Like hundreds of others (no doubt), I recently watched this interview with Mark Driscoll regarding his visit to Sydney. Unlike some, I haven’t been very interested in Driscoll— I’ve only heard the audio of one conference and none of his sermons. But I really liked the effort he made to try and understand Sydney culture, and his commitment to missionary effort. Alongside his reformed theology, there’s clearly lots to like.
One thing that surprised me was his talk about receiving prophetic insights into people’s situations—insights that helped his ministry to them. Driscoll gave graphic examples of such miraculous revelation he’d received—of one woman being identified as a victim of domestic violence, and of another being raped. To be honest, when I heard this, I flashed back to the early 90s when John Wimber was around. These amazing anecdotes sounded like the ‘words of knowledge’ Wimber claimed to receive at times.
Now my own views on guidance and the sufficiency of Scripture are brilliantly captured in Guidance and the Voice of God by Phillip Jensen and Tony Payne. This book suggests the Bible’s teaching on guidance can be summarized in several propositions:
- God sovereignly uses everything to guide us ‘behind the scenes’.
- God can guide us in all sorts of ways with our conscious cooperation.
- In these last days, God has spoken to us by his Son.
- God now promises to speak to us through the Spirit in the Bible.
- God does not promise to guide us by any other means apart from this.
So although I have no great expectations about receiving extra-biblical revelation and feel no need for it, I am open in principle to the possibility that it may occur. Let God be God. I understand that reformed charismatics might have greater expectations in this area of extra-biblical revelation, and I am totally open to the possibility that what Driscoll reported is exactly what happened.
This is the long way round to getting to the point I want to discuss today: when is it appropriate to share such amazing anecdotes of claimed prophecies in the public arena? And if they are shared, then how do we test such claims to extra-biblical revelation?
In the video interview, Driscoll said he did not speak about such things much with his own congregation. But he freely mentioned them in this particular interview which can be accessed by anyone with an internet connection. Clearly they add to his interest value.
I notice in 2 Corinthians 12:1-6 that Paul had a great reticence in speaking about what appears to be his own visions and revelations from the Lord. In verse 6, he said, “Even if I should choose to boast, I would not be a fool, because I would be speaking the truth. But I refrain, so no one will think more of me than is warranted by what I do or say.”
Driscoll mentioned that he didn’t want to follow a charismatic model of ministry. So even if such amazing things happen, I wonder about the wisdom of sharing it publicly. A focus on the spectacular will only encourage people to think that this is the normal and desirable means of Christian ministry. Paul’s reticence about signs and wonders is a contrast.
As a secondary point, if someone is going to mention such claims of extra-biblical revelation in public, then one should be willing to have his claims tested. It certainly seems that Driscoll has made a real effort at accountability and at sharing leadership responsibility with others. But I wonder if there is someone on his eldership team who can say, “Give me the names of the people involved in this claimed revelation so that I can check your story”.
In practice, such deeply personal information may not be appropriate to share with others. Indeed, the code of conduct I serve under warns against disclosing confidential information received in pastoral ministry to others without permission. But if it is not appropriate to give out personal details, then is it appropriate to share the spectacular claim in the public arena—especially if that’s not the typical model of ministry the Bible leads us to expect?
What do others think?
Given Driscoll’s large following consisting largely of young men who have never met him and never belonged to one of the congregations he pastors, I am greatly concerned by his remarks in the interview. Many who watch this video may not be mature believers, and, because of their personal admiration for Driscoll, they may see his experiences in God-given premonitions or visions as experiences to which they should also aspire.
Like you, Sandy, it’s not that I would say such things simply cannot happen in these last days, but they are certainly not promised, nor are they necessary for pastors to fulfil their full responsibilities.
Our culture in Sydney Anglican churches is often to venerate the speaker from afar, not your local minister. Driscoll’s comments may cause some to think he has a more profound ministry with a greater impact because of his dreams and visions. He does not. I’m sorry he did not say that no one should draw that conclusion in the interview.
Sandy,
Great questions, thanks for raising them.
