“Be A Man, Hulk”
35 Comments so far
Leave a comment
June 30, 2007, 10:50 pm
Filed under: Uncategorized
Filed under: Uncategorized
“…They don’t look like church boys, wearing sweater vests, walking around singing love songs to Jesus… guys like David”
Mr. Driscoll, I’d like to introduce you to the book of Psalms. Psalms, Mr. Driscoll.
35 Comments so far
Leave a comment
...in case you were wondering. 
“You get the young men you get everything – the families, the women, the children, the money…”
Wha…?
I’m sure this interview is probably taken a bit out of context (to give the benefit of the doubt) but I still think someone needs to take a perspective pill.
Comment by Kat June 30, 2007 @ 11:31 pmKat.
The “actual” video can be listened to here. I’m not sure if there is much to take out of context.
Comment by brodyharper July 1, 2007 @ 7:37 amI think that Mark’s vision is for the young men. He sees very clearly in Scripture that there are distinct genders and specific gender roles and he feels that we have lost that almost unknnowingly. We have such worldly views on men and women and don’t even realize it. You can look at people that are major problems to society and the percentage is something like 80% of them did not have a father, or had a bad and/or broken relationship with their father. Mark has argued in the past that ministries are not bad, but they are bad when we have women’s ministries because the husband does not know how to minister the Word to his wife. And children’s ministries are great, but if they are taking the place of a dad doing his responsibility of teaching and raising his children through the scriptures then the man is being negligent. He also suggests that a lot of times church becomes about the mom and the kids, the dad sort of disappears from the church scene. All of a sudden the kids see that church and God is not important from Dad and it no longer has much importance to the kids, they go sort of to appease mom. The daughters will then grow up and marry someone like their dad who will probably be a non-Christian, or an apathetic one. I have listened to a lot of Mark Driscoll and the first time I listened to him I was sort of offended and didn’t like a lot of things that he said. But I realized that you can still “eat the meat and spit out the bones”, so I listened to more of his sermons. The man has an amazing heart, an amazing passion, he loves Jesus and teaches the Bible. He is very much about impacting and transforming culture without becoming weak doctrinally, he holds a reformed traditional viewpoint. His main goal at his church in Seattle is to build a city within a city..a city that loves God that works for others and actually helps benefit the big city. Within this city he wants to provide an “alternative” lifestyle that views God, sex, power, wealth, etc differently than the big city but that invites them in. He desires that godly men marry godly women and have kids and raise them to be godly kids and if everyone did that the city would begin to flourish. So he encourages a very strong distincting between men and women: men be men, women be women. This is partly because he lives in Seattle where people don’t even know if they are guys or girls. I think that what he has to say is very interesting, impacting, relevant. I know that there are people that have blogs just devoted to degrading and talking about Mark Driscoll. He knows and he doesn’t really care. I think that he doesn’t have a problem with people loving Jesus or singing songs about loving Jesus as long as men are men and women are women. Honestly, I agree with him, I have been challenged by him, and I can’t wait to see the ways God continues to use Mark.
Comment by Danielle July 1, 2007 @ 10:21 amI agree with what you have to say. And I also agree with a lot of what Mark has to say. But there are also things that I don’t understand why he would even bother to bring up.
I like the idea of “eating the meat and spitting out the bones” but I have never heard that “excuse” used more on any other preacher than Mark. I’m sure he is a great guy and am even friends with Mark’s assistant. (that is if he is still talking to me).
I’m sure there is plenty that I could learn from Driscoll, but insulting me and calling me feminine and calling my wife an un-
innovative “chick” isn’t the way to go about it.
That’s all I am saying.
Comment by brodyharper July 1, 2007 @ 1:50 pmI can see some where Mark is coming from, it’s just that the statement here is so general, one demensional and… not nice. And being a Mr. tough guy Christian doesn’t give you an excuse to be an arse and call people names like I just did. Plus there is a difference in a stupid thug who can beat people up and a brave, selfless act of courage.
And, I’ve got news. Just because you are tough and can beat other people up doesn’t mean you aren’t gay or have homosexual tendencies. Greek Gladiators used to swing about any way there was to swing.
And yes David knocked down Goliath but he did it with his brain and a rock.
