John Piper's writing style annoys me. It annoys me because he seems to go out of his way to invent a clumsy way of saying a thing, then uses the clumsy label throughout an entire book. I have shelved more than one of Mr. Piper's books out of sheer frustration over this unfortunate writing technique, and chalk it up to saying the same things as I might say, but expressing them in a way that I would not.

What does that have to do with Mark Driscoll?

Well, I hope that when Driscoll says or implies that Jesus was a rebel, that what he really means is that Jesus did not cater to the religious culture of His day; that is, I hope Driscoll means only that Jesus was seen as a rebel by those who were keeping the status quo - that Jesus was more concerned about the truth than rocking the boat of the established religious culture.

I hope that this trend in Driscoll, therefore, can be chalked up, as with Piper, to differences in expression, in fact I am certain it can. What offends is not the thought behind the expression, but the ambiguity of the expression - is he not co-opting a phrase just for the shock value? Is the gospel so impotent that we must resort to sales gimmicks?

I’m with you on Piper. When I like him, I really like him (as in God is the Gospel and The Swans Are Not Silent), but when he messes with the language (Christian hedonism? What?), he really irritates me.

I know Driscoll probably means “rebel” just as you say; but if you use one word and then have to explain that you really meant something else, you’ve failed to communicate. The fact is that when ABC reports “Jesus was a rebel,” the world hears the word according to it’s proper definition, and so do most Christians, especially the young “dudes” that so admire Driscoll.

In short, no matter how obtuse it makes me seem, I’m going to take words at face value. If you want to say something, say it with the right words.

A rebel is someone who hates authority and refuses to submit to it. God's word says that rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft (1 Sam. 15:23). Jesus certainly never did such a thing. The secret to His submission was that He knew Whom to obey. When He disobeyed, it was because He was choosing to obey the higher authority which the lower authority was contradicting (such as when He and His disciples picked grain on the Sabbath in defiance of the Pharisees' legalistic interpretation of Sabbath laws). That doesn't make him a "rebel." It makes Him a wise and discerning obeyer of God.

Betsy, I can’t believe I didn’t think of that passage. Thanks for adding it.

"As usual, Driscoll said some things .... things no Christian should say"

Agreed. In my view, a deliberate and ongoing strategy, the cussing pastor has adopted to raise his own profile.

"The phrase that caught my attention was, “Jesus was a rebel. ... it just isn’t true. Jesus was no rebel. Jesus was the most humble, submissive man ever to walk this earth. He never committed a single rebellious act or had a single rebellious thought."

Agreed. It does sound like something Driscoll would say and it is a despicable statement.

I haven't listened to the interview but as far as I remember in his sermons Mark when he told to the youth for them to be Rebels is exactly to be humble and to be servants. So maybe it is just a miscommunication or something?

Cheers,
a.

Driscol says things that are crude. There's no doubt about it. But he's a pastor of a church of 6,000 people, and they all listen to him. So, he must be affected by that, I would guess.

The Scriptures and the Word of God should be what molds Mark. The Word is powerful. The Word is a razor sharp sword which cuts to the depth of our soul. It convicts, and encourages. It exposes, and edifies.

I pray Mark would be more set to allow the Holy sword of the Spirit to cut deep into his heart, and so expose his crudeness for what it is, even though 6,000, or 600,000 people cheer him on. May the truth consume him, and not the applause of people.

May the Holy Spirit do the same for the rest of us as well.

And I suppose could be wrong. I don't know his heart, that's for sure. But there's no doubt Mark says things that are crude. I've heard him, and read Vintage Jesus.

Great post BTW. Excellent. And good comments as well.

Look at the man's fruit and the crowd he's reaching out to. Things are changing in the world and Christians can evolve with those changes as long as they are keeping true to the word of God. I am 18 and I believe in order to live for God in this day and age you must live radically for Him. There is such an onslaught of sin in this world how can we combat it if we don't speak out the word of God? Driscoll is doing that and so many are seeking this church for that truth. Those who watched the interview would see the majority of people in his congregation are young adults. It's crucial for kids like me to go to church or else we'll be swept away by whatever enticements the world brings. We don't want to continue hearing what the world says of Jesus we want what's real and the truth is he did rebel against the social norms of his day. Rebellion against a culture of sin isn't bad is it? Well Jesus rebelled against a culture of man's law and man's sin. Driscoll will always have critics I understand but look at the man's fruit and you'll see he may be radical but he's saving souls.

