Where are Rick Warrens disciples now?
Great new article from my brother in the Lord -Joseph Farah.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53048
About a year ago Rick Warrens unofficial spokesman Richard Abanes disappeared from the internet. I have debated Richard many times online and to see Richard shut his mouth and not comment anywhere is some kinda feat.
Did Rick Warren have anything to do with this.
I really don't know but in my debates with Abanes I can tell you again thats some kinda trick.
This is part of the purpose driven covenent from Saddlebacks website-
"I wont be captivated by culture, manipulated by critics, motivated by praise, frustrated by problems, debilitated by temptation, or intimidated by the devil. Ill keep running my race with my eyes on the goal, not the sidelines or those running by me. When times get tough, and I get tired, I wont back up, back off, back down, back out or backslide. Ill just keep moving forward by Gods grace. Im Spirit-led, purpose-driven and mission-focused so I cannot be bought, I will not be compromised, and I shall not quit until I finish the race."
The sad thing is Saddleback is blinded to what spirit is leading them.
We have said for quite sometime here at Simply Agape that Rick Warren has created a new religion.
With all that has developed and the followers of Warren being led on a broad not narrow road we need to remember to pray for these followers of another jesus and another gospel.
Jude 23 "And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.
Sad I can almost see behind the scenes at Saddleback the spin doctors in a room guessing how many they will lose from this latest Warren debacle.
And thinking of new ways to seduce more to replace those who have left.
Very sad.
Tim
posted by Tim Wirth | 11:29 AM
7 Comments:
You may find this very interesting:
Purpose-Driven Lay Offs? Is Rick Warren a Victim?
You may find this very interesting:
Purpose-Driven Lay Offs? Is Rick Warren a Victim?
Discernment is noble and called for in God's word. As Americans we treasure debate and as Christians we need a discerning eye to evaluate good from bad, well-intended from evil. For that, I applaud your site and your purpose. However, your constant criticism of Saddleback and your assertion that Rick is a false prophet who set up a false religion whose followers worship a false god, is unnecessarily over-dramatic and untrue.
Is everything good at Saddleback? No, of course not. There are many shortcomings. The majority of services are straight out of any self-help book, albeit with a Christian flavor. Deep and meaningful growth occurs not at a weekend service but in the Bible Study curriculum consumed either in a small group or on campus throughout the week.
To suggest that Rick's survey of non-believers somehow created a false church because the roots were mis-guided is connecting dots that simply aren't there to connect.
Did he conduct a survey? Yes, that is irrefutable. The simple purpose was to target non-believers instead of other Christians. What good is a new church that picks off other fish and moves them into a new fishbowl? The better role for a new church is to find new fish.
There is an assertion on your site that the Church is for believers. Perhaps that is true, I am not studied enough to debate that point with you. But the purpose of the church is to reach the unsaved. Criticize the survey and other methodology if you want, but Saddleback certainly has reached a large population of unsaved souls in OC. Does that mean everything is done correctly or according to correct doctrine all of the time? Of course not. Neither am I suggesting that the end justify the means. If Saddleback promotes false doctrine, lets call it out. But in my experience I have yet to attend a church that does it right all of the time. Whether a sermon outline is constructed accurately, or the music is chosen properly, or the interpretive dance was done non-offensively, or the translations were selected wisely...there is always something to call out most weeks at most churches that I have attended. For example (and there are many examples), at one church a guest musician playing to an audience of high schoolers chose to play a Bon Jovi song that promoted drinking alchohol and taking revenge. It was misguided. Did that mean that the church was on shaky doctrinal ground? No. Did it mean the pastor was a false prophet that had succumbed to the popluarity of post-modern secular America? No. It meant that the musician made a stupid choice. People make mistakes, do and say things they shouldn't. To convey or conjure intent on another is a dangerous game that is played all to often on your site.
One obvious issue is the scale with which things are done at Saddleback. It is a HUGE church with the potential for HUGE influence, both good and bad. As Christians, we can all agree that we want that influence to be used to win souls for Christ. When Rick says or does anything, it gets attention that was unheard of a few short years ago. There is a bigger spotlight on Saddleback now, which comes with the territory. He, and the other leaders of Saddleback, aren't going to "get it right" all of the time. To expect so would be naive.
