Rick Warren, market-driven church, and being all things to all people...

All I've seen from those advocating Rick Warren is opinion and no scripture....it goes both ways.

 

I'm affraid I would never go to a church that does not believe in allowing the unsaved to come in their church building. If you'll notice they didn't have any church buildings in the bible. So you could say having a building to congergate in is unbiblical, and so is sunday school, and musical instruments, dressing up for church, a personal copy of scritpure people in the bible didn't have all that. They didn't pews or bathrooms. But it's alright for your church to ahve them. I mean if your going to carry it that far, might as well go all the way with it. I take it since you don't allow unsaved to enter your building you monitor whos children are attending vbs, and your preacher never preaches the gospel,after all, all the people in his building are saved already. And what happens if a person gets saved and joins your church, do you allow their unsaved spouse to attend? When you sstart thinking about all the conquences of not allowing the unsaved in yoru building it isn't very pretty. The church building is not the church, of course you do not allow unsaved to join a church(the body of Christ, not the building)), but theres nothing wrong with allowing them inside a building.
Still no scripture to say something is unscriptural. Didn't think so.

 

Once again,I am misunderstood,but it is not your fault,maybe I am not explaining myself well.

Unsaved can come,but we should not make a church service for unsaved(we should go out,etc),if an unsaved was seeking God and wanted to come in,of course,they are welcome! Hopefully thay would hear the Word preached and repent...that happens and is fine...but what I am saying is when a church becomes completely evangelistic,like Saddleback,in their philosophy,their service styule,the way the dress,everything caters to the unsaved,then other things of greater importance get diminished....it happens! I've been a part of it.

Hope you can understand. what you have stated in your last 2 post are not at all what I am stating. But,I will take responsibilty for it,because maybe I wasn't clear.

[ November 10, 2002, 07:52 AM: Message edited by: Molly ]

 

Sorry Molly logical debate does not function in that manner. In discussions of this nature, the burden of proof lies in the arena of the accuser not the accused.

Warren's book is full of scriptural support (no one should argue that point). The real question is: can you show us from the text where evangelism is not to be one of the purposes of the church?

Again, these arguments over my preferred method or yours can go on and on. But they are nothing more than that: our PREFERENCES. So I will still be waiting for proof that Warren has ever compromised the gospel but not anticipating a scriptural or factual response.

 

That was a cop-out, SBC. If there's scripture to support what Warren's doing and how he's doing it, then you should be able to provide it. That would shut us up in a heartbeat, and you know it.

Warren uses a lot of scripture to back up his position; so do a lot of Baptist "I am king of my church and must rule with an iron hand" pastors.

Just cause they can find scripture to back up their position doesn't mean they're right.

 

SBC,
I disagree...I think both deserve accurate scriptural backing. Before I can support ANYTHING,it has to be biblical,so I line everything up with scripture and what I know scripture to teach,(This would include Rick Warren or even more in depth books,like John MacArthur's,Jonathan Edwards,John Piper,A.W. Pink,and others)and I believe what is true to God's Word and expel what is not. So,your side is just your opinion as well.

One other aspect to this is I believe when one comes to church(if it is a biblical bible preaching church...one of 2 things will happen....they will see their sinful nature and repent,or thye will not like it. I don't think a sinner in a church should feel comfortable for long....then I would question the preaching.

Also,in the area of church discipline following Matthew 18 as the guide,if those believers that are in sin are confronted,and do not repent,it eventually comes before the church,with repentance as the goal,and they still choose their sin,then their are asked to leave the felowship of believers....so there are times that a church has to stand up for purity and actually not let someone in....it is called keeping the church pure from known sin...yes there are sins not known,but when it is known,it sould be dealt with like the Matt.18 mandate.

None of this fits the seeker sensitive model of what church is to be.

There,I used a scriptural example.

[ November 10, 2002, 03:30 PM: Message edited by: Molly ]

 

Another scripture would be Paul's direction to Timothy to "preach the Word"...it doesn't say find what works,get a new image,make the worship rock,target a certain people group,then your church will grow...(by the way,Rick Warren says these things)...nope it says "preach the Word"....make that the emphasis,preach the gospel and the whole counsel of God,confront sin,call men to live holy lives....once again,it does not say to have programs to meet people's felt needs,to bring church down to a level where the lost like it...scripture does not support this at all....please show me verses that do.

