click here to tweet this post
click here to share with your friends
subscribe to this feed
Give Rick Warren a Break!
by C Michael PattonSeptember 15th, 2010
125 Comments
I don’t keep up that much with Rick Warren, but I have read many of his books.
I have always scratched my head in confusion as so many Christians want to burn him at the stake. Well, I scratch my head a lot at all the friendly fire that is out there. We shoot stun darts at enemies and bazookas at our family. With Warren, at every turn, I see “discerning Christians” trying to rub him out.
These type of Christians stake out in front of the house of their target and don’t leave—ever. I suppose that I could go there and see where they are coming from. I suppose that I can understand their wiring. After all, from their perspective, they are standing up for the truth of the Gospel. They are “contending for the faith.” Grace must take a backseat to truth since, after all, it is truth that produces grace, right? Mercy must stand in line as it waits for contention to run its course. Maybe we will get to those things later, but the foundation must be laid. Onward Christian soldiers!
I call this ”the gift of parochialism”:
1) The ability of Christians to target and focus only on the bad in others; 2) The chronic display of other people’s shortcomings; 3) The gift of the Holy Spirit to be excessively narrow in our findings; 4) The uncanny ability of being indignant of other people’s theological shortcomings and indulgent of our own.
But it is easier. It is easier to attack than it is to be tactful. It is easier to lead rash assaults. “Skip the reconnaissance. Did you hear what he said?” After all, hastiness is natural. “‘Behold, you have now heard the blasphemy; what do you think?’ They answered, ‘He deserves death!’” . . . ”Master, we saw him casting out demons in your name and we tried to stop him.” . . . ”Master, do for me whatever we ask (for I am worthy and I can handle anything). Grant to me that I sit on your right hand, so that I can act as the judge and you can get a break.” . . . ”Cut off his ear!” (Loosely, Matt. 26:65-66; Mark 9:38; Mark 10:35-41; Jn. 18:10).
In fact, you will always have a following if you are hasty and rash because it appeals to the same in all of us. Wisdom, understanding, grace, and tact are not welcome when we are inciting a lynching. “He deserves death!” Everyone is a rookie of grace, but an expert at “monster.” The human body comes standard with pitchforks. Bandages are optional.
Back to Warren.
I feel sorry for Rick Warren. Well, I don’t feel too sorry for him because I know that he has thick enough skin to take what is being dished out. I also know that there are a lot of people who appreciate and see all the good that he does. Has he said some stuff that is theologically off? Possibly. Who has not? Has he misrepresented our faith here and there? Certainly. We all have (and do). Is he perfect or imperfect? Please use a number 2 pencil and shade in the circle next to “imperfect.” In fact, do that for everyone but Christ.
Why today? Why Warren? Why this post?
Because I read a blog post that was warning people about Warren and, simply put, it hurt to read. I get Warren’s tweets through my tweet catcher, TweetDeck. I have been impressed by his daily thoughts. Impressed and encouraged. You can tell a lot about a person by the way they tweet. (For those of you who are unfamiliar with Twitter, what it amounts to is quick thoughts that are 140 characters or less.)
Here are some of the more encouraging ones that Rick Warren has posted over the last 28 hours:
“If someone is full of bitterness hate, no amount of logic will change their mind. Absorb their hurt, love, forgive & pray for them.”
“What we think is a deadend is often God’s detour to a better way.”
“For Kay & me,our best way to pray together is conversationally, back & forth aloud, rather than 2 uninterrupted prayers.”
“The most common way Jesus comes into our lives is through a broken heart.”
“Prayer is dialog, not mere monolog. 50% is quiet listening.”
“Prayer isn’t convincing God to do our will but alligning ourselves with His will, which requires overcoming evil with good.”
“Neither the length nor eloquence of your prayers causes God to answer. God responds to faith. See Mark 11:24
“It’s dumb not to learn from others because u disagree with much of what they say.Even a broken clock is correct twice a day” [oh, the irony of that one]
“We’re always just one heartbeat away from eternity.”
“Giving up faith in God because perversions of faith occur is as irrational as giving up sex because rape & incest occur.”
“If u think divorcing& marrying another will bring u happiness know this:74% of 2nd marriages AFTER a divorce end in divorce.”
And last but not least:
“Many CLAIMING to hold to Sola Scriptura actually trust manmade confessions.The WORD,not us,is inerrant,so we need humility!”
Wait, one more,
“The darkest blindess is refusing to see the truth.”
I hope you were encouraged by his words. I hope you saw his heart here.
I am not cherry picking. However, I did leave out this one:
“Hiddenness is the place of purification. In hiddenness we find our true selves.”
This tweet caught the eye of some of our friends who were were staked out, binoculars in hand, in front of his house, in a dark alley. What? . . . You don’t see the problem? Desensitized fool! Oh ye who don’t have the gift of parochialism. Oh ye without the ability to discern. You who do not appraise what you eat. Take a close look at the leaven being put into your mind.
(The sarcasm here is about to make me point my canon straight up!)
The problem that this particular group has with this quote is this: “Rick Warren’s choice [for tweet] today was New Age mystic, Henri Nouwen, a Buddhist sympathizer who believed all paths lead to God.” They go on to dissect what this must mean about Warren. In short, he is attempting to lead people to universalism.
I tweet. I tweet often. Many times I quote from Christians who are not of the same ilk as me theologically. I just encouraged people to follow my friend Paul Copan, who is an Arminian. I have quoted Francis Beckwith, who is a Roman Catholic. Last week, I even tweeted this: “I slept with faith and found a corpse in my arms on awakening.” This comes from Aleister Crowley, an occultist. It does not mean that I have a secret plan to lead people to occultism. I also, like Warren, tweet straight from the Bible. Just this morning, while reading Genesis, I tweeted this, “Gen 6:1. Angels? ‘The sons of God saw the daughters of men were beautiful; they took them as wives.’ At least they married them 1st!”
If people are waiting for me to “slip” by quoting or saying something that is a bit off, they won’t have to wait long.
Here is what I think to myself about the attack on Warren here:
1) Who cares if Warren quotes from a guy who is off theologically? Does this mean that he endorses all Nouwen’s theology? Why would we ever think such?
Most importantly…
2) Didn’t they read all of Warren’s other tweets? Didn’t they see how rich they were? His heart is on his sleeve. These other tweets were as orthodox as you can get. He is defending Christianity, not universalism. Why, out of all these, do they pick the Nouwen quote? Why not one of the others? He is quoting the Bible. He is defending marriage. For goodness sake, he is even standing strong on sola Scriptura!
When did grace get put in the trunk? When did reason get flicked out the window? Why do those of us who care about theology so dearly become back alley back stabbers of our own family?
We need to learn to have grace in our theology. We need to recognize those of the same DNA and commend before we condemn. We need to be seen as people of grace before we ever have a right to prune.
Folks, if we are hanging out on theology corner looking for a fight, we can find one. We will also always have an audience who is willing to watch and cheer as we beat someone up. But what we will find is that we become blood thirsty after a few rounds. The cheers of the crowd will become our heroine. However, in the end, we might discover that we are punching the face of our brother.
We need to be theologically discerning. We need “appraise” things. But when we realize that this is all we are doing, I think we need to appraise ourselves.
Grace and Truth. Truth and Grace. What a difficult combination to find.
Similar Posts:
- The Dark Side of Theology
- Fourteen Characteristics of Theological Legalism
- Can Heretics Be Saved? Or “Aren’t We All Saved Heretics?”
- Three Types of Christian Scholarship
- What does it take to be an Evangelical?
125 Comments
Like or Dislike:
0
I was that person when I wore a younger mans clothes.
Like or Dislike:
1
Michael,
One of the problems as I see it with someone like Rick Warren quoting Nouwen–even if the quote he used was just fine and he agreed with it 100%–is that people can see a quote used by someone they respect and think something like, “Hmmm, that was a great quote. That author probably has a lot of good to say. Guess I will check him out some more.” Then, if they are not well trained theologically, or very discerning, they may go read some of the stuff Nouwen wrote that is not right on, and find themselves being led astray. The fact is, using a person’s quote because you think that one statement was good can come across as an endorsement for that person. Maybe that is not fair, but I believe it happens.
It seems to me that if Rick Warren seriously disagress with a good deal of Nouwen’s theology, it would be very wise for him to state something to that effect when using his quote. That would eliminate any possiblity of others thinking you are endorcing something that you may find to be the total opposite of what you really believe.
Like or Dislike:
0
great post Michael…. I think these folks need to take Intro to Theology and wallow for a bit on the concept of being irenic….
Like or Dislike:
0
[...] In Defense of Rick Warren? Posted on September 15, 2010 by T.C. R Over at Parchment & Pen, C. Michael Patton calls on fellow believers to give Rick Warren a break. [...]
Like or Dislike:
0
In Warren’s defense , if I’m not mistaken Chuck Swindoll has also quoted Nouwen…. nuff said!
Like or Dislike:
1
The tiolet at the local truck stop can look bright white and the water look clean, but I don’t recommend you drink from it.
Like or Dislike:
0
Thank you, Michael…excellent word.
Like or Dislike:
0
Speaking of Chuck Swindoll, I saw him in Kroger Sunday night shopping in a salmon colored t-shirt, shorts, and flip-flops. Unlike many in this world he does not allow fame go to his head. He’s a regular guy just like the rest of us and that’s why I love him.
Like or Dislike:
0
Rick Warren chose to quote Henri Nouwen who was a Buddhist-sympathizer. Guess I’ll go check out all that Nouwen has to say. Oh, here’s what Nouwen believes. Interesting!:
“Today I personally believe that while Jesus came to open the door to God’s house, all human beings can walk through that door, whether they know about Jesus or not. Today I see it as my call to help every person claim his or her own way to God.”
