Mark Driscoll Steps Down. I Have a Few Things to Say

source I have been asked to take a stance on the recent trouble Mark Driscoll has gotten himself into.

Oddly enough, I have come to a place where I don’t believe it is in good taste to get cheap PR by turning this tragedy into a circus. Pastor Mark Driscoll is a father, husband, and pastor of at least 10,000 people.  This is a very messy situation.  I want to go on record as saying shame on those who have decided to make this into a news story.

I’m learning (the hard way) that stirring up controversy is NOT useful, and is not Godly. I have been rightly accused of being an internet troll, and I have hurt a lot of people.  I have gained a reputation as a jerk, troll, trouble maker, douche, etc etc.


Take this as my public confession of that sin. I am deeply sorry to those who I have hurt in my idiotic troll adventures.  If I have hurt you, this is your open invitation to talk to me about.  I would love to personally ask you for forgiveness.  

Ok. sin confessed, Log removed. Now I can talk about this.

Here is proverbs 6.

16There are six things the Lord hates,
seven that are detestable to him:
17haughty eyes,
a lying tongue,
hands that shed innocent blood,
18a heart that devises wicked schemes,
feet that are quick to rush into evil,
19a false witness who pours out lies
and a person who stirs up conflict in the community.

Anyone else catch that? Right there next to hands that shed innocent blood is the person that stirs up conflict in the community.

I am going to learn from all the mistakes Driscoll has recently apologized for, and do my best not to stir up conflict. Especially surrounding this controversy.

Here is the advice I was given on the situation, and I’m going to pass it on to you.

1. Pray for Mars Hill, Mark Driscoll, and the Driscoll family. They need it.
2. Keep your opinion to yourself.
3. Encourage others to do the same.

And that’s it folks…..that’s all I have for you.

Once everything is sorted out, there will be lessons to be learned. Until then, it might be best not to make this situation any uglier than it needs to be.


“One man-One woman is hardly a biblical stance on marriage” Stick with me here.

I didn’t ask Andy if I could post this.  But I feel like it’s about time we have this talk.


I think the church (as in the church all around the world) should reform its view on marriage. “One man-One woman” is hardly a biblical stance on marriage. It is only an anti-gay agenda with a bible verse attached to it. A biblical view on marriage holds VERY high standards for everyone involved involved in the covenant. One of the most challenging passages about marriage is found in Ephesians 5


22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.
25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.[a] 28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body. 31 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. 33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.
Pastors around the world are refusing to marry gay couples, “taking stands” and doing their best to enact and enforce legal bans on same sex marriage, while turning a blind eye to couples in their church who claim to believe this book and submit to it that are not following its prescription for marriage.


So if you and your church want to land on the no gay marriage in the church side, that’s fine. That’s where I land too. You can’t change the bible. But you can’t ignore the rest of it either.
For the sake of avoiding hypocrisy, I believe that among other things, the roles and responsibilities of husband and wife need to enter the conversation when we talk about a biblical view of marriage.  Along with same sex marriages, churches need to consider what other types of relationships they refuse to affirm.
My point is, if you want to thump the bible, thump the whole thing.

Blog: The Creation Vs Evolution Debate

As I was brainstorming with Andy the other night on topics to blog about, this one came to mind, and we both sort of face-palmed. Between me forgetting to live tweet the state of the union (as a Christian democrat supporter), and forgetting to blog about the Creation debate, we pretty much struck out on our current events. Though the night of the debate is somewhat foggy to me, having gone to two different band practices and catching the debate 2 hours late over a few beers, I seem to remember telling myself not to go to the social media about it.

I went back and looked at my Facebook wall, messages, emails, twitter feed, G+ feed, and worst of all…Reddit. That’s when I remembered why I didn’t write a blog or live tweet the event. BECAUSE EVERYONE DID!

That’s why DWS stayed out of it. We have never been the kind of show that just likes to talk about what everyone else is talking about, and say the same things as what everyone else says. When I came out of my cocky Calvinist phase, I vowed never to use the phrase “Well John Piper says…” again. So when something like this blows up, I usually try not to comment.