Oh,and another thing I'd like to so graciously add....if a church says they are preaching the word and are doing these other things,they do not believe in the sufficiency of scripture....which goes back to my doctrinal issues with this philosophy. Paul knew that preaching the Word would be enough,that God's Word is what works. People who truly love God and his word will come to church....people who really are believers will not need to be swayed or convinced that church is good....

This is where I am coming from,this is what I believe that scripture teaches.

[ November 10, 2002, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: Molly ]

 

I would assume since the book is full of scriptural support of evangelism, and a person(like Molly has) read it, then they've already seen the support.\
All I've done is ask where is the scripture thatss says evangelism is not something the church is supose to do. I mean who is supose to do it fi not the the 'church'/ body of Christ? I for one would love to see the evidence becasue so far I've never seen anyone use anything but opinion, and I'm not about to make a decision on this subject based on opinions of people I don't even know.

I don't really think this is what is meant, I think it means to feel comfortable going someplace you've never been, full of people you probably don't know, with a lot of things going on you are unsure of. I don't think it means( I don't know how Warren preaches, he may do just what you say) to not preach that all have sinned and need to repent, becasue that is certainly not whats going on in my church. My pastor preaches to the body for spiritaul growth, and also preaches to the unsaved, need of Jesus is always part of it(don't want to argue if I've used different language then anyone else).

What about worship in the church, you've left that out.
Programs? Like what? Any programs we have are aimed at ministering to the body, helping them grow spiritually, and live a christ like life style. I'm not sure what the problem is with that. I can only assume you are speaking of some programs I have no knowledge of since we don't have them. So please give examples so I'll knoww hat you mean.

Yes, I can agree there, should be no need to tak christiasn into going to church. But people do get saved in church, we can't keep them out or we aren't being the church. I was saved in church, and whether or not you believe it, yes I am really saved according to scripture. If my church did nothing to reach the lost, I wouldn't be there now.

 

Maybe we are closer on this that we think. I do think evangelsim is a part fo what a church should be about,but only a part...I've said before,having a secial evangelsitic service or meeting would be fine. The problem I have is the emphasis on evangelism as their thrust of what the church should be. I see discipleship as an even greater part,worshipping God,yes,it is also vital....When the entire church becomes evangelsitic to the point of changing to make it more appealing to the lost,that's where I have a problem. His whole book is on *what works* and in this world,yes,it seems to,but God's ways are always better. Programs that teach the word are fine,to disciple believers...I just call them bible studies. His church offers(or did at one time) potty training classes,classes for all kinds of social grievances(the felt needs I was talking about). These are designed to attract those who have problems with these things,to get them into church.

I'm sure Rick Warren presents the gospel,no question about that,and I am also sure there are people being saved,because God's word does that...but I can not support shallow teaching and worldy techniques to grow... there is more at stake here.

But,I really do think we may agree on some basic bible principles. And,Katie,there are many churches who have bought into this. Some incorporate some of the ideas,and leave some out. But,some have bought into it completely. It is everywhere and it is big business,the whole church growth concept. I guess I wish more men of God would put their energies into study(in depth) and presenting God's word so that the people can grow and be evangelsitic in the marketplace,school,work,etc. Equipping them to *go out* not just invite people to church and let the style of the church attract.

Thanks for discussing this in such a nice way. It is okay to disagree.

[ November 10, 2002, 05:56 PM: Message edited by: Molly ]

 

Not all churchs following this are totally evangelistic, and nothing else. I know one of our focuses is to worship God, and have a relationship with Him. You seem(notice I said seem) to be saying we can't do both, it's one or the other. Maybe there a ballance in it you haven't considered. Maybe God has called you to one type of church that He uses to reach certain people, and has callled another church to another minisrty to do whtever His will for them might be. Do you at least agree that we have different ministries in different churches becsaue God has given us different things to accomplish? We have a migrant ministry(23 saved last night), you do not (at least I think you don't, maybe you do). Maybe you don't need one in your community, we do, God called us to it. If we don't all ahve the same personality, then our churches don't either. And God hasn't made us all the same in personality, looks, or anything else, except our salvation of course.
My pastor see our purpose in being a church(local body ofchristians) as mor then evangelisim, and so do the rest of us. It is not our primary focus. Discipleship, worship, bible study are our number one focus.

We don't have anything even similar to this, there would be a lot of opposition if we did. Every class we teach if aimed at the believer, learning and appyting scripture. We don't do community type classes.

