (CNN, MSNBC, etc) the anchors seemed to be unable to resist the temptation to make continual sexual references and innuendos when reporting on the news of the Tea Parties. (I am not going to go into detail here but suffice it to say it is clearly inappropriate when reporting on the story.) This has led to an outcry by many.
Then I read of a razor sharp blog debate that continues within the Reformed camp. John MacArthur is continuing to highlight Mark Driscoll’s liberal use of frat house style language to describe marital intimacy.
I wonder if we (the Reformed guys) might look in the CNN mirror for a minute. The stuff that Anderson Cooper, Rachel Maddow, and David Shuster were saying were attempts to make a quick laugh through clever sexual innuendo. They were trying to communicate and win a large, varied audience with their sarcastic, sophomoric, frat-house language. Oh they still looked professional. They were wearing their suits and trying to commend themselves as respectable. The trouble is they were acting like a bunch of drunk 19 year olds around a keg trying to one-up each other with their clever jokes.
Some people probably thought the anchors were clever and funny. Others thought they were classless and shameful. I think they just looked stupid. They should be embarrassed. They brought reproach upon themselves, their office, and their organizations.
When pastors use Jesus to be a punch line of a joke, regardless of the ostensibly biblical point that is being made, they too should be embarrassed. Whether you are suggesting or inferring homosexuality to Jesus or suggesting that people thought Mary was “knocking boots in some guy’s car at the prom” you are out of line. This is just using Jesus to make a joke. Folks who do such things bring shame upon themselves, the church, and their boss, who is the Lord of the church.
The shtick is tired and old. It’s really time to turn the page and put the old Chris Rock routines to bed. After all, there is a gloriously infinite and inexhaustible fountain of Christological delight to be had in the gospel.
updated links:
From MacArthur:
- The Rape of Solomon’s Song (Part One)
- The Rape of Solomon’s Song (Part Two)
- The Rape of Solomon’s Song (Part Three)
- The Rape of Solomon’s Song (Part Four-conclusion)
- Link provided by MacArthur of the language in the Scotland sermons
From Challies
Irish Calvinist
Possibly Related posts:
- MacArthur on the ‘raping of the Song of Solomon’
- Mark Driscoll on his current trial
- Confessions of a Reformissional Rev (Mark Driscoll)
- Jesus Christ, Jack Bauer, and Mark Driscoll
- Mark Driscoll at the Exponential Conference
44 Responses to “Anderson Cooper, Rachel Maddow, Mark Driscoll and a Frat Party”
Leave a Reply
About
Subscribe to Updates
Twitter Updates
- @JustinBuzzard Hands down Pillar's Edwards & then Lane. Ferguson's lil book is good as are Keller's & MacArthur's sermons.
- With him there is plentiful redemption (Ps.130.7). This is good for one who's sin is plentiful!
- We are officially in the South- Fried Chicken & Pickles @ the gas station register.
Recent Comments
- Gordan on John Piper on Sermon Prep
- Tweets that mention John Piper on Sermon Prep -- Topsy.com on John Piper on Sermon Prep
- Erik on Running from God and To God
- donsands on Running from God and To God
- Tweets that mention Running from God and To God- Irish Calvinist -- Topsy.com on Running from God and To God
“After all, there is a gloriously infinite and inexhaustible fountain of Christological delight to be had in the gospel.”
Well said.
Excellent.
Amen to that.
No matter what side of the “emergent / reformed” debate one comes down on, you are absolutely right.
There is a case to be made for speaking in common language, but crassness and innuendo should never find a place in our conversations.
Another clue we should take is from our Black brethren, who have struggled with when, if ever, it is appropriate to use the “N-word” in speaking about, or addressing members of their own race.
Relevance (aka “appearing hip”) is sometimes bought at too high a price.
I second Pyro’s “well said.”
Thanks Erik.
Amen!
What Phil said. One has to wonder where the shock-jock preachers will be in 10 to 20 years.
Thank you Erik.
Very well said.
The shtick is tired and old and certainly unbecoming the Holy God.
Amen!
You know what else is “old & tired”? The holier than thou attitude in the upper echelon of the American Christian Church. I pray that people would stop telling me why others are wrong and start telling me why they were wrong, but God… While I admit to an attraction to the “train wreck” that Pastor MacArthur and others are causing in the blogosphere, I know that most who aren’t in that elite crowd don’t know about it and frankly probably don’t care. What the lost, and most lay Christians need has always been and will continue to be pastors who fervently preach the Word of God. I’ll take a “non-conference” style Sunday morning sermon from MacArthur, Johnson, Driscoll, Chandler, Piper, Keller, etc. over the banter occurring over this. This small inside-baseball glimpse is more than enough to make me very thankful that I am not in corporate ministry.
