A Sample of The Strange Teachings of Rick Warren

I read the article in the op, then see here that is gives false information,

I fail to see what your link has to do with RW, or this topic.

 

I followed the link, but perhaps you could explain how the article on feminism at Georgetown University connects to Rick Warren. Is he a feminist?

 

It's OK to lie, as long as you lie about rick warren. Apparently.




If I ran any journalism site, and had a reporter hand me a story with that many factual (and IMO deliberate) inaccuracies, I'd fire him on the spot.

And, as Dr. Bob said....we should be above bearing false witness.

 

Same publisher and university who published the other article.

 

The link is published by the same university as the article referenced in the OP. The article which was reefrenced in the OP is riddled with false information. How could anyone trust an author who writes spurious information that is easliy obtained and verified.

 

Absolutely. I am quite sure everyone of us would have our share of critics if we wrote and exposed our theology.

 

Did this thread open itself back up?!? It was locked this morning...

 

HisWordIsTruth

You said...

I agree with that statement there 100%.

When people ask me "what are you?" (baptist, church of christ, etc) I usually will only say "I'm a christian" and leave it at that. Sometimes I will stubbornly refuse to go beyond that. If they ask me "What do you believe"...I'll say "ask me a question".

I sometimes refer to myself as a "bapti-costal", some times a "cal-minian", and sometimes a "funda-liberal"

I've said things like "I'm more liberal than the fundamentalists, more conservative than the liberals, more pentecostal than the baptists and more baptist than the pentecostals.

It is SO...INCREDIBLY...SAD...to see brothers and sisters on these boards stating their view and interpretation of a scripture, and condemn all other views as "heresy" simply because its A DIFFERENT VIEW THAN THEIR VIEW!!!

I'm not referring to legitimate heresy here. Not at all. There is legitimate heresy. I am talking about views where both sides are not heretical in the least...just different.

You know, sincere disagreements regarding issues where their is room for different views. Rather than....

It goes without saying that the discussions and disagreements are HEALTHY. They are a good thing and ordained by God. But WHY WHY WHY do people have to get nasty, condemning, and mean spirited?

Grace and peace,

Mike

 

webdog,

I dont think threads get locked until 30 pages.

Mike

 

It was closed this morning.

 

RevMitchell,

HWIT has been banned in the last 2 days? I know the authorities here have "condemned" millennium exclusion, but I didnt see an millenium exclusion in his posts on this thread.



Mike

 

It wasn't this thread.

 

You don't really sound like you know what you believe. Or how you stand with respect to scripture. Titles are not important, but I have no idea what a bapticostal is?? And if someone asks you what you believe, imo you should be able to state clearly your faith, belief, position, w/o doing twenty questions.

 

nunatak,

I have been born again since 1982 and I have been feeding on the scriptures ever since then. I have no problem articulating my view, scripturally, on multitudes of issues. I have developed strong convictions regarding what I believe.

But I refuse to be "pigeon holed" into anyones corner. I am a child of the living God, not a pigeon. I search the scriptures, not a particular denominations "what we believe" statement, for my convictions.

Scripture is our only truth standard given to us by God, with the Holy Spirit being our only interpreter. Although christians can and should learn from one another, I reject all theories that say that we should bow to the Hierarchy of a particular group (such as the Jehovahs Wittnesses and Catholicism) and let them command us as to what we must believe. The same with the "early church fathers" They are no authority either.

There are millions like myself who have great respect for the Baptists, fellowship with them, and hold to many of the great truths they hold to. (justification through faith alone, water baptism as a symbol, autonomy of each local church, etc) and yet also believe that the gifts of the Spirit (speaking in tongues, prophecy, etc) are still for today. Most baptists reject those views.

Hence..."bapticostal"

I can. I just did some of it in this post. You missed the point of my statement about "asking me a question"

God bless,

Mike

 

They lie in the same bed, just on opposite ends.

 

I don't think I missed your point. You clearly do not line up with any grouping of believers in the traditional sense. I guess most Americans would agree with you. The largest growing religious affiliation is "nothing in particular." While that is not what you are saying, you also don't line up with any grouping either. Again, sounds confused.

Edited in: However, having come out of a major pentecostal denomination that espouses false doctrine, I am very sensitive to this. I would never call myself bapticostal. I am still learning what I should call myself, but it will be something that I can prove with a statement of beliefs.

 

RevMitchell,

By Acts 16, I assume you mean the Phillipian jailer.

How in the world do they get 2 different gospels/salvation out of those 2 accounts?

Mike