Phil Johnson and Mark Driscoll, Part III - Driscoll's Past Responses to Critics

I am doing a series of posts on the fallout from Phil Johnson's plenary session at the Shepherd's Conference entitled, "Sound Doctrine; Sound Words." The reason why this has become an issue, especially among Reformed folks, is that Phil Johnson used Mark Driscoll's name in his talk. Further, both Driscoll and Johnson classify themselves as being Reformed. So what seems to be happening, then, is a polarization. Some are praising Phil Johnson for rising up "getting that guy", while others seem to be upset with Phil for what seems to them to be an arrogant, overly critical, misrepresentation of Mark Driscoll.

Just to be clear, the purpose of these posts on Mark Driscoll and Phil Johnson is to pursue truth together with a spirit of love and charity. I am not interested in spreading "gossip" or encouraging attitudes that do not reflect humility and grace. Neither am I excited about the polarization effect. So I pray that we can steer a straight course and benefit together for this.

So, we know Phil has spoken and has been very clear both on his blog and in his message. But what about Mark? Well it appears that Mark has still not responded, at least in any formal way. Incidentally, he did comment Saturday that he, "is pondering good counsel 2day from John Piper". (1) I don't know what counsel it is, but I bet it's good.

Anyway, the reason why Driscoll has not responded is not because he doesn't have any thoughts, but simply because Driscoll has chosen, for whatever reason, not to respond. We simply cannot speculate why. Maybe he is preparing something now, which would be nice to hear. But having said all that, Mark has spoken in an indirect way to Phil Johnson. He has spoken. Not so much about what Phil has said in reference to him, but more about the very subject that Phil is concerned with. In his message 2 weeks ago Johnson said,

"I chose that text (Titus 2:7-8), frankly, because I'm deeply concerned about the tendency of so many pastors lately to employ profanity, crude and obscene words, vile subject matter, carnal topics, graphic sexual imagery, erotic language, and filthy jokes. Most of you, I know, are aware of the trend I'm talking about. I'm tempted to call it the pornification of the pulpit." (2)

Directly after that statement, he uses Mark Driscoll as an example by saying,

"The New York Times Magazine recently did a feature article on Mark Driscoll in which this was a major theme. "Who Would Jesus Smack Down?" was the title of the article. Here's the lead sentence: "Mark Driscoll's sermons are mostly too racy to post on [an] evangelical Christian 'family friendly' . . . Web site." (3)

So what does Driscoll think about the use of sharp language in the pulpit? Well, he was asked by John Piper to address this topic among other things at the most recent Desiring God National Conference. The title of his talk, "How Sharp the Edge: Christ, Controversy, and Cutting Language". When John invited him, he asked Mark to "think hard, think deep and think biblically." (4)

So, I have taken some time to compile Mark Driscoll clips where he specifically talks about the use of language in the pulpit. What follows, then, are several video clips of Mark. I have also included a piece from Piper about Driscoll.I think Mark's words help us discern just how he might interact with those who are critical of his choice of language, critics like Phil Johnson.