If you ever want to see what Rick Warren's vision for Purpose-Driven Preaching looks like in practice, then all you would need to do is watch or listen to Saddleback's sermons on-line. Over the past couple of years the sermons preached at Saddleback have covered such topics as Knowing Your Purpose, Thirty Days to a No Regrets Life, Leaving a Legacy, Deepening Relationships that Matter, Setting Financial Goals, Managing Your Time, Learning the Ancient Secrets From God's Word for a Less Stressed, More Relaxed, and Lighter, Freer Lifestyle, The Secrets of Staying Power - How to Always Give Yourself Fully to the Work of the Lord, and Breaking Free from Desperate Hidden Lives.
Every one of these sermons was teeming with 'good advice' and practical 'how to' information that could be applied to your life the same day that you listened. All of these sermons were heavy with God's law but sadly had nothing to offer me. For you see, my problem can't be fixed with 'good advice' and practical 'how to' applications because I am a wicked and sinful man.
It is too late for me to have a 'no regrets life'. Even though I have been a Christian for nearly all of my life, I have committed terrible sins for which I have deep regrets.
As for managing my time, I have struggled with procrastination my entire life. I cannot even begin to tell you how many times I have squandered my time doing unimportant and wasteful things when I should have been working on a project, doing homework, spending time with my wife, playing with my kids, visiting my grandparents etc. The correct way to describe me when it comes to time management is selfish. Even that doesn’t even correctly describe the depths of the ugliness of my sin when it comes to time management. In order to rein this sin in I’ve been to Franklin Covey time management seminars, read books and attended classes. Everything that I’ve tried has petered out over time. Overall, there has been some improvement but even when I am doing what I should be doing in my heart I want to be doing something else.
When it comes to financial management I have sinned so terribly that I deserve God’s wrath and punishments both in this life and the life to come AND I AM A CHRISTIAN.
I don’t need good advice, I need good news.
Am I going to burn in hell for all of the sins that I’ve committed? Can God forgive me for all of these sins? Will God forgive me for them or is there a limit to God’s grace? What if there is a limit and I have exceeded it? I’ve already asked God to forgive me for these sins tens of thousands of times. Can God forgive me the next ten thousand times I ask him to forgive me?
I am sick with sin. I don’t need good advice I need good news.
Don’t even get me started on the other areas discussed in these sermons. I am so depraved and sinful that I don’t even know what it means to be heavenly minded and prioritize my life accordingly. Yet, I read the Bible through several times a year. My priorities are so far out of whack compared to what God would have them be that they could only be described as wickedly selfish. As for offering forgiveness to other people, that is always so difficult. My first inclination when someone has wronged me is to knock their block off. But, according to God’s perfect law, that inclination is sinful and murderous. As for living as if it were my last day’s on earth, you’ve got to be kidding me. I am a selfish and wickedly sinful man. My obedience is pathetically weak and shot through with sin. If I were told that I had 30 days to live then the ONLY thing I could count on is sinning for 30 more days.
I don’t need good advice, I need good news.
I confess that I do NOT love God with all of my heart, I HAVE taken the Lord’s name in vain, I have NOT kept the Sabbath, I have NOT honored and obeyed my parents, I HAVE murdered, I HAVE committed adultery, I HAVE stolen, I HAVE lied and I HAVE coveted everything that belongs to my neighbor including his wife, his car, his clothes, and is entertainment center.
All of these sins I have committed since becoming a Christian. All of these sins I have committed THIS WEEK and every time I break even one of the commandments the Bible says that I am guilty of breaking the ENTIRE law.
James 2:10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it.
I am sick with sin through and through. I don’t need good advice, I need good news.
I am desperate because God’s word says that I deserve His wrath, punishment and hell for all eternity for the sins that I have committed and I am terrified because I know that God is just.
I don’t need good advice right now. I need good news.
Telling me to repent, change my mind and be more obedient just won’t cut it. I already know and believe that all of these things that I have done and continue to do are sinful and wrong and contrary to what the one true and holy God expects and demands from me. It's too late, the cow is already out of the barn for me. I can’t go back and undo these sins and ‘trying harder’ and 'doing better' is just not going to be enough.
So I don’t need ‘good advice’ right now.
Does Rick Warren or any Purpose-Driven Preacher have any good news to offer me?
Rick Warren: I determined to know nothing among you save your successful, stress free, regret free and purposeful life.
St Paul: I determined to know nothing among you save Christ and Him crucified.
Large difference there it seems.
Posted by: David Cochrane | June 08, 2008 at 07:30 AM
Douglas,
I think you and I agree on many many things.
When I summarized the gospel as, "a message about God loving us so much that He sent His son to die for our sins by dying for us on a cross" I was using John 3:16 as my backdrop. I did this not because I was trying to give a thorough treatment of the subject as you have, but to highlight once again that what is missing from Warren's sermons is the forgiveness of sins.
1 John was NOT written to unbelievers, per se, it was a letter written to the church. The intended audience for the letter were Christians. This supports my contention that BELIEVERS need to hear the gospel not just unbelievers.
As for the Gospel of John's intended audience, there are strong reasons to believe that the Gospels were written for a 'universal' audience of both believers and unbelievers.
