a "purposelessness" driven life

It is interesting that you associate PDL with postmodernism because most of the Emergent Church that does openly identify with postmodernism would call the PDL, Saddleback and Willowcreek the epitome of modernist, rational-reductionist, consumer/market driven Christianity that they are trying to emerge from.

 

I agree that Jesus would never attack His own work or deceive His own sheep. I also believe we shouldn't substitute lost souls with present culture. I'm just unsure of where the PDL or seeker sensitive movement does these things. I'm willing to be convinced that it does, but I'm not just going to take your word for it.

 

That's an interesting thought, and a good point. PDL is associated with postmodernism only by default since the culture is postmodern, which is the way I meant it.

For that matter, I'm not even sure if postmodern is a good way to describe our present culture. It just seems to be the term people are using lately. What term would you use to describe present culture?

 

That's an interesting thought, and a good point. PDL is associated with postmodernism only by default since the culture is postmodern, which is the way I meant it.

For that matter, I'm not even sure if postmodern is a good way to describe our present culture. It just seems to be the term people are using lately. What term would you use to describe present culture? </font>[/QUOTE]I would describe it as a culture that is emerging from modernism (starting with the Enlightenment) to something postmodern that is being defined as we live in it.

I would describe PDL/Saddleback/Willowcreek/seeker-sensitive as being the epitome of modernist evangelical Christianity that started with the Great Awakening of the 1800s.

 

Oops. That should have said 1700s.

 

Everyone who has posted seems to mean well, and of course everyone here is seeking for truth. The only Scripture I will use is Acts 5:38-39

"38Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. 39But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God."

Our fight is against evil. Whether you interpret this "movement" as evil or not doesn't matter. What God says is what matters.

 

Nor should you. And I appreciate your honesty. To apply Biblical truth without regard to doctrine, where it falls, or who it offends is most important to me. After experiencing years of the influence and terrible consequences of bad teaching, God put me on my deathbed. When he raised me back up, I wanted to know the TRUTH, and I was in no mood to listen to ANY man. Just the Holy Spirit. The result was a Biblical foundation and view that is in harmony with and very close to most of the people on this board.

Any teaching must be able to stand the test of scripture and, in my view, the PDL fails. It'll take a while but if you'd like to walk through it, I'll walk through it with you.

[ May 31, 2005, 06:51 PM: Message edited by: IveyLeaguer ]

 

Lead on. Although from reading your previous posts, I would prefer if you give us the reader's digest version.

An fyi to speed up the process that I already have quite a bit of exposure to Saddleback and Willowcreek having used their resources, read books by Warren and Hybels, and heard their preaching.

So where does PDL and the "seeker-sensitive" movement do the things you accuse them of doing?

 

And you have tested their teaching with the Word of God?

 

And you have tested their teaching with the Word of God? </font>[/QUOTE]What I've read does not conflict with the bible. Maybe you've read more than me and have a better understanding of the bible than I do. I await your enlightenment.

 

Iveyleaguer,
Good post. I'm new to the BB but I have been stirring up some discussion on PDL. All may not agree with Paul Proctor but I do. He is quick witted and packs a punch. Sundquist writes some good stuff to. I've read aot of articles concerning the Heglian Dialect. Some here may think some of that stuff is a little conspiratorial but I don't.
I'm amazed at the simularites between thePDL and PDC philosophy and its simularites to Marxist Socialism. Why can't people see that it just isn't healty to have to guys like Warren and Hybels have such sway over so many people. Between the willowcreek association of churches and all the Saddleback followers it is kind of wild to see how everyone is sort of being led to think along the same lines. There are alot more people with balance in their thinking that are writing about this type of thing than people want to acknowledge. Some just don't want to question the methods, connections etc... because it works.
And you know pragmatism rules the day!

 

That is a new accusation to me. Would you please cite some examples?

If you can give some reasons why, backed up with some evidence from their own works (and not their critics), maybe will see things your way too.

I would agree that this is one of the primary weaknesses of Saddleback and Willowcreek, the assembly line consumer "pre-packaging" of church. I believe they understand that weakness too and try to address it by being flexible to customization. But there is an inherent problem with trying to fit someone else's packaging into your unique church with its unique makeup and context, no matter how flexible it is.

However, they do a good job of emphasizing, teaching and effectively strategizing things that are common to many evangelical groups and that is the reason for their success.

 

Warren preaches the truth. You might not like him. He is a man of God. He teaching is solid. I think you should really look at him.

Our lives do have purpose!!! The PDL is just a tool to use to hone in on yours. It isn't not a sub for the Bible. I think it is pretty solid in theology.

 

Let me say I dont' think RW is a heretic. I think he loves the Lord. I think the basic 5 purposes he mentions in the book are biblical, positive things that can help people with their walk with the Lord. As ecumenical as he is i would still distinguish him from Hybels as far as some of their associations and other things.
I do think he stretches alot of scripture to fit the theme of his book. He does seem to contradict himself at times in the book. Things like that.


Gold Dragon, as far as some simularities between how the mega church movement operates in comparisons to Marxist,communist, socialistic thinking there are just some traces of things that you will find in all three.

For example, this idea of "community" that is so often spoken of in those circles. I'm sure in small groups and those sort of things there is some wonderful things happening. But what disturbs me is how it seems like "unity is often more valued than what is true. In other words for everybody to feel comfortable lets not be to objective or dogmatic about things lets "talk this out as a group" It could be that over time people that are into this sort of teaching could one day think that consensus from the group determines the truth over what is biblical.

I don't like the idea of how loads of sermon material, resources all that kind of stuff is in a sense facilitated from one church to another church to the sunday school to the small group.

Over a period of time this can reshape a whole generation of people and how they think. Some may think that is a good thing.I'm not so sure. Especially when some things are questionable biblically speaking from the get go.

I'm not the best at articulating what I read and how I feel about it I just try to put it together.

Have I read material than was anti-purpose driven?Sure. Have you ever thought of this? Why do so many people get bent out of shape if some folk question such a popular movement? That in itself raises a question in my mind. "Never question what God is blessing" That was a quote from RW. That is a little weird, not even biblical.

I have also did a little reading in relationship to my own original thoughts as well.Go and read the "humanism manifesto" then go read the latest "communist manifesto" written by the kids at harvard. Then just bone up a little on Carl Marx and some of the major tenets of his beliefs. You may think I see some kind of conspiracy thing. No I do not. I'm not a wacko. What I do see are words and phrases and thoughts that sound alot like the Church Growth jargon you hear flying around all the time.
Do I think RW is some false prophet doing the devil's work. No. Do I think God could be using all this stuff for His sovereign purposes. Sure.
Could all this Market driven, from the top down kind of teaching one day be used to bring more harm to the church than good. I think in the long run it is highly possible.

All this stuff is interesting to talk about. I'm certainly not a fan of CGM or PDL or Willowcreek but in the end here is how I go about my business.

JOHN 21:21-22 -- Peter seeing him (John)saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?
Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry til I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.

God has given me a ministry to take the Gospel to Spain as a missionary.
RW has his calling as well. He can answer for his ministry and I will have to answer for mine. I need to be concerned about the race I'm running not the guy in the lane beside me.

 

Thank you for trying to provide evidence of your comment. I must admit I was not very convinced, especially since you didn't cite anything from Rick Warren himself and simply gave your interpretation of what you think he is saying. Your claim that group dynamics in PDL are valued over truth or determine truth are not related to Marxism/communism/socialism and I have never read anything like that from Rick Warren. If you have evidence to back up this claim, it would have been good to provide it.

Once again, I commend you for trying.

 

Gold dragon,

Type in "eastern regional watch on your computer.
They are a kind of watchman type of ministry. I admit you may not find some of what the authors of some of the articles have to say but there are tons of articles on that sight. They have articles on everykind of thing you can think of thats going on in the world today.

I did not say group dynamics is valued over truth in PDL. I said I was just concerned that one day that kind of groupthink could lead to that sort of thing. I appeciate your response. However, I never said RW has written anything like that I just simply said I notice simularities in my own opinion from different things I have read.

Which do you think is more condusive to a one world goverment? Rugged american individualism or groupdynamics. I'm just suggesting that the CGM ministry philosophies are in a seductive way conditioning evangelicals into slowly accepting a more socialistic type of goverment in the future.
Again, do I think anybody out there in the CGM circles are aware of the fact that maybe this type of teaching and thinking could have the kind of effect I mentioned. I doubt it. So I'm not accusing RW or Hybels of doing anything I just think the philosophy is not right.

 

Yes, I've seen many sites like that one before and read many of sites they link to before. They are all quite similar and use similar arguments and writing styles. Thanks.

Eastern Regional Watch

 

So what does that mean? Do the authors not carry enough intellectual weight for you? Are all those sites like that bias?
You seem like a pretty sharp fellow why don't you answer my question concerning groupthink in my earlier post? Give me your real thoughts you won't hurt my feelings I got broad shoulders.
Or do you choose not to comment because I might have a tiny bit of truth in there somewhere?
Which is more pliable to a global goverment for all versus a nationalist form? groupthink type dynamics or the guy that wants to cut his own path?

 

I think your groupthink vs. individuality concerns isn't a part of Marxism/Communism/socialism and it can apply to any corporate structure. Community is not a Marxist idea. The first community was the Trinity. The individualism of our culture is however a recent development.

I think your affinity to conspiracy theories is showing in this thread and the types of writings you cite.

Regarding those articles, I hope you read them with as critical an eye as they suggest you should read other things.

Are they biased? Of course they are, just like every other thought or writing in the history of man. The question is not are they biased, but what is their bias?

 

Thanks Gold Dragon appreciate your thoughts