Not to mention he was also a musician that soothed the spirit of Saul with his harp.
I am sure that Mark is as intelligent as everyone says that he is and loves God and Jesus in a manly way and so forth, but this rhetoric here sounds a bit lockeroom football player strutting my “homophobic-I’ve-got-to-overcompensate-for something-I-am-scared-I-don’t-have” stuff.
Calling other Christian men a bunch of chicks might be kinda funny to a bunch of guys comparing their wanker-size over beer and a poker game but all in all there is probably a better way to say what he is trying to say.
But maybe not.
Comment by Seth Ward July 1, 2007 @ 8:35 pmbrody,
so you still have your V-Neck sweater or did that get caught in the pile of clothes that my dad burned when we were Juniors in Highschool.
Comment by randy July 1, 2007 @ 10:00 pmI think he’s forgotten about the men out there that are not into those things that he deems “macho”. What about the men that aren’t that into sports, hunting, or building huge muscles?
I’m married to such a man, and he is just as much a man as one who barks like “Tim-the-tool-man Taylor”. He supports his family and loves God.
It’s a good thing Mr. Driscoll is “aiming” for those young tough guy types. If he’s not careful, before long that’s the only crowd that will be willing to listen to what he has to say.
Comment by Leslie Brooke July 2, 2007 @ 10:24 amSo, yep. I’m apparently Mark’s walking cliche:
1. I’m a worship leader.
2. I like Diesel jeans. Tight. Low rise.
3. I don’t hunt.
4. I don’t watch sports.
5. I drive a Land Rover and an Eclipse Convertible, not an F150 and a Malibu.
6. I’m currently avoiding red meat.
7. I’m lactose intolerant.
8. I’d rather sail than motorboat.
9. I’d rather hang with my wife than with friends.
…and the all time best “macho man” killer…
10. I’d rather go shopping than play football.
Comment by Jay Sellers July 2, 2007 @ 10:28 amThis is interesting. I did listen to the full video that Brody linked to above, and I think there is a little difference in context based on that. I sure do feel un-hip and out of touch — I’ve never even heard of this guy, and everyone else already has neat opinions about him and stuff.
What this shorter clip doesn’t allude to, that he touches on briefly in the longer clip, is what I was hoping to hear — words like character, courage, and competency. When you start talking about “manly men”, but get too specific with individual activities that are part of the current male-oriented culture, I think you really lose the overall context.
I want to see the fruit of the Spirit developed in young men. I want to see the virtuous and Godly character traits of Bible heroes, not an emphasis on their personal habits and outward appearance.
I do understand what he’s saying, and I figure that he’s trying to break through to an audience that just hasn’t heard something like what he’s trying to convey, so he’s trying to do it through a lens that they can relate to. I’m alright with that. I suspect that upon deeper listening to more of what he has to say, that’s probably where he’s headed with all this — to put emphasis on genuine integrity, courage, character development, discipleship, and other traits that are not always stressed today, especially among young men.
But maybe not.
Comment by Chaotic Hammer July 3, 2007 @ 12:18 amI am so homosexual. Damnit.
Comment by Los July 3, 2007 @ 2:28 amLos
watching the full video, i only have more problems with what this guy is saying…the only people who are innovators are young manly men. what about women who are innovative or can God not use women to bring change? Second problem i have is the whole assessment part. Can God use in a way other than what your innitial character, courage, competancy would tell us? would we have chosen david to fight goliath or the twelve disciples to build the church? isn’t that what training is for?
Comment by Dos Booters July 3, 2007 @ 11:48 amOkay so I did go back and listen to the whole thing and it makes more sense. He is talking about trying the church trying to put some guys to work in areas that they have no business working and then trying to train them if they can’t. He uses “church planners” to start out with. They might be rough around the edges and bad event planners but they might be great leaders. I think he is saying that there isn’t much place for guys who are rough around the edges and who don’t have the “expensive” taste. There is something to that. I wasn’t really offended hearing the whole thing.
Some good points if you watch the whole thing.
Comment by seth ward July 3, 2007 @ 4:38 pmSee, Seth… I was totally agreeing with you and now I can’t. I think we all know what Driscoll is “trying” to say. The problem is that we are all reading into what he is saying and interpreting it because we “know” what he means.