Throughout your site I see little in the way of thoughtful criticism brought forth from investigative objectivity. Rather, there are arguments threaded from incomplete context or understanding to reach conclusions that look good but are flawed. It seems that anything Saddleback does gets an instant criticism or sarcastic post. How does that help the kingdom grow? Assuming, for the moment, that Rick's intentions are pure and the leadership team that makes decisions for the church is seeking God's will through the Holy Spirit, then what good is to become of spiteful sarcastic criticism masked as discernment?
Yes, I do attend Saddleback. You may have already sniffed me out as such. My friends and family are curious about what it is like to attend such a large church. They are intrigued, interested, inquisitive. I tell them of the pros and cons of attending such a large church. I am publicly critical of its flaws and make no bones about the downsides of attending such a large church. By no means am I a "Kool-Aid" member that can't see past the bright lights of the weekend service.
By attending and getting involved in the ministry of the church during the past several years, I have learned that the core of the church is strong and is made up of God-fearing Christians that are saved by grace through faith in Jesus. You find these people in small groups (house churches), service projects, and Bible studies. Does that describe all of the attendees? Not even close. Does that mean a seeker-friendly format on the weekends is wrong as a result? No. Is every weekend a "Calvinist" fire and brimstone alter call? No. Are there alter calls on a regular basis? Yes. Believe it or not, there are "Jesus Saves" alter calls at Saddleback. Not "Rick Saves, buy my book" alter calls as some have sarcastically suggested.
As for the assertion that we "follow Rick Warren", I am sure there are some that are drawn to Saddleback for its "cult of personality". That is true of most things that reach a popular status in our culture. We've seen it with churches time and again just as with celebrities, fads, and fashion. It is sad and, probably, inevitable. Those people are misguided and my prayer is that they would be drawn closer to the ministries of Saddleback (or other churches) that will point them in a proper, more "vertically aligned", direction.
I don't follow Rick. I am not a "Rick Warren disciple" as your title suggests. I follow God, who saved me through His Son and who guides me with His Spirit; and Saddleback is where I worship Him.
Your posts have renewed my discernment and for that I am thankful. In closing, all I can say about most of the assertions you make about Rick Warren and Saddleback is that they are inaccurate. Some by a little, some by a lot. If your goal is true discernment, then I think you should focus on objectivity. Research and investigate your facts first and post them objectively for others to evaluate for themselves. Then you will be providing a service of true discernment, not opinion masked as discerment.
I do appreciate your well thought out comments.
I have friends who have partcipated in Saddlebacks music conferances and Im sure their are saved and many fine folk at Saddleback. The Bible speaks of the endtimes being a time of great deception. Even the elect may be deceived.
Thats something I hope you think about.
And please do not take my word about anything but search the scriptures to see if what I post here is the truth.
If it doesnt match up with what scripture teaches I encourage you to reject it totally.
Because only Gods Word counts.
Not Tim or Sandy or whoever.
Rick Warren has been proven that he doesnt tell the truth. Check out all the articles here and WorldNet Daily etc..
Rick also uses a spin doctor your own OC register comments about that.
There are many exposes on Purpode Driven and the Purpose Driven Church.
Neither book stacks up with Gods Word on what the Bible teaches on the variety of topics covered.
I do apoligize for any mean spiritness. I get mad sometimes and that effects my posts. Im sorry for that because when you get in the flesh it does not benefit the Body of Christ.
Anyway thank you for your thoughtful comments.
I really care about the folks at Saddleback and the deception going on there.
Search the scriptures to see if what you hear being taught at any class or service you attend.
SHAPE doesnt add up to scripture but it does to Carl Jung.
Check to see of what I say is true to scripture.
If its not reject it.
The the only Word that counts is Gods Word.
Not Christian flavored talk.
Tim Wirth
Thanks for your reply and acknowlegements.
I will reiterate that the bulk of what is evaluated by this site and others is based on what is publicly disseminated either by Saddleback (on its website and/or e-mails) or through the press. What goes on on campus during an average weekend has less to do with Rick and more to do with an evangelical pastoral staff that is handling the day-to-day affairs of the church itself. He is there about 50% of the weekends, but you probably already know that. Regarding what is printed by "our own" OC Register or other outlets, I have already learned to look askance at what is printed in the press.
