Well, thanks. I hope that first session wasn't too dry for you. Like I said, this is more teaching as opposed to preaching and conveying of a lot of information. And this session is going to be similar in that I'm going to try to convey a lot of information. And so once again, though, let me preface this by looking first to Scripture. And so if you have a Bible, let's look over at 1 John. 1 John chapter 1 and verse 4. Sorry, chapter 4 verse 1. 1 John 4 chapter 4 verse 1. Beloved, do not believe every spirit but test the spirits, whether they are of God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world." Let's go to the Lord together in prayer. Lord, once again we want to applaud and thank you for your word. It is pure, it is like silver refined in a furnace of fire purified seven times. I want to thank you for this admonition that we are to test the spirits, and I pray that you would give, particularly to these men who are pastors and preachers, to myself included in that number, an ability to be discerning, that we would not exclude what is helpful, but we would not include what is harmful, and that we would be careful in what we teach, knowing that not many of us should become teachers because we will receive a closer scrutiny from you as to what we've taught. And so guide us in our thoughts. Again, give us the balance of boldness and humility in this examination. We pray this in Jesus' name. Amen. Well, Ron had asked for a session on the emerging church. And that is, by its own postmodern definition, a very difficult topic to nail down. Trying to define the Emerging Church is like trying to nail jello to the wall. It's just the Emerging Church, by definition, doesn't want to define itself. However, in more recent days, I think we can say that there has been, in what is called the Emerging Church movement, a dividing line within itself between a left wing and a right wing. A left wing that is self-consciously embracing doctrinal liberalism and a right wing that is saying that it's embracing doctrinal orthodoxy and even Calvinism. And so, what I want to do instead of, it's just a little too easy to bash the left part of this. I want to look a little more closely at those who are advocating on the right spectrum of the emerging church movement. And I want to look at one person in particular, a young man, about 37 years old, who's having a huge impact among younger pastors in our day. His name is Mark Driscoll. And so I want to offer a review of Driscoll's ministry. My sources for this, I read this past week a couple of his books. This book, The Radical Reformation, was published by Zondervan in 2004, and Confessions of a Reformation Rev. was published also by Zondervan in 2006. I can tell you that most young men in Southern Baptist seminaries, probably many other independent seminaries, Presbyterian seminaries, I'm going to guess that most young men who are heading into ministry have read these books. Most men under age 30 have read these books, and they're being influenced by the ideas that are within them. I'm also basing some of these reflections on a feature article on Driscoll that was in the September 2007 issue of Christianity Today. You can find it online if you Google it. The title of the article is Pastor Provocateur, and it's a little article about Driscoll's ministry. Driscoll's ministry has also been increasingly embraced and promoted by more mainstream New Evangelicals, including some Southern Baptists. Driscoll spoke at the 2006 Desiring God Conference that John Piper sponsors. Piper has also preached in Driscoll's church in Seattle. Driscoll is a council member of D. A. Carson and Tim Keller's Gospel Coalition Group. He was also a featured speaker of the 2000 Convergence Conference on the Emerging Church Movement that was held at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, and I was listening to those audio files that Ron mentioned from the Building Bridges Conference back in November 2007 on Calvinism and the SBC, and during one of the discussion sessions, Danny Aiken mentioned that although he didn't feel he could work with those on the left wing of the Emerging Church, people like Brian McLaren, Tony Evans, Doug Padgett, if you know those names, Rob Bell, he did feel like he could work with people like Mark Driscoll, whom he had invited to this conference at Southeastern. The North American Mission Board's Ed Stetzer is on the board of directors of Driscoll's Acts 29 Church Planning Network, for example. And Driscoll has several books that will soon be published by crossway publishers, which are very respected in most evangelical circles. Of course, not all evangelicals have embraced Driscoll and his message. John MacArthur, for example, has expressed a pretty harsh critique of Driscoll, particularly in a December 2006 article in Pulpit Magazine, which is the blog that he, Master's Seminary, I guess, puts out related to pastoral ministry. Let me tell you a little bit about Mark Driscoll. Who is Mark Driscoll? He is the founding pastor of Mars Hill Church. The name, of course, comes from Act 17. Paul engaging with the pagans in Athens Anyways pastor this Marshall Church in his hometown of Seattle, Washington This is an alternative church in an alternative town Driscoll founded the church in 1996 when he was in his mid-twenties He proudly notes that he planted the church, having never attended seminary or Bible college, and having never been a member of any church. Driscoll was born in North Dakota in 1970, grew up by his own autobiographical account in a family that suffered from alcoholism, violence. He grew up in a hardscrabble neighborhood in Seattle as a nominal Roman Catholic. He was an overachieving person. He's a very bright man. He's not a dummy. He was the president of his class in high school, played baseball, edited his school paper. He went on on a scholarship to college at Washington State University where he studied philosophy and particularly got very interested in postmodernism. He was converted after reading an NIV Bible that a high school friend gave him when he was 17, and that friend, a pastor's daughter, later became his wife. Mars Hill Church has grown from humble beginnings to have attendance currently at over 4,000 people at their weekend services. Driscoll has expressed hopes that His attendance will eventually grow to over 20,000 and he can speak approvingly of the Korean full gospel church that has tens of thousands of members and sort of sees that as something he's shooting for in church growth. The story of his planting of the church is told in this book, Confessions of a Reformissionary Rev. He started out trying to plant a Gen X church. Remember when that was popular about ten years ago when everybody was trying to identify the different generationals. You know, you were a builder, you were a boomer, a buster, a Generation X, or millennial. Well, he started out sort of targeting Gen X, but later, to his credit, he jettisoned the whole idea of trying to do generational targeting. Driscoll sees himself as a cross-cultural missionary. He sees himself as examining American culture, particularly the kind of post-Christian culture of Seattle, Washington, and planting within that culture a credible Christian witness. He sees himself more, I think, as a cross-cultural missionary than as a pastor. As early as 1995, he started traveling and speaking with the leadership network. So he was being invited to speak on postmodernism, even though he admitted his book at a time when his church was very small and struggling. He was traveling all over the country and promoting this postmodern ministry, even before his church had become numerically successful. And out of that leadership network, by the way, came the so-called emerging church movement. And it was an idea among these young leaders, there was a group called the Young Leaders Network, young men who were in ministry, that they were on the edge of the next big thing in evangelical Christianity, an emerging Christianity that was more culturally relevant than traditional evangelical Christianity. Around 2001, that group became, and again, as with most young people, it centers around technology, the web, internet. They focused on a website called Terra Nova, originally, New Land, and then that later became the website Emergent Village. But around that time, 2001, Driscoll broke with many of the other young pastors in the emerging movement. And he broke with them because he said that they were getting soft on doctrine. And I'll come back a little bit later to talk about his critique of his fellow emerging church enthusiasts. So he broke with them in 2001, and he has moved again in a more, you might say, doctrinally orthodox position since that time. He also started what's called the Acts 29 Network, a church planting ministry network seeking to start like-minded missional churches. That's another clue. If you're looking at a church promoting itself, if you don't already have this at Roanoke, you're going to have it. You probably already have it. A church that promotes itself as missional. That's a buzzword for an emerging church. a church that is bought into many of the ideas, methods of the emerging church movement. We talked a little bit about Driscoll's views on ecclesiology, and he promotes this in both books. Driscoll sees four basic different kinds of churches, or four different church models, relating to three key areas, and the three key areas are The church, culture, and the gospel. Church, culture, gospel. The four types of church models, he says, are number one, you can have, there are those who try to have the gospel plus culture, but take away the church. And that's parachurch. Trying to take the gospel to the culture without the church. That's parachurch. Second, he says, you can have a church plus culture minus the gospel. And he says that's liberalism. Church trying to be relevant to the culture, but forgetting about the exclusive truth claims of the gospel. Third, he says, you can have the church plus the gospel minus the culture. And he says, that's fundamentalism. Have the gospel, have the church, but separate completely from the culture. That's fundamentalism. The fourth alternative, if somebody ever gives you a list of things, it's always the last one they're advocating, right? The fourth one, he says, is to try to have the gospel plus the culture plus the church. And he says, this is Reformation. This is what he wants to do. To have a church that preaches the exclusive truth claims of the gospel, but is relevant to our contemporary culture. He says in the books several times over that he wants to be culturally liberal, yet theologically conservative. So that's his goal. Let me offer now six things that I think we can commend about Mark Driscoll, and then I want to follow that up with six cautions. And that means I want you to pay more attention to the cautions, right? Six commendations. First, Driscoll claims to be reformed in theology. He notes that he came to these convictions after preaching through Romans in his church He commends the reading and embracing of the doctrines of men like the Puritans, John Piper, Martin Lloyd-Jones, J.I. Packer. He encourages young pastors to read theology, to read doctrine. Believes in, in his own terms, says man is bad and the only way he's going to get saved is through God's work. So, embraces Second, he rejects post-modernism, comes to reject post-modernism. In the book Radical Reformation, Driscoll describes the rush of young pastors to jump on what he calls the present-day post-modern bandwagon. And he denounces post-modernism as, quote, basically a philosophical junk drawer in which people toss anything and everything they cannot make sense of. If you ask four philosophers what post-modernity is, you'll get five answers." Third, he is openly critical of the emerging church liberalism. In the Confessions of a Reformationary Rev., he distinguishes between emergent liberal churches and his own emerging evangelical churches. And that's more buzzwords you might look to as you evaluate things, at least Driscoll. I think some others are trying to distinguish between what they're calling emergent, ending in E-N-T, as on the liberal end, and emerging evangelical churches, as they feel like being more on the conservative, doctrinally at least, end. He describes the emergent church as the latest version of liberalism. And he notes, in particular, the following five ways in which the emergent church has drifted from the gospel. First, he says, it's drifted in its rejection of the penal substitutionary view of atonement. Second, it's drifted in its resistance to openly denouncing homosexual acts as sinful. And here, Driscoll, in one of his books, quotes Brian McLaren's infamous A statement in the February 7, 2005 Time Magazine cover article on the 25 most influential evangelicals in America, in which McLaren, who's an emerging church pioneer, was asked what his views were on gay marriage, and McLaren replied, You know what? The thing that breaks my heart is that there's no way I can answer that question without hurting someone on either side. And Driscoll rightly notes, Sadly, by failing to answer, McLaren was unwilling to say what the Bible says. Third, I'm on my third point that he's openly critical of emerging church liberalism. The third area is critical of it is in its rejection of the concept of a literal eternal torment and hell for the wicked. Fourth, in its embracing of open theism. and its rejection of biblically defined gender roles. So we can commend Driscoll for being critical of his fellow emerging church folk who have drifted to the left. Here's one typical jab that he takes at the emerging church in radical reformation when he discusses his church's efforts to reach young men in Seattle with the gospel. He writes, quote, In Seattle, young men are generally pathetic. They are unlikely to go to church, get married, have children, or do much of anything else that snacks of responsibility. But they are known to be highly skilled at smoking pot. masturbating, playing video games, playing air guitar, freeloading, and having sex with their significant others. However, the emerging church massage parlor tactics of labyrinth walking by candlelight will do little more than increase the pool of extras for television's will and grace." Now, you may have a shot at some of the coarseness of that statement. Many of the quotes I can't read from his book because they are so coarse. Fourth commendation, he rejects homosexuality and fornication. Fifth commendation, he rejects egalitarian notions of church leadership. As an example, he chides those in the emergent churches who have jettisoned preaching in the name of egalitarianism among believers. He says, quote, some churches have gone so far as to replace a preaching monologue from a recognized leader to a spiritual dialogue among a group of peers who refuse to acknowledge any leader in authority over them. This makes about as much sense as shooting your doctor and gathering with the other patients in the lobby to speculate about what is wrong with one another and randomly writing out prescriptions for one another in the name of equality." End quote. Sixth is to be commended because he affirms expositional and doctrinal preaching and teaching. He preaches. His preaching method is to go verse by verse through books of the Bible, biblical exposition, He's having thousands of young Seattle people come. I think the average age in his church is in the mid-twenties. Most people who come to his church are single. So he's drawing lots of people and he's distanced himself from many others in the emerging church. Well, those are six commendations. However, there are also some very serious concerns about Mark Driscoll and his ministry, so let me offer six corresponding concerns. First, and this is the one you hear most about with him, is in the area of personal conduct and language. Again, this is likely the most controversial area with Driscoll. And this first came to light when Don Miller, in the book Blue Like Jazz, which is a cult classic among emerging church types, they all read it. He referred to Driscoll as Mark the Cussing Preacher. Driscoll's language is often coarse and irreverent. He admits in Confessions of a Missionary Rev, it's often cussing people out. often cursing while preaching and so forth. Christianity Today quotes a Seattle Times article that noted Driscoll comes off as a smart aleck, former frat boy. It proceeds to say that Driscoll's sharp tongue is his greatest strength and his glaring weakness. Of course, Driscoll justifies his language as an attempt to avoid sanctified preacher talk. and to speak in a manner that unchurched people can understand. Driscoll also is notorious for his frank discussion of sexual topics. One of his first breakthrough message series that drew large crowds was one on the Song of Songs, in which he explicitly addressed sexual issues from the pulpit. In Radical Reformation, He caused waves by advocating the consumption of alcohol without drunkenness, including the brewing of beer. He notes three views on alcohol. The prohibitionist, who thinks that alcohol itself is evil. The abstentionist, who thinks Christians should avoid alcohol so as not to cause anyone to stumble. And third, the moderationist, his position to say drinking is not a sin and that each person must let the Christian conscience guide them without judging others. In this area in particular, Driscoll parodies those who object to alcohol consumption as simply unbiblical, frivolous, and narrow-minded. He does not address serious and conscientious objections to alcohol use by believers not merely based on simplistic or naive exegesis or prudishness, but in light of the great harm that has been done to individuals and society through alcohol abuse. Any pastor knows the damage. done by alcohol in the lives of our people. Driscoll's in-your-face advocacy of alcohol use does not fairly address the issue. The chapters of Radical Reformation profile different members of the Marshall Church, including one man who is the founder and president of a brewery who, in the little section within that book, advocates drinking even by pregnant women, stating, with regard to the fetus, my mother drank beer during her pregnancy, as did most mothers in that era, without undue harm. I don't believe that moderate drinking is any threat to the unborn." Other members profiled, by the way, in the book, other members include a fellow who is a tattoo artist and owns a tattoo studio in Seattle, and a person who is a rock and roll band manager. who's a member of the church. Phil Johnson on his Pyromaniacs blog made the following trenchant observation about Driscoll back in October of 2006. Johnson said, but I don't think his perpetually coarse language in the pulpit and his apparent preoccupation with off-color terms and ribald subject matter are merely minor flaws in an otherwise healthy ministry, it is a serious shortcoming. No, it's actually worse than that, because it blatantly violates the clear principles of Ephesians 5, 3 and 4. But fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as is fitting for saints. Neither filthiness nor foolish talking nor coarse jesting, which are not fitting but rather giving of thanks." Johnson goes on to say, "...it is shameful and therefore a reproach. It's characteristic of the old man and one of the fleshly behaviors we are expressly commanded to put aside." Colossians 3.8, "...but now you yourselves are to put off all these anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy language out of your mouth." Scripture even seems to indicate Johnson continues, that unwholesome language signals an impure mind. Matthew 12, 34, for out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks. And then he concludes, and yet this seems to be a deliberate, calculated, and persistent practice of Driscoll's. It is practically the chief trademark of his style. Second caution, criticism, is his advocacy of cultural engagement. Driscoll urges Christians in general, and pastors in particular, to be fully engaged with contemporary culture. He notes that they should do this not in the name of entertainment, but in the name of education. He says, quote, as a missionary you will need to watch television shows and movies, listen to music, read books, peruse magazines. attend events, join organizations, surf websites, and befriend people you might not like to better understand people that Jesus loves. He also, to his credit, notes the dangers of getting too close to worldliness. He says, quote, All this is to say that worldliness is a sin, and before we naively seek to be relevant to a dying world, we must realize the dangers before us and proceed with our eyes wide open and our hands ready for spiritual warfare. And he does chide young pastors, particularly those in the emerging church who have fallen into moral error and compromise. He is very critical of, as he sees it, fundamental sectarianism, which he says is as bad as liberal syncretism, because fundamental sectarians enjoy huddling up close to each other, he says, and with Jesus, without caring about anyone who is lost and dying outside of Christ. He, at one point, says, eventually sectarians become so dated and removed from people in the world that their churches are little more than museums dedicated to the past, with dumb reader boards outside that sound like silly telegraphs from an alien planet." The question, however, I think for Driscoll on cultural engagement is this. Is such engagement really required for authentic biblical ministry? Is this really what Paul was advocating in 1 Corinthians 9, 19 through 23 when he said that he would become all things to all men so that he might by all means win some? What of Paul's corresponding call in 2 Corinthians 6, 17? to come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord, and do not touch what is unclean, and I will receive you." Though complementary of Driscoll's soteriology, John MacArthur noted that this does not make up for his, quote, infatuation with the vulgar aspects of contemporary society, end quote. And MacArthur adds, the lifestyle Driscoll models, especially with his easygoing familiarity with all this world's filthy fads practically guarantees that his disciples will make little progress toward authentic sanctification. Third area of concern, doctoral drift in spiritual experience. If you read Driskell's book, this is something I was rather struck by because I had read criticism of him, but I hadn't really read many people take him on in this area. Driscoll is an avowed non-cessationist, and particularly in the book Confessions of a Reformationary Rev., he talks about many strange spiritual experiences. He describes confrontations with the demon-possessed, miraculous dreams and visions, words of knowledge, and even a dream that came to him, he says, from Satan. Very peculiar from one who is claiming to want to uphold biblical orthodoxy that he has placed so much emphasis on spiritual experience. Fourth caution, doctoral drift in ecclesiology. Driscoll speaks of people becoming part of the church before they become Christians. That's his evangelistic method, make them part of the church before they become Christians. How can you be part of the church unless, of course, you're saved? So he's got a deficient ecclesiology. He also speaks of non-Christians discipling Christians in the ways of the world. That doesn't seem to correspond to me to any biblical definition of discipleship. Fifth, doctoral drift in his views on manhood and womanhood. On one hand, Driscoll puts forward view of that seems like to be Christian manhood on steroids. He's often criticized by feminists, particularly in Seattle, for being an anti-woman, although the Christianity Day article noted that most of the attendees at his church are women. But he puts forward a persona of being very macho. He writes of carrying a handgun. He loves to watch Ultimate Fighting. I've never seen it. but apparently it's a form of wrestling or boxing put together. He brews his own beer, and he expresses disdain for limp-wristed wimps constantly in the writings, has an aversion to homosexuals, and so forth. Within his church, he adopts what he calls a moderate complementarian view of gender roles in the church, so he rejects pastors and elders, women to be pastors and elders, and he affirms male leadership in the marriage relationship, and he also endorses and encourages those in his church to be fruitful and multiply, and he often says that Seattle has more dogs than children, and yet the young people who are attending his church are getting married and buying homes and having children and enjoying the blessings of family. Again, however, he contrasts his view of the role of particularly women in the church with what he calls the hierarchical, or the conservative view. And so he notes that at Mars Hill, quote, all church ministries are open to qualified men and women, with the singular exception of elder pastor, which is only open to qualified men. Women can be deacons, teach, lead worship, serve communion. and be in full-time paid ministry." Well, that might be one definition of complementarian, but it seems to be a very weakened definition of complementarian roles for men and women within the church, and my sense is if you adopt a position like that, you will eventually drift into full-blown egalitarianism. Sixth caution. This is the biggest, I think. I think Driscoll has bought into the myth of the moral neutrality of medium and means. The myth of the moral neutrality of medium and means in ministry. His view seems to be one of, it doesn't matter how you get them to come in as long as they come in. Driscoll maintains that the culture or that the gospel can be mediated through high culture, folk culture, or pop culture. He notes, quote, while each of these cultural forms can mediate the gospel, arguably some more easily than others, this fact is often overlooked because people tend to attach a moral value to a cultural form they prefer. What he's saying is your cultural forms are just preferences, they're morally neutral, And so you could use any cultural form to convey the gospel. And so this would lead him to say that really his church, although it's quite different than the seeker movement, is really no different than Willow Creek. In his view, they have the same goal, reaching people, evangelism, but they use different methods. He describes Willow Creek as attractional, focused on getting people to come in, while the emerging church is more missional focus on sending people out. He notes that there is a growing criticism between these two camps, but he says this is unnecessary because, quote, they are working for the same goal, the reaching of lost people for Jesus, but simply using different methods, methods that are complementary, not contradictory and quote, and he adds. Jesus's incarnation is, in itself, missional. So this approach, neutrality of means and method, leads Driscoll to praise, I think with some discordance, the Puritans alongside Billy Graham. Bill Heigl's and Rick Warren alongside John Piper. For Driscoll, the end, reaching people, justifies various means. And I think what's lacking here is an evaluation of whether or not the means themselves are biblically faithful. Are the means faithful? And I think this is most evident in the area of evaluating the use of music in worship, always a controversial topic. Driscoll, as you might imagine, is, of course, an advocate for rock music. His church even sponsors secular rock concerts at a church-owned theater called the Paradox Theater. He is proud of the fact that his church's worship bands are respected by the alternative music scene in Seattle, and that one of his drummers is part of a popular punk rock band. Well, I was thinking about comparing Driscoll's views with that of Dan Lucarini, if you've ever read his book, Why I Left the Contemporary Christian Music Movement. In that book, Lucarini suggests that contemporary Christian music based on rock music is clearly and unequivocally associated with immorality, especially promiscuous and adulterous sex, glorification of drugs, and rebellion against authority. He thereby raises the question, Lucarini does, with what moral dimension is my music associated? And Lucarini concludes, We should not accept just any worldly method to reach the lost. Instead, we must discern carefully what methods are acceptable for use in the kingdom of God. In reading Driscoll, I could not help but think of Joel Beeky's little book, which I would commend to you, A Loving Encouragement to Flee Worldliness. You know, I was thinking about, I was contrasting my mind, I don't know how many of you are familiar with Beaky, Driscoll and Beaky, because if you've ever listened to Beaky, Beaky cogently addresses our culture. He addresses, though, in prudentially every area that a person can struggle with in sin. without being strident or course, but addressing it biblically in a biblical and a faithful way. And so if I had to choose a ministry, I want to follow Beaky rather than Driscoll. But in a loving encouragement to flee worldliness, Beaky writes to Christian parents and he urges them to refuse to love the world. He says, quote, including turning away from worldly music, hard rock, soft rock, contemporary music, and many forms of today's music which either in their lyrics or their beat promote the lust of the flesh. Of all the music that we and our children listen to, we must ask, can I pray over this music? Does it glorify God or ignite fleshly lust? Does it pass the test of Philippians 4a, being honest, pure, lovely, and of good report? If it encourages lust, rid yourself of it. Let me conclude. Mark Driscoll is a very gifted and able young man. I was telling Travis, I would encourage people to read particularly this book, just for your own knowledge. I wouldn't encourage adopting tactics, but I think any pastor will benefit just from reading this book. Driscoll will speak cogently to many things you deal with as a pastor on a personal level. You don't have to agree with where he ends up with it, but I think it could be profitable to read it. I'm thinking to understand perhaps where many of the churches around you are going, the directions in which they're moving. He sees himself as a missionary to culture in contrast to fundamentalists who avoid culture. The problem is that Driscoll both overestimates his own ability to use culture as a gospel tool, and he underestimates, vastly underestimates, the culture's corrosive impact on those who immerse themselves in it. Many young Calvinistic pastors are going to be prone to jump on the Reformationary bandwagon as the latest next big thing. We should heed John's warning. Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God. Amen. Thank you. I have not. I've not read it. I've seen it. I know my friend Travis has read it and written a review of it. You did that evangelical forum, didn't you Travis? Yeah. I've not read his book. But that would be a good resource. Like I said, and I'm not sure, that was a couple of years ago that that came out. I'm not sure all these issues really were split within the emerging church, a left-wing, right-wing. Yeah. Mark Driscoll. I'll tell you the truth, I don't know a lot about it, except that it's a church planting network, and what they're doing is trying to plant churches that they feel are culturally relevant. You would have to ask me that question. I didn't have a chance. I was going to look online and just see how many there were. The boundaries. I believe it was in this boundary that just came out. Follow that boundary, fellas, and you'll get it. There's some information there that the Missouri, the commission in the state commission of Missouri has withdrawn all support. So maybe that's what Act 29, I think it's over. Yeah, if you read Tom Askell's blog from the Founders' Ministry, he addressed that, and I think there are a couple of things. First of all, each one of those churches and those church planners ought to be evaluated individually, because they might not share all the views of those who hold extreme positions in that movement. So I think they ought to be evaluated individually. The second thing, though, I think is, sadly, is A lot of that issue has gotten caught up with larger SBC political issues, and there are a lot of non-Calvinistic inerrantists who have an axe to grind against Calvinists, and they're seizing upon alcohol and they're trying to tar all Calvinists as people who uncritically promote use of alcohol and trying to, I think, appeal to a bedrock tolerance feel among most Southern Baptists. And so that's kind of unfortunate that the reason to critically evaluate that Acts 29 church plant doesn't have anything to do with alcohol. It has to do with whether or not they're being biblically faithful and starting a church. You know what I mean? Yes? Yeah, I was about to say, the funny thing is, you know, my church has just joined the SBCV, and a lot of the church planting methodology, I think, is being uncritically used by many otherwise mainstream evangelicals like Southern Baptists. And so, yeah, you're hearing a lot of talk in churches that would appear to be conservative evangelical churches where they're wanting to use some of this emerging church language. When they say missional, what they're saying is they want to focus not on bringing crowds in, but like I said, taking their members and making them missionaries and sending them out and opening their homes up to hospitality and sharing the gospel and doing acts of mercy. And there's something about that that's laudable, right? I mean, shouldn't we be equipping and discipling believers to have personal ministries? Yes. But there's an edge to it. When they say missional, they also mean buying into some of this postmodern philosophical background for this and also some assumptions that people out there perhaps don't want to hear a straightforward propositional presentation of the gospel, and we have to be kind to them before we can get around to, after we've developed this friendship, after a while, maybe we can slip the gospel in there somewhere sideways. I've told my people several times, you can read through Acts and Paul's epistles, and you never see Paul going into an area and saying, let's build a platform of good works so that we'll gain a hearing. But you do see him going into a place and just preaching the gospel. And where Christ is lifted up, he will draw all kinds of people to himself. So we just preach the word and we and we pray and we watch as he draws and he'll do that work. He's the greatest evangelist. Anybody else? Thank you, brothers.