Driscoll pulled this macho rant out of left field. It has nothing to do with “assessing” the leadership of the church, which is what he was originally talking about. Training church planters, and assessing what people are good at, has nothing to do with all the “innovators” being at home watching football.
I think Driscoll has some daddy issues, and we will never know what those are. I know he’s a great speaker. I know he is a great preacher, but there is something homophobic and wrong about his approach.
Comment by brodyharper July 3, 2007 @ 6:15 pmI agree with Brody. His approach (and his views) are very offensive. I don’t want to dig in the trash for food, and I don’t want to sift through his statements for something redeeming. He’s probably making a pretty good living at being so provacotive. Sorry, but it’s lucrative. Oh, and I love football.
Comment by Karen July 3, 2007 @ 8:48 pmWow, I took a glance over that last comment of mine and… sheesh. I need to re-read before posting.
Anywho, I am not advocating his homophobic rhetoric, I am simply saying that I see more clearly where he is coming from and why he is trying to say what he is saying, however poorly.
I have been, for the last 4 years, in a music department that is about 10% heterosexual and 2% Christian. (Not including the 4 years of undergrad.) Now, let me say before I go any further that I am trying not to be homophobic here. I have had some good friends over the years that are gay and they know how Amber and I feel about that but still consider us friends.
That being said, he sounds like he is being reactionary a bit. Probably because the homosexual culture CAN BE a very, very cutting and catty environment for any man that doesn’t either swing both ways or profess to be a flagrant metrosexual and flirt back and laugh it off.
You might disagree, but it happens. Been there. Bunches. Sometimes you feel as though you have to get a little macho-rude to fend for yourself and send off the right vibes. A hetero man can be a challenge for some gay guys and usually those are the guys that are convinced that every man is secretly gay.
For instance, Last year a friend of mine, a fellow composer, tried to put his arm around me at a concert nonchalantly. Now I had been his friend for a while and had been very patient up to this point and had tried to be nice and clue him in, in the nice Christian turn the other cheek way, that his flirting and little comments weren’t going to fly with Sethro. It didn’t work so when the arm floated around my shoulders at the concert, I had to be a little more, “harsh.” (non-violent but “harsh.”) Agree with that or not, it did the trick.
All of that is no excuse for his calling guys in the church “chicks” and the rest of the macho crap but it does give a little perspective to the situation. I saw another interview, or maybe it was that one, where he said the he was one of two hetero pastors in the whole city and went on to describe Seattle as a pretty sexually liberal place. If you haven’t lived as a hetero man in that kind of environment, it can get rough. Not always, and I am not saying that Gay men are totally evil, it just depends on the situation.
Again, not an excuse by any means to call guys who are stylish chicks, but his reaction is a little more understandable considering his circumstances.
Karen, part of what I was trying to say was that it might be the other way around. It seems a bit like guys sift through the good stuff to find the harsh comments.
Comment by Seth Ward July 4, 2007 @ 3:56 pmI see what you’re saying. I hope I didn’t offend you. I still think he is scary. Sorry. This isn’t the only video I’ve seen of him. I just know that the closer you get to Jesus, the more of a servant you become. Selflessness, turning the other cheek and so on. He is either a VERY immature christian, or he’s making up something that fits his personality. I am a woman- not a chick. My daughters aren’t chicks. His comments provoke and offend people. He has no business being a leader. I’ve heard him say that christian married men should be having sex at least once a day. (a friend of mine asked if he could insure that the women enjoy it once a day. 🙂 ) That’s a wierd thing to say. It sounds like he he thinks men are entitled. I’m in a rant now. Forgive, please. It just bothers me when people profit from ignorance. My opinion. Sorry, again.
Comment by Karen July 4, 2007 @ 5:06 pmNo, I agree. I really don’t know enough about Mark to say much more about him. And Brody could very well be right about the Daddy issue. I’ve no clue there. Most hang-ups men have are because of something Daddy did or didn’t do. It’s weird but true. But again, I’ve not clue about that.
My 2nd comment was quickly and poorly stated. Even though I don’t agree with what he said, when I see the full context it isn’t as bad as when I saw it isolated.
But it is more fun to show those moments than the whole context so Mark, as the leader of a honkin’ church, should be more careful in calling guys a chick. Because that’s what people do. They look for that crap.
