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

Since by your own admission, you know little to nothing about Warren, I will take this statement as merely a reflection of your self-admitted lack of knowledge.</font>[/QUOTE]I wasn't referring to Warren. I was referring in general to the "seeker" type churches I have come into contact with and my knowledge of Willow Creek.

You may or may not be willing to defend these. If Warren doesn't make high use of entertainment-based ministry then feel free not to defend him for it.

 

The church's purpose is an extension of the individual's purpose which is an ancillary of God's purpose in creation which is demonstrated by the verses I posted to be, His glory.

Love of God is manifested when we exalt Him above all else- seek His glory. I am not certain what else you require. I don't arrive at such views lightly.

 

Read the latest Christianity Today article on Warren.

 

I read it...It is scary that he is influencing so many pastors in this direction....

[ November 13, 2002, 09:01 AM: Message edited by: Molly ]

 

It is funny to me that the purposes he has suppossedely(this is not spelled right) coined have always been in scripture,in fact my current church has had those on the front of the church bulletin for years now,even before Rick Warren's book came on the scene. We have glorifying God,preaching and teaching,discipling,evangelsim,and fellowship.I will add our way of doing evangelism is uch different than his ways,we have special evangelsitic meeting at times,we are equipped to go out and live holy lives so that the lost will see a difference in us. Our Sunday services are geared towards believers.

So,there is nothing new or unscriptural in those things.

But,he has that as his cover sheet and the organizational part of it appeals to many leaders in the church. I can see how that part might be helpful...not against that....

But,then he adds his own ideas of what church should be,what he feels works and develops those as the main emphasis of his church. This is where the problem lies. The seeker sensitive philosophy is one that I can not see any biblical support for. If anything,it diminishes the things I hold dear.

Another thing,in my current church,I have met family after family that have joined our congregation because their church was ebracing this concept. These people are not just church attenders. I have found they are students of the word,who are seeking to glorify God and leaving their church was not what they wanted to do. They see big problem with this. They could not stay in a church that was seeker sensitive to the point of that became the thrust of who they were and what they did.

So,have purposes,that's fine,but remian biblical in how you carry those out. That would be my warning to those reading. Caution...examine everything...

[ November 13, 2002, 09:03 AM: Message edited by: Molly ]

 

You paint with a broad and faulty paintbrush, but nonetheless, I would simply ask: is it wrong as a church to attempt to meet the needs of the people in your community? If there is a need for a class on drug abuse or parenting or financial training, what is wrong with the church offering solid advice on such matters from a biblical standpoint? If it serves as a bridge to share Jesus Christ with a lost person (who would probably never darken your church door otherwise), what is wrong with that approach?

One thing I can say for sure having been in this debate many times with many people arguing from a multitude of standpoints (most based on personal preference and few based upon Scripture): few people who oppose the style ministry Warren promotes would support the "Jesus style" ministry we find in the NT. Just a thought to ponder. Jesus was the most seeker-sensitive proclaimer of truth I have found.

And no I am not RW in disguise. I do not agree with everything Warren does or says. We do not even have a "seeker-sensitive" service. My whole point is that we must allow for differences without condemning those who disagree with us or somehow thinking that our preferences and methods are the only "biblical" or "spiritual" ones. It is a trap that plagued the religious Pharisees of Jesus' day and one that haunts many evangelicals today.

There is a reason most people attack Warren from a philosophy of ministry standpoint and not a biblical one. And I will let you figure out that reason for yourself.

 

Molly:

You reveal in these words that this issue is primarily one of preference and choice. It is not one of what is scriptural or unscriptural. You chose to worship in the type church you prefer (which is obviously not a Warren-type) and others make a different choice. Thank God Christian liberty allows such choices without compormising the gospel.

 

There is some clear distinctions between Willow Creek and the PDC model. And no entertainment-based ministry and a purpose-driven ministry are not the same. I know of no church in either of these movements that is based solely upon the goal to "entertain."

I agree with this. I have never suggested the ultimate purpose of the believer is to bring glory to God. I have simply stated that from a "why does the church exist" standpoint, that we can not restrict the purpose of the church to worship b/c the NT is clear of other purposes.

Again I agree. My whole point is that the Great Command is not the only mandate. The Great Command has a second part and the Great Commission is of equal validity. That being the case, we (the church) cannot limit our purpose to worship or exaltation of God.

And I hope by this statement you are not suggesting that those who disagree with your assessment arrive at their views lightly. I have been involved in ministries that were very supportive of Warren and those very critical of him. I have travelled the Arminian-Calvinism circuit and spent several years working out my own philosophy of ministry and theology. I have earned 2 Master's degrees (one in Systematics, one in Biblical Studies) and am in the final stage of completing a PhD in NT Language and Theology (as well as a minor in Preaching). So please don't patronize me by suggesting I have arrived at my views lightly

 

Then,SBC...if this is true,about your training and biblical background...I am wondering how you are okay with this concept of ministry?

The great comission states to also make disciples. How are disciples made? Through study of God precepts...knowing the depths of who God is through in depth study of His word. Does that happen at Saddleback? Can you give examples? Can I listen to some of his Sunday morning sermons somewhere to see what his teaching is really like on a normal Sunday to Sunday service?

 

But,it is simply *your opinion* that the gospel is "not" compromised...my opinion may be that it is. So,who decides who is right? How do we know? We have to line everything up with scripture and what the Bible teaches....please show where the early church was seeker sensitive,since this is just opinion....

 

I agree with this. I have never suggested the ultimate purpose of the believer is to bring glory to God. </font>[/QUOTE] This was a typo wasn't it? You do believe that the ultimate purpose of the believer is to bring glory to God, don't you?

Nope. I was responding to what I viewed as an insenuation by you that I drew my conclusions by simply following Piper rather than ensuring that he was in agreement with scripture.

BTW, I am not sure that I have drawn any fixed conclusions regarding Warren. I am wary because he is unorthodox in his methods but much of what I have read has seemed to be positive. I do believe that we should go out and reach the lost "where they are". At the same time, we should never be man focused nor so flexible as to overstep scriptural bounds. I don't know that Warren does this. I am fairly certain that Willow Creek and its spin-offs do.

When dealing with the lost, our biblical examples were very direct in their approach. The declaration of the gospel was the center piece of what they said. If there is one thing that I would object to about Warren's methods so far is that they seem less direct.

 

Can you not see the derogatory nature of some of your posts? This paragraph implies that someone who is biblically grounded and academic cannot have a philosophy of ministry with which you disagree. Perhaps I merely think differently than you. I encounter this same attitude among others who somehow in their finite minds believe that there methods of ministry are the only right ones and that someone who thinks differently is not as "spiritual" or "academic" as they are. Well I fly in the face of that perspective. Don't let me disappoint you, but someone can actually have a different perspective of ministry than you and bring just as much glory to God and be just as concerned about the truth of the Bible and be just as "spiritual" and "right" as you are.

I am sure you do not intend to be so derogatory but please examine your words more closely before posting them. This is not about IQ level or academic training. It is about recognizing God uses people very different than me to do greater works than I will ever see.

What an awesome God we serve. I am glad He does not limit Himself to our boxes.

To have claimed to have read Warren's book, you sure have missed a lot of what he says. You must have been reading with TULIP-colored glasses (sorry couldn't resist) .

Of course Warren is concerned with the indepth study of God's Word. I have already said he just spent 2 1/2 years going verse by verse through Romans. The goal of the Saddleback model is to make disciples. Their motto is to transform members into ministers.

I get this image that you think Saddleback is full of a bunch of shallow, we know nothing about the Bible, may be saved-may be lost, pagans who are unconcerned with spiritual growth.

You can order Warren's sermons off Pastors.com or other places. But to be honest with you, you are not the judge of whether Warren's sermons meet some type of standard of what is right and what is wrong. His goal in preaching is life change. He makes the truth of the Bible applicable to everyday life.

Warren owns more preaching books than any person I know. He is an avid student of preaching. And the great thing about Christian liberty is that I do not have to see eye to eye with him and at the same time recognize that God is bigger than me or him.

If someone wants to demonstrate how the gospel has been compromised at Saddleback, I will interact with those accusations. Up until this point, not one person has shown where and how Warren has compromised the gospel.

I agree. Line it up with Scripture.

Simple question: was Jesus seeker sensitive?

 

That was a typo. Sorry.

Warren makes it clear that the gospel is never to be compromised. Warren is very direct that we are sinners and need Jesus Christ in order to have a relationship with God. I am not sure what level of directness is needed beyond that fundamental fact.