MacDonald and Driscoll can moderate discussions with anyone they wish. But we kid ourselves if we think inviting someone so recalcitrant about fundamental biblical teaching as Jakes can result in anything positive. MacDonald, Driscoll and others will not be the first to privately and publicly exhort, admonish, instruct and challenge Jakes on this vital issue–to no avail thus far. And we kid ourselves if we think the Elephant Room invitation itself isn’t an endorsement of sorts.
We can’t downplay the associations by calling for people to suspend judgment and responding ad hominem against “discernment bloggers.” We certainly can’t do that while simultaneously pointing to our association at The Gospel Coalition as a happy certification of orthodoxy and good practice, as Driscoll seems to do here with MacDonald.
Collateral Damage in the Invitation of T.D. Jakes to the Elephant Room Also:
This isn’t on the scale of Piper inviting Warren. This is more akin to Augustine inviting Muhammad. This invitation gives a platform to a heretic. It’s imprudent and counter-productive–witness already the Trinity-related confusions and obfuscations happening since announcing Jakes’ involvement.
There are 25 Comments
That's the best articulation
That's the best articulation of fundamentalist attitudes about associations by an evangelical I've ever read. Thabiti was my pastor for a few years. Love that guy.
I wonder if Dever feels the
I wonder if Dever feels the same way?
-------
Greg Long, Ed.D. (SBTS)
Pastor of Adult Ministries
Grace Church, Des Moines, IA
Adjunct Instructor
School of Divinity
Liberty University
Probably.
Probably.
Is there....
Does anyone know if there's a list of doctrinal positions that have to be held in order to belong to the Gospel Coalition? I had thought there was, but I can't seem to find it.
I'm glad to see Anyabwile articulating a clear call for the repudiation of TD Jakes, but I'm beginning to wonder if they've recreated the fundamentalist movement's problems in saying "We're going to be together for the Gospel" (like the '20's stand against modernism), but having not defined what those doctrines (the Gospel) really are.
If it were just guys like Driscoll and Wilson with others, that's one thing. But now it seems like they're just pulling in big names into events for the sake of having big name guys speak, and that's alarming.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
TGC statement of faith
Jay,
Actually they have defined the gospel for TGC. All members must sign this statement of faith.
http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/about/foundation-documents/confessional/
I too see a lot of parallels between this controversy and past fundamentalist controversies. It will be interesting how this plays out.
I wouldn't worry that too many in the Gospel Coalition would ever invite TD Jakes or other "big names" to their churches. My guess is that MacDonald is in the minority among TGC members and committee members.
Shayne
what should Thabiti and/or TGC do?
Shayne,
I know how I'd answer, but what do you think?
My guess is the talk will die down and nothing will happen.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Don Johnson wrote: Shayne, I
Don,
Up to this point, the Elephant Room 2 discussion hasn't happened. So I think I'll wait and see how it plays out to really answer, and the Elephant Room 2 isn't scheduled to happen until January, so it could be some time. I'm sure there are a lot of background discussions happening right now, as Thabiti indicated in some of his comments on his blog article. I don't think this is a straight-up case of automatic and swift separation given the nature of the Elephant Room as a place for intense disagreement.
Shayne
I wouldn't be so sure
My hope is that something happens, but I'm in 'wait and see' mode rather than 'nothing will happen' mode. I do think that it's very, very interesting that the members are coming out and saying something publically against each other and that this is now the second or third time this year that we're seeing some kind of faultlines forming in the TGC or in (broader) Evangelicalism over major doctrinal issues within their movement.
We've had:
MacArthur v. Driscoll and the YRR
Several CEs v. Rob Bell
TGC members v. James MacDonald & TD Jakes
Don't get me wrong - I'm not hoping there's a civil war. I'm simply interested in how this plays out with a movement that doesn't typically wave the cape of separation at every bull in the ring.
I think the knock on YF's and CE's has been that they don't separate sufficiently, and I think we're seeing a change and a willingness to fight there that doesn't have to be spearheaded by the same guy or org. all the time, which is a good sign.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
Wait and see
It looks like the wait and see attitude is taken by Thabiti as well:
From Team Pyro-
Phil Johnson weighs in http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2011/10/evangelical-freakshow.html on this and the Evangelical mess in general (emphasis his)....
So my question is - who are Furtick and Noble?
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
wait and see will devolve to just wait
This has been the pattern before amongst evangelicals. Consider Lindsell and The Battle for the Bible. Did it create any real divides in evangelicalism? Don't think so. Their default reaction is "wait and see". I agree that is what Thabiti is saying. He is not willing to follow the logic of his own clearly stated objections.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Jay C. wrote: Phil Johnson
For Furtick's interaction with Matt Chandler in Elephant Room 1, try watching this:
http://www.benarment.com/history_in_the_making/2011/04/furtick-v-chandle...