My guess is that if I were to evaluate any church with such a hyper-critical eye, I would find many things to question. Call it "monday morning quarterbacking" or "back-seat driving", but in my experience someone looking for something to criticize will always find it. Couple that with a pre-determination to suspect someone's intentions and you have an endless list of things to comment on.
Granted, we are talking about scripture here, so the need for accuracy is critically important. But if someone has a worldview that Rick Warren is the "anti-christ" then it doesn't really matter what Rick Warren says, it will always be criticized even, I would submit, if he were reading from the Bible itself.
Regarding SHAPE, it is a study and curriculum intended for believers. Arguably, many things at Saddleback are overly-programmed or packaged (including the S-H-A-P-E acronym). The membership class is called 101. Next class (I forget what its focus is) is 201. The next class is 301 (for SHAPE), etc. The focus of doctrine and the priority of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ are covered as MAJOR topics in 101. In fact, each 101 class has an alter call in the first segment. As you progress through the 101-201-301-401 classes, the priority of that personal relationship with Christ is assumed as the curriculum for each particular class is explored. Thus, SHAPE was never intended by Erik Rees to stand on its own as a device to lead people to Christ. It lacks a salvation component probably by design, although I am only speculating. I went through the 301 curriculum last spring and then the SHAPE book was published later in the year. It is an abbreviated version of the 301 class, broken into equal parts to make a small group study. The goal of 301 and the SHAPE study are to get people oriented to where they will be most effective and passionate about serving the body of Christ. With all of that in mind, how is it that SHAPE does not line up with scripture?
Additionally, while I have not studied Jung (no interest, thank you very much), I suspect there are many texts that have a ton in common with SHAPE. Myers Briggs personality profile is one. DISC profile is another. I am certain that if I wander down to Barnes and Noble and look at their shelf of self-assessment books, I will find numerous similarities between those texts and SHAPE. So what? Doesn't that confirm a truth of creation? We are God's creation and no matter how a humanist, secularist, or cultist chooses to explain him/herself, the common truths about how we are hard wired remains the same. We all have inate interests, abilities, desires and traits that guide our thinking and motivate us to do different things. I think it is ironic that there is so much in common with someone like Jung, while you view it as heretical. Regardless of who is right/wrong, the context of SHAPE (as a curriculum designed specifically for believers) is important and appears to be overlooked by your postings and other blog sites that seem to make it their sole purpose to disect, second-guess and criticize everything that comes out of Saddleback or Rick Warren's mouth.
I am a reader of WorldNet Daily and have come to find their editorial style to be (at times) alarmist, paranoid, extremist, and wrong as often as right on many issues. Speaking of discernment, I think a healthy dose is prudent on that site. If you are suggesting that everything published on WorldNet is absolutely true, then you are guilty of what you are accusing the "Rick Warren disciples" of. I doubt that is the case, so I will assume we can at least agree that discernment is a good prescription no matter where the content is coming from. Therefore, I am less likely to believe an op-ed column on WorldNet as I am my own first-hand experience.
I do wish there were more focus on the gospel message each weekend. I do wish there were deeper Bible expository or apologetics taught from the pulpit. I was at a church like that that became so focused on feeding the flock that they forgot about the people they were trying to reach. It became a club of Christians teaching each other "Christiany" things but never "taking it to the streets" (to quote those great theologians, The Doobie Brothers). So which is worse? I church that has forgotten about the Great Commission or Saddleback?
So here we have Rick Warren who established a church intended to appeal to non-churched folk and guess what, it works. It becomes a vibrant growing church. Publishers want this new pastoral phenom to write a book or two. On the third or fourth try, lightning strikes. The Purpose Driven Life hits the big time. I agree that it is watered down. As a believer, I took it for what it was. A daily devotional that helped me with some very practical thoughts on a daily basis. If I look at it as an evangelical tool, it falls short on the gospel message for sure, but what if it plants a seed of interest in the non-believer. Again, not arguing the end justifies the means, but doesn't it have value as a pretext to the text (that being God's word?). If Christians are always quoting scriptures or acting like every encounter needs to be a "4 spiritual laws" discussion, then we come off as heavy-handed Jesus thugs and, if you haven't noticed, that turns a lot of people off. Without changing the truth of the gospel, we should try to appeal to the people we are trying to reach. Jesus went to the people. Dined with them, met in their houses, reached out to them. Saddleback could/should "preach it" more often (i.e. the gospel message) and that is one of my criticisms of the seeker-friendly format. But to suggest that Rick has created some new religion that denies the truth of Christ is patently false and misinformed. I can see how it might APPEAR that way based on the selected examples that are referenced in this site and others. That method of argumentation uses selective references to make a point that has already been determined, regardless of what all the facts indicate.
