A Sample of The Strange Teachings of Rick Warren

[donnA]

Did you read the article at http://www.thehoya.com/node/15919

Any truth in it?

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

"Rev. Rick Warren, the founder and leader of a nondenominational megachurch" is wrong. It is a SBC church.

"Warren, the senior pastor of the 100,000-person..." Wrong! It is not 100,000.

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

 

[David Lamb]

Did you read the article at http://www.thehoya.com/node/15919

Any truth in it?

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?

 

[rbell]

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.

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.

 

[gb93433]

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?

Same publisher and university who published the other article.

 

[gb93433]

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

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.

 

[gb93433]

People who spew about Warren by ripping his remarks and ministry (the greatest single-church missionary effort - Rwanda - in history) make me sick.

Why not grow up a bit. :BangHead:

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

 

[webdog]

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

 

[D28guy]

HisWordIsTruth

You said...

"Rick Warren describe Fundamentalist Christians as "those that stopped listening....it is an attitude that doesn't want to listen to anybody else."

I think that is very accurate unfortunately. There are problems on the liberal left of Christianity and there are problems on the fundamentalist right in Christianity. Neither of which uses the Bible as it's guide. The left uses whatever feels good at the time, while the right uses well this is what we've always done and what we have always believed (tradition). BOTH are incorrect if they do not line up with Scripture.

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....

"Let your brother be fully persuaded in His own mind, for to his own master he will stand or fall, and God will make him stand."

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

 

[D28guy]

webdog,

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

I dont think threads get locked until 30 pages.

Mike

 

[Revmitchell]

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

:laugh: :laugh:

HWIT was banned for the heresy of Millenium Exclusion.

 

[webdog]

webdog,



I dont think threads get locked until 30 pages.

Mike

It was closed this morning.

 

[D28guy]

RevMitchell,

"HWIT was banned for the heresy of Millenium Exclusion."

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

 

[webdog]

It wasn't this thread.

 

[Revmitchell]

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

HWIT has been banned several times. He first showed up on this board as JJump. At that time he and a large number of others was banned all at once for ME after being warned not to support it.

Then he registered again as Seekinghistruth. Again he instigated discussions with elements of ME as he did this time.

Saying that Acts 16 is speaking to a different type of salvation that Romans 10:9,10 is a core belief of ME. And there is no other way to go when trying to make that case other than ME.

 

[nunatak]

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

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.

 

[D28guy]

nunatak,

"You don't really sound like you know what you believe."

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.

"Or how you stand with respect to scripture.

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.

"Titles are not important, but I have no idea what a bapticostal is??

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"

"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."

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

 

[gb93433]

There are problems on the liberal left of Christianity and there are problems on the fundamentalist right in Christianity. Neither of which uses the Bible as it's guide.

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

 

[nunatak]

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

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.

 

[D28guy]

RevMitchell,

"Saying that Acts 16 is speaking to a different type of salvation that Romans 10:9,10 is a core belief of ME."

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

 

[Revmitchell]

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

They heretically believe the acts passage refers to eternal salvation and the romans passage refers to Millenial salvation. They hold to the idea that you can be a Christian today, deny Christ tomorrow and still be saved. However you will spend the millenium in hell or outer darkness(depending on which one you talk to) for being an unfaithful Christian.