AND as you correctly pointed out there is more to John 3 than verse 16. Verses 17 and 18 both discuss the fact that mankind is under the condemnation of God for their sins and that Jesus came not to condemn but to save.
As I have pointed out and as others have further pointed out, Rick Warren's philosophy of preaching is missing all of the hard edges that we see in the preaching of the disciples in the New Testament. Yet, the apostles learned to preach under Jesus himself. What I'd like to know is why Purpose-Driven preachers know better than Jesus and his disciples what should be preached and how it should be said?
Posted by: Chris Rosebrough | June 08, 2008 at 10:05 AM
I remember a purpose driven pastor telling me that if he or other pastors preached like Paul did, his church would be empty, the people would leave and never come back. I'm wondering if the apostle Paul preached in Saddleback for a couple of months how many of Saddleback churchgoers would stay in the church and how many would leave the church. I would certainly start attending Saddleback, but wouldn't the current Saddleback churchgoers leave the church?
Posted by: Bill | June 08, 2008 at 10:24 AM
Chris: "Saying that 'God Loves You' and that you are 'not junk' is not the same thing as preaching the gospel, despite how nice those platitudes sound."
Bill: This is absolutely true. Warren keeps saying God loves you, no matter what and gives as an example that God loves us when we are asleep like a parent loves his kids when he sees them sleeping and wathes their breathing. This is total nonsense, God loves us in Christ because He doesn't see our sin but sees Christ's perfect obedience. God's love is about his mercy and the forgiveness of sins. God does not love our flesh, our sinful nature, and neither should we. Otherwise we become lovers of ourselves and not lovers of God. And yet this is what Warren tells us, that God loves us and so we should love ourselves. To that I say nonsense, we ought to view ourselves as sinners under God's mercy, we ought to love Christ ans his work, God's mercy, but not love ourselves.
Posted by: Bill | June 08, 2008 at 10:51 AM
Douglas,
After re-reading your post, I wanted to answer one question very clearly. Who did Jesus die for on the cross?
I have to believe two things in this regard.
1. Jesus died as a propitiation for the sins of the whole world. The scripture is undeniably clear on this point.
1John 2:2 He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.
2. Only the elect, those whom God chooses in His sovereignty are saved. Man has no ability to choose God. The doctrine of election rules out universalism in all its forms.
Both God's election and the fact that Jesus died for the sins of the whole world are true.
Posted by: Chris Rosebrough | June 08, 2008 at 12:07 PM
RW does not make a distinction between the sinner before regeneration & the Christian after regeneration. In other words, that God loves you like a parent, and when you are sleeping He loves you & watches your chest rise, and loves it...
I buy that after regeneration, but not before. Before regeneration you are God's enemy, and His wrath is intended for you. That line, God hates the sin, but loves the sinner, big lie cracked out of hell. He hates the unconverted man! How many sins can God tolerate, how many sins did it take for Adam to get cast out? He can even tolerate A sin...
So for RW to blur the line between God loving the creature, man/woman and not explaining the man and womans condition before regeneration, and need for propitiation, to impute Christ's righteousness to us to avoid God's wrath, is a sin in itself.
Posted by: Zek | June 08, 2008 at 12:22 PM
Douglas- (I know you didn't ask me, so forgive me for my 2 cents)
Christ died & atoned for ALL believers, not the whole world. Whether you believe in the doctrines of grace/ Election, TULIP as I do, or not. We know that the entire world doesn't got to heaven, so Christ did for His people. It think it's John were Jesus says, I don't pray for the world, but for the sheep that the father gave me (from memory)
John MacArthur does an amazing job with this difficult question, who God died for:
http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/GTY65.HTM
Posted by: ZEK | June 08, 2008 at 12:31 PM
"He can even tolerate A sin..."
Meant to say CAN'T even tolerate...
Posted by: Zek | June 08, 2008 at 01:03 PM
Zek: "He hates the unconverted man!"
Yet, he humbled Himself and came to earth for that man (for the sick, not the healthy).
He died for the unconverted man (us), taking on our sins, so that that man (us) might be saved.
Jesus often showed love to sinful people first, then watched them be converted.
The most loving, self sacrificing actions ever, done for people He hates?
I'm not sure that makes much sense. God acted out of love for His creation.
Just a thought...
Miguel
Posted by: Miguel | June 08, 2008 at 05:08 PM
Zek,
Perhaps you missed the part about being born in sin - making every human being born in Adam intolerable to God, eh? God is Soveriegn right? That was His plan right? Now take a step back, get off the TULIP bandwagon and consider this - God has always meet us at our fallen condition, He continues to dispense His Grace to the unfaithful (Ezekiel chapter 16 for instance among many), now you (a fallen sinner, a death stenched rag, imperfect, and proud - just like the rest og humaity) tell us God creates His own image to be damned to eternal destruction from the very begining - ?
Chris states Man has no ability to choose God.
Utter human wisdom - can you imagine Paul and the other saints preaching that message to those in need? Two truths (our absolute responsiblity to God's call and His complete Sovereignty), they look like they never meet and are forever parallel - but they indeed do meet - at the footstool of Christ in His Kingdom - where are all Truth flows.