Driscoll seems to follow Grudem’s view of prophecy. Grudem (The gift of Prophecy in the NT and today, 359) hopes ‘that the church may yet come to a balanced understanding of this gift as something valuable yet never equal to Scriptures in authority, and always to be tested. Then the church may yet enter into a period where this gift is neither rejected, nor disdained, nor trusted as blindly infallible, nor blindly followed, but earnestly desired and expected according to 1 Corinthians 14:1,19, and regularly tested according to 1 Corinthians 14:29 and 1 Thessalonians 5:19-21; and where it may function as God intended, for people’s “upbuilding, and encouragement, and consolation” (1 Corinthians 14:3).’ I expect both Grudem and Driscoll would share your concern that prophecy be tested, but are happy to publicly share occasional examples in the hope of encouraging the wider church to ‘earnestly desire’ (1 Cor 14:1) prophecy for the building up of others.
I’m not simply defending Driscoll just because I like his style but that anecdote arose from a question posed by the interviewer, not freely espoused by Driscoll as a cool story.
That being the case, I think he did a good job at explaining it appropriately with out drawing too much attention to it and away from the Bible but also not pretending it didn’t happen.
Honestly, for me, it didn’t really change much of what I thought of him one way or another.
Hi Sandy,
Nice to hear your thoughts. While I admit to be an unabashed Driscoll-phile, I’m happy to hear a cautionary voice too, especially such a gracious one.
I don’t feel you’ve been entirely fair in this instance, though. Mark didn’t offer the information up, Russell specifically asked him about dreams. And Russell didn’t seem to want to let the subject go, either! It seems to me that in this instance, your criticism might be more fairly aimed at our brother Russell, rather than Mark.
Dreams and prophecies are not a big part of Driscoll’s preaching. I’ve heard a lot of his sermons now, and I can’t recall the subject being raised in any of them.
I hope you get the chance to listen to some of the talks he has given in Sydney…I think you’ll be encouraged at his strong focus on the gospel and Jesus.
You might want to check out Driscoll’s current podcast which is a series on Spiritual Warfare. It was originally presented in Feb 2008.
for what it’s worth, i’ve heard a high profile sydney anglican clergyman make similar claims.
<i>when is it appropriate to share such amazing anecdotes of claimed prophecies in the public arena?</i>
not too often.
<i>And if they are shared, then how do we test such claims to extra-biblical revelation?</i>
if they are true or not!
I had exactly the same concerns myself that Sandy has raised here. I was also disturbed by Mark’s comment that he doesn’t talk about it in his church, as I had recently listened to a sermon he did just before coming to Australia. (The first in a series called “Pray like Jesus”)
At the end of that sermon he gave an account of his recent trip to the UK, and recounted two such occurrences. One sounded similar, about a girl who God told him had been raped – the other an account from the airport.
He has spoken many times about how many people download his sermons – and surely is aware that this interview would receive lots of attention as well. It would appear to be rather disingenuous to go into quite a lot of detail about his visions, then say, but I don’t really talk about it much.
Also people are saying that it was Russell Powell who asked the question – but I would assume that the question was asked precisely because Mark has spoken/written about this before.
In his book “Confessions of a Reformission Rev” he speaks of hearing from the Lord through voices, dreams, visions and words of knowledge (pp. 39, 74-75, 85, 121). Therefore anyone who has read his book would be aware of them.
I am actually encouraged by his very infrequent anecdotes of so-called “words of knowledge”. I have heard some of them before, in the context of teaching on spiritual gifts or other topics that directly relate.
I like Mark Driscoll, even if I’m not an uncritical fan. The fact that he is open about having those gifts and yet still emphasises Jesus and the Bible far more strongly has provided perhaps the best modern day model I’ve seen. I think that if he didn’t mention his own experience, (and he’s stated that it’s not everyone’s gift), then many people’s questions about these gifts would have been left unaddressed.
So, yes, I think it appropriate in some contexts.
Thanks everyone, for your comments. I appreciate the tone. You are right that in the interview Driscoll was responding to questions fielded by Anglican Media and filtered through Russell.
However it seems, several of you have given enough further information to show that although not the central thing to his ministry, Driscoll does see a real place for this sort of extra-biblical revelation thing and for speaking about it and encouraging openness to it.
I am certainly not ready to accept that the one off “word of knowledge” phrase from 1 Corinthians 12 corresponds to what we’re talking about here. We have no idea if that’s what Paul was meaning.
And I am also not convinced that this sort of ‘premonition’ stuff (as Phil G called it) is even really what the NT is talking about mostly when it speaks of prophecy.
We’d need to get into a big discussion about prophecy then, I guess.
But initially my main concern was when is it right to highlight these sort of things <i>in the public arena</i> – when it is impossible for any of us to check his claims.