Thank you Erik.
Well…I didn’t like it at all.
Just kidding. Everybody being so positive and all….
Can anyone explain to me how Jesus was being used as the punchline in a joke in either instance cited above? In the first case a false contemporary image of Christ was being lampooned. In the second case, the assumptions of Christ’s contemporaries were put into the equivalent modern day scenario. Christ was not the punchline – false statements and images of Christ were the punchline.
I have to agree with Old & Tired on this one…
I agree and am saddened.
I may be old fashioned, but I love deeply my 89 year old mother and wonderful as she is and precious to me, Mum didn’t die for me to take my shame and filthy sin upon her like my beautiful Saviour did.
I groan at times when I read Mark, and I have read 2 of his books, they say some wonderful challenging things to my lukewarm heart and I need his rebukes, but then he overflows in to, in my understanding anyhow, coarse language and I’m grieved.and wonder why he needs to use these terms etc .
I’m happy to give him the benefit of the doubt and I’m probably missing an important aspect he is trying to convey or teach me but I confess I’m struggling.
But….the dreaded ….but….going back to my Mum I could never dream of using the street terms Mark sometimes uses next to my Saviours name in a conversation about or referencing my Mother, so how much more the King or glory, the all together lovely one. For me, it would smack of lack of respect and honour.
I hope I’m wrong and perhaps seeing/hearing Mark unclearly, I’ve so many blindspots its more than possible.
What the lost, and most lay Christians need has always been and will continue to be pastors who fervently preach the Word of God
While that is true, it is also true that we need to keep a sharp eye out on each other lest we stray. This isn’t about nitpicking. That’s why some of the “old and tired” things need to be addressed. If we choose to ignore the manner in how the gospel is preached (even amongst people we hold as brothers in the cause), then we set ourselves up for problems that will cause us to yearn for these old and tired debates.
Thank you Erik for not ignoring the issue.
it’s funny how divided people are over this. some are struck by how crass driscoll’s language can be, others have no problem and are apparently edified. a lot of people are taking this way too personally (which i can understand) but seriously, if our concern is purity and honoring Jesus, then this debate MUST happen and those involved must be held accountable.
macarthur once had to answer a diverse panel of theologians who were concerned with his teaching many years back – he did it with grace and explained at length his position on certain doctrines. it all ended well and with much commendation from the “investigative” body. i’m not saying driscoll should be subject to a similar grilling but perhaps there can be a loving yet formal meeting between pastor mark and the ministers who believe he is out of line? or is that too much of a reaction at this point?
Bravo, Erik! Bravo!
I must admit that I am alarmed and dismayed with John MacArthur and his pit bull Phil Johnson’s public attack on Mark Driscoll. At the Gospel Coalition last year a friend and Master’s Grad asked Mark about the “feud” and Mark said that he had tried to contact MacArthur “numerous” times and could never get a call back. I have a couple of questions for the Dr. MacArthur and for Phil Johnson.
1. If Mark’s sin is as serious as you say why haven’t you confronted Biblically and privately?
2. What is it that you are attempting to accomplish with your actions?
I have benefited directly from Dr. MacArthur’s Ministry and the Ministry of GCC but fear that they have completely out in left field on this issue. The difficult part for me is that I think that Dr. MacArthur could have been a great help and encouragement to Mars Hill and the ministry of Mark Driscoll. I don’t feel too bad though since Dr. D. A. Carson, Dr. Tim Keller, and Dr. John Piper are using their wisdom to speak into Mark’s life.
“This is just using Jesus to make a joke.”
I think this is poor analysis, Erik. You’ve missed it. It’s the other way around. Driscoll is using satire to demean a false conception of Jesus in order to highlight and glorify an accurate conception of the real Jesus, who is Lord and Savior of sinners and the head of the Church. Thus, you’re comparison of Pastor Driscoll to non-believing, professional journalists who are making sexual references to mock those with whom they disagree and probably dislike is wholly inaccurate, as well as unhelpful.
Certainly, Mark isn’t perfect. I heard he still sins. Next thing you know, he’ll be hanging out with prostitutes and tax collectors…and that’s the last thing our clean, American church needs. Good thing we got the stones ready.