Posted by: Mark | June 08, 2008 at 05:18 PM
Miguel,
You are correct is that God acted out of love for us by sending Christ to die to our sins. We must never forget that this same God is a Holy God who will not allow any unclean and sin being in
God hates sin and everything that is sinful. The paradox is that Holy God who hates sin and also a loving God who sent His son to bare our sins.
Every Sunday, we must hear the God is both Holy and Loving and we can see this is Law and Gospel.
Posted by: Steve Newell | June 08, 2008 at 05:23 PM
Hi Steve,
See, the "every Sunday" thing is interesting to me. I mean, we could also go to church twice a week. Or four times a week. If we did that, would that same precise message be expected at every meeting? Or is it possible to, over a series of sermons, get that message truly planted in us?
Jesus did not preach the same message everytime...He often gave life lessons as well. He spoke of many things many different times, but there was no denying that the combined effect of all He said was, in fact, the full Gospel. To the prisoner on the cross, there was no message preached at all - no call to repentance, recognition of sin, etc. - yet this "unconverted man" was saved.
Like I said in my earlier post, the full gospel IS preached at Saddleback, but I agree that sometimes, it may be preached in its entirety over the course of a series (Cheap example: This week, we talk about sin; next week, forgiveness; the next week, redemption; the next week...). But there can be no denying, at least not for anyone who is there every week, that it IS preached and that people ARE hearing it and people ARE coming to genuine understanding AND faith and lives ARE being converted to Christ and people ARE fulfilling the Great Commission. In the thousands.
Its okay for you to want it differently (every Sunday I want to hear "this" preached) but isn't the ultimate goal that lives are genuinely being won to the Kingdom? If that is truly happening with the full Gospel being understood, shouldn't we be joining hands and praising God together?
I am a witness to just such a thing on a regular basis, so all this criticism pales in comparison to what I see with my own eyes.
Miguel
Posted by: Miguel | June 08, 2008 at 05:45 PM
Miguel,
What is the "full gospel"?
Why cannot we hear Law & Gospel every Sunday? Both Christians and non-believers need to hear this every Sunday. It will take different forms as the Pastor preaches out of Holy Scripture.
BTW, a non-believer cannot praise God. They are spiritually dead.
Posted by: Steve Newell | June 08, 2008 at 06:05 PM
By "full gospel", I'm referring to basically all the things these various comments are asking for in a message - sin, repentance, God's love, etc. - its just my "shorthand". And I'm not saying we shouldn't hear this every Sunday, but to say that other methods (like giving this message over time sometimes) are ineffective doesn't jibe with results I see.
And I didn't say that non-believers can praise God. I was talking about you and me - believers - celebrating those won to the Kingdom...even those won by Rick Warren.
Posted by: miguel | June 08, 2008 at 06:14 PM
Again, I reiterate, when I had fallen away from God and had turned my back on anything good and moral; when I was living my life the way I wanted to, nothing....no doctrinal message that anyone ever told me or any kind of religious standard anyone implored me to live up to....nothing (including the cross) made sense to me, made me care or touched my heart until I heard and began to finally understand that God is love.
Maybe talking about the good news about God's free gift of grace and His love isn't the standard way to begin to reach people for Christ, but it sure reached my heart. I didn't understand it but I accepted it. The understanding came gradually, through study and a desire to know more; not because of what any one man was telling me but because of the Holy Spirit opening my eyes.
John 4:17-21 (NIV)
17 In this way, love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment, because in this world we are like him.
18 There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.
19 We love because he first loved us.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on 1 John 4:17-19 states:
Love hath conformed us to him; as he was the great lover of God and man, he has taught us in our measure to be so too, and he will not deny his own image. Love teaches us to conform in sufferings too; we suffer for him and with him, and therefore cannot but hope and trust that we shall also be glorified together with him, 2 Tim. 2:12. 2. It prevents or removes the uncomfortable result and fruit of servile fear: There is no fear in love (v. 18); so far as love prevails, fear ceases. We must here distinguish, I judge, between fear and being afraid; or, in this case, between the fear of God and being afraid of him. The fear of God is often mentioned and commanded as the substance of religion (1 Pt. 2:17; Rev. 14:7); and so it imports the high regard and veneration we have for God and his authority and government. Such fear is constant with love, yea, with perfect love, as being in the angels themselves. But then there is a being afraid of God, which arises from a sense of guilt, and a view of his vindictive perfections; in the view of them, God is represented as a consuming fire; and so fear here may be rendered dread; There is no dread in love. Love considers its object as good and excellent, and therefore amiable, and worthy to be beloved. Love considers God as most eminently good, and most eminently loving us in Christ, and so puts off dread, and puts on joy in him; and, as love grows, joy grows too; so that perfect love casteth out fear or dread. Those who perfectly love God are, from his nature, and counsel, and covenant, perfectly assured of his love, and consequently are perfectly free from any dismal dreadful suspicions of his punitive power and justice, as armed against them; they well know that God loves them, and they thereupon triumph in his love. That perfect love casteth out fear the apostle thus sensibly argues: that which casteth out torment casteth out fear or dread: Because fear hath torment (v. 18)—fear is known to be a disquieting torturing passion, especially such a fear as is the dread of an almighty avenging God; but perfect love casteth out torment, for it teaches the mind a perfect acquiescence and complacency in the beloved, and therefore perfect love casteth out fear. Or, which is here equivalent, he that feareth is not made perfect in love (v. 18); it is a sign that our love is far from being perfect, since our doubts, and fears, and dismal apprehensions of God, are so many. Let us long for, and hasten to, the world of perfect love, where our serenity and joy in God will be as perfect as our love! 3. From the source and rise of it, which is the antecedent love of God: We love him, because he first loved us, v. 19. His love is the incentive, the motive, and moral cause of ours. We cannot but love so good a God, who was first in the act and work of love, who loved us when we were both unloving and unlovely, who loved us at so great a rate, who has been seeking and soliciting our love at the expense of his Son’s blood; and has condescended to beseech us to be reconciled unto him. Let heaven and earth stand amazed at such love!