Furtick is a pastor in Charlotte I believe, and Noble is a mega church pastor in Anderson, SC. Think of Noble as the worst personality flaws of Driscoll multiplied by two without a theological seatbelt.
And Furtick is as bad as if
And Furtick is as bad as if not worse than Noble. Furtick has had sermon series entitled "Visionary Love, Dream Sex", "Bringing Sexy Back", and "All I Need to Know about Elevation Church I Learned from 80s Rock".
If IFBx = Independent Fundamental Baptists (extreme), then these guys are SSCx = Seeker-Sensitive Church (extreme).
-------
Greg Long, Ed.D. (SBTS)
Pastor of Adult Ministries
Grace Church, Des Moines, IA
Adjunct Instructor
School of Divinity
Liberty University
Paul's applicable counsel to
Paul's applicable counsel to the original young evangelist/pastor is found in II Tim. 2:22--"Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart."
A significant issue with the CE's and YRR's is that they effectively ignore this maxim. The cultural enamorization with apparent success, leadership, and a celebrity-ish profile (youthful lusts all) is hardly being fled from, and the following of righteousness, etc., will be quick to follow. As this article states we are already seeing the inclusion of those who do not "call on the Lord out of a pure heart."
There is only one meaning to the word "flee," and NT Scripture only implores its' use 4 times. Sooner or later for a movement to remain pure and effective in every way, the matters we as individuals and assemblies are commanded to flee (immorality, "idolatry," love of money, and "youthful lusts") are going to have to be approached seriously. I am not seeing that in evangelicalism as a whole, and this situation in particular.
Call me cynical, but I am not expecting much more than smoke from this little brouhaha. Sounds like Jakes is spewing heresy. He has already received his first and second admonition. Let's see how interested these guys are in rejecting him, as per Scripture command.
Lee
A little humor...
Greg,
If this keeps up, I am cutting off all support!! :bigsmile: :bigsmile: :bigsmile:
Church Ministries Representative for the Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry
Dever out
Looks like Dever is out of The Elephant Room. He is no longer listed as a speaker.
http://www.theelephantroom.com/
Here's the Oct 1 version.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:MzwcQEYA3EoJ:www.th...
Interesting
Shaynus, that's a great catch. Thanks for sharing.
Anyabwile has made some more interesting comments in the discussion. Here:
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
Thabiti has been excellent
I've read the recent "Four Views on the Spectrum of Evangelicalism," and this is an interesting test case of how closely the ideology of conservative evangelicals and fundamentalists actually is. Thabiti is talking like a fundamentalist here, and I'm proud of his courage and wisdom.
BTW, I didn't make the "catch" without some help.
good news
And now a public statement? It would seem to be in order due to the widespread publicity.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Good for Dever. It doesn't
Good for Dever. It doesn't surprise me. I'm still disappointed in MacDonald, though.
-------
Greg Long, Ed.D. (SBTS)
Pastor of Adult Ministries
Grace Church, Des Moines, IA
Adjunct Instructor
School of Divinity
Liberty University
Don Johnson wrote: Shaynus
I kind of agree Don, but then he didn't promote his own role in the Elephant Room. I would say, while it would be good if Dever said something, it also forces MacDonald to explain a sudden disappearance of a guest. I'm sure he'll say something at some point, but he doesn't really have a regular blog and it just isn't his style to say everything about everything.
MacDonald eats humble pie.
http://jamesmacdonald.com/blog/?p=9292
...
That's carefully worded.
^ Yep.
No kidding David. You think he's going to say that Jakes isn't coming, but then. . . he doesn't. Jakes is still coming, but just as the one lone heretic? Creepy strange.
Damage Control, not Humble Pie
I wasn't impressed with the statement. Here's the bullet point version of his post:
*I've taken a lot of criticism for this.
*A lot of people have given me a lot of feedback, and I was overly harsh in the way I spoke.
*I wasn't clear enough in explaining what was going on, but we've decided to expand our format to just about anyone who will sharpen iron.
*We are not neglecting African Americans in our quest for sharpening, but are very committed to engaging them in our presentations.
*Thank you for the feedback and criticism; we're going to take some of it to heart.
*Please wait until the Elephant Room is over before you start saying that this will be of no value.
You know what he didn't talk about? All the main points of the criticism that he's received and claims to acknowledge!
*TD Jakes is a modalist, or at the very least preaches a modalist message.
*that the thrust of the complaints about this invite has nothing to do with Jakes' skin color or some kind of ancillary doctrine - the Trinity is a critical doctrine to a proper understanding of God. If Jakes is a modalist, he's a heretic.
*If he is a heretic, then he should have never been invited in the first place.
*The whole idea of the Elephant Room is for believers to sharpen believers, not to engage with anyone who will 'sharpen one another'.
*That Mark Dever has already dropped out, and that other prominent participants and Cons. Evangelicals are telling him that Jakes is a heretic.
So color me unimpressed with what I see as damage control, not an acknowledgement of wrongdoing or even an error in judgment.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells