Grunge match

In an effort to boost traffic this week, I'm cross-posting this from the PulpitLive blog because it's a question I haven't seen worked out yet in this conflict. It deals with Mark Driscoll, but in a round-about way.

OK — as a guy “on the team” (I guess) who would agree with everything Dr. MacArthur wrote here, I have a question about this issue of engagement which I have not seen too many of the “emerging” types take up against their critics. And I offer it because I’m not sure I have an answer to the question, but I’m hoping that if Phil gets better soon, or Nathan is reading, or if Dr. MacArthur himself has a moment, there might be some interaction with this idea.

In Phillipians 1, Pauls writes this:

12I want you to know, brothers, that what has happened to me has really served to advance the gospel, 13so that it has become known throughout the whole imperial guard and to all the rest that my imprisonment is for Christ. 14And most of the brothers, having become confident in the Lord by my imprisonment, are much more bold to speak the word without fear.

15Some indeed preach Christ from envy and rivalry, but others from good will. 16The latter do it out of love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel. 17What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice.[ESV]

Paul’s perspective here is either confusing or shocking, especially given the strong language of the letter to the Galatians. He says, in effect, that as long as the actual Gospel is preached, the faults of the preachers ought to be overlooked. As long as Christ is proclaimed, even men who preach out of envy or rivalry (and one assumes this might also include vanity — the motive to be seen as one kind or another of man) should be rejoiced over.

On the one hand, I think this is a great rebuke to those who find "contenders" offensive and unloving. But on the other hand, I think it gives us "contenders" a moment of pause to think that perhaps someone like Driscoll — as long as his theology is not rank heresy — is allowed a certain degree of license.

Any comments about that?