Ron-
Well said. However, if you are right and “This isn’t about nitpicking.”, then I’d sure like to know what MacArthur’s 3 posts (and the 60+ comments to each) over at the Pulpit blog are all about? What is your definition of nitpicking? There is no way this is edifying to Driscoll and I’m simply left dumbfounded as to what to think of MacArthur (one of the true heroes) at this point. I anxiously await his final post where he has said he will speak to some specific questions like these. I’m also left wondering how it must feel to be Driscoll at this point? Hopefully, he isn’t following along with the blog! But, I would find that hard to believe. The man clearly has a heart to serve the Lord and God has given him a gift to teach and yet folks like MacArthur are essentially telling him he needs to walk away from his ministry (i.e. the “beyond reproach” comment). Again, this makes me very thankful I am not in corporate ministry.
Bravo, Erik!
Good post. I think the solution to such pastors is the same as with CNN. If you don’t like what is being said, stop watching / listening. CNN has become an absolute joke. Their ratings for their primetime shows have recently slipped lower than MSNBC’s to third place among the cable news networks. CNN’s starting to get the message that America doesn’t want what it’s producing. Maybe that’s the same message we need to give to these pastors and give them bad “ratings.”
[...] Anderson Cooper, Rachel Maddow, Mark Driscoll, and a Frat Party Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)The Peasant PrincessMy Wife is Cool – She likes listening to Driscoll! [...]
Not Phil Johnson: “At the Gospel Coalition last year a friend and Master’s Grad asked Mark about the ‘feud’ and Mark said that he had tried to contact MacArthur “numerous” times and could never get a call back.”
See: if Mark said that, it was categorically a lie.
I’m going to answer this (though it should be unnecessary to have to answer hearsay and gossip) because I keep hearing again and again that Mark has made that claim. When I raised the point with him directly, he ignored the question.
Someone with whom I shared the platform at a conference last October told me Mark had given him a similar story. So when I contacted Mark directly, I brought that issue up in my letter’s PS. He ignored the issue just like he ignored the other questions I asked him.
The story simply is not true, and Mark himself knows it. Before you spread the accusation further based on that kind of hearsay, I suggest you ask Mark directly if it is true. I’m guessing that’s not a claim he is willing to make publicly and have subjected to careful analysis.
By the way, there is more than one way to speak wisdom into someone’s life. Scripture is pretty clear that sometimes–especially when a Christian leader sins repeatedly–this may entail a public rebuke.
Benjamin: “I think this is poor analysis, Erik. You’ve missed it. It’s the other way around.”
@ are you kidding me?? He is making a joke. He is trying to get a response. He is being unduly vivid, crass, sarcastic and frankly vulgar. And who is he talking about? Jesus! C’mon. This is exactly the same thing the anchors were doing only to an infinitely higher degree.
All you have to do is say that the book is about love, courtship and romance. Many have applied some interesting hermeneutics to make this a story about Christ and his church. This obviously makes it difficult to understand the book literally.
But no, he takes this as an opportunity to impute unnatural and unrealistic characterizations to Christ in order to get a joke and make his point. And frankly, if his point was that this type of interpretation insults Jesus with irresponsible suggestions then he just undermined it himself for a cheap laugh.
Old and tired,
I’ve been directed to enough links that produce no doubt in me Driscoll has a problem. This is a public problem since they concern material on his website whether informative or things he has said. Your concern is to edify Driscoll. Well, I think edification for him may be a strong rebuke from a man such as MacArthur. Maybe he should feel shame. I understand some comments are more harmful than good, but that is the nature of comment boards. You’ll see it in the history on Eriks blog, and any other blog that posts comments. That is not the case concerning MacArthur.
The larger issue at stake here is what is happening to us? MacArthur rightly says we seem to be adjusting by moving our language and behavior towards the base of the culture. I don’t think that’s what Paul meant when he said he he become all things to all people.
It’s not nitpicking. It’s making sure we are staying in the world, but not becoming of it.
The emergent church spreads relativism, health and wealth televangelists deceive millions, a growing movement of neo-atheists mock and ridicule Christianity, and yet MacArthur decides to turn the big guns on a Christ-exalting man like Driscoll, a man who daily preaches the Bible and extols Jesus as the only means of Salvation to the darkest and most un-churched city in America. Ignoring the wealth of Driscoll’s contributions to the kingdom and the tens of thousands of people who have profited from the Mars Hill ministry, MacArthur instead uses his pulpit to bloviate about the occasional “harsh” language which Driscoll uses to reach a segment of society in dire need of Jesus. MacArthur should take a look at the big picture and I pray that God reveals just how unhelpful and myopic his accusations against Driscoll are.
Also, the attempt to compare Driscoll to unbelieving, sophomoric, cable TV mockers is unfounded. The worldviews and ultimate intent of the two parties couldn’t be more different. One is using language to defile and deride, the other is using language as a means to reach lost sinners who need Christ.