Posted by: catransplant48 | June 08, 2008 at 06:34 PM
Catransplant,
Once again your comments are giving a far more in depth and accurate presentation of the gospel than any sermon preached at Saddleback in the last 24 months.
The good news that "God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us" (Rom. 5:8) is exactly the message that we need to hear because that message is the message that casts out fear.
Go back an re-read my original post here. I know the gospel. My pastors preach the gospel every single Sunday. It is this message of God's love and the forgiveness of sins that comforts my soul, leads me to repentance, and casts out my unhealthy fear of God. Yet the 'good news' of the forgiveness of sins is exactly what is missing from Saddleback's sermons.
Posted by: Chris Rosebrough | June 08, 2008 at 07:58 PM
Chris,
Perhaps I wasn't making myself clear. I'm not arguing for a works sanctification. And yes, I read Jerry Bridges' article several months ago but reread it again at your suggestion. And, I am not disagreeing with it. You asked if I sin daily. I imagine so as humans do. But I am not trying to make myself better through the law and because I have the certainty of salvation through what Christ did at the cross for me, I also have certainty (Phil. 1:6) thta He through the Holy Spirit is working to deliver me daily from the power of sin. I am realizing that many sins I committed a long time ago have or are losing their hold on me. However, I don't take this for granted as we can all be tempted with sin, even those that have been defeated in us. Will we become perfect in our lifetimes? No, because we are still in the flesh. I am vehemently opposed to ultra-Wesleyan doctrines of perfection and certainty consider the latter rain teacheing of the Manifest Sons of God to be apostate.
I am not quite understanding if you are saying that there is no victory over your sins and you daily just confess and then sin the same one again and confess and so on. I am wondering if that is what you are saying.
Posted by: Diane R | June 08, 2008 at 08:37 PM
Hi Chris. Yes, I know you know the gospel. My post was just a reminder to those who might be quick to dismiss what the Holy Spirit (not man) can do in the life of a person who has really gone down a bad path or fallen away from their walk with the Lord. Many people enter the church doors each week feeling unworthy, not good enough, undeserving (which of course we all ARE but for the grace of Jesus and the cross). And it's also a gentle reminder to all posting here that I am a long-time Saddleback Church member; a product of all it has to offer both to unbelievers and believers.
I fully owe my relationship with God to Jesus' sacrifice on the cross and the Holy Spirit, however, I will be forever grateful to Rick Warren for helping me understand that as much of a mess as I was when I went back to church after years of staying away, God still loved me.
I have to admit I am saddened to hear you speak of the "good news" of the forgiveness of sins being absent from the messages at Saddleback, because I have definitely heard it preached. Often. I guess we'll just have to "agree to disagree" on that point.
Posted by: catransplant48 | June 08, 2008 at 08:37 PM
Does God hate anyone?
Does He? Does God really hate anyone? Sounds rather harsh to think that God actually hates someone or something, sinners and sin, demons and devils. Maybe the word "hate" is a bit over the top?
"...Hell is after all, the final expression of God's hatred. God does hate the reprobate sinner in a very real and terrifying sense.
I would never say such a thing were it not clearly taught in Scripture. Psalm 5:5-6 says, "The boastful shall not stand before Thine eyes; Thou dost HATE all who do iniquity. Thou dost destroy those who speak falsehood; The Lord abhors the man of bloodshed and deceit." Psalm 11:5 says, "The Lord tests the righteous and the wicked, and the one who loves violence His soul HATES."
The psalmist himself reflects the divine attitude when he writes, "Do I not HATE those who hate Thee, O Lord? And do I not loathe those who rise up against Thee? I hate them with the utmost HATRED; they have become my enemies" (Ps. 139:21-22).
As we have noted previously, this is not a malevolent hatred; it is a holy abhorrence for that which is vile, loathsome, and evil. But it is TRUE HATRED nonetheless." - From The God Who Loves by John MacArthur quoted from Critique: The Evangelism Message of Rick Warren
Is what is said in the above Critique the truth?
On Distorting the Love of God
by D. A. Carson
Is D. A. Carson correct? Do many of us distort the love of God at the expense of His other attributes? Is God a God of love and not much else?
How many know this God?:
The God Nobody Knows
by James Riscinti & Ray Kane
Is God still like that or is that just the God of the Old Testament? Is the God of the New Testament all love?
Is God a God to be feared? Should we fear God? Should 21st. century Christians fear God or was that for days gone by? We don't really want to scare people with the fear of God do we? We don't want to scare them into heaven do we, we want to love them into heaven don't we? What is LOVE? Is love a wishy washy, gooey ooey, all warm and tingly, fuzzy and cosy emotional thing? Is God's LOVE subjective or objective? What is "agape?"