Lastly, taken out of context, PEACE can look like some misguided worldview straight from the bowels of the UN. Like the similarities between SHAPE and many assesment texts, so does PEACE have with many such plans to address some of the biggest problems facing people groups today. If you prescribe a spurious intent on Rick Warren, then you come up with a negative. If, on the other hand, you prescribe a more favorable intent, you see that PEACE could actually lead to some pretty good things for the church on a global scale. Isn't it our goal to reach as many people for Christ as possible? If we act like no other group of people and show an unprecedented concern for others by serving others and loving them unconditionally, then aren't we living a very Christ-like existence? In fact, it sounds a lot like the basics of Christian doctrine - be set apart; they will know us by our love; etc. Is PEACE perfect? No. It is watered down in print? Probably. Could Rick be more steadfast in his presentation of the truth of Christ as part of the PEACE plan? Yes. Have other evangelical leaders always been "on message" 100% of the time? I don't know.
It certainly seems to me that the critics of what Rick and Saddleback are trying to accomplish are hell-bent on seeing only negative intentions in everything that is done by Saddleback Church. I think that is sad.
I will continue to discern what I read and hear from my church as well as elsewhere. The thing about discernment is that it is best when all of the facts are gathered. Hopefully I have provided you with some additional facts/information for you to consider.
BTW, since you mentioned him elsewhere in your site, do you know that Lincoln Brewster is the Worship Pastor at Bayside Church in Granite Bay CA? They are a "sister church" of Saddleback and are "purpose driven".
Well transplated I can see you really dont understand your own programs at Saddleback including SHAPE. I even check any new programs at my church up to the light of scripture as well. And I see that you have been pretty much programed. There is a differance between unchurched and unsaved. That is a spin word created by Schuller I think. If a church is seeking a unchurched believer that is different than seeking a unsaved person. The church should only be seeking a unsaved person to share the gospel with them or perhaps help them with food, clothing etc.. as well as the gospel. Whats the sense of going to hell with a full belly if you have not shared Jesus with a unbeliever. Saddleback was made to make unsaved people feel comfortable that is why it thrives. Its more than being watered down. Rick Warren has succesfully bought the world into the church ie Saddleback and Purpose Driven Church. What does the Bible teach about bringing the world into the church and partnering with unbelievers for anything? Go check that for yourself there is no argument there the Bible is very clear. Go read 1 John the entire chapter.
As for your summit or conferance or however you want to spin that what does the Bible teach there?
2 John 10-11 "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine receive him not into your house neither bid him God speed. For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
What that means is that if someone comes into your meeting and does not teach the truth about Christ dont even invite him into your house or encourage him in any way. If you do you become a partner in his evil work.
You cant match that verse up with the speakers you have coming and not see the problem.
Saddleback is taking part in their evil deeds.
Your a part because you go to that church.
Want to end AIDS?
Preach abstinence and preach that homosexuality is wrong.
I know the numbers on how many get AIDS from blood transfusions and hetrosexual sex. The numbers are very small.
And any sex outside of marriage is wrong as well.
The apostles in Jerusalem made it a point to preach against sexual immorality. Out of all the points they could address this was a main one.
Why do you think that is.
Do you think abortion would have even been a topic of discussion for them?
Wake up.
Linking arms with a lesser evil is still linking arms with evil.
Tim Wirth
Transplated if you want you may comment on other topics. Im not going to debate you here. Ive heard the same arguments from guys like Richard Abanes and they go no where. You may also email at nogoofyzone@hotmail.com if you have any further questions on this thread and I will answer you through email.
And no you have not gotten under my skin I hear the same thing from others who attend Saddleback.
I do think Ive given you ample room to post what you think Saddleback is about and teaching. Any other discussion for this thread needs to be done by emailing me.
Thanks
Tim
Post a Comment
<< Home