We have enough problems fighting against Satan and his forces. Let’s not make his job easier by turning on one another. Many of the caustic, ignorant, and self-righteous comments under MacArthur’s blog posts make me embarrassed to be a Christian and are far more troublesome than anything Driscoll has said or done.
It’s going to be unpopular on this blog, but I have to agree with Benjamin. Unload your slingshots, Mac.
Driscoll has made me wince on more than one occasion, but I’ve also watched him mature under the guidance of CJ Mahaney and John Piper. I wonder why Piper and CJ aren’t lobbing grenades?
For the record I am not a Driscoll sniper. I have posted numerous articles highlighting positive elements of his ministry. (I even have Driscoll’s co-author commenting and thanking me for book reviews)…But at the same time I have been critical where I think he crosses the biblical line. Overall I think I have been pretty balanced.
This stuff is just flat out–out of bounds. The fact that so many people appeal to pragmatism as the trump card to deflect any type of criticism is seriously troubling. People act like the Scriptures are not clear. I just don’t get it.
Jared, you are using the age old trick of trynig to deflect from a problem by pointing at other problems. Maybe we should thankful that MacArthur considers Driscoll worthy of this attention, as opposed to ignoring him.
Have you seen some of the links to Mars Hill that people are concerned about? These are not minor issues. Mars Hill may very well be leading many to Christ. That does not give it permission to flaunt its opinions on the myriad of ways couples should perform sex (and are in essence commanded by scripture).
Erik is right, pragmatism has become a god, and it’s seriously troubling.
You’re a good thinker, Erik. Well done, and right on!
Tom
Doctrine Matters
P.s. And on a personal note – GO BIG RED!
I agree with MacArthur pretty much on all he has said about Marks use of the Song of Solomon . Plus since it was preached publicly it is open to critic and correction . The only thing that I winced at when MacArthur said language and lifestyle. Language I get but what lifestyle is he referring to . I will defend Mark here because from what I have read and listened to he loves his wife and children , loves his parents and unless you have some direct info that points to public sin in his life style , that was a low blow. My only fear is this conversation is not going to lead to anything beneficial , which I hope it does.
Ron-
First of all, I don’t appreciate your accusation of trickery. I have a different opinion than you do, but I’m not trying to trick anyone. Let’s reserve our slings and arrows for those who are truly attempting to deceive and corrupt.
My point was that we need to get better at choosing our battles. As our culture and government become increasingly hostile to Christianity, the freedom to quibble over minor doctrinal issues on the internet may give way to more serious and intense issues and problems for Christians. As Piper exhorts us, let’s live a war-time lifestyle and focus on the bigger realities of the kingdom of God. With that focus, things like what Driscoll thinks about oral sex will be minor and instead of wasting time attacking one small aspect of a Christian brother’s ministry, we’ll support and encourage the overall good he is achieving.
erik and Phil Johnson.
any thoughts on Piper’s article? I ask because I was convicted over it…
What I Said to the Pastoral Staff About Unity Amid Differences
Jared,
This is a problem, and it’s importance should not be gauged by being for or against Driscoll. This is a very public issue because Driscoll has made it so. I too love Piper and sat under his teaching for a handful of years. I agree with the wartime lifestyle, but that has nothing to do with what is being addressed here. The government and culture as they operate are the least of our problems. They have been and will be hostile to the gospel in varying degrees, but do not have the position to inflict damage on the church as it would occur from within. And yes, some reputable people are concerned that Driscoll is inflicting damage.
John MacArthur is not some kook who’s looking for a fight.. There are godly people greatly concerned about this. I suggest you not marginalize them or the issue being discussed.
Seth, it is a good list. I agree it is convicting. I would have liked to see him include something about the need to elevate a unity in truth, holiness and the glory of Christ. This mandates biblical admonishment and confrontation from our seat at the foot of the cross (cf. Col. 1.28-29; 3.15-17). I don’t want it to ever get so important to ‘just get along’ that we shelve important stuff. Of course you and I have spoken personally about how devastating this danger is not just to us but to the church. Thanks for the link.
(Link to 4th article goes to the wrong place.)
I was initially worried that this would be a pro-Driscoll and anti-MacArthur post by Erik, but then was also worried that MacArthur would step out on some cultural critique of Driscoll’s style.
I think Erik has been very fair to Driscoll and has helped me to examine my own heart in my preconcieved notions of evangelical correctness over the last year. However, Driscoll has gone to far here (does that mean he was headed this way to egin with?). This treatment of Scripture isn’t shock for shock’s sake. It is mishandling of the text. This isn’t cultural and it isn’t a personal attack against a man, but a call to show respect to the King and his Word.
Thanks to Erik, Phil and MacArthur
I think I should say something about my motivation for these last two posts on the ‘controversy’. One of my main motives is due to the fact that the Peasant Princess is quite popular among many who attend Omaha Bible Church. I am a pastor there and this blog is aimed first to serve them and then whoever else may benefit from it. So if Challies or Johnson or whoever link to something I write that is fine but I am not out trying to make a name for myself by spitting razorblades at Driscoll, that is not my thing. As I have said and shown, I think I have been fair in this regard.
Whatever the reach or scope of this blog is it is not attended to eclipse my primary goal which is to help those around me to see Christ clearly in his word and as a result be more impressed with him.
So, since I’ve posted a couple of times on this subject, I thought I’d do some “Spring Cleaning” of my own now that MacArthur has posted his final article.
I’m thankful for his final post. It has opened my eyes. I think the drastic variations in opinion in comments both here and at the Pulpit were due largely to a lack of information. Prior to today, I think you could probably look down the list of commenters and divide them into two groups: 1. Those who had seen/read the sermon by Driscoll from Scotland. 2. Those who had not seen/read the sermon by Driscoll from Scotland but might have seen some or all his series titled “The Peasant Princess” at Mars Hill. Say what you want about some of the comments from the PP Series, but it is definitely subdued comparatively. Now that I have been made aware of the comments made by Driscoll in Scotland (via the link provided at the Pulpit) I find my opinion has changed on the subject. I cannot offer a defense for the comments that I myself would find totally inappropriate in a corporate venue. (Granted, I’m not offended by the words themselves. I have read very similar items in Christian marriage books and I have discussed it with fellow men one on one. One and one and in a discipleship or consulting venue it may be appropriate.) However, one of the items I believe MacArthur was arguing is that the words are totally inappropriate for a pastor to speak from the pulpit in that type of venue. In that, I’d have to agree 100%. I wouldn’t be happy if I were sitting in the room with my little brother (who is single, 22, and struggles daily with sexual temptation). As a matter of fact, I might have walked out of the room dragging him with me.
So, where do we go from here? Driscoll has half-heartedly agreed with the rebuke (i.e. pulled the content from the net, posted an ambiguous blog at Resurgence.) From my perspective, a Christian who enjoys the preaching of Driscoll (along with Piper, MacArthur, Chandler, Johnson, and many others) I would like to hear a detailed response by Driscoll. Geniune repentance and a request for forgiveness would also be appropriate. If he were to do that, tackle this head-on, work on it, try to change, I know I would be right there with him supporting him and continuing to listen to him minister the Word. If that doesn’t happen, I’m one who will have no choice but to drop him from my list of podcast subscriptions.
OLD & TIRED, I appreciate you coming back in here and ‘spring cleaning’. I agree with a lot of what you say and find myself at the same conflicted and awkward position with Driscoll.
All you guys have way too much time on your hands – get off your key board and go build relationships with non-christians and display Jesus to your community
unbelievable!!!!!!!!!
JFM and MD mentoree-
Even though I think you could have said it in a more encouraging way, your comment is very true.
Thanks.
JFM and MD mentoree,
You are making the assumption that the individuals who have posted are not building relationships with non-christians and displaying Jesus to their community. You are assuming that just because a post is online, that precludes relationships.
Thus, based upon your own assumption, you must not be building relationships with non-Christians and displaying Jesus to your community, being that you have posted a comment and must have been on your keyboard to do so.
Unbelievable!!….
You made a comment you have not defended, therefore I am wondering if perhaps you would like to take the opportunity to post something constructive.
Now, so that I don’t fall into that same error. I want to say a couple of things that are hopefully constructive. I need to remind you of the transparency of the post and the wrestling taking place. Is it an arbitrary discussion to engage in a dialogue about how we honor Christ with our language, attitudes, and actions, and yet engage the culture of today? I think both must be true. We must engage the culture, but our language, attitudes, and actions should demonstrate some level of sobriety/respect and not a capitulation to the sub-culture idealogy that some prominent teachers have engaged in. Our primary motivation should be to honor Christ and proclaim Him in a God-honoring, and edifying manner. I think using crass language and course jesting is self-defeating to proclaiming Christ. Oh and by the way, I think that using God-honoring, God-glorifying language in proclaiming Christ and Him crucified is how be build relationships with non-Christians and display Christ to our community. Wast of time????? That would be…”unbelievable!…”.