But then again, it is those comments that get him plastered all over everyone’s blog and get people talking about him. He’s got an editing team. He knows what he is doing. And I think THAT would be the thing that would tick me off the most. – Saying something in an inflamed way for the purpose of ticking people off. Again, don’t know him well enough to make that call…
btw, no offense taken AT ALL!
Comment by Seth Ward July 4, 2007 @ 6:11 pmThanks. cyber-handshake. Peace.
Comment by Karen July 4, 2007 @ 9:55 pm[…] think Mark Driscoll, Brad Stine, and most of these guys would be […]
Pingback by Manly Things « July 5, 2007 @ 9:48 ambtw, I thought that song was saying “Be a manwhore” before I went back and saw the title.
Comment by Seth Ward July 6, 2007 @ 1:06 amseth.
being a man whore is not manly… no matter what anyone says.
Comment by brodyharper July 6, 2007 @ 1:22 pmi dont think he has any hang ups with men…………i see him stating what he sees as fact. Obviously this is what he sees & its is true in his church or the churchs he has been to.
Comment by ally July 7, 2007 @ 5:06 amIm not so sure that i find any of this offensive though, i am not in any way close to the macho guy he describes either. I also dont think he is being homophobic but then i despise how the PC crap about that has clouded our ability to speak out for what is right. Is a Christian no longer allowed to say anything negative about homosexuality without being labelled homophobic…………is it wrong in our eyes or is it not?
the church in this country is full of women in leadership roles, full of women attending on their own & losing young guys before they become men……….there is something wrong with that is there not? what is the deal with the men? and yes there are feminine guys who are super involved all over the place…………not “gay” just feminine, hey i happen to be good friends with a couple of guys who are as camp as a row of tents………..i think driscoll is trying to re-dress the balance by using shock factor style messages! dont all these hip dude pastors do this now? i do agree with a lot of his theology though
Not much to say about this video other than it is homophobic and sexist. To degrade men by saying they are like women is an insult to women. Sounds like Mark has some issues of his own he needs to work out.
Comment by brian July 14, 2007 @ 1:55 pmPlease slow down long enough to take in what he is saying. Men are drawn to action and the Church needs the men to stand up and serve and take action. Read Romans it is about putting our faith to action. Church has become Safe, secure & Predictable. Men need to feel a sense of risk and that what they are a part of cost them something. This may not be true of all men but we must agree that it is of the majority.
Comment by Luis July 14, 2007 @ 11:13 pmLuis.
You said:
“The Church needs men to stand up and serve and take action”
I wholeheartedly agree with that. I like the way you said that and even the words that you chose. Unfortunately Driscoll didn’t use any of those words. He didn’t even allude to any of those words. What Driscoll said was that “all the innovators (men) were home watching football”, and all the men in the church were still kinda like “chicks”….
It’s tough to translate what he said into what you said, but thanks for giving it a shot.
Comment by brodyharper July 14, 2007 @ 11:47 pm—
most of these things have already been said…but…i just don’t see how we (any rational person included) can defend mr. driscoll’s statements. he meant them to be clear, so he made them clear. he meant to make generalizations, so he made them.
now, if we look at the things that mr. driscoll is applauding in this video we can make some fair criticisms. for example, somehow, i don’t think God is disappointed that none of we american christian men are ‘known for our ability to slaughter other men.’
in all of these types of discussion (if we must have them) it is best (i think) to take it to its logical conclusion…because…if this is the portrait of biblical manliness, then according to mr. driscoll, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ wouldn’t really fit into the mold.
maybe our Pacific Northwestern friend has a special biblical translation where Jesus did NOT do these things:
– weep over the city of Jerusalem
– weep for his friend, Lazarus
– reach out and show kind affection to beggars and lepers
– allow children to play on His lap
and my personal favorite…
– have other grown men lay on His bosom (john 13.23)
so…my question, mr. driscoll…do those things make Jesus Christ an effeminate homosexual? or…i’ll meet you half way, does that make Jesus an undesirable man for the ’21st Century Church’?
i don’t want to deride the man, but these views are undeniably antagonistic. a brief survey of mark’s ministry and teachings reveal that his plan is to shock, provoke and antagonize in the name of Jesus.
