RESPONSE TO MARK DRISCOLL'S REVIEW OF "PAGAN CHRISTIANITY"

Since I have no way of directly responding to pastor Mark Driscoll concerning his late review of Frank Viola and George Barna's PAGAN CHRISTIANITY, I wanted to respond to a few of his points here on my blog.

First of all, I must disclose that, although I love Mark as a brother in Christ, I am still struggling with his previous comments about our Lord. Specifically, where he has said that he "cannot follow a God I can beat up" and voiced his preference for an ass-kicking UFC-style champion Jesus. (Which only makes me think of Will Farrel's scene from the film "Taladega Nights"...but I digress).

Pushing this aside for now, I turn to Mark's recent review of PAGAN CHRISTIANITY. Most of his critique is based solely upon the response of New Testament scholar Ben Witherington, and while it's always good to rely on the wisdom of others in areas where we are weak, Driscoll makes the mistake of ignoring the very public trouncing of Witherington's arguments by Jon Zens over a year ago.

Anyone who would like to read Jon's rebuttal of Ben Witherington may do so
HERE

Honestly, if you will read the point-by-point response that Zens gives to each and every one of Witherington's arguments, you will pretty much have decisively answered every one of Driscoll's points (because they are one and the same).

I would also like to call out the section of Mark's review where he mentions me by name. By quoting from Belcher's DEEP CHURCH, Driscoll uses me as an example of why he has trouble with house churches. I'll quote from Driscoll's article here:

One glaring absence in this book is a lengthy discussion of how church discipline is done. How does an organic house church practice church discipline without any form of hierarchical leadership? Pastor and author Jim Belcher, in his book Deep Church, discusses this issue in the context of his relationship with a house-church leader, “My greatest concern about house churches like Keith Giles’s is that there is no formal structure for discipline. When I asked him how he would mediate a struggle between him and another member or leader…he really did not know. He would try, he said, to convince that person based on the strength of their relationship. But I have seen firsthand that this is not always enough. Sometimes a higher court, like an elder board or a denomination is needed.” This is indeed a major problem for house churches of the Viola and Barna mold as well. On the other hand, Belcher appeals to “The Great Tradition” and its “ordained office of elder/pastor” as being “charged with godly discipline.” This is not simply a tradition but appears to have biblical precedent as the nature of the pastoral elder’s governance extends to “refut[ing] those who contradict” sound doctrine (Titus 1:9), and “reprov[ing] with all authority” (Titus 2:15).

First of all, Driscoll omits the section from Belcher's book where the author agrees with my assertion that anyone in our house church family who will not repent based on their ongoing relationship with me, and the rest of the Body, will hardly respond to the voice of an authority figure they have no relationship with.

Allow me to share the entire quote with you for clarity:

"Keith would agree that they have no hierarchy, offices and fluid structures. But he would disagree that they have no accountability. When I asked about discipline, he said it is done through the relationships that are built in the house church. He mentioned a few times that he has had to confront wrong choices people have made.

'But what about when the leader is a lot younger and not as theologically trained? Would they be able to do the same? Or would they just let it go?' I asked.

'If they are not going to listen to me, when I love them,' he said, 'why would they listen to someone above me in a hierarchy?'

I would have to agree."

-Now, does that sound like what Driscoll reports in his article? Does it sound as if I have not thought of how to respond to church discipline, or make provision for it in my ecclesiology?

No. In fact, the actual quote from Belcher's book not only reveals that I have "had to confront wrong choices people have made" in our house church (church discipline) but that my assertion regarding the power of hierarchy to overcome sinful behavior is affirmed by Belcher, not contradicted.

In the actual interview between Belcher and myself for this book, the author went on to share several very specific instances where he personally confronted people in his church who were behaving sinfully and they did not respond. Nor did they waver when he brought in the denominational authority.

Granted, Belcher and I disagree on the importance of hiearchy, and Belcher does go on to say in his book that he doesn't feel comfortable without a hierachy in place, but Driscoll's pull quote is misleading and doesn't present the entire dialog in context.

Perhaps I will take the time to respond to a few more specific points of Driscoll's assessment of PAGAN CHRISTIANITY later, but I had to get this off my chest for the record.

Peace,
Keith


"

Not Perfection, Just Obedience

I had a wonderful lunch meeting today with my friend Jim Belcher. Jim's book, "Deep Church" is the number one book on Amazon.com right now in the religion section. His book is an attempt to find a middle ground for the traditional and emerging christian church to dialog in civil tones.

Jim himself is an ambassador, and an embodiment, of such an idea. I met him a few months ago when he interviewed me and visited our house church family while he was writing his book. That first meeting at Starbucks (which he recounts briefly in his book) came at a time when I was at odds with some brothers in Christ who would not sit down with me and make peace. Here was Jim, a total stranger to me, and not only did he sit down and have coffee with me, he openly, and lovingly, disagreed with me on matters of ecclesiology. When we were done I had made a new friend and discovered a new brother in Christ after spending over an hour disagreeing on the very same issues that divided me with other men of faith.

The difference was that Jim honestly believed that he and I were brothers in Christ in spite of our differences on the practice of church. It was refreshing beyond belief to hear him say, "We may disagree on ecclesiology but we still serve the same Lord. We're still Family." I must confess I nearly burst into spontaneous tears when he said that.

Today over lunch Jim and I met again. He handed me an autographed copy of his book and, once more, we shared as brothers and rejoiced over the (mostly) peaceful dialog that God was creating through his book and the ideas represented. Although I haven't read the book I'm sure there are some things I agree with, and probably a handful of other things I disagree with, but that doesn't change the fact that Jim and I are still family. I love him as a brother and I left today's lunch meeting feeling that Jim felt the same.

Driving home after work I couldn't help but think further about the different ideas of church that Jim and I have. I'm in the process of putting the final touches on my own book about the church. In it, I am sure that there are many ideas that Jim would agree with, and probably more than a few ideas that he might disagree with. Still, there's room for open dialog and honest disagreement between member of the Family of God. Jim has wonderfully demonstrated this to me and this inspires me to do the same as I look towards the inevitable backlash my book might create.

One final thought: Our ecclesiology doesn't make us better people. One look at the New Testament will proove this. You can have the most New Testament model church since the one in Jerusalem and you will still have weak, foolish, selfish, broken people who need to be constantly immersed in the presence of Christ and daily in need of forgiveness and grace.

What our ecclesiology can do is to help us to be more like what Jesus intended His Church to embody- a family where He is the Lord, a body where He is he Head, and a temple where He is the center of everything.

At minimum we who are called by His name are commanded to be known by our love.
My hope is that God will continue to show us, especially me, how to love in truth and not just in word or tongue, especially when it comes to the household of faith.

Peace,
Keith