While reading through the social media wars, I realized the big problem with debates….they don’t end. The Ken Ham/Bill Nye debate was not the beginning, but rather a link in the chain of debates that have been going on for darn near two hundred years! And the Creation vs. Evolution debate shows no signs of slowing down. It will live on through social media, on regular media, in formal debates, over the water cooler, and so on and so forth until Jesus comes back. The problem with having this discussion in the form of a debate is that there is no way to find who “Wins.” Do you want to know why I believe this? Because no winner was officially declared.

So was this debate an attempt at getting closer to the truth? Did it really change any beliefs either way? Or was this just a way to get people riled up? Because of the garbage that went around social media over the next week or so, I think it was the latter of the three. This debate confirmed what I have always believed about debates. Nobody cares about becoming right, they care about being right. What I mean is this: apart from a tiny minority, I did not see one tweet, post, comment, email, or anything from a Christian that said “Wow, Bill Nye has a good point. I never thought of that.” It was just the same old rhetoric: “Ken Ham is great” “Bill Nye is wrong” “Science isn’t good enough” “Bill Nye needs Jesus.” Even worse were the atheist tweets. “Ken Ham the illiterate retarded croc hunter that believes the earth was made by magic! What about all the priests that rape little boys?! who created them??? #BS #teamatheist”

The worst part is this: when asked “If shown sufficient evidence which proved that what you believed wasn’t true, would you change your mind?” Both debaters said “No.” So we aren’t really looking to strive toward a deeper understanding of how the earth works or how God created it. We are just trying to make sure the world knows who is right and who is wrong.

I mean, seriously, did anyone watch this debate to learn more about the earth, or did we just watch this to learn new apologetic methods? I originally began writing this post with a nice three points about using what you learn to talk to your unbelieving friends. After thinking this through, I realized that we shouldn’t watch debates for ammo.

Here is my observation about debates. 50 people come in supporting guy #1 and another 50 people come in supporting guy #2. By the end of the debate, 50 people leave still supporting guy #1, and the other 50 leave supporting guy #2. There were perhaps five undecided people in the room who decided to side with whoever spoke more confidently or had the nicer tie. Why does this happen? What causes this?

I don’t visually see people plugging their ears, so I’m convinced it is little gnomes. I think what happens is that when somebody starts speaking, whom you already know you don’t agree with, your pulse accelerates. This accelerated pulse causes an alarm to go off which alerts the gnomes in your ears to deploy the plugs so their blabbering doesn’t make it hard to hear yourself think about how smart you are and how wrong they are. This is why arguments happen so quickly. These gnomes conveniently plug your ears while the other party explains their side of the story so you don’t have to bother listening to them. That way you can think of what you are going to say next. They take a breath and, Bam! There’s your chance! Get back to talking! That’s when the gnomes take the plugs out.

Or i mean, it could be pride… or fear…

No…it couldn’t be!

I would love to go into stories of how opening my mind and listening to the other person’s point of view has changed my life and been awesome, but I fear I am losing your attention. I could point to examples like Martin Luther who was skeptical of the Roman Catholic church and ended up reading the Bible, somewhat open minded, and re-discovering the gospel. I could use the example in my own life of how I learned that I won’t go to hell if I take communion before I’m baptized. (I actually believed that.) Growing up in a conservative republican Christian house, I believed that Barack Obama was the Anti-Christ when he ran for office. Now I realize he’s just a crummy president like any other. Another great example is in college, when I bought into the faith versus science lie and tried to make God go away by learning a bunch of science. I came out believing in intelligent design and worshiping that much more.

Bringing it back to the debate

My primary point is this: unplug your ears and listen. We have all met God, and know that He is who He says He is. Studying his creation can only lead to a deeper knowledge of the creator and his attributes. Read the bible critically. When you find something that doesn’t make sense, don’t stop thinking and learning until you have the answers you need. When you read anti-theistic literature, don’t just toss it in the trash, but wrestle through it. Get to know your Creator, Father, and Savior.

You can’t just stop at “I know God is real.” First of all, you make yourself and the rest of us look stupid. Second, and more importantly, you deprive yourself from the deep deep understanding that comes by exploring God’s creation, his word, and his character. So the real reason I didn’t comment about the debate is because everyone is talking and no one is listening. But you, follower of Dinner With Sinners, be different!