Why does God love us so much?
That’s one of the most difficult questions to answer if we think of it from God’s perspective.
Here we are, his creatures who have been made in his image with the responsibility of mirroring and reflecting his glory and his righteousness to the whole world. We have disobeyed him countless times in every place and in every way. In so doing we have misrepresented his character to the whole universe. The Bible tells that nature it self groans in travail, waiting for the day of the redemption of mankind, because nature suffers under our unrighteousness (Rom. 8:22).
When we think of how disobedient and hostile we’ve been toward God, we wonder what it is that would provoke him to love us so much. In Romans 5:7, when Paul is astonished by the love of Christ that was manifested in his death, he says, “Scarcely for a righteous man will one lay down his, but imagine one who is perfect laying down his life for those who are not perfect and praying for those who are in the very act of killing him.” That’s the kind of love that transcends anything we have been able to experience in this world. I guess the only thing I can conclude is that it is the nature of God to be loving. This is part of his internal and external character.
The New Testament says that God is love. That can be one of the most misunderstood verses in the Scripture. We remember a few years ago when it was fashionable to say that “happiness is a warm puppy.” We had these brief definitions of what happiness was, and the same thing was applied to love -- “Loves means never having to say you’re sorry,” etc. -- and we we’re all very interested in what is involved in the whole act of loving.
But when the Bible says God is love, that statement is not what we would call an analytical statement whereby we can reverse the subject and predicate, and say that therefore love is God. That’s not what the Bible means. Rather, what the Jewish form of expression says here is that God is so loving and his love is so consistent, so profound, so deep, so transcendent, and such an integral part of his character that to express it in the maximum way possible, we say that he is love. That is simply saying that God is the ultimate standard of love. Pages 5-6 "Now, That’s a Good Question" by R. C. Sproul
What should move God to love us?
(Thomas Brooks, "The Transcendent Excellency of
a Believer's Portion above All Earthly Portions")
"The free favor and love of God, the good will and pleasure
of God--is the true ground and cause of God's bestowing of
Himself as a portion upon His people. There was no cause,
nor loveliness, nor desirableness in them--which could
move God to bestow Himself upon them.
God, for the glory of His own free grace and love, has bestowed
Himself as a portion upon those who have deserved to have their
portion among devils and damned spirits--in those torments
which are endless, ceaseless, and remediless.
But what should move God to love us, who were so unworthy,
so filthy, so empty, so beggarly? The question may be resolved
in these words--He loves us because He loves us. The root
of all divine love to us, lies only in the bosom of God."
Posted by: Douglas | June 08, 2008 at 08:44 PM
I won't state alot here because of my own reasons. I am not impressed with alot of the conversation. I did want to say, as one who is not dye hard fan of Rick Warren or John MacArthur........Miguel, I am glad you are here and you represent yourself well.You provide enough information to believe you go to the church and an avid attender at that. If, from a distance, I had a concern that someone sitting in Rev. Warren's church would not have a full grasp of the good news of Jesus Christ and the salvation offered through His mercy and grace, you have settled those concerns. Now that you have a relationship with Christ, I pray that the teaching of the church will continue to grow you in your disciplship as you spur one another on towards holiness. Blessings!
Posted by: tsnGodguy | June 08, 2008 at 09:41 PM
"I am not impressed with alot of the conversation."
God bless you.
GOD'S OMNIPRESENCE
"Perhaps the most serious, sobering thing my mind has ever
contemplated is the fact that I am always in the presence of God.
God cannot be shut out anywhere. Even in the most secret
recesses of my mind and the deepest, most secluded imaginations
of my heart, God is there. Everything I think, say, and do
is done in the immediate presence of God. This fact should
cause me to be filled with reverence and godly fear and
with great joy too. God is present everywhere to save,
preserve, and comfort his elect." -Don Fortner
Posted by: Douglas | June 08, 2008 at 10:52 PM
The guys at White Horse Inn are spending this year on the theme "Christless Christianity." I found their program for this week, Assuming the Gospel, to be very applicable to the last couple of Chris's posts.
IMO, it fleshed out Chris's point very well. I recommend it.
Posted by: Jason | June 08, 2008 at 11:28 PM
I honestly believe that this dialogue with Rick Warren would improve a lot of Rick were a bit more open and honest and explain why he rejects the Reformation.
You know people are afraid of taking on theological giants like Augustine, Calvin, Luther, Arminius, Wesley. But let's face Rick Warren has abandoned the traditional protestant faith. If Rick were to admit that, and tell us why, it might be very helpful. The council of Trent rejected Luther and said so clearly. The catholic church did not accept Martin Luther's reformation, they declared anathema. Now Rick Warren thinks that catholics are as good as protestants, Rick be honest with yourself you've rejected Luther and the Reformers who called the Pope the Antichrist. Rick Warren pretends his doctrine is the same as the Reformation, this folks is some serious mistake on Warren's part, he's got to come clean with himself. Once this is done a dialogue is possible.
You know there are some great theologians like Karl Barth who clearly disagreed with the reformers, reinterpreted the atonment etc. But I respect him, because he used exegeetical scriptural analysis to refute the reformers. Warren needs to do the same thing, tell us where you got your theology from, come clean, because you are not a Reformer. And there's nothing wrong with it, but he shouldn't pretend his gospel is like the one preached by Luther,
Calvin, Wesley, the White Horse Inn, Chris, Ingrid, etc. Warren would get a lot of respect from me if he were to tell me where Luther and Calvin went wrong backing it up from scripture, just like Karl Barth did.
Posted by: Bill | June 09, 2008 at 08:40 PM
Let’s assume for a minute there is a HIGH probability that RW changes nothing. So then what do we do with a guy like RW if there is no change in his approach to the gospel, his style & approach to preaching the gospel to Christians and non-Christians? If there is no change, no repentance where do we go from here with a guy that has an incredible reach & resources into the world, and seems to be moving towards pluralism, and unity of all religions towards a “common ground” in the name of social issues and not Jesus Christ?
Posted by: Zek | June 10, 2008 at 08:41 PM
I echo Jason's recommendation of this past week's White Horse Inn on "Assuming the Gospel."
I just wrote up a post on our site too about it. (our meaning Jason and my site)
Assuming the Gospel on PurposeDrivel
I cannot recommend that epsiode strongly enough. There are also a few selected sermons that are some of my favorites of Bob DeWaay's, which talk about what exactly IS the message that we must not neglect, that precious precious GOSPEL! Perhaps Richard will find it a little clearer if he listens to Bob expound on that for a while.
Posted by: Paula | June 11, 2008 at 12:01 AM
"Let’s assume for a minute there is a HIGH probability that RW changes nothing."
You're on very safe ground there.
Posted by: Ken Silva | June 11, 2008 at 09:38 AM
I was wondering if you would mind answering SDG's question. Do you believe it is possible for a Christian to please God?
He asked, "
It sounds like there is a fundamental difference of opinion about the ability/inablity of man (including Christians).
Rick Warren would say that man has the ability to please God.
Chris Rosebrough would say the man does not have the ability to please God.
Is this correct?
Posted by: SDG | June 06, 2008 at 12:05 PM
"
Posted by: Joe Martino | June 11, 2008 at 04:50 PM
Chris I'm listening to Mike Corley's show that you were on. Again I must say I am disappointed in the complete lack of grace and compassion toward brethren who have been very hurt and spiritually harmed by PD in their churches. Yes, they were upset at your thank you to Rick Warren. Threw you under the bus. But put yourself in their shoes. They felt you just threw THEM under the bus by what appeared to be fawning over someone they perceive to have damaged their churches and oppressed themselves and many people they love!
If you had been abused by someone, would you take kindly to someone talking up his good points in front of you? Take President Kieschnick for example. I haven't seen the same kind of 'gentleness' offered to Kieschnick.
Frankly if you wanted to thank him, why did you do it from the streetcorner to be seen by men? trying to make a statement? This has nothing to do with 'defending the faith' -- in that segment of the show it seems hermeneutics just left the building. THere is a great difference between how we treat unbelievers and how we treat those who claim to be Christ's yet pervert the gospel.
If you really want to show how we are to defend the faith graciously, with gentleness and respect, release the audio.
The 'continuing dialogue' idea also alarms me.
This whole thing reeks of RW trying to feel out a way to more effectively combat his opponents. Surely God can still use it to reach him, but it doesn't negate the danger. Good interrogators know that the best way to turn some people is a soft sell, by building up 'relationship' and offering friendship, etc. (watch some of the old WWII training videos for how to relate to your captors as POW's. Name Rank and serial number. NO DIALOGUING!) I am sure you won't fall for that, but you can't blame people for being alarmed, because they also know you are only human. The defensiveness against such warnings only tells me that you may need to consider how 'let him who thinks he stands beware lest he fall' applies.
Also I'm wondering how "vipers, whitewashed tombs full of dead men's bones," and things like "May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money! You have no part or share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before God." and "I wish they would go all the way and emasculate themselves" and "do not even bid him godspeed, for to do so makes you a partaker in his evil deeds" etc fits in with the 'gentleness and respect' motif?
Posted by: Paula | June 11, 2008 at 11:20 PM
Paula.....how I pray for you......
Posted by: catransplant48 | June 12, 2008 at 01:34 AM
Paula,
Are you really saying that Warren "abused" you? You attended Saddleback and his church "abused" you? You were "abused" at a church that subscribed to PDC maybe but that doesn't mean Warren did it. Your anger is palpable. Seek help.
Posted by: Joe | June 12, 2008 at 08:54 AM
"that doesn't mean Warren did it"
For those who don't seem to understand the ways of the Lord let me 'splain something to you Joe Martino. James 3:1 is what applies to Rick Warren and his PDL teachings.
Warren is the one God will hold finally responsible for what he has taught in both the PDC and the PDL because Warren's concepts - wherever he got them from and whatever his motivation may be - have influenced and shaped the teachings of thousands of other teachers.
Warren can try and wiggle off the hook, and with his charm he will convince many human beings that he's not responsible for what happens during a PDC takeover of a church. But Rick Warren best hear this as well: In addition to those who do whatever they do locally the Lord will also hold Warren personally accountable as well.
