I have yet to read the incriminating evidence that has been posted on the previous thread here, pertaining to certain statements of the ’said’ character, Mark Driscoll, who is the figure under the other ’said’ characters intently gazing stare.
I do plan to print it out and read it, so that the highlighted portions, assuming they won’t show up when printed in black and white, do not play a pejorative part in influencing my impression of the content of Driscoll’s address. I will then compare I am Jonny King’s colourations with the googled document, and let the chips [that is "chups" for all you Aussies] land where they will.
However, this may take some time, as I am trying to finish an assignment, I know, fancy using that as an excuse!
As I have said in a previous thread, I am a fan of both men, and to extend that reflection, I do think that both their ministries are important in and for the body of Christ. Therefore, I would hope that all this discussion and debate [I would say 80-90% of my hits since I posted about this, have come from that thread, and I am behind the times] with much of this happening in the blogosphere, would be framed with this perspective in mind!
What this situation has brought to mind are some words from one of my Prof’s in my undergraduate that are worth remembering and reminding one self with, particularly in light of the immediacy of the Internet in sharing of one’s self and one’s perspective on any given issue, at any given time, for an innumerable number of people, for an interminable duration of time… Oh, and by the way, Christian, all for the glory of God… every time!
Which, as it relates to our present discussion, was also the context where the incriminating work of Driscoll was sought and gained…
Here is my Prof’s point… Let me digress.
It was in the context of publishing a work/ book that he spoke about being careful before putting something down on paper, into print, because it is very hard to erase its reality and its impact, both in the present and into the future.
The words in James 1:19 that relates to the slowness to communicate and speed in hearing is something quite relevant when applied, particularly if we are going to have the self-awareness that is vital in discerning ourselves, our motive and our method in such a context as is before us today, which is the Internet.
In a Christ-encompassing context, one is concerned not only for God’s glory, but also that the documents in question would play their redemptive part, be it in their justified or sanctified sense!
In the context of getting a book published, the likelihood of what has “possibly” happened is greatly discouraged, in comparison with the immediacy of the Internet, as one will generally spend more time, more reflection, and more study, with the editorial process also helping to weed out content that may not be worthwhile [in a sanctified sense].
Yes, there are examples, like Sam Storms, who has changed direction in some theological positions, that he has previously published on. I do remember reading that such does impact him as he reflects on their possible readership.
However, it is not the manner of the content that is problematic in such examples, but the theological perspective that may prove troublesome, which, while there are very good practical reasons why the author is troubled by the published work, there will probably be others in orthodoxy who will hold to the “ditched” perspective previously espoused, which means that such a scenario is very different in the charges to this situation.
In the example of Mark Driscoll, it is my understanding that he is not being charged with theological heterodoxy, but in-effect, he is being charged with malpractice, which, as a definition in allwords so defines means….
|
It even gave me a little box for free!
Given that he has subsequently produced, what he has stated is a better study on Song of Solomon, which he has encouraged those so inclined to make use of, is this not an example of what can happen with the immediacy of our worldwide hook-up? Information and dissemination can happen at an alarming rate that is not given the time to mature.
If such is indeed the case with Driscoll, on numerous occasions, we would be wise to learn from this situation, and let our sleeping dogs lie, until He would be ready to wake them up!
There has been much informed discussion on how to interact through the Internet and the importance of guarding one’s content on it, but let us further redeem the possible Driscoll divergence, with reflecting on how the internet can be our friend, but also our foe, particularly as it relates to its immediacy, which is highlighted by the MacArthur vs. Driscoll… Smack-down.
So you think you have got something worthwhile to contribute?
The restriction to getting one’s work online, is really only limited to the individuals technological means, and their willingness. Such questions that relate to whether one has been diligent, discerning and careful that what is produced is both theologically and praxilogically wise can be virtually absent…. and the other vital area that can be sacrificed with the Internet is… time.
Never underestimate the importance of time in this reflection.
Here’s why!!!
Biblically, knowledge can happen in a moment, but wisdom takes time!…which is also why, the trap that many very “knowledgable-of-the-facts” younger believers can fall into is, pride… God, through one’s Life, has not had the time to smack it out of you… yet!
What this means, as it relates to the Internet, is that one can be producing material that does not presently reflect biblically-based wisdom, which in other ages, like a fine wine, would have been given the time to mature under the Sun/ Son… but in our present context, it is allowed out for those to taste and see that such is not so good, which will subsequently have an impact on those thus inculcated, which should also cause all thus afflicted with the consumption-to-production, to pause and reflect… we have a responsibility with such an opporunity… and we will give an account for such!
Therefore, as such is the case, it is wise to raise a “Wo Jolly” for all us viral communicators who have freedom in Christ, but maybe who should not have so much freedom in communication.
If I am reading between the lines correctly, in Driscoll’s personal post, there was a tacit reflection that he had not intended to post the incriminating piece. This does not remove responsibility, but brings another possible pit-fall, particularly for those who are involved in a ministry that is conducted in other contexts, and where other people hold sway over what is produced.
We need to remind ourselves once again, we are accountable for what we produce!
The media [Internet] being what it is, will always be ready to affirm our immaturity… and, even when we have given ourselves the time to mature, unlike our God, who will not hold onto our repentant sinning, the Internet, will not be so gracious [unless of course, we are able to rub them out].
Therefore, be quick to pause before putting something online, be slow to click publish as you seek his glory, which means the likelihood of being slow to receive your Creator’s and other individuals righteous anger will have been greatly decreased, and you will also be able to reflect in the future with joy that your machinations continue to be marvellous, so that your words outlive your presence, and continue to glorify God.
With such a possibility, may we continue to redeem the Internet, as it can be truly a righteous form of dissemination and information for His purpose of transformation… but do so, with an ever maturing wisdom-based practice for the glory of our God and Creator, and the good of those thus impacted… after all, I do love you!
Until Next Time
I am Jonny King
August 9th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
[...] Post-Postscript: An initial reflection by I am Jonny King on MacArthur vs. Driscoll that is the subsequent post on this issue, can be found here. [...]