We manage to do both quite well. I can say that of the churches in ur town, we are the only ones actively concerned with reaching out to the lost. And yes people are saved, which as it should creates growth in the church. We do not want in anyway to ahve growth by leaving off the gospel, or changeing it, or making it easier to be saved(like not having to repent, or not having to be baptized or whatever, not that I am saving these are a part of salvation.), we even have a new memebers class about to start so that people first thing learn what we believe as a church, what the bible says and the importance of living he christian life.

You've got to be able to pick through it all and take out the good, and leave the bad.

I think we've about discussed this to death don't you. I'm ready for a new focus of discussion.

 

Molly, I just don't want to have to feel as if I'm at odds with you all the time. Which is why I think we need to end this discussion.

 

I hope you can see how your words contradict each other w/o me having to point it out:

a. If what Warren is doing is scriptural, show us and then we will be quiet (even though again the burden of proof lies with the accuser in this instance).

b. Warren uses a lot of Scripture to back up his position.

c. Just b/c you can find Scripture does not make it right.

I truly hope you can see the inconsistency and fallacies of your logic here.

In the end, you are suggesting that no matter what Warren (or one of his defenders) shows you from the text that does not make it right.

Once again, we are left with only one option: show us from the Bible where Warren is wrong.

 

Molly,

I want honestly to believe that you are sincere in your attempts here to discredit Warren's philosophy of ministry. But you are just not offering any biblical evidence that what Warren does diminishes the gospel in any way.

I can cry until I am blue in the face: "unbiblical .... catering to the wrong crowd .... insufficiency of Scripture .... no expository preaching ... yada, yada, yada." But unless I produce some scriptural evidence that his methods are faulty, I might as well scream "wolf...wolf".

Your post above regarding church discipline and Warren's failure to "preach the Word" simply have no warrant. I have addressed both of these in a previous discussion we had. They are without evidence.

I respect your opinion to focus upon the style of church and preaching that you prefer. My only suggestion is that you do not somehow make your method appear more "correct" or "spiritual" than someone else's choice.

Rick Warren emphasizes "life-change" preaching, and that is what his preaching does--it transforms lives. Please do not accuse him of diminishing the authority of Scripture or not believing in the sufficiency of Scripture. To do so is to show your own lack of knowledge in this area.

I posts these thoughts as one who has been on both sides of this issue (including the one you and your husband seem to prefer). Some of my closest friends and mentors are critics of Warren, Hybles, etc. I am also an avid student of preaching. Preaching and ministry are my passions. But God has taught me in recent years that there are many methods and approaches that are outside my box that are equally as valid as the ones I prefer. I want God to give me the grace to think outside my own box. If we could all adopt a similar attitude, we would be a lot less critical of those a little different than us and a lot more focused on loving God/others and fulfilling the Great Commission.

Just some thoughts ....

BTW, I will still be waiting for that support that shows Warren has distorted the gospel in any fashion

 

I hope you can see how your words contradict each other w/o me having to point it out:

a. If what Warren is doing is scriptural, show us and then we will be quiet (even though again the burden of proof lies with the accuser in this instance).

b. Warren uses a lot of Scripture to back up his position.

c. Just b/c you can find Scripture does not make it right.

I truly hope you can see the inconsistency and fallacies of your logic here.

In the end, you are suggesting that no matter what Warren (or one of his defenders) shows you from the text that does not make it right.

Once again, we are left with only one option: show us from the Bible where Warren is wrong.</font>[/QUOTE]Let's examine this a bit more closely, shall we?

a) If what a pastor is doing is scriptural, show us and we'll be quiet.

Can you show scripture for ruling with an iron hand? Yep, you sure can (Rev 2:27, 19:15); but is it scriptural, or is is scripture taken out of context?

b) That pastor uses a lot of scripture to support his position.

I know people who use Romans 12:9 and Proverbs 23:7 to justify hating homosexuals; is this proper scriptural support?

c) So I reiterate: Just because you can find scripture doesn't mean it's right.

You should have seen that one coming.
-------------------------------------
For anyone else who's read "The Purpose-Driven Church": Did any of y'all notice that a LOT of it was taken from the TQM "bible"?

[ November 11, 2002, 08:44 AM: Message edited by: Don ]

 

Don:

So once again, the burden of proof lies with the accuser. Show us from the text where Warren is faulty. This has been the plea from the beginning, yet it has not happened.