And a takeover is exactly what happen in this business model straight out of the Church Growth Movement. You see as a former radio personality/programmer I am sadly familiar with corporate takeovers - been there. New ownership comes in and any of those who do not play by the new rules are always forced out, if they're even given a chance to comply.
There are many reading Chris Rosebrough's materials, and my friend Paula is one of them, who can tell you that what I just described is how "resisters" are dealt with in a PDC takeover of the leadership (management) of scores of local churches. And as a pastor it is my job to help give them a voice by speaking up for those who do not have the forum to speak for themselves.
Please do yourself a favor Joe and stay out of what doesn't concern you.
Posted by: Ken Silva | June 12, 2008 at 12:01 PM
Good heavens, Ken, such anger and bitterness. Where does it all come from?? I counter your James 3:1 assessment of Rick Warren with James 3:5 - "Likewise the tongue is a small part of the body, but it makes great boasts. Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark."
"Make every effort to live in peace with all men and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the Lord. See to it that no one misses the grace of God and that no bitter root grows up to cause trouble and defile many" (Hebrews 12:14,15).
"Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you" (Ephesians 4:31,32).
"For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins" (Matthew 6:14,15).
Ken, you cannot possibly be a happy person with so much bitterness pouring out towards even your Christian brothers and sisters because they dare to have a different opinion.
I'm sure you will give me quite a tongue-lashing for what I've just said, and I fully expect it based on your most recent harsh posting; but truly, although you are probably going to try to tear me to shreds, I am praying for you.
Posted by: catransplant48 | June 12, 2008 at 12:22 PM
Is this the same Joe Martino that just posted at CRN.info about not biting and devouring one another in the blog world? Joe, Joe. Go back and read your post at your own site. Leave Paula alone. Who are you to question her experience with Rick Warren's teachings? She is one of countless people who have contacted me over the last few years who have been injured by the practical application of Rick Warren's PD teachings. I could write a book about the victims of this movement. James Sundquist and Noah Hutchings already have. Your snide, nasty line, "Get help" is appalling coming from a supposed Christian brother. Heal thyself, Joe, first.
Posted by: Ingrid | June 12, 2008 at 12:26 PM
Catransplant 48,
In an age of effeminized males who are more concerned about hurting people's feelings and posturing as nice guys than fulfilling the biblical calling of contending for truth, I praise God for Ken Silva and his willingness to be right, rather than popular. Additionally, the conduct of supposedly Christian men towards Christian women in the blog world is truly contemptible. "Seek help!" sneers Joe Martino to a Christian woman genuinely concerned over her experiences with Rick Warren's teachings. There is no excuse for it and it's time someone started calling men on it. Disagree all you want, but the disgusting lack of basic courtesy in disagreement is a blot on the name of Christ. "But she did it first," whined Adam in the Garden of Eden. That's been the excuse of men since the dawn of time. Some things never change.
Posted by: Ingrid | June 12, 2008 at 12:32 PM
Catransplant,
"I'm sure you will give me quite a tongue-lashing for what I've just said."
Ready, here goes: The Lord bless you.
Posted by: Ken Silva | June 12, 2008 at 12:40 PM
My eight year old son's Sunday School class ended 10 minutes before the class that I taught ended. He would quietly open the door, find a seat and listen and wait for his father. The room of adults loved rubbing his head and hugging on him. My son and and I would then meet up with my wife and 13 year old daughter attend service. This went on about 2 years.
Then one day my son asked, "Daddy, why aren't you teaching Sunday School? Did you do something wrong?" I assured him I did not do antthing wrong, and that I was taking a break from teaching.
A few weeks later, my son asked, "Daddy, aren't we going to church today?"
A few months later, my son asked, "Daddy, arent we going to go to church anymore? Can we go back, please?"
I did not tell my son that:
- the pastor had lied, manipulated, breached confidentiality (a civil offense under the Commonwealth of Virginia)
- I was removed as a Sunday School teacher for refusing to back down from my position on the Purpose Driven program.
- I was no longer welcome to attend Sunday School.
- the pastor refused to respond in writing for my removal which occured without a vote by the congregation that originally voted to install me as a teacher and a deacon
- my fellow deacons cutoff the mediation process witha mediator from the state convention
- my fellow deacons sent me a letter stating that they see no evidence of pastoral misconduct or theologicla issues with Purpose Driven.
No, I did not tell my son these things, but he knew something bad happended because he saw it on the face of my wife and daughter.
It may be hard to prove in a court of law that Rick Warren does not own vicarious liability for the social and emotional harm that was done to my family.
But Warren and his pastor network will have their ultimate Day in Court with The Judge of The Ages.
Posted by: Jim | June 12, 2008 at 01:03 PM
Ken, back at you. For the record I braced myself for an attack based completely on a lot of your previous postings and also some "colorful" emails you and I recently exchanged.
Ingrid, while I appreciate what you said, our dear friend Paula (and many of us, you and I included) often come across as harsh and unkind. Unfortunately, we are judged by the words we use, which can be quite nasty (ex: This whole thing reeks of RW....). Reeks. Thesaurus.com is a wonderful thing. There are many more effective ways to express a POV than using words that wound.
Blessings to you both.
