Monday, April 04, 2016

Driscoll tweets a March bromide from Spurgeon about fighting sheep (i.e fighting Christians are self-evident contradictions). Okay then ... what did Driscoll say in 2001 about fighting, again?

https://twitter.com/PastorMark/status/707337603394088960
Pastor Mark Driscoll Verified account
"Fighting sheep are strange animals, and fighting Christians are self-evident contradictions." - Spurgeon
2:50 PM - 8 Mar 2016


Nothing like an old Spurgeon axiom.  `twas nearly a month ago.  If Driscoll's love for Spurgeon was something extending back over the last two decades, it's worth asking whether this kind of sentiment would be appropriate, even for a guy who was playing a character:
http://wenatcheethehatchet.blogspot.com/2014/07/pussified-nation-page-6.html

William Wallace II
posted 01-06-2001 09:01 PM

I love to fight. It's good to fight. Fighting is what we used to do before we all became pussified. Fighting is a lost art form. Fighting is cheaper than medication and more effective than counseling. Fighting always wins over compromise. Fighting is what passionate people do instead of killing. So log on, fight away. And if you are reading this and talking to yourself log on you coward and get in the ring.

Ah, yes, well, he feels differently now, right?  The fighting Christian was clearly not that self-evident contradiction to Mark Driscoll back in 2000-2001.

What has become clear, particularly for those who took the time to cross reference "Using Your Penis" to the lament Mark Driscoll had early in Real Marriage about his frigid wife, is that while Mark Driscoll engaged in character play in his time as William Wallace II, there was a weird amount of overlap between the persona and the history of the person.

http://wenatcheethehatchet.blogspot.com/2014/07/the-raw-text-no-pun-intended-of-william.html

William Wallace II
 Member   posted 01-18-2001 11:13 AM             
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Christian pornography. Christian phone sex. Christian cyber-sex. Christian lap dances. 

 Someone recently asked me about these issues. And, they are quite valid.


 The problem with many unfaithful unmanly unmen is that they have heads filled with desires and dreams, but they marry a Christian women raised on a steady diet of gnosticism (so she hates her body) psychology (so she thinks too much before she climbs into bed) and guilt ridden don't have sex because it's a dirty nasty thing that God hates and makes you a slut youth group propaganda from hell/Family Books.

 So the poor guy is like a starving man who is told he can only eat once ever couple weeks and his restaurant only has one crummy unspiced bland item on the menu and he either eats it or starves to death.

 Bummer for that guy.  ...

Of course William Wallace II was speaking hypothetically, right?  To go by the stories recounted in Real Marriage there was apparently something Mark Driscoll had not yet learned about his wife.

Real Marriage
Mark and Grace Driscoll
Copyright (c) 2012 by On Mission, LLC
Thomas Nelson
ISBN 978-1-4002-0383-3
ISBN 978-1-4041-8352-0 (IE)
page 9-10
To be honest, fornicating was fun. I liked fornicating. To stop fornicating was not fun. But eventually Grace and I stopped fornicating, got engaged, and were married between our junior and senior years of college.

I assumed that once we were married we would simply pick up where we left off sexually and make up for last time. After all, we were committed Christians with a relationship done God's way.
But God's way was a total bummer. My previously free and fun girlfriend was suddenly my frigid and fearful wife. She did not undress in front of me, required teh lights to be off on the rare occasions we were intimated, checked out during sex, and experience da lot of physical discomfort because she was tense. [emphasis added]

Keep that emphasized material in mind as we go.
...
Before long I was bitter against God and Grace. It seemed to me as if they had conspired to trap me. I had always been the "good guy" who turned down women for sex. In my twisted logic, I had been holy enough, and god owed me. I felt God had conned me by telling me to marry Grace, and allowed Grace to rule over me since she was controlling our sex life. [emphasis added] I loved Grace, but in the bedroom I did not enjoy her and wondered how many years I couild white-knuckle fidelity. ... We desperately needed help but didn't know where to turn. Bitterness and condemnation worsened.

page 121
... When we married, I (Mark) tended toward sex as god. I was a newer Christian who had accumulated most of his knowledge about sex from culture, locker-room talk, and sinning sexually with a few young women. Conversely, Grace was raised in a home that was religiously conservative when it came to sex, had sinned sexually, and had been sinned against sexually. She considered sex gross. For her I was too much sexually. For me she was too little sexually. We made very little progress for many years until we had spent considerable time talking through our sexual history and beliefs, working together through many hours in the Bible and Christian books to arrive at a unified view of sex as gift.  Once we came to the same place in our thinking about sex, we began to work as allies instead of enemies. Our marriage has never been the same since, and our sex gets better all the time.


When we got married, I (Grace) didn't understand the physical and emotional aspects of sex for men. It seemed with his high sex drive that was all Mark wanted from me and that he didn't appreciate anything else I did. His drive seemed to get stronger the less we had sex, and I wondered if it was an idol to him or if that was normal for me. I later realized it was partially a real physical need, not an obsession, since he wasn't masturbating  or getting relief some other way, which I am thank for. I read somewhere that if you have sex more, it actually decreases the necessity for frequent sex over time for most men. I tried that but it didn't seem to change anything for Mark.

So ... we can't be sure that "Bummer for that guy" was necessarily hypothetical.  We can't be sure that in that moment there wasn't at least a little bit of self-pity going into that character. 

And if Driscoll didn't love to fight back in 2000-2001 Pussified Nation wouldn't even have gotten a tenth as long as it got, would it?

Of course once somebody got wind that William Wallace II was Mark Driscoll and wanted to throw down with him for real all of a sudden people took themselves too seriously and couldn't get that it was all in jest.  There is some proverb somewhere about how it's like throwing around firebrands to deceive a neighbor and then when confronted with this to plead "Was I not joking?

Driscoll's tweeted a bromide in the past about how forgiveness doesn't mean you can't call the cops if a crime has been committed.  Okay, well, what if the RICO suit were somehow a manifestation of that kind of teaching about forgiveness bearing some fruit? How comfortable will Mark Driscoll be to be on the receiving end of "We love ya, but here's what we're doin'" when it involves a civil RICO complaint?

It was ten years ago, in Confessions of a Reformission Rev, that Mark Driscoll admitted he wrote using the pseudonym William Wallace II.  He's expressed regret about methods but has he definitively repudiated the substance of what he was saying? 

No comments: