Posts
Great debate/discussion between two great men:
Wednesday, April 04, 2012
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
Mark Driscoll and "Pornifying" Marriage
I don't post regularly to this blog anymore - mostly because Facebook has become my medium of choice and time - but I decided to post this in a "more public" forum in the hope that this may be edifying to a broader group than just my circle of friends.
I, like many of the Internet generation, have had a fairly extensive exposure to pornography. Its ubiquity and influence cannot be over emphasized, from the development and introduction of innovative technology to the shaping of popular worldviews and general acceptance and, in fact, promotion in the current "hook-up" culture.
First off, let me be explicitly clear - pornography is the graphic depiction and perversion of the physical component of the God given method of reproduction and marital relationship. It strips away the intimacy, beauty and even mystery of this component of marriage and reduces it to the basest hedonistic and God-dishonoring elements. Nothing about the depiction of pornography or associated types is redeemable or useful to a child of God in Jesus Christ.
This fact is why I wanted to join in with other much more prominent and influential voices (Tim Challies, in particular) on the Interwebs around the consistent "porning" of the marriage relationship by Mark Driscoll, pastor of Mars Hill church in Seattle, in hopes that he will acknowledge his error and turn from it (repent).
One cannot be a person aware of the "New Calvinism" movement and not know of or be influenced by Mark Driscoll. His adoption of the basics of the doctrine and promotion of it has been monumental to the resurgence of the theology and worldview that can be broadly characterized as "reformed".
Mark's doctrinal alignment, straightforward style and unapologetic, "no holds barred" approach has proven enormously effective and has led to tremendous membership growth at Mars Hill and the associated Acts 29 church network.
With all the success surrounding his brand and the positives of much of his teaching, there is another, darker aspect that threatens to overshadow and corrupt the beneficial components of his work-that is, the hyper-sexualized and graphic approach he has taken and promoted in his teaching ministry.
In the interest of brevity, I am not going to try and reference all of the content Driscoll has produced in this vein, as there are plenty of sources and resources that have identified and commented on them. I will however, attempt to shed some light on why his approach misses the more important foundational issue and ministers to the symptoms and not the disease.
As I have already identified, the intimate and physical component of the marriage relationship is God-given and beautiful. There is no sweeter co-joining of man and wife within this context and I rejoice with my fellow married-folk for the gift and responsibility.
I also am not against variety, within the proper context - there are options that facilitate mutual pleasure in the act of intimacy and I encourage the Biblical, responsible and mutually respectful exploration of them. I am, however, much more skeptical about the origin of the activities Driscoll examines and even promotes in his teaching.
If Driscoll could somehow come to the realization that the interest and popularity of sex in the culture is as a result of worldly as opposed to Godly influence, then he could focus more precisely on topics and explication that combats the root of the problem as opposed to grooming the branches.
Instead of lending respectability to things that come from sources of dishonor, he should instead focus the inquirer on why they are seeking to play out these acts and peel back the influences that they are betraying by focusing on the more carnal aspects of a relationship that should be primarily spiritual. As it is, he is lending an aura of credence and credibility to the wrong area, as opposed to areas his influence could be better leveraged.
I pray that Mark Driscoll will examine himself and his motivations for focusing on the more sensationalistic aspects of relationships and instead encourage husbands and wives to explore how they can make Jesus more and more central to their lives in every aspect.
JDL
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Modern "Tolerance": From Steps To Leaps
I guess we had to see this coming sooner or later...
Group of psychiatrists wants to redefine pedophilia to promote tolerance
Friday, August 19, 2011
More Atheistic Eschatology
This is the kind of stuff one can expect when the Biblical view of humanity is rejected...
Aliens may destroy humanity to protect other civilizations, say scientists
Thursday, May 05, 2011
Scientist seeks to banish evil, boost empathy
It seems that naturalism is beginning to form the eschatology portion of its religion.
Click here to read article.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Canyon carved rapidly by local flood...how edifying!
Our traditional view of deep river canyons, such as the Grand Canyon, is that they are carved slowly, as the regular flow and occasionally moderate rushing of rivers erodes rock over periods of millions of years.
Such is not always the case, however. "We know that some big canyons have been cut by large catastrophic flood events during Earth's history," Lamb says.
More here
Saturday, February 05, 2011
Al Mohler frames the nature of the Creation vs Evolution debate
...the vise of evolutionary theory is now revealing the fault lines of the current debate. There can be no question but that the authority of the Bible and the truthfulness of the Gospel are now clearly at stake. The New Testament clearly establishes the Gospel of Jesus Christ upon the foundation of the Bible’s account of creation. If there was no historical Adam and no historical Fall, the Gospel is no longer understood in biblical terms.more here
This is the new shape of the debate over evolution. We now face the undeniable truth that the most basic and fundamental questions of biblical authority and gospel integrity are at stake. Are you ready for this debate?
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
Darwin vs ID
Pretty good stuff - Smart feller. I'd only comment that we don't know via the scientific method how life came about.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