Posted by: catransplant48 | June 12, 2008 at 01:39 PM
"Seek help!" sneers Joe Martino to a Christian woman genuinely concerned over her experiences with Rick Warren's teachings. There is no excuse for it and it's time someone started calling men on it. Disagree all you want, but the disgusting lack of basic courtesy in disagreement is a blot on the name of Christ.
No Sneering Ingrid. I'm serious. I'd rather warn her that she needs help than be popular with you. I seriously believe she needs help. As I believe you need help. Call me out all you want. You have perfected the art of personal attacks and that's fine, it's your choice to make. Ingrid, your lies, and attacks have been exposed and will continue to be exposed for what they are. I'm not questioning her experience, I'm saying that Rick Warren didn't abuse her. If he did, she can correct me. Thanks for reading my post over at .info.
What else do you want to "call me out" on Ingrid. This one seems pretty flimsy.
Posted by: Joe Martino | June 12, 2008 at 02:48 PM
It may be hard to prove in a court of law that Rick Warren does not own vicarious liability for the social and emotional harm that was done to my family.
But Warren and his pastor network will have their ultimate Day in Court with The Judge of The Ages.
Really? You're gonna blame RW for something a pastor did in Va.? That's craziness. I knew I should have just stayed away from this blog.
Posted by: Joe Martino | June 12, 2008 at 02:50 PM
Please do yourself a favor Joe and stay out of what doesn't concern you.
WOW, I got the full treatment today. Here I am mowing my lawn and Ingrid and Ken are both taking umbrage with what I have to say. Ken, if only you could take your own advice. That would be swell. Why are you and Ingrid so afraid to have your side questioned?
Posted by: Joe Martino | June 12, 2008 at 02:55 PM
The Lord bless you Joe Martino.
Posted by: Ken Silva | June 12, 2008 at 03:09 PM
Jim,
While I am sympathetic to your situation I must say the leadership of your church is really the ultimate authority about your situation.
It sounds to me that your issue is more about the governance of your church, their actions in the mediation process, and your refusal to give forgiveness.
Again sorry for your situation but holding RW culpable is as logical as me saying, on judgment, that I wasn't saved because I went to Catholic Church and they never taught me about salvation. We will all have to give an account for ourselves, not RW for me or Joe for RW.
Posted by: chris | June 12, 2008 at 03:17 PM
Ken,
Did you just really tell someone to mind their own business. WOW...
You can rail against everybody and every church this side of Cananda (and some of those as well) and you have the audacity to tell someone else to mind their own business. Again WOW!
Must be that you have to call yourself a pastor-teacher-president, and set up a discernment ministry blog to be able to call people out on un-biblical behavior.
One final WOW!
Posted by: Chris | June 12, 2008 at 03:23 PM
"We will all have to give an account for ourselves, not RW for me or Joe for RW."
Correct to the point to which you speak. However, James 3:1 is crystal clear that those of us who are pastor-teachers will also have to account for that which we teach as well. That's why no one should enter into this area lightly.
So yes, no one can "blame" Warren for what happens to them. But no, Warren is not excused for the hurt his philosophies and teachings have brought upon genuine Bible-believing Christians pushed out of their local churches through PDC takeovers, which are often done to the letter with PDC/PDL books/materials from Warren.
Posted by: Ken Silva | June 12, 2008 at 03:35 PM
Chris with the capital "C",
May the Lord bless you.
Posted by: Ken Silva | June 12, 2008 at 03:37 PM
Ken,
Lets just do away with the formality of judgment then and let us start attaching millstones to whomever we deem deserving.
Posted by: chris | June 12, 2008 at 03:49 PM
chris,
I'm afraid your argument is with the Lord on this one and so I pray He will bless you as well.
Posted by: Ken Silva | June 12, 2008 at 04:22 PM
Ken,
You tell Joe to mind his own business. You tell me that Jim has every right to have issue with RW. You then tell me that my issue is with the Lord right after you told me that you have every right to hold RW accountable. ????
So who is accountable to whom Ken?
It's seems that you are making all the rules to the game and then changing the game have way through.
"A mans ways seem right in his own eyes"
Posted by: chris | June 12, 2008 at 05:15 PM
c[C?]hris,
"you told me that you have every right to hold RW accountable."
I am not God and this is what I said: "Warren is the one God will hold finally responsible for what he has taught in both the PDC and the PDL."
Posted by: Ken Silva | June 12, 2008 at 05:52 PM
John Piper on "false teachers", notice the last line, "and do not manifestly prize above their earthly good the whole counsel of God."
False Teachers Serve Their Own Appetites
The other reason why doctrinal vigilance is so crucial, Paul says, is (verse 18a) because “such persons [the false teachers] do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites”—literally their own belly. In other words, the issue in false teaching is not a simple intellectual mistake. Behind the plausible speech and the smooth gentlemanly demeanor is idolatry, and the idol is the belly—the appetite for food or sex or human approval. Behind serious false teaching, we almost always find not merely intellectual mistakes, but worldly passions enslaving the mind.
Watch Out
So I close with a pointed call to vigilance: Watch out for smooth talkers who pastor large churches, write many books, lead wide ministries, and do not manifestly prize above their earthly good the whole counsel of God.
Posted by: Zek | June 13, 2008 at 01:48 AM