Is Mark Driscoll just confused over his atonement theories

The Mark Dricoll here for all of the things he has to say about men and men and men and men, articulates at the end a really victorious Christ.

He is pretty much describing Christus Victor model.

Mark Driscoll is also known for his reactions against a 'limp-wristed', overly effeminised, 'herbal tea drinking' 'hippie' Jesus (not my words, his) but really he subscribes nearly exclusively in most of his teaching to PSA. The problem with PSA is that it can present Jesus in terms of those characteristics which Driscoll so wants to remove from this portrayal. With PSA, Jesus models 'being a voluntary, passive, and innocent victim, who submits to suffering...' So with Mark Driscoll, he might be actually promoting this portrayal to just the same extent as he finds it embarrassing.

J Denny Weaver argues that Jesus' death was not something willed by God. 'Death does not pay off or satisfy anything. On the contrary, it is a product of the forces of evil that opposed Jesus and opposed the reign of God. The real saving act of and in and with Jesus is his resurrection.' (Bartley and Barrow', Consuming Passion, 'Jesus' death and the Non-violent victory of God', p.57).

1 comment:

Tim Goodbody said...

Never been a fan of Driscoll's, but you have to admit there is a fair amount of overlap between the different theories.
I'd still go for "Jesus chose to die" rather than the wimp thing.
Hope all this studying won't spoil your Easter


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...


A little background reading so we might mutually flourish when there are different opinions