—From Sabbatical Journey, Henri Nouwen’s last book
page 51, 1998 Hardcover Edition
Cool. People will walk through the door of God’s house whether or not they know Jesus. Looks like Jesus should have saved himself a lot of trouble when he died in agony on the Cross! People could just get to God through Krishna or whatever god they like. So glad Rick Warren introduced me to Henri Nouwen. Never knew who he was until I saw Warren’s tweet. I’d like to share the good news about non-Christians with our small group next week!
Like or Dislike:
0
“Hiddenness is the place of purification. In hiddenness we find our true selves.” Nouwen
By the way, would someone please tell me what this quote even means? What is the hiddeness he speaks of and why is it the place of purification? And what is the meaning of our true selves?
I’m not sure I even know what he is really talking about here.
Like or Dislike:
0
I guess I would have to ask the question “Do Ideas really matter”? If creeds really are old school, and deeds are all we should really care about, then perhaps RW is right. Why get upset about Nouwen’s universalism, or Mertons zen antics, or RW’s own inclusivism and acceptance of comtemplative prayer and TM and so on? Why worry about his sitting at the feet of Peter Wagner and Robert Schuller and absorbing their “wisdom”?
I have been witnessing to my mom for over 35 years. About five years ago she told me she had come to believe there was a God!!! But then she said “But I don’t want to get caught up in all the details”. I said “Mom, did you know that every one of the 19 9/11 murderers believed in Jesus? You know the details just might be really important”.
I quote every rotten philsopher and theologian and heretic that I can think of in my seminars – I especially like to quote Nietzsche of all people. I don’t care who RW quotes – but I do care that so much of his thinking seems to resonate with people like Nouwen, Merton, Schuller, Wagner and so on. I do care as he is probably the most recognized pastor in the world that for many people both inside his huge network and outside of it – that he seen as speaking for God.
As a slight aside, I think there is an integrity issue to deal with as well. At least three examples that I know of where he publicly stated his position when there was private evidence of his believing/stating the exact opposite. The first was the video several years ago of his little trip down Damascus way with that genial dictator of Syria. The second was his position on inclusivism that was on his family questions page on his website – until it got publicly known and then the page disappeared down the memory hole of the web. The last and perhaps most shameful was his public denial of supporting prop 8 in California on the Larry King show and then the video of him supporting prop 8 to his church. Who is this man???
Like or Dislike:
1
Regarding comment #7:
I think that maybe, (just maybe!), all of the reasons (and more) that you gave for concern about Rick Warren in this comment, Bill, are very likely the reasons that people come down so hard on Rick Warren in the first place. It isn’t simply the issue of one Tweet–it is the issue of many things being heaped up over the years that have caused a lot of folks to have very grave concerns about this gentleman and what he believes and preaches. Sure there is good stuff there. But a lot of folks have also seen very grave causes for concern.
Like or Dislike:
0
I see that there are some comments that must have been in moderation that became visible after I posted my last comment. So the numbering is now way off. I referred to #7. It is at this time #10 and is by Bill Honsberger.
Like or Dislike:
1
To quote Bob Dylan,
“You don’t need a weather man to know which the way wind blows.”
“People seldom do what they believe in. They do what is convenient, then they repent.”
“Sometimes it’s not enough to know what things mean, sometimes you have to know what things don’t mean.”
“To live outside the law you must be honest.”
“People disagreeing everywhere you look makes you wanna stop and read a book.”
“But if the arrow is straight
And the point is slick,
It can pierce through dust no matter how thick.
So I’ll make my stand
And remain as I am
And bid farewell and not give a damn.”
Like or Dislike:
1
Of all the things to make a fuss over, this is really dumb, honestly. Paul quoted a Greek poet when speaking to the Athenians. Jude quotes an apocryphal book. The book of Genesis quotes the words of Satan himself.
Sometimes a heretical, secular, or even anti-Christian writer can pen a turn of phrase that is too good to pass up. When Caiaphas said that Jesus would “die for the people” was it wrong for John to include this saying in his gospel, since he was wrong in other areas?
Like or Dislike:
0
Ken,
That’s no way to talk about apprising (sic) ministries!
Like or Dislike:
0
One of the issues that concerns me when we pull people apart for what they say.. such as Henri Nouwen is that they don’t dissect the cultural / historical aspect of where that person is placed.
Nouwen cared for many intellectually challenged people. He was faced with the pastoral challenges of how do these mentally / physically challenged people know God… and so he had to intellectually work through those processes within the theological / social / church framework he was in.
Like or Dislike:
0
“Grace must take a backseat to truth since, after all, it is truth that produces grace, right?”
You speak as though grace is a creation rather than grace as the uncreated life of God communicated to His creation through His energies.
Like or Dislike:
0
Brian I was just about to make the same comment about Jude…
Like or Dislike:
0
Now I don’t feel so bad about that Catholic post
Like or Dislike:
0
Can’t we talk about something else?
Like or Dislike:
0
Are we practicing grace or truth in pulling apart those who pull RW apart? I wasn’t sure which.
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael, it sounds like you’re assuming motive. ‘Standing outside with binoculars.’ We don’t need binoculars to see what RW is doing. Also aren’t you doing the same thing you seem to be accusing them of doing? e.g. you’re letting us know something that, in you’re opinion, could be harmful. seems like you’re also reading an attitude into their writing that just may not be there? Have you ever talked with them? Paul quoted non believers, yes, but he didn’t recommend we adhere to what they taught etc.
Like or Dislike:
1
Some of these comments sound a lot like the ones I see over at Ken Silva’s site. Methinks Ken might have mobilized the “Apprising Army,” all ten of them, to head over here to P&P and snuff out the Warren sympathisers.
“Attention! Attention! Sympathetic Warren material at P&P. Attack! Attack!”
Actually, Ken’s toilet illustration may be more apropo than even he realizes. Fact of the matter is that the water in the toilet may be fine for drinking. It would certainly be sufficient to save the life of a dying man. The biggest issue may not be one of safety, but one of distaste. Ken may not like the idea, but I used to have a dog that had no qualms at all. And the dog remained healthy. Perhaps the danger is exaggerated.
See, a certain amount of contamination is normal in our water and in our food supply. Ken, do you use pepper on food? According to the FDA, pepper may contain insect body parts and mold – “Average of 1% or more pieces by weight are infested and/or moldy” and/or Mammalian excreta – “Average of 1 mg or more mammalian excreta per pound.” And contaminants like that are in all our food. And yet we live longer than ever.
We all have contaminants in our understanding of God and how well we reflect him. Some are just unaware of their own level of contamination.
I have no doubt that Warren, like all of us, may have a speck or two in his eye, but for right now, I just focus on ducking the beams swinging around every time the “discernment” guys turn their heads.
Like or Dislike:
0
I disagree often with things that you say in your posts…but you make me think about things in a different way…that is why I keep reading…maybe you’ll change my mind about something one day.
Like or Dislike:
0
Hodge, that is a fair question and one I certainly anticipated. Therefore, I will take the time to respond briefly.
First, I did not ever mention what blog I was speaking about. I don’t mind so much if people find out, but I was careful as I believed that my purpose could be accomplished without it. I am sure some of the commentors will figure it out, but 95 percent of the people who visit this blog don’t read the comments. To most, it is just a generic representation.
Second, I never said that we should not speak out against things. My whole point is that when we are of this mindset, camped out waiting for the next “enemy” to destroy. This mindset will often begin to create enemies, because it is so easy to act in hast.
If you have been associated with this blog or our ministry for long enough, you will find that this type of stuff is not at all characteristic of what we do. This, I believe, helps us gain an audience when we do speak in such a way. If this is all you do, you really have lost credibility except with those who already agree. It is like a friend who corrects you at every turn. Your “holiness” is all they talk about and they are intent on playing the Holy Spirit. There is never any encouragement. They never recognize any of the good you do. All they want to talk about is what you are doing wrong. Sooner or later, you turn them off. But a friend who is balanced, recognizing the good, recognizing their own faults and find correction a hard thing to approach, you listen to them.
I am certainly not saying I am perfect or that this ministry is perfect, but we are not making stakeouts looking for evil.
Winston Churchhill “A fanatic is one who won’t change their mind and won’t change the subject.” These type of ministries and people are like that. In fact, they might even be thinking about why I quoted Churchhill! We need a lot more grace. Humility, gentleness and respect goes a long way.
Like or Dislike:
0
“Some of these comments sound a lot like the ones I see over at Ken Silva’s site. Methinks Ken might have mobilized the “Apprising Army,” all ten of them,…”
Perhaps in an alternate universe; like Brian McLaren’s site there is no comments section at my site.
Just something to contemplate while you’re in hiddenness, the ad hominem isn’t likely to show me a better way, ya know.
Like or Dislike:
0
There are two things I always find funny about these types of things. 1) guilt by association, and 2) the idea that because someone is wrong on one thing they must be wrong on everything. [begin sarcasm] You know those apostate Roman Catholics believe in the Trinity. Just so I’m not associated with Roman Catholics I hereby renounce all belief in the Trinity.
Like or Dislike:
0
Great job, Michael. Speaking truth and grace of Christ very well here! I also share your concerns of this fairly new cottage industry phenomenon of “let’s get Rick Warren” or whoever we need to police. These folks don’t realize how horribly sick and sad they look.
Like or Dislike:
0
THIS COMMENT WAS DELETED DUE TO A VIOLATION OF BLOG RULES.
Like or Dislike:
1
My issue with Rick (or anyone else who would stand in the pulpit) is being careful with the Word. He simply is not. Now if this was some little backwoods minister it’s still an issue, but when you are supposed to be at the top, it is a big deal. The guy is plain sloppy.
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael,
I understand where you’re coming from, and agree with you to some extent. An issue does arise, however, over how egregious Warren’s errors are. One group seems to be presenting them as mere specks in an overall good theology. The other, as huge logs in a mill of bad theology and even false Christianity. I don’t study RW enough to know which is true, but I think we need always to be aware that our dislike for criticism often stems from our cultural sensibilities rather than the Scripture, which frankly is more correction than affirmation in the sense that we use those terms. I agree that encouragement is needed in balance, but not in equal balance. We should never get to the point where we close off another because they criticize us too much in our minds. Otherwise, we fall prey to the spirit of Ahab who cried out against Micaiah, saying, “There is yet one man by whom we may inquire of the Lord, but I hate him, because he does not prophesy good concerning me, but evil.”