I really would be interested to know if there’s an elder (for example) on the church team, who checks the <i>bona fides</i> of such claims. Otherwise how can we know if such claims of prophetic extra-biblical revelation are being tested like the Bible says they should be?
Presented this way, it does tend to inflate his authority.
And as I said, I do not see Paul putting any spotlight on signs and wonders, or even too much on such prophecy.
As well as the reference to 2 Corinthians 12, one thinks also of 1 Corinthians 1-2, where the hankering for signs and wonders and power is put firmly in its place.
Now I’ve heard Driscoll at the Ministry Intensive Conference put on by my diocese’s Ministry Training and Development department – along with Don Carson and Kent Hughes.
And I liked plenty of what he said. But I’ve got some more to say about in this area. However that’ll be a separate post that I’m trying to think carefully about before mouthing off.
Surely it is completely inappropriate to share this information in the public arena without permission from the people concerned, while still guaranteeing complete privacy as to specifics. Gossip is still gossip, regardless of how many specifics you give. In fact, sharing a few tidbits and not elaborating simply leads people to try to fill in the gaps themselves.
I haven’t seen/read the interview.
Perhaps if Russel’s questions were pushing the “Dreams/visions/premonitions/prophecy” line then the most appropriate response would be to give a non-answer with the encouragement to move on. Such as “I’m not at liberty to share aspects of my personal ministry with others” – thereby not making claims and not revealing personal information.
While it is slightly different, I would be highly embarrassed if my pastor/minister shared something that I had shared with him in private – regardless of whether he revealed who it was or not. This would still apply if it was done in a sermon as a “guest speaker” to another church. It is a great breach of privacy.
I have no idea who Mark Driscoll is – I’ve never listened to his sermons etc. I feel that he has responded inappropriately in this case, but let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water because he’s made a perceived error of judgement. Let’s encourage him on to higher things and the calling of the gospel!
Just noticed this post. Can I just support Sandy’s remarks? I made a similar post on the Sydney Anglican forums on 22 Aug which was as follows:
“Was anyone else as disturbed as I was by the “vision” stories? I was really grateful that Russell asked the question, and not really all that happy with Mark’s answer.
Of course I didn’t want Mark to lie about having had these experiences- if he had them, he had them. But what I query is the wisdom of telling others about these experiences when you are in the position of leadership that Mark is. While Mark of course says that these things have to be tested against the Bible, I’m afraid my radar went on- because however much you say this, the tremendous temptation when you hear stories like this is to say that this bloke has a “direct line to God” and to be in awe. Sure, the “direct line” doesn’t work all the time- but humanly speaking one is tempted to say, wow, I’d better listen to this guy. Which means that if, God forbid, in years to come Mark drifts away from Biblical truth, there will be some who will be tempted to say- well, the Bible is a bit fuzzy here, I’ll just go with the guy who has the direct line.
I seem to recall a quote from one of Mark’s heroes, Spurgeon, touching on this issue. (Maybe some else who is a Spurgeon fan can give me the reference.) It was along the lines that if a shining angel appeared in church one day and announced to the congregation that Spurgeon was destined for heaven, that he would not thank him- for his assurance was based on what God had already said in his word.
So- I don’t deny God can reveal special insights to people when these insights are needed. But it seems to me that a Christian pastor and teacher should mostly just keep these to himself (I gather the only reason Russell asked the question was that Mark had put it in a book), following what I think is Paul’s example in 2 Cor 12:1-5.”
I think Mark has a great ministry and enjoyed the Entertainment Centre night. But this is an area where my “John Wimber” radar went off as well. So thanks for bringing it out, Sandy.
Thanks, Sandy, I look forward to further posts on words of knowledge, prophecy, Grudem etc. etc. from my far wiser Sola Panel friends …
From my own experience, I have seen how emphasising such experiences leads to Christians depending on “words of knowledge” as much, or more than, Scripture in their personal devotional life, group prayer, and counselling of other Christian. I could tell many tales, but I won’t.
On the other hand, I wonder what to make of the more spectacular stories I’ve heard, sometimes from Christians I greatly admire, and sometimes not easily explained away.
I’ve read Don Carson’s “Showing the Spirit”, and heard Philip Jensen speak on the connection between Word and Spirit, but the personal stories disturb and/or confuse me.
More discussion of these issues on Sola Panel would be profoundly helpful!