Bethany, you’ve entirely missed the point. The fact remains that Jesus was no rebel, and redefining the word to make it fit your usage does nothing to change that. Calling Jesus a rebel only demonstrates one of two things: either you don’t know Jesus, or you don’t know English.

But to answer your comments:

Things are changing in the world and Christians can evolve with those changes as long as they are keeping true to the word of God.

How, as relates to the gospel, is the world changing?

I am 18

I won’t hold that against you. I’m sure you will learn a lot in years to come. I hope your learning will be from God’s Word, rather than from pragmatic, seeker sensitive personalities.

and I believe in order to live for God in this day and age you must live radically for Him.

What does that mean? Does it mean using outrageous behavior and unclean speech?

There is such an onslaught of sin in this world

Yes, and so it has always been and will always be until Christ returns.

how can we combat it if we don't speak out the word of God?

We can’t. What’s your point, as it relates to this article?

Driscoll is doing that and so many are seeking this church for that truth.

I hope so; but I suspect many are there because he’s übercool and they get to snicker at his dirty jokes.

Those who watched the interview would see the majority of people in his congregation are young adults.

Yes, and that should be a warning sign. The young leading the young is not a healthy situation. Where are the elderly folks? A church that prefers young and crass to old and dignified has some very fundamental problems.

It's crucial for kids like me to go to church or else we'll be swept away by whatever enticements the world brings. We don't want to continue hearing what the world says of Jesus we want what's real

Again, what’s your point? Is the Word of God as it is not “real” enough? Does it need to be embellished?

and the truth is he did rebel against the social norms of his day. Rebellion against a culture of sin isn't bad is it? Well Jesus rebelled against a culture of man's law and man's sin.

And again, living righteously in an unrighteous culture is not rebellion. It’s just the normal Christian life. But that doesn’t sound cool and radical, does it? Sorry.

Driscoll will always have critics I understand but look at the man's fruit

The end justifies the means?

and you'll see he may be radical

That’s just funny. See, he’s not really radical at all. That’s the irony of the pursuit of cool. The cooler you get, the more you’re just conforming to the expectations of your audience. Boring, I say.

but he's saving souls.

No, he’s not. JesusChrist is saving souls. They are souls that were chosen by the Father before the foundation of the world, were given to the Son, justified through his death, raised with him to new life, have been given eternal life, and will be glorified with him in heaven. Their salvation was accomplished at the cross, not at Mars Hill Church. (I’m guessing Driscoll would agree with that.) God is not waiting for us to come up with “radical” new ways of reaching the lost, especially when those methods involve sensational and unwholesome speech. He’s just expecting us to preach the Word.

I suspect that Mr. Driscoll, if he stays true to the Lord for his whole ministry, will regret much in his latter years.

A rebel is someone who:

"Breaks with established customs"

Did Jesus do what the pharisees did? No. Did he speak out against the Pharisees? Yes

Jesus didn't conform to the pattern of this world, and we aren't meant to either. Romans 12:1-2.

I'm sorry but yes he did rebel against something. No of course it wasn't his father, But it was the Pharisees and others like them. He didn't conform to what they expected or wanted, and if I'm right, based on the meaning of a rebel, he did rebel against.

If we're not for the ways of this world, then we are for them. This world, when it doesn't see us fitting into its ways, thinks we are rebelling against it, that doesn't have to be in a loud obtrusive way, but we are rebelling against it because we "Breaks with established customs".

If we allow false doctrine to take place in our communities, then who is going to stop that? We are meant to(1 Timothy). Rebelling doesn't mean it has to be loud, but it does mean not conforming to it, and that whats Jesus did against the Pharisees and its what we're meant to against the ways of this world.

“A rebel is someone who: ‘Breaks with established customs’”

No, that would be a nonconformist.