Like or Dislike:
0
BTW for what it’s worth my all time favorite quote from an economist (taken out of context of course) comes from a economist whose philosophy I think is completely wrongheaded.
“In the long run we are all dead” – Keynes
I also know of plenty of good ideas and quotes from theologians I disagree with on various issues as well (e.g. Aquinas [Catholic], Pascal [Catholic], Niebuhr [Neo-Orthodox], Augustine [quasi-Catholic], Anselm [quasi-Catholic] just to name a few). The point is one can find that an individual had a good idea or good insight on one thing without accepting their whole belief system.
Like or Dislike:
0
The trouble with Rick Warren, and not just him but so many Evangelical pastors, is the utter confusion of law and gospel.
Whe the law is used properly (theologically speaking), it ough convict and kill us off…to our own religious ladder climbing projects.
Rick uses the law (as do all Baptist preachers) as a ladder for the Christian to climb…instead of the means by which Christ has come all the way down TO US.
I like Rick, but he’s a Baptist. What else would anyone expect?
Like or Dislike:
0
I was browsing one of the Saddleback websites tonight:
Ihttp://www.saddlebackfamily.com/maturity/spiritualgrowthcenter/topics/spiritualformation.html
I saw at least 5 books by Henri Nouwen that were recommended there and apparently for sale in their store at the church. None of them were personally spoken of by Rick Warren, although other staff members said some of them had been influential in their lives.
Woudn’t you think however, that since so many of Nouwen’s books are recommended and sold in the store of Warren’s church, that it is likely that he thinks quite highly of Nouwen and at least a share of his theology?
I must note however, that I couldn’t find the particular book mentioned there that seems to indicate Nouwen believed in a form of universalism.
But with so many recommendations for Nouwen coming from Saddleback, it is certainly safe to assume that people will probably seek out other books written by him and read them too if they enjoyed these.
Like or Dislike:
1
If you have read anything by Nouwen you know that he passionately loved Jesus, and believed in him. He certainly had some theological leanings that I think were wrong, but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t a fellow brother in Christ, that also doesn’t mean that he doesn’t have much to offer the church. You don’t have to read him if you don’t want to, but maybe you should cut him and people who find him helpful a little … grace.
The ultimate question is how powerful was Christ’s death on the cross? How truly deep is his grace? How completely victorious was his resurrection? Do we believe that God can work through every believer, even those who may have some suspect theology?
In other words, can it save and transform a life even if that life doesn’t get all the theological ducks perfectly in a row? I think and hope so.
Do does anyone have all their ducks in a row?
Like or Dislike:
0
Cheryl, C.S. Lewis is mentioned by a lot of people as well. He was an inclusivist like Nouwen. People recommend him without hesitation (as do I). But I don’t suspect that this will automatically turn them into inclusivists.
Like or Dislike:
0
I can’t find them now (Maybe too early in the morning), but I saw some comments that seemed very disrespectful. Please filter things through the gentleness and respect filter seven times.
Like or Dislike:
0
Even Paul said that for now we only know in part….. It seems to me that those in the camp of ticking every box and crossing every cross and dotting every I are on the slippery slop of salvation by works…
Only this sort of work involves what one believes…. The restless reformed camp seems to think the actual gospel is their version of the WHOLE systematic theological base they hold to.
It makes me ask the question if God really is bound by what we believe or is he actually bigger than that?
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael,
I believe that many folks would have more problems with Nouwen then the fact that he is an inclusivist–which, by the way is quite a large problem, is it not? Helping people find their own way to God as I believe he put it?? Is that not quite different then orthodox Chrisitin belief??
In your OP, you referred to Nouwen as being “theologically off”. You also referred to C.S. Lewis and said you recommend him “without hesitation” although he is an inclusivist too.
I’m sorry, but I just don’t get recommending someone–anyone–without hesitation if you know that they have some very large theological problems. Recommending them for certain things perhaps with a disclaimer of some sort about the rest. But whole hearted recommendation of someone with major theological differences like this just does not seem to be right to me at all.
I know many here will not agree with me on this, but it is honestly the way I understand the situation.
Like or Dislike:
0
A quote from David Barton of Wallbuilders:
It has always been interesting to me throughout my political and religious life that many Christians seem more intent on whacking allies than enemies. Years ago I helped lead tens of thousands of Christians into civic involvement for their first time, and I then remained engaged with them in the political arena. An axiom I developed during that time was: “I don’t need enemies; I have friends!” I also learned that in public Christian life you should wear a bullet-proof vest, but that it should be turned to the back to protect from the friendly fire!
Like or Dislike:
0
Cheryl, I can’t endlessly footnote myself or that is all it will be. There is no one that I agree with on everything. Church history is littered with people with whom I disagree on many things, much of which is significant depending on what you are recommending them for. Martin Luther and the Jews, John Calvin and the inquisition, Pascal and his Roman Catholic leaning, Augustine and his views about baptism, Aquinas and his views about the Lord’s supper, John Wesley and his perfectionism, CFD Moule and his view of the Holy Spirit, so-and-so and his eschatology, C.S. Lewis and his view of Biblical authority, Beckwith and his Evangelical Roman Catholicism, C.I. Schofield and his view of classic dispensationalism, BB Warfield and his view of evolution.
I remember walking into the church library at my old church seeing an elder throwing away CS Lewis books. I asked him why, he said “because he does not believe in inerrancy. He is a heretic.” The problem with throwing away all of the writings of those you have problems with to “protect” the weaker person is that you end up with an empty library. Taken to it end, the only one you will recommend without footnotes is yourself! Then, in Christ’s presence, you will probably, if remaining consistent, have to throw away your stuff as well, for you will find that you were not perfect either.
Certainly there is a time to footnote, but it will depend on the context of your recommendation, your passions, and the severity of the issue. All of these combined will help you evaluate.
Hope that makes sense.
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael, I have read a lot about Warren, though I have not read him. To me, he looks like a sincere gentleman who truly loves Jesus.
But honestly, I was only thinking of how some self-appointed theological cops were shooting at Billy Graham at his couple of comments that sounded like Inclusivism. Even after his retraction, these cops won’t “forgive” him. They kinda get a kick out of shooting at their own brethren, I guess!
Like or Dislike:
0
While I certainly think there is a lot of unnecessary rudeness in expressing opinions among Christians, (especially in blogdom) I don’t think being irenic means we have to accept questionable theology in order to show grace to each other.
It works both ways. Just because we’re legitimately questioning someone on a theological matter doesn’t automatically mean we should be character assassins, and think they should be burned at the stake. OTOH, we shouldn’t be chastised for pointing out when they are deliberately misleading people. Don’t think the Lord would be too pleased with that either.
Like or Dislike:
0
MBaker,
That is true, but when that is all you do and are known for, it does not honor God nor does it have a positive effect.
Like or Dislike:
0
Hey ya’ll, have a question that is somewhat is related to this one… I was just asked to be a part of the leadership of this church plant I go to, whose origin is from the Missouri-Synod Lutheran denomination. I believe contrary to what they believe… namely, they believe in baptismal regeneration, and also the physical presence of Jesus being in the bread and wine. We all know that neither of those teachings are biblical. So my question is this…
Could you join the leadership having so great a difference on how they say a person is saved?
And could you email me at spencer@barefoot-webdesign.com with your reasons? Thanks! I just really want to do the right thing here…
Like or Dislike:
0
Hey Ken and Cheryl,
Cool, you have it all figured out! Wow, it must be great to know exactly how God works. See, the funny thing is, you are just two of thousands of believers who think you know “the right way”. But you can’t all be right. I used to be you, and I’m relieved to be free of that belief. You are afraid of the boogie man, that somehow God can’t guide “the average person” through faith issues and doctrines. It’s old, tired thinking and it has nothing to do with God.
Oh, and so cool to come up with the toilet illustration. Wow.
Like or Dislike:
0
I probably would not be able to be on the leadership. However, the fact that they asked you to join them gives me the impression that they don’t care THAT much about the issue. That is a plus, but probably not enough to make me jump on board.
However, saying that I could not be part of the leadership is far from saying that I believe that they are damned to hell!
Like or Dislike:
0
I’m not sure if my comment was not accepted (not sure why), or lost in the mix, but wanted to point out that a negative ministry is all that Jeremiah, Elijah, Micaiah and many of the prophets were known for. If you look at Christ’s ministry, count how many times He corrected someone versus how many times he “encouraged” someone. We need correction if we are in error, specifically concerning who God is, the gospel, what we’re preaching and teaching, our theological emphases if they’re off, etc. People didn’t kill the prophets and Christ because they were primarily encouragers in the sense that we see encouragement. This doesn’t mean they nitpicked everything, but it does show what ministry primarily entails in a world where the devil is so hard at work to destroy the mind through what is false.
Like or Dislike:
0
I am not an inclusivist, but I can understand the argument, and I can understand that there are nuances in various people’s views on this topic. And being an inclusivist does not mean that you lose a passion for evangelism or proclaiming the glory of Jesus to all people.
Frankly, a lot of people in evangelicalism are moving away from the classic evangelical motive for evangelism: namely to save people from hell. Many are realizing that that is actually giving the gospel short shrift (are all we selling is fire insurance, how selfish if the only reason you trust God is to get out of something), and that it is really about connecting people to the triune God and allowing that triune God to heal the broken relationship between sinner and God, and then using the healed to reconcile the entire world.
In other words, there are manifold reasons (and maybe some that are more biblical) to be passionate about telling others about Jesus.