i guess, in the case of mr. driscoll, i’m left wondering: would Jesus say the things he says?
blessings
Comment by gene pensiero jr July 17, 2007 @ 12:12 pmgene…
great thoughts…. i agree 100%
Comment by brodyharper July 17, 2007 @ 12:20 pm[…] i remembered today that i wanted to post this little talk because one of the blogs i read had a video of mark driscoll’s definition of ‘manliness’ and a discussion afterward. in june we had a mini-men’s conference here at church. the title of our morning was Act […]
Pingback by .orphan.leper.sinner. » Blog Archive » Act Like A Man On The Internet July 17, 2007 @ 1:12 pmI’m sorry but I’ve watched the (full) version of this several times now (and I’m a member of Mars Hill) and I have yet to see what the majority of posters find so offensive. The PC-knee jerk response of ‘homophobe’ is thrown around quite a bit and what is that in response to? The “sea-foam green” mention? There is more than mere biology that differentiates men and women, there are corresponding roles and unique abilities of both that define. Godly Men do need to be more present in the church and the culture at large in order to affect change and expand the Kingdom. Why is there resistance to that? We need fighters and leaders as much as we need “guys wearing sweater vests and singing love songs to Jesus”, the problem is that there is a horrendous imbalance and the Church suffers for want of it.
Comment by ryan July 18, 2007 @ 3:08 pm…”We need fighters and leaders as much as we need “guys wearing sweater vests and singing love songs to Jesus”…
I’m afraid I missed the part where Mark even hinted at that. Was it mixed in with the part where he called all the men in the church “chicks”? There was never and suggestion that both were needed in the church…
“You get the men, you win the war”… that’s what I heard.
Comment by brodyharper July 18, 2007 @ 3:18 pmGeneralizations are a common and useful tool in speech to address broad issues. Mark uses them and often. I don’t see a need to defend my pastor, he’s a big boy and can take care of himself. However, I am still curious why his specific words in this case seem so ‘offensive’ to people. I just don’t get it. Are y’all offended that an effort is made to reach out to young men? Did the term ‘chicks’ suddenly make the non-PC list? Or are you a little too protective of your sweater vest? I can understand not liking his style of speaking, it comes down to personal preference. He tends to use strong words to point out problems in the church and that offends some people but are you so offended that you fail to see the issue?
Comment by ryan July 18, 2007 @ 5:00 pmryan…
are you married? if not, I wouldn’t suggest meeting a woman for the first time and calling her a non-innovative chick. just a thought.
if you are, how does your wife feel about what Mark says in this video?
And yes, maybe I am a little protective of my sweater vest. It’s a camo one made of human hair though…
Comment by brodyharper July 19, 2007 @ 12:24 am[…] if you stumbled on to this blog by searching “EL PASO TEXAS UNDER GROUND TUNNELS” or Mark Driscoll, and would like me to link to you, let me know and I would be glad […]
Pingback by …in case you were wondering. August 15, 2007 @ 10:08 pm[…] go ahead and take away my man card. Remove Wild at Heart from my bookcase. You can even tell Driscoll on me. I don’t […]
Pingback by Hairspray « August 22, 2007 @ 10:26 pmI used to like to listen to Mark but after awhile it just becomes more and more dribble. In Australia we call it ‘little man syndrome’. I come from a background that would make Mark blush and if I ever preached like he does I would as he say’s “punch myself in the head”! I understand that it is hard in Seattle, get over it Mark. Where I currently live in Australia they still dig holes and bury you if you upset the wrong people and if you talked to most people on the street here like he does in church they would give you a right flogging. We had one preacher stick his nose in once and they cracked his skull.
Folks just ask yourself would you see Jesus talking like that, why do we think it is any different or worse now that back when He was here? Are we called to be like the world or set the example for the world? Sorry but I think it just aint right and in no way honors our Lord Jesus Christ.
Likewise, urge the younger men to be self-controlled.Show yourself in all respects to be a model of good works, and in your teaching show integrity, dignity,and sound speech that cannot be condemned, so that an opponent may be put to shame, having nothing evil to say about us.Titus 2:6-8 (English Standard Version)
Comment by Erik September 30, 2010 @ 10:43 am