Did Jesus Turn Up The Heat OR Did Jesus Continually Bring The Heat?
Rick Warren was interviewed by Scott Hodge and Chris Elrod at a side session of the Exponential ’08 Conference. RW was asked for his reaction to the “Revealed Study” and a summary of his dialogue is below:
“You don’t have to not grow spiritual people. There are ways to do it…Purpose driven strategy is not a church growth strategy, it’s a spiritual maturity strategy. It’s bringing people closer and closer to Christ. First you get them to know Christ; then to love Christ, then to love Christ’s family, then to grow in Christ, then to serve Christ, then to share Christ. We have been doing this process for 28 years.”
“Spiritual maturity is not rocket science…if you look at the way Jesus did it. The biggest mistake that churches make is we think that sermons will produce spiritual maturity; they will not… If people don’t take notes, they are forgetting 95% of what they’re hearing within 72 hours. If you’re forgetting 95% of everything you’ve heard in your lifetime; that is not going to produce spiritual maturity. There are simple tools that Saddleback developed early on, that have been made fun of and laughed at, but have produced spiritual maturity. One of them was the outline…People take notes every week. A lot of people come and take notes…and then they review it.”
“Saddleback is built on a series of five covenants. Jesus had a process by which he took people from no faith in Christ to deep disciple. The very first public words of Jesus when he talks to his disciples was, ‘Come and see’…that’s the entry point for faith…come check us out. What’s the commitment level for ‘Come and see’, nothing. All that you have to do is show up. Go ahead and sit in the back, you don’t have to sacrifice anything, just show up, but Jesus never left them there and from ‘Come and see’ he took them through consistent steps and during his 3.5 years of ministry he’s turning up the heat. He starts saying, ‘You’re my disciple if” and he re-defines the commitment, ‘You’re my disciple if you love one another, You’re my disciple if you bear fruit, You’re my disciple if you take up your cross and follow me’ and he’s turning up the heat until at one point he says, ‘You’re my disciple if you eat my flesh and drink my blood’ and people go, “Eewah you gotta be kidding” and it says many people couldn’t understand that and many people walked away, because the saying was too hard. Jesus turns around to his disciples and said, “You guys gonna leave me too?” And they go, ‘Where we gonna go Lord? We got no place to go.’ Then right before the cross, he turns to them and says, ‘If you wanna follow me, you gotta take up your cross, deny yourself and follow me.’
“Now nobody in those days took up a cross unless the Romans were going to nail them to it. So he’s saying, ‘Come and die.’ Now would you agree that there is a huge difference in commitment between ‘Come and see’ and ‘Come and die’? Oh yeah! Now he doesn’t say ‘Come and die’ at the very first. He’s three years into a relationship with them and he’s moving them. There’s a big difference between ‘Come and see’ and ‘Eat my flesh and drink my blood’. T hat’s a whole different level of commitment. So churches have not understood that commitment is sequential, systematic and processed… Churches are usually one or the other. They’re usually a ‘Come and See’ church or a ‘Come and die’ church. Some of them bring a lot of ‘em in the front door and win them to Christ, but they don’t deepen them to spiritual maturity. Or there’s the ‘Come and die’ church that doesn’t reach anybody for Christ. And they’ve got their “frozen chosen” and they’re taking everybody deeper and deeper and deeper, but those people have ‘Koinonitis.’ They’re so close that nobody else can break into it.”
“What a church has to do is see that ‘Come and see’ to ‘Come and die’ is the whole spectrum. How do you get people from ‘Come and see’ to ‘Come and die’, I don’t have time to go into that, it’s a whole seminar. There are covenants, classes, commitments, cells and coaching. Jesus used one to group, one on one, one to large group and all of these have to be built into discipleship… There is a combination and you have to take into account that people learn in different ways… Most churches have not built in the different ways of learning into discipleship.”
First of all, three of the four gospels records that the Messiah started his ministry by preaching the gospel before he called his disciples (Matthew 4:17, Mark 1:15, Luke 4:14-44). The first preaching that Jesus Christ was involved in included a call to repentance. In the Gospel of John, Jesus first calls two disciples of John the Baptist. John the Baptist also preached repentance (Matthew 3:2). Therefore, repentance and the call to conversion was preached to at least two of the disciples (Andrew and Peter) prior to the start of Jesus’ earthly ministry.
RW claims that there is a time line in the teachings of Jesus where Jesus is “turning up the heat.” RW also claims that Jesus “redefines the commitment” level that he requires for discipleship. However, there is no time line presented in scripture as RW indicates, nor does Jesus redefine the commitment level.
Now let’s look at what it means to “come and die.” RW is right in saying that in the times of the Roman empire, taking up a cross meant that you were going to be nailed to it. The biblical teaching of denying oneself, taking up your cross and following Christ (Luke 9:23) has to do with a daily crucifixion of sinful desires and practices. Therefore, taking up your cross or coming to Jesus and dying, involves repentance from sin. The saying, “come and die” or “take up your cross and follow me” are just another way to teach the crowds and disciples about repentance from sin and the need for conversion. When Jesus taught that people must eat his flesh and drink his blood, he was teaching that “