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael,
I used to get Warrens tweets on FB, but I had to hide that feed sometime last month. He was tweeting all of these statements that smacked of so much pride and arrogance in his church and PEACE plan. Lots of folks were concerned that perhaps it wasn’t Rick tweeting, and that someone had hacked his account. Until then, I stood up for Warren.
Like or Dislike:
0
Hey Michael, thanks for your quick comment on what you would do. Do you think that this would be a big enough deal for you to where you would have to leave the church? I mean, in light of the fact that you teach a lot, and if others in the leadership believe so differently than you do on how a person is saved, could you still stay at the church if you were not permitted to teach on baptism or the Lord’s supper.
This is the predicament I am in right now…
Like or Dislike:
0
Wanted to quote this again, since my other comment didn’t make it (maybe I hit something when I tried to post it?):
Ahab, speaking of Micaiah,
“There is yet one man by whom we may inquire of the Lord, but I hate him, because he does not prophesy good concerning me, but evil.” (1 Kings 22:8)
Like or Dislike:
0
CMP,
I certainly think you are right about honoring God and having a positive effect.
However, disagreeing on theological points and being personally disagreeable to our brethren are two entirely different things.
Good apologetics has it’s rightful place in the church just as sound doctrine does. Both should be done carefully and honorably done, keeping in mind it is not honoring God to let his truth not be as important as His grace in our lives. John says Jesus was full of grace AND truth.
I think we Christians often make it an either or thing.
Like or Dislike:
0
Marv,
“Cool, you have it all figured out! Wow, it must be great to know exactly how God works. See, the funny thing is, you are just two of thousands of believers who think you know “the right way”. But you can’t all be right. I used to be you, and I’m relieved to be free of that belief. You are afraid of the boogie man, that somehow God can’t guide “the average person” through faith issues and doctrines. It’s old, tired thinking and it has nothing to do with God.”
So now you have it all figured out? Now you have the right way and everyone else who does not see it as you do is wrong? This is the problem with critiquing other people for critiquing. Everyone critiques. They just want their view to reign supreme because they believe that they have the truth now and others are wrong. Let’s discuss the truth, not argue over whether anyone can know it.
Like or Dislike:
0
Wow, Hodge. Had to dig deeeep for that one. Impressive. Lisa’s upcoming post on proof-texting may come in handy for you.
Okay, fun set aside. Do you really think that this passage overpowers the gentleness and respect that is admonished throughout the NT? Do you really think that you can equate Warren to an evil king who is practicing idolatry and openly mandating the nation of Israel into syncretism?
It is these type of associations that we need to be careful with.
Like or Dislike:
0
Looking forward to see what comes out of the Desiring God national conference in a couple of weeks:
http://www.desiringgod.org/events/national-conferences/2010
Rick Warren is sharing the platform with Piper, Mohler and several others…
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael,
Actually, my original post that didn’t make it said that I agree with you to some extent and that I’m not sure what camp RW falls into. I don’t follow him, so I don’t know. The problem is that I’m not digging deep at all. It’s right there in all of the prophets, Michael. My point is that we cannot criticize for criticizing, as you just did to me. We all do this, and it is the nature of ministry in the world. Who set setting aside gentleness and respect? But you are associating ideas with these that are more cultural than biblical. So I ask you, Do you think you can set aside the mandate to hold every thought captive, teach the whole counsel of God as preemptive to the attack of wolves, to defend the faith (whether from external or internal attacks) with the command to be gentle and respectful as we do it? Ahab is INSIDE the camp, not outside. He’s a “Christian” shepherd. He’s one of us, except that he’s not; but if we’re going to assume that everyone who claims Christ is of Christ, I see no reason to reject him. Once again, I’m not saying RW falls into this category. I would further argue that the prophets are all speaking to the community of God, not a bunch of outsiders. They are killed and put in jail by the community for their negative messages.
Like or Dislike:
0
Again, my question: Is Christ’s ministry primarily encouragement in the sense that we’re using the term or correction?
Like or Dislike:
0
Let me clarify, since my other post didn’t make it.
Michael’s camp is saying that everyone is flawed and therefore those who criticize RW are doing so in error. In this camp, RW simply has a few specks in his eye. The other camp seems to think that RW’s errors are more substantial and deal with the gospel itself. This camp views his theology as much more dangerous and that he is deceiving people or contributing toward their deception in some way. The post needs to be about why one camp is wrong rather than the other, not about criticizing. If we all assume with Camp 1 that RW just has a few flaws in his theology that are not substantial, then of course, Michael is right to some degree. If we assume that Camp 2 is right, then Michael’s post becomes absurd to those who see the occupation of ministry to shepherd the sheep from wolves and hold every thought captive. We’ve all been a victim of assumptions and emotions are flaring over them.
Like or Dislike:
0
Hodge, I am not against being critical. I most certianly think that there are time when we must be such. But what I am trying to focus on here (esp in the comments) is that you don’t automatically have the right to be critical. Your audience is not a given. People can be tactful. Most importantly, we can be seen as a person who is gentle, respectful, and gracious in all things. When we have that, then our criticism is not only more effective, but, most importantly, biblical.
I think the best thing to do for these type of ministries is to ask yourself, Would I say that I am gentle? Would I say that I am respectful? Or would I say that I am always critical of everyone and everything? What is my attitude?
I am certianly not perfect…ask my wife. But these attacks on Warren seem to lack tact, gentlness, grace, and recognition of all that he does do and confess. The list of tweets demonstrated this I think very well. Look at the one that was chosen. Look at the assumptions that they had to tag to it. Look at what was skipped.
12Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. 13Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. 14And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity.
Col.3:15
12Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. 13 Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. 14And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity.
Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, since as members of one body you were called to peace. And be thankful. 16Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God. 17And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.
Once we have truly done this, the “wounds of a friend” will accomplish much. Skip this, and don’t bother.
Like or Dislike:
0
I guess I just think that this is still assuming that Warren is a brother who needs to be gently admonished. If that’s true, then your point is well taken. I just think that those who seem to be criticizing him, do so because they think he has been admonished to no avail, and that his errors are more substantial. I’m not familiar with the website to which your referring though, so maybe if I saw it I would agree.
But I do think we need to all remember that Christ who called Peter the devil, His disciples blind and ignorant, Paul who said he wished the Judaizer “Christians” would castrate themselves, and Peter who called Christians who turn away from the truth “unreasoning animals good for nothing but to be captured and killed” are also being gentle and humble in doing so (“gentleness” in the NT is in contrast to physical violence, not a soft spoken tone and humility is in relation to God first and then to others in priority). We just need to be careful that we are not imposing our ideas of etiquette on those passages and then gain a theology of rebuke that is itself in need of correction.
Like or Dislike:
0
All good.
Here is some good comments on the tact about which I speak from Bucer and Newton:
http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2009/11/bucer-and-newton-and-theological-tact/
Like or Dislike:
0
Hodge, there’s a difference in the positions. It’s not that Marv or any other critic of the watchblogs has it all figured out. But we do have one thing figured out, and it’s that we are all fallen and we are all imperfect in our theology, and it is on that basis that we are to be humble, considering others better than ourselves (Php 2:3). I think we all agree that none of us has perfect theology, therefore we should be humble. But the mocking and ridicule I see on the watchblogs has no hint of humility.
You say “let’s discuss the truth….” OK, let’s do just that. Is it not true that all humans, including Warren, Silva, MacArthur, you, me and CMP, have imperfect theology? Is that not a cause for humility? To me, the primary error of the watchblogs is the assumption that they hold the only possible correct view. And, mind you, none of the disputes are over anything that is central in church history! Warren does not deny anything that the ancient church held dear enough to place in a creed. And to my knowledge, no one can accuse him of some egregious sin.
Paul writes:
Which of those will you accuse Warren of? But I feel the watchblogs are guilty of slander on almost a daily basis, turning mere speculation about motives into accusations of intentional spiritual deception, delivered with the utmost haughtiness and arrogance.
Again, I have no doubt Warren has some theoloical specks in his eye, so I don’t mind if they disagree with Warren. but I will speak out against the arrogance, venom and hatred with which they express their disagreement.
Like or Dislike:
0
“You say “let’s discuss the truth….” OK, let’s do just that. Is it not true that all humans, including Warren, Silva, MacArthur, you, me and CMP, have imperfect theology? Is that not a cause for humility? To me, the primary error of the watchblogs is the assumption that they hold the only possible correct view.”
Yes, but it’s also true that Arius, Pelagius, Alexander the Coppersmith, and Hitler have imperfect theology. The discussion should have been centered around your next statement concerning whether he is in agreement with the ancient creeds. The assumption that all of what is central and important is found in the creeds is itself a discussion we should have. Again, I’m not familiar with the site, so maybe I would agree that they are nitpicking. I certainly think that harping on someone for quoting someone who is theologically off can be nitpicking, unless the person endorses parts of that person’s dangerous theology. Perhaps it’s a site that glorifies in abasing others to exalt the self. I don’t know. I just don’t want to go down the “well, everybody is imperfect, so we shouldn’t harshly criticize” route. That seems more American than biblical to me.
Like or Dislike:
0
I’ll also point out that on multiple occasions Warren has attemped to reach out to and dialog with the most outspoken of his critics, and those overtures have been consistently refused. Here’s this from http://surphside.blogspot.com/2010/04/ingrid-schlueter-on-john-piper-and-rick.html
I find that to be telling, along with the fact that most of the watchblogs either heavily moderate comments or do not allow readers to comment at all. Honest discussion and accountability can be such a distraction…
Like or Dislike:
0
@ Craig. “slippery slope of salvation by works.” DING DING DING DING DING BINGO!!!!!!!! You nailed it. That is THE biggest problem with these self-proclaimed critics. It’s ironic they don’t even see the irony of what they are doing!
Like or Dislike:
0
I just posted a new article here that might connect into this specific topic. I entitled it, The Persecuted Becoming the Persecutors.