Your attempts to link the radical examples you employ with reality will not suffice. And neither will your feeble efforts to take a cheap shot at the translation Warren uses to communicate clearly.

One might refer to this is as a red herring.

Still waiting ....

 

?????

What are you talking about? Are you unclear on my "TQM" reference? It stands for "Total Quality Management"--which Warren's book really is: A manual on management principles.

"Radical examples"? Oh, puh-leeze. You and I both know pastors of the type I mentioned; they are most likely at the opposite extreme of Rick Warren. They serve as valid examples of the kind of people that use scripture to suit their purposes rather than redefine their purposes to match scripture.

You should be able to take one section of Warren's book, with or without a scripture reference in it, and show how it's taken from scripture (rather than an idea that has found scripture to support it).

If you cannot, then the intelligent person would say, "Maybe I need to re-evaulate this thing."

By the way: I'm going on the fact that I've read the book, and have copious notes in the margins and white spaces.

 

Opinion noted. BTW, most pastors are required to serve in a CEO type capacity (whether they chose to or not). Of course there are those who reach a level of ministry where administrative duties and management requirments can fall on secondary staff.

I find it interesting that even those (like Piper--who I enjoy reading) who want to attack pastors who read CEO or business management books to help them do effective ministry often have people in their own ministries who perform a similar role.

You have yet to show us how Warren does this -- uses Scripture to simply support his own purpose.

Are you suggesting the 5 purposes (evangelism, discipleship, worship, service, and fellowship) are not found in Scripture?

Remember, I am not the one attacking Warren. It is not my duty to show where he is right or wrong. As soon as someone shows me where Warren's paradigm is unscriptural, then we can discuss it. Why is this such a difficult task? Could it be that those who often attack do so on the basis of personal preference and not scriptural evidence? My request from the beginning has been simple, yet it continues to be ignored each and every time.

What does intelligence tell us now???

Then you should be able to give a clear biblical refutation of Warren's philosophy!!!

Until then ....

 

I have given quite a few examples of scripture and biblical principles on what the church is to be....seeker sensitive does not meet those principles.

I feel you are not willing to see what I have already stated,because it doesn't jive with your position. Scripture has been given,you are sold out to being open to this philosophy,so you do not want to see it.

I would like to see where scripture says we are to become more like the world to evangelize...I don't have a problem with his 5 *purposes*,but I see error in how he implements them....show me chapter and verse that says we can become more like the world to make church acceptable and win souls for the gospel.

 

I have looked at the arguments presented in these threads. I don't know anything about Rick Warren other than what I have read here nor have I read his books.

There aren't any particular problems with the "5 points" as long as the focus remains the glory of God.

The problem seems to be that seeker churches in practice make being palatable to the non-believers the central focus. I don't believe this is what "being all things to all people" means... and surely it is not what "be not conformed to this world" means.

The biblical NT model is that sinners are evangelized then welcomed into the church when baptized (which represented a tremendous testimony of leaving the world in those days). Welcoming unbelievers or even carnal Christians into a church is contrary to the Bible... and foolish.

Are people saved in church? Yes. Thank God, I was. But biblically, should that be the focus of the church? No. The primary purpose of the church is to build up the believers to the glory of God.

My two brushes with seeker churches have made me wary. One guy was thinking of leaving his church specifically because entertainment greatly over shadowed spiritual edification. The second guy gave evidence that he and many other in his church primarily valued the church for its worth to them socially... almost to the point of being a place to meet other singles his age.

[ November 11, 2002, 01:53 PM: Message edited by: Scott J ]

 

Molly:

If you have posted examples that show where Warren is in violation of the text, then I have definitely missed them. Can you re-post them or at least point me to them? I am willing to address any point where you can show me Rick Warren is compromising the gospel.

Again you misunderstand his seeker-sensitive approach. If you can show where his approach directly violates Scripture, then we can discuss what is at stake. Saying "we are not to become like the world to win the world" does not suffice. You must show how a method or approach they are using directly violates Scripture.

Since obviously you do not want to discuss specific instances where Warren compromises the gospel, let me ask another simple question: do you believe a church should be insensitive to unbelievers? There is no middle ground here. Sensitive or insensitive? Just provide scriptural support for your assertion.

I remember Jesus hearing similar complaints in his ministry ... he eats with sinners ... look at who is hanging around ... does he know she is a sinner ... etc.

Again--recognize there is room in the world of methodologies for those who are differ from your preferences but which are just as biblical and just as right.