Like or Dislike:
0
I think even the implication that someone is a slanderer because they disagree with someone’s theology is also painting this issue with too broad a brush.
Maybe CMP’s friend was wrong, but let’s not make him out the monster either because he expressed an honest opinion. Folks on this blog do it all the time.
Yes, there is arrogance aplenty and mean spirited folks out here in the Christian world on all sides, who want to make a point by making another seem inferior so they can show off their superior knowledge or goodness or whatever.. Does that mean all who disagree with our conclusions are automatically wrong? No, of course not.
The whole point should be not to err on either side of the coin.
Like or Dislike:
0
Dave,
With that we definitely agree.
Like or Dislike:
0
The site you linked to above Dave, while proving your point, also just reminded me of another issue many people have with Rick Warren.
That link mentioned tha Rick Warren is on the advisory council of Tony Blair’s Faith Foundation. Here is the declaration people sign to be a part of their group:
http://www.tonyblairfaithfoundation.org/page/s/declaration
While fighting poverty and malaria in the world are certainly noble goals, is it really right for a Christian to join with all of the religions in the world to do so for the purpose of making a statement that religion is a force for good in the world as this declaration states? If we truly believe that Jesus is THE way, THE truth, and THE life as we claim we do, should we be linking arms with other world religions to prove that we are all a force for good? Many obviously would say yes–so long as we are doing it for the purpose of fighting disease and poverty. However, are we not putting the Christian faith on equal grounds as all others by signing such a declaration? Is that what we really should be doing??
Another quote about the Foundation from here:
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/tony-blair-receives-2010-liberty-medal-at-the-national-constitution-center-102820839.html
“In 2008, he established the Tony Blair Faith Foundation, which promotes respect and understanding among the world’s religions to show how faith is a powerful force for good in the modern world. By encouraging better understanding of other people’s beliefs, particularly among young people, the foundation aims to mediate and prevent conflict through increased recognition of shared values.”
“Increased recognition of shared values” and preventing conflict. Might sound good. However, when we are not at all in sync with those other world religion’s on the major issues of faith, should we as Christians be emphasizing our “shared values” and not the fact the world needs a Savior, and the only one is Jesus?
Like or Dislike:
0
Is sharing the fact that the world needs Jesus best accomplished by sequestering ourselves from any and all who don’t share our faith?
Like or Dislike:
0
Hey Spencer Barfuss,
Check this out!
http://utah-lutheran.blogspot.com/2010/09/baptist-lie.html
This may help you to understand why the Missouri Synod and other confessional Lutherans believe that God really IS present in Baptism and Holy Communion.
Thanks!
Like or Dislike:
0
Here is one more quote from Tony Blair:
“Religion is as important in this century as political ideology was in the last, Blair said. The Tony Blair Faith Foundation will fight extremism, organize faith groups against poverty and illness, and educate people worldwide about religions other than their own, he said.
There is a new reality. We have to come to terms with it. And it implies, at its fundamentals, peaceful coexistence or catastrophe,” said Blair in a speech before religious and business leaders at the posh Time Warner Center. “If faith becomes a countervailing force, pulling people apart, then it becomes destructive and indeed dangerous.”
http://truedsicernment.com/2008/06/05/rick-warren-joins-tony-blairs-interfaith-movement/
The trouble with that whole statement is that it basically totally contradicts everything that Jesus said would be true for His followers and the Christian church. Does not the fact of being Christian often mean severe division according to Jesus? But obviously that is not the case for Tony Blair. So what is Rick Warren doing as a part of the advisory council of this group?
Just another point to show that people do have rather large concerns about this man. And it seems to me they are for very good reason.
That whole article is worth reading, IMO.
Mavin the Martian,
Proclaiming Jesus as the only way definitely pulls people apart very often does it not? That is a real “no, no” to Tony Blair obviously. Therefore it seems to me his whole premise is totally impossible in the light of Biblical Christianity even though he says each religion’s beliefs can still be upheld. There just doesn’t seem to be much room in his statement for a religion that declares itself to be the only way, does there?
Like or Dislike:
0
Hodge,
“Again, I’m not familiar with the site, so maybe I would agree that they are nitpicking. I certainly think that harping on someone for quoting someone who is theologically off can be nitpicking, unless the person endorses parts of that person’s dangerous theology. Perhaps it’s a site that glorifies in abasing others to exalt the self.”
Since the owner of the site in question has personally commented on this post I see no harm in outing him. Just Google “Apprising Ministries”. It is the first site listed.
Like or Dislike:
0
cheryl -
It can be, but doesn’t have to be. Are you saying you wouldn’t want to work with a Muslim in Africa who would be up for fighting poverty and disease? I know we might think the best thing is to form our own Christian group. But what an opportunity to be salt and light, to share the love of Jesus, as we serve humanity together.
Of course, every opportunity needs to be considered individually. But to simply be 100% convinced we should never consider ever working with concerned Muslims is not the answer either.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cheryl, in Mere Christianity, Lewis’ argument throughout the entire first section is that all of us share common values – God-given values. Later, he observes that many faiths share common ideas, and that’s OK. It’s where Christianity differs from other faiths that we must take a stand, but up to that point of difference, we stand together on the basic and universal natural law, or basic morality.
We really do have shared values with the Buddhist who says stealing is wrong or desiring another’s spouse is wrong, do we not? The division comes later. But I’m not sure the division is found in a medical issue.
I do not feel that working with people of another faith on issues of common value is making a statement that “one is as good as another.”
For example, imagine a murder trial. The victim was a 15 year old girl shot by a gang member in a case of road rage. Would you serve on the jury with a Hindu? I suspect you would because you and the Hindu have a shared value, you agree that the incident was wrong. But is that some statement that your faiths are equal? I would say no. (BTW, this is a true example, my friend was on the jury for three weeks)
I know people have concerns with this, but I think we must be careful not to base our arguments on guilt-by-association. By that standard Jesus himself could be condemned. Everyone he hung around with was a sinner. And the Pharisees were quick to point it out.
Like or Dislike:
0
A very short youtube video that Raick Warren could benefit by watching:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCwSfO5eH5E
It shows the proper direction of the gospel…the opposite of Rick Warren’s theology of ‘doing’ ‘purpose driven’ stuff.
Our God is purpose driven, and that is good enough.
Like or Dislike:
0
Dave and Scott,
I agree with what both of you are saying up to a point. However, it seems to me that with the quotes Tony Blair has made, we are talking about something beyond that here.
The first paragraph in the ariticle I quoted in my last comment has this to say, “Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair said Friday that leaders in an interdependent world must work to end religious conflict or face “catastrophe” as he introduced a new foundation dedicated to interfaith understanding.”
I’m sorry, but it sounds to me like that doesn’t leave much room for the Christian proclamation that Jesus is the the only way. That proclamation inevitably brings conflct with those that do not believe the message. One only has to look around us and read what others are saying every day to know the reality of that.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cherylu
I am not denying that Christianity is at it’s core a devisive faith, separating wheat from the chaff. When you say that all are depraved and claim that there is but one way to redemption, you can’t help but be devisive.
However, I doubt that Tony Blairs Foundation is concerned with spreading faith(s) nor of salvation theology. It strikes me as being more about “good works”. And that is the context of my (devil’s advocate) question. We know that the nature of our salvation message is divisive. Should we by extension sequester ourselves from other faiths with regards to the performing of good works? What we may see as “maintaining purity” may be seen by others (who also desparetly need Jesus) elitist snobbery.
Just so you know where I am coming from, I do have problems with Rich Warren. But I waffle back and forth big time . When I listen to him for extended periods of time, I am struck by his humility, graciousness, sincere desire for christian charity, and the salvation of the lost. He is also aware that his methods are not without controversy within Christian circles. And when I listen to his explanations, they are not without some merit. But I personally just can’t get past the conclusion that his methods tend to result in easy believism Christians. But how many people have developed saving faith inspite of that? God will save whom He wills, yes?
Like or Dislike:
0
Here is what I think of the Spiritual Formation stuff that some are associating Warren with: http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2009/06/why-i-dont-think-to-much-of-spiritual-formation/
Obviously, I don’t agree with it. So much so that I wrote a blog about it sometime ago. However, is it enough of a problem that I am going to focus only on these things? Not at all. These people have so much right that it is hard to focus on the wrong. I am just so glad to be able to say that we are so like minded on so many key issues. I can hold hands with a lot of people so long as they get the person and work of Christ right.
“Master, we saw someone casting out demons in your name and we tried to stop them.”
Be careful who you are trying to stop.
Like or Dislike:
0
Marvin,
Thanks for your continued response to my concerns.
I’m sure you are right that his foundation deals with good works and not with salvation theology.
However, since he believes we must “work to end religious conflict or face “catastrophe”, it doesn’t sound to me like he would leave any room for someone trying to speak of salvation at all since it is so devisive. And he talked about faith that “pulls people apart becoming destructive and dangerous.” Again, it sounds to me like that is what he would call Christian evangelism.
So how can a Christian in good conscience get on board as an advisor to a group whose head has stated these goals as he introduced his new Foundation? If this is what Blair is pursuing, how can a Chrisitian be a part of that without going directly against what Jesus has said and our Biblical command to be witnesses and make disciples?
Working together to fight malaria and poverty is one thing, but if it is being done in an atmosphere where anything that promotes “conflict” is an absolute no–no, are we not in effect signing away our ability to be obedient to God’s commands and in fact yoking ourselves with a group that would be in direct contradiction to those commands?
Like or Dislike:
0
Cheryl,
I would be hesitant to serve on the board. But is it black and white AND, most importantly, is it THAT a big of a deal to give “warnings” about someone, closing our eyes to all the good that they are doing?
Simply put again, there are warnings that I could give about EVERYONE since NO ONE matches up with me either in their actions or their theology. It is a lonely world, this theological legalism, and it is one that does not have much room for the power of the Spirit (since he is doing such a terrible job on everyone but yours truly)
Like or Dislike:
0
CMP
What you lose your hair shirt so you need a little flagellation on your own website? Looking for some purgatory here on earth?
Just step up and slam your head into the door several times – the door will develop comprehension sooner.
Like or Dislike:
0
You are making an assumption here aren’t you (a couple actually)? And besides, how a Foundation operates in theory vis a vis a mission statement isn’t necessarily how it operates in practice when boots are on the ground.
I don’t know. It isn’t my conscience that is troubled.
All kidding aside, Warren seems to me to operate in a “foot in the door” mentality regarding evangelism. Perhaps he feels that by being on the board as an advisor, he can make sure that dialogue between the faiths can be done? But you would have to ask Warren as to what his motivation is.
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael,
Call it theological legalism if you will.
Many folks see a lot of this stuff as serious theological error, (not just yours truly).
I guess we can just all be quiet about all of it and not care how much error we see being spread around out there and going unchallenged by anyone. Or when we are concerned, we can step up and say something. Doesn’t mean everyone is going to agree with us obviously!
And I don’t believe we need to go about it in a nasty way either. And I have tried to avoid that. Don’t know if everyone will think I succeeded or not.
And I haven’t said that Rick Warren hasn’t done anything good. But because he has done good, I see no reason that everyone has to just be quiet and let what is perceived as error go totally unchallenged either. Might we be wrong in our perceptions? Certainly. But does that mean we all just sit back and do nothing because there is that possibility?
And there is a difference, by the way, of trying to stop a man and trying to alert to and stop error.
And one last thing, I can’t help but think that the repeated references in this thread to the power of the Holy Spirit in dealing with error to maybe be a little bit misguided. Is it not often through other people that He does that work? Why were the apostles so diligent to point out error when they saw it and why did they tell others to do so too at times if the Holy Spirit does it all by Himself without any human help?
Like or Dislike:
0
Cheryl,
The “yours truly” was rhetorically generic. I did not mean you. Sorry.
I don’t know if you have read any of these type of blogs, but I know you well enough to know you don’t fit their ilk. I would think that if you spent a day or two reading through them and reading their rhetoric, you would catch a better sense of where this post is coming from.
Again, I am not saying we should not be critical of many things. I am. Shesh, this is a theology blog devoted to truth (and that means we will be combating a LOT of error). My main contension is with the “we tried to stop him” mentality that we can so easily fall into.
Like or Dislike:
0
Does anyone else get Monty Python quotes running through their head when they read this post and comments?
“Ximinez: Now, old woman — you are accused of heresy on three counts — heresy by thought, heresy by word, heresy by deed, and heresy by action — *four* counts. Do you confess?
Wilde: I don’t understand what I’m accused of.
Ximinez: Ha! Then we’ll make you understand! Biggles! Fetch…THE CUSHIONS!
Biggles: Here they are, lord.
Ximinez: Now, old lady — you have one last chance. Confess the heinous sin of heresy, reject the works of the ungodly — *two* last chances. And you shall be free — *three* last chances. You have three last chances, the nature of which I have divulged in my previous utterance.
Wilde: I don’t know what you’re talking about.
Ximinez: Right! If that’s the way you want it — Cardinal! Poke her with the soft cushions!
Ximinez: Confess! Confess! Confess!
Biggles: It doesn’t seem to be hurting her, lord.
Ximinez: Have you got all the stuffing up one end?
Biggles: Yes, lord.”
“NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition! Our chief weapon is surprise…surprise and fear…fear and surprise…. Our two weapons are fear and surprise…and ruthless efficiency…. Our *three* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency…and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope…. Our *four*…no… *Amongst* our weapons…. Amongst our weaponry…are such elements as fear, surprise…. I’ll come in again.”
“I think that all good, right thinking people in this country are sick and tired of being told that all good, right thinking people in this country are fed up with being told that all good, right thinking people in this country are fed up with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am”
“No it can’t! An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.”
Like or Dislike:
0
Sir Bedevere: What makes you think he’s a witch?
Peasant 3: Well, he turned me into a newt!
Sir Bedevere: A newt?
Peasant 3: [meekly after a long pause] … I got better.
Crowd: [shouts] Burn him anyway!
Like or Dislike:
0
Cheryl, I have this question:
After all this discussion, can you see where it might be possible that this is a “disputable issue?” In other words, individual believers can reasonably come to different conclusions about what Warren (or any other believer) says and does. Or even come to different conclusions about , not just whether he’s right or wrong, but the importance of the issue itself.
Here’s how I personally look at it – if other Christians, who are indwelt by the Spirit just as I am, can come to a different conclusion or hold a different position than I do, shouldn’t I give that some consideration? I may still disagree, but my disagreement is tempered by the thought that maybe I’m the one who is wrong.
If, as CMP teaches, theology is best done in community, shouldn’t all members of the community listen and let the Spirit guide the group? To me, this is the strength of the ancient councils and creeds. The core truths of Christianity were recognised and clearly stated. So, if I find myself disagreeing with central truths, I need to be very careful. But the issues Warren is being condemned for are not those cardinal truths. Nowhere has he said “all paths lead to God.” By definition, the concerns are over peripherals, and I think we need to be careful in how we judge others on such things.
Continued below…
Like or Dislike:
0
“In essentials, unity, in non-essentials, grace, and in all things, love.”
Perhaps you feel that not working with a Muslim on a medical team is an essential, but if that’s not your view, then maybe it shoud be approached with the idea that if we err, let it be on the side of grace.
I guess I base a large part of my evaluation process on whether the fruit of the Spirit is evident in whatever I’m looking at. Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. In all honesty, and without trying to be harsh, I do not generally find those qualities evident on the watchblogs.
On the contrary, I find them to be focused on one thing – accusations against professing Christians, and I can’t help but think of the second half of Rev 12:10.
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael,
I appreciate your last comment. Thank you.
Marvin,
Again you have made some good points. And I did make several assumptions However it seems to me that they are certainly logical ones given the Blair quotes about the dangers of religious conflicts and divisions caused by religions. But granted, they are still assumptions.
And you are certainly right about dialogue between religions. That is part of the purpose of the foundation–dialogue and better understanding. And maybe that is Warren’s motive for being there. I don’t know. And there is merit in that for sure. What I am concerned about is the fact that in an organization where conflict and divisiveness seem to be looked down on by the group’s founder as the biggies to be fought against and done away with, evangelism which is by nature divisive and conflict causing, would not seem like it fits at all. It is possible that it doesn’t work that way in practice though.
Dave Z,
Back up a bunch of comments, you said to me, “I do not feel that working with people of another faith on issues of common value is making a statement that “one is as good as another.”
That wasn’t exactly what I meant or said. Here is a part of my quote, “However, are we not putting the Christian faith on equal grounds as all others by signing such a declaration? Is that what we really should be doing??
I meant are we not just lumping the Christain faith in with all others–thus on equal grounds–by emphasizing shared values and that all religions are a force for good? I still think that point has validity. That does nothing to say that we believe Jesus is the only way.
I don’t want to ignore your last comment, Dave, but I have been needing to go do some errands since mid morning and it is now 3:30 and I still haven’t gotten there. So have to go for now anyway.
Like or Dislike:
0
BTW Ken Silva’s toilet illustration is not original, he got it from Chris Rosebrough from one of his recent podcasts. Either a case of osmosis or living under Rosebrough’s shadow for too long.
I have personally commented on Rosebrough’s site that if it wasn’t for RW he’d have very little to do. Warren keeps these folks employed. He has become an indispensible commodity. RW critique (bashing?) “sells” the same way Hollywood uses sex and violence to make blockbusters, and news bulletins that rely on the “if it bleeds it leads” opportunism.
I’ve read enough of Warren to be convinced that he is an unconscious heretic and that (IMO) he allows his passion to overshadow his theological integrity. But the obsession the doctrine cops have with him is a site to behold. It is analogous to blood thirsty Romans in the Coliseum applauding ravenous lions ripping the flesh off those thrown in the arena for Nero’s enjoyment.
Like or Dislike:
0
Just a real quick comment before dinner here, John. I have a hunch that the reason that folks have such an obsession with Warren, as you termed it is because he has such an extremely high profile. He has been called “America’s pastor”, is known as one of the most influential Christians around these days, and seems to be always involved with high level folks around the world and doesn’t seem to be shy about letting the rest of us know about it.
In other words, he has to one degree or another put himself in the place he is in himself by deliberately, it seems, maintaining such a high and extremely visible profile.
And also, if he is truly “America’s Pastor” and one of the most influential people around today in religious circles, is it not all the more necessary to warn folks if there is error being promoted here?
That doesn’t mean, however, that others should behave as bloodthirsty Romans getting their enjoyment from watching the lions eat someone.
On to fix dinner.
Dave,
I haven’t forgotten your question.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cheryl – you’re right!
His high profile requires ‘high warnings’. But they’ve being doing it for so many years now that comes a point where one wants to say “o.k. we GET IT, can we move on to something else now?” Picking on RW doctrinally is no feat anymore.
Warning people about RW’s proclamations/statements/beliefs is one thing, but doing it obsessively with vampiric delight is another!
Still breakfast time here and you’re talking to me about dinner!!
Like or Dislike:
0
Interesting comments about RW. I was involved in a small church a number of years ago. As a church we decided to aim to get the whole church into small groups and together work through his book “40 days of purpose”
We also invited people who were linked to the church through families / friends to get involved and they did. I found nothing theologically wrong with the book; though I know the Fundies and Restless Reformed would / will / do. But I don’t sit in that camp anyway.
The result after the 40 days was that we had a near 100% attendance in small groups which continued for a number of years till I left… as far as I know this has continued.
We saw many people who were on the fringe commit their lives to Christ and become rooted into the life of the congregation.
I think some of these so called discerning ministries operate out of jealousy and need to go and have a read of Jonah and learn from him who was angry at God because he dared cared for those whom were enemies of Israel…
Seems to me that those in these type of ministries really don’t want to see people come to know the Lord and will pull down anyone who does……
Like or Dislike:
0
The focus is now on YOU, and what you do…instead of on the fact that you are a poor miserable sinner who needs a Savior.
The focus ought be on Christ and what He has done, is doing, and will yet do.
Instead, we get the grand religious project out of Warren and many, many others.
What we ‘DO’, is what got us into this mess in the beggining.
That’s the problem.
Like or Dislike:
0
Hello.
Is this thing on?
Like or Dislike:
0
This is becoming old news, but John Piper has invited RW to be a speaker at the upcoming Desiring God 2010 conference. This has upped the sale of heartburn meds throughout the anti-Warren blogosphere Piper has been denounced by people who have loved him for years. Articles have been written on teampyro and many other sites. Phil Johnson laments the viciousness of the attacks that are being made against Piper for daring to invite Warren. And they are vicious.
Here’s a video of John Piper explaining why he invited Warren.
http://www.desiringgod.org/blog/posts/more-details-about-our-national-conference
Then read the comments. Then go to teampyro and read Johnson’s article and read those comments.
http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2010/04/on-piper-warren-connection.html
Then ask yourself just what it is that provokes such hatred in those who claim to be believers. I don’t mean hatred by the bloggers, who I thought wrote fairly, even in their disagreement. I mean by the commenters.
I do not use the term “hate” lightly, but regarding the attitude of some towards RW, it seems like an appropriate term. And it’s spilling over onto Piper. People are talking “separation” from Piper.
Like or Dislike:
0
John (Who is still at breakfast time!)
You said, “His high profile requires ‘high warnings’. But they’ve being doing it for so many years now that comes a point where one wants to say “o.k. we GET IT, can we move on to something else now?”
Only trouble with that is there seems to be a lot of people that don’t GET IT-this thread is proof!
Dave Z,
I am trying to get back to your question now. First of all, the things we are talking about may not be essentials and they may be disputable. But they are not unimportant either. So do we just let them go? And considering the position Rick Warren holds and his high degree of influence, these issues do become even more important, IMO. As John from Down Under commented, high profiles need high warnings.
Yes, it is possible I am wrong about these things. But very frankly, even if I am wrong about the things we have specifically discussed here, there are several other issues also that could be brought up that are also of concern to me. I don’t plan on going there though. I don’t have the time and energy and I am sure none of the rest of you do either!
As I believe someone mentioned way back up the thread somewhere, Jesus was full of both grace and truth. We as individual people seem to tend to come down on the side of one or the other. Either we are going after the truth and forgetting about grace in the process, or we tend to go to the opposite extreme and give so much grace that we don’t want to, or don’t dare, to try to make any points about what is true and what is not. I don’t think we can afford to neglect either one of them.
But anyway, yes it is possible that I am wrong. But I still have concerns re what we already talked about–plus more. And it seems to me that with the status this man has, it is not wise at all to just sit back and not speak out when we see things that are of concern to us. He has vast potential where he is to do good–or to do harm.
Like or Dislike:
0
I can’t believe there is that big of an issue over Rick Warren.
Michael your comment about shooting a stun gun at our enemies and bazookas at our family is absolutely correct.
I have really enjoyed this blog over the short time I have been following it. I just wish you didn’t hold to complementarianism,inerrancy, and dispensationalism, (although progressive is much better) although I would still allow you to teach, work, and preach in my church.
Your ministry seems to be great. I personally know several people who have taken your classes and benefited greatly from them. In fact I happen to be really good friends with someone who just graduated from UCO and is now a nurse in Dallas, while attending DTS.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cheryl, I appreciate your responses and the gracious tone in which you’ve made them. I don’t mind honest disagreement and I don’t feel a need to convince you of my point of view. I trust you to consider the information you receive and make up your own mind and I feel like our exchanges have been good, so I’m content and (I think) done with this thread. My time and energy are fading too. You are certainly correct that neither grace nor truth can be left out of our thoughts and interactions.
I would encourage you to look at the Piper video in my last comment and consider what he says. Also look at the followup comments.
Thanks for the good discussion.
Like or Dislike:
0
I would really like to thank you too, Dave, and all of the others that have been a part of this gracious discussion.
I will hopefully get a chance to watch the Piper video you linked.
Like or Dislike:
0
One more comment….
I came across this article regarding Rick Warren’s meeting with a Muslim group. I would like to reference it simply because it has direct bearing on the specific things we have just been discussing. It is found here:
http://www.christianpost.com/article/20090705/rick-warren-to-muslims-talk-is-cheap-let-s-work-together/pageall.html
There are some direct quotes and then some statements from the articles author:
“I will tell you that I am not interested in interfaith dialogue. I am interested in interfaith project. There is a big difference,” said Warren to attendees of the 46th annual Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) convention Saturday evening.
………..
“You know as an evangelical pastor, my deepest faith is in Jesus Christ,” Warren stated. “But you also need to know that I am committed not just to what I call the good news, but I am committed to the common good.”
He called on the members of the two largest faith communities in the world to not only figure out how to live in peace and harmony with each other, but also to find a way to work together for the greater good without compromising each group’s convictions.
In his speech, Warren suggested that Muslims and Christians work together to challenge the mischaracterizations and stereotypes in the media about each other’s faith; to restore civility in America by showing that people can “disagree without being disagreeable;” and to promote peace and freedom, particularly freedom of speech and religion, together.
At least in this instance, he said he was not interested in interfaith dialog.
Then a direct quote coming from this source that is from the same meeting: http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs019/1101818841456/archive/1102630976959.html “Muslims and Christians can work together for the common good without compromising my convictions or your convictions.”
Like or Dislike:
0
[...] six seconds after CMP posts on Rick Warren, the slice of hate crowd comes out to put a stake into him (both CMP and [...]
Like or Dislike:
0
[...] idea comes from Michael Patton who recently said – Give Rick Warren A Break! Patton offers an interesting perspective that gives much to think about. Of critic Patton points [...]
Like or Dislike:
0
Regarding Tony Blair’s aim to eliminate religious conflict, I don’t think he is talking about theological disagreement and debate and competing claims of exclusivity, as much as about bringing an end to situations like we’ve seen in India, where Christians were physically attacked by Hindu nationalists and their houses and churches burned just because of their faith, or like the actions Martin Luther was quoted as recommending against Jews early on in this thread, or Christians being killed in riots my Muslims based on a rumor that the local bishop said something disrespectful of Mohammed. I think he’s talking about physical, bodily-harm conflict (which followers of Christ are told to turn away from, turning the other cheek), not conflicting ideas.
I think there’s something to be said for evangelizing through respectful dialogue and examination of ideas, and that’s more easily accomplished when there are no fears of physical violence..
Like or Dislike:
0
Brian,
I wonder if you are right about that, I hadn’t thought of it in that way.
I quoted him in comment 74, I believe as saying, ““If faith becomes a countervailing force, pulling people apart, then it becomes destructive and indeed dangerous.”
Granted, countervailing may be a pretty strong word. But “pulling people apart” sounds to me like something less then physical violence-something more like the division that can come when Jesus is preached as the only way. Anyone else have any thoughts on that?
I came across this statement by Rick Warren explaining why he took the position on the advisory board of Tony Blairs Foundation:
“The vision and values of the Tony Blair Faith Foundation are desperately needed today when every major issue in our world is influenced for good or harm by faith factors. It would be foolish to ignore how religious conviction impacts personal and national identity, poverty and education, extremism and reconciliation, disease and development, peace and progress. In any effort to help people learn to live and work together, we must engage the vast networks, resources, wisdom, and influence of the faith communities. My friends, Tony Blair is uniquely prepared with the gifts of temperament, knowledge, experience, leadership, and global respect essential for a task this great. I honestly don’t know of anyone better suited for this challenge. It’s why I agreed to serve on the Advisory Board. The Tony Blair Faith Foundation’s potential for doing good is staggering.”
Like or Dislike:
0
Sorry, I didn’t include the link for that last statement by Rick Warren. I found it here:
http://news4themasses.wordpress.com/2009/06/05/faith-foundation-and-globalization/
Like or Dislike:
0
I’ve was reborn almost 4 years ago, at the age of 50. In the decades before I came to Christ, I read widely, about all kinds of spirituality, and had basically ditched the whole mess for the last 15 years before the Lord dramatically intervened.
The thing that always gets me about these sorts of conversations/debates (the accusation-and-defense, truth vs grace stuff, generally over someone well known and his theology or lack thereof), it always makes me shake my head.
I have to hope it is all just in the way of exercising brain muscles, but I fear not.
Where are the Christians who trust the LORD to do his job, and do not feel they must do it FOR Him? Do you feel as though He is incapable? Do you feel as if the rest of humanity lacks the ability to discern? Do you think that anyone profits at all by your rancor? Didn’t Paul say something about not caring who was teaching as long as the word was getting out?
Call me a newbie, but I do have a brain. Despite all my investigation into false gods, the Holy Spirit did work in me, and eventually I was transformed by that and by the Lord Himself. As far as I know, everything is eventually going to turn out in accordance with God’s plan, and the justice and grace will be His to wield.
Some of it, I trust, will be applied to those among us who feel their own discernment is to be forcibly applied to the rest of us.
I don’t recall Jesus ever doing that. I think I’ll continue to follow HIM.
Like or Dislike:
0
I am curious as to why no one is drawn to comment on the integrity issues I mentioned in #11?
Like or Dislike:
0
I left a church over the Purpose Driven nonsense. I’d leave again sooner if I had to do it over again.
Like or Dislike:
0
Bill,
He’s just another So. Baptist preacher under the guise of non-denominationalism.
He’s all about the ‘self’ (what WE DO). It’s just law, and the law works like a dangling carrot to keep people going on the religious treadmill. Sure, he knows the gospel, but he covers it with so many layers of law that it can barely breathe.
Just the fact that his church is SO BIG…tells me that they are doing something wrong. Christianity has never been that popular.
People don’t need to have themselves handed back to them (at worship)…they need to be killed off…and then raised again by the gospel. But they are much too busy (“driven”) for that.
Like or Dislike:
0
Bill honsberger,
I have been wondering why the first item he lists as the 5 global giants that need everyone working on them together to solve seems to change with the audience he is speaking to?
When he unvelied his P.E.A.C.E. plan, the first probelm he said needed addressing was spiritual emptiness. And that is still listed on the Saddleback Church webpage when you go looking for info on the P.E.A.C.E. plan. However, in quotes to other groups of people, like the Muslims I quoted him speaking to above, he lists conflict as the first problem. Here is that quote from the full transcript of his speech: Number 1 is the problem of Conflict. War, confrontation, hostilities, terrorism, refugee camps. All of the things that cause hostility between generations, hostility between races, hostility between nations, hostility between ethnic groups and economic groups, and it is just an evidence of our unwillingness to reconcile with God and to reconcile with each other.
http://blog.beliefnet.com/cityofbrass/2009/07/transcript—pastor-rick-warre.html
What is up with that I wonder?? It doesn’t seem to me like one equals the other. Spiritual emptiness may certainly lead to conflict, but they are not the same thing!
Like or Dislike:
0
Candace,
Thank you for discerning for us in regards to our discernment. I guess we should follow what you have said then?
As a new believer you may be unaware that we are commanded by God to “discern” for others. It’s called rebuke, correction, admonishing, exhortation, etc. The Holy Spirit works primarily through us, not primarily despite us. And no Christian teaching, except that which is heretical, considers the human brain capable of discerning apart from the Holy Spirit’s use of the Scriptures as they are preached and taught by humans in the Church.
I would suggest spending your time learning ecclesiology, biblical anthropology, hamartology, and pneumatology rather than lecturing us who have been learning these things since we were toddlers. Praise God that you have come through the door, but don’t let that cause you to think that you’ve come to Him in all things. There are many thoughts still left “uncaptive” to Christ. He sets His ministers up for that reason (Eph 4:8-16). It is, therefore, we who are ministers who should shake our heads at those who dismiss our correction as foolishness.
Like or Dislike:
0
Aw, c’mon Hodge, lighten up a little. While your points may be correct, they were delivered with a bit of an unnecessary jab, IMO.
To Candace – Christianity teaches that we are involved in what is actually warfare in the spiritual realm. As in any war, there are battles and skirmishes. Not pleasant but reality. Speaking for myself, and without going into too much detail, I jumped in whan I felt an attack had been launched – unfair accusations had been made. I feel strongly that such attacks must not be allowed to pass unchallenged and misinformation must be corrected. I agree that it is unpleasant and should be unnecessary. Ideally, we should be able to discuss issues in a respectful manner, searching for truth instead of just trying to prove our side of the argument. Such discussions are possible and I felt the exchange between myself and Cheryl was an example of that.
But the bottom line is that, if the Bible is true, we are at war in a spiritual reality. Unpleasant battles will continue until God’s plan is complete.
Like or Dislike:
0
Dave,
I disagree. Having been a pastor, I’ve come across this sort of hubris before. It needs to be very plainly addressed. The person who has a “better” way is usually the person who is most unteachable of all. I just want Candace to learn instead of teach at the age of four.
Like or Dislike:
0
Eckhart Tolle, Oprah, Obama and George Bush all claim to be Christians too. Can’t we just forget about the evil, can’t we ignore the war crimes, can’t we put aside the demonic roots, be politically correct, ignore the negative and only focus on the positives of these brothers and sisters in Christ?
I hope no one seriously believes what I just wrote. If it wasn’t for the work of some of these discernment ministries along with the work of the Holy Spirit in my life, I would have been one that was so deceived.
We don’t poke at only the negatives in others, but because so many people believe that we MUST NOT mention the negatives of anything in the politically correct and man centered churches there days, there are those wise men out there who DO point out the negatives for the benefit of all who listen, to compensate for the weak and undiscerning who teach and publish works that keep us from seeing the whole picture.
Like or Dislike:
0
Rick Warren made the following statements concerning his P.E.A.C.E. Plan that was pitched to the United Nations.
“Billions of people suffer each day from problems so big no government can solve them…”
“The only thing big enough to solve the problems of spiritual emptiness, selfish leadership, poverty, disease, and ignorance is the network of millions of churches all around the world.”
That’s pretty haughty in my opinion.
Bottom line: Millions of churches operating under the influence and approval of the United Nations CANNOT solve those problems, and it doesn’t matter how hard they try or how organized they are.
Only God’s Kingdom under the rulership of His Son, Jesus Christ can solve the problem of spiritual emptiness, selfish leadership, poverty, disease, and ignorance.
It looks to me like Rick Warren is placing his hope and trust in men to solve problems, and in the United Nations especially.
Psalm 146:3 advises us against this when it says:
“Do not put your trust in princes, in mortal men, who cannot save.” (NIV)
Daniel 2:44 points us to the only government that will ever solve the problems that humans face in this fallen world: “In the time of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, nor will it be left to another people. It will crush all those kingdoms and bring them to an end, but it will itself endure forever.” (NIV)
look for further comment…
Like or Dislike:
0
Rick Warren seems to be very involved in politics. So much so that he is working in union with the United Nations, was present to give the invocation at President Obama’s inauguration, and even hosted a Presidential Debate at his Mega-Church between Obama and McCain.
What’s wrong with that you may ask? Let’s see what the Bible has to say about Christians being politically involved.
John 6:15 – “Jesus, knowing that they intended to come and make him king by force, withdrew again to a mountain by himself.” (NIV)
John 17:16 – “They are not of the world, even as I am not of it.” (NIV)
James 4:4 – “You adulterous people, don’t you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.” (NIV)
What is the point you might inquire? Well, as 1 John 5:19 says, “the whole world is under the control of the evil one.”
Also, at John 14:30, Jesus calls Satan “the prince of this world.” The point is that it doesn’t matter what worldly government or organization a person might support or place their trust in, because either way they come under the influence of Satan.
Although as Christians the Bible commands us to remain neutral does that mean our hands are tied when it comes to helping others?
Certainly not. Christians should know well and put forth an earnest effort to apply the command repeated by Jesus: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” (Matt. 22:39) Paul also counseled: “Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.” (Gal. 6:10) As Christians the greatest good we can do for anyone is to share with them the good news of God’s Kingdom, which will forever solve the issues facing mankind and which allows those who embrace it the wonderful opportunity of everlasting life.
Like or Dislike:
0
Latest Rick Warren tweet: “The value of anything is whatever someone’s willing to pay for it.”God paid for YOU with the lifeblood of Christ”1 Pet1:19″
compromiser…
Like or Dislike:
0
Ah, yes, you see it … the subtle poison so carefully blended into Warren’s lie. In his unashamed humanism, he places the value on man, not on God’s glory. Scripture, on the other hand, says Christ died for the Father’s glory, not for me. Once again, the deceiver, Warren, is attempting to seduce ill-informed Christians with his New-Age, man-centered, so-called “gospel.”
(Maybe this post will result in an invitation for me to write for a discernment site)
Like or Dislike:
0
Dave Z,
“Christ died for the Father’s glory, not for me.”
Uh, Dave? I think your ways are higher than my ways. Not getting your point. I think the first part of your sentence is on target (Christ died for the Father’s glory), but totally confused with the second (“not for me”). Jesus and his death is absolutely about the redemption of people as taught throughout the Scripture, yes? Am I missing something? Please don’t tell me that after five years of Greek and four years of Hebrew studies that I missed that his atoning death wasn’t for you and me. If so, I’m going back for my refund! If God didn’t love the world (John 3:16) please let me know. I still believe in a God that doesn’t want anyone to perish, which makes his passion for people/humanity stand out.
Like or Dislike:
0
CMP, I love your website, been reading for several months now and I appreciate your honesty on each subject you write about.
Hodge, in your response to Dave, you wrote the following concerning Candace, a relatively new believer (posts 115-117).
“I disagree. Having been a pastor, I’ve come across this sort of hubris before. It needs to be very plainly addressed. The person who has a “better” way is usually the person who is most unteachable of all. I just want Candace to learn instead of teach at the age of four.”
I, like Candace, came to know the Lord later in life. It would have been nice to be “called” as a toddler, as you were, and spoon fed ecclesiastical, anthropological, and other theological truths while potty training, but such was not the plan of God in mine and many other’s lives. Could it be sir, that the spirit (notice the little “s”) with which you have written to Candace is the reason you speak of your pastorate being in the past tense. As to being unteachable, maybe adding a bit of mercy and grace into your “teaching” would be a better way to help Candace understand further theological study would benefit her. I happen to agree completely with Candace, but I’ve only been a believer for 14 years, so I’m sure my opinion doesn’t matter to you either.
Your attitude towards Candace is the very reason I refused the pull of the Holy Spirit on my life for so long. But finally a pastor, who fits the model of RW almost perfectly was able to help me see where I was wrong. You see, my statement to him was, “I don’t want to go to church with a bunch of hypocrites.” His reply to me was, “I would rather go to church with them, than to go to hell with them.”
Many in the world today believe the same thing I did back then and do not want anything to do with Christians. If we want to show ourselves as Christ’s disciples we will have love for one another.
Sincerely,
Greg
Like or Dislike:
0
A few months ago, you wrote an article, “Do Joel Osteen and I worship the same God.” I believe Mr. Warren and I do worship the same God. I won’t compare him to anyone else, but I have read both his books; The Purpose Drive Church and The Purpose Driven Life. They are not perfect, but I gained a lot of practical advice in his books. Mr. Warren has his own style, but I believe he does adhere to the Bible more so than Mr. Osteen. If I am really suffering, I might prefer others than Rick Warren, but when I need simple, practical advice for life or church, I frequently refer to his books and I am always encouraged when I read them. I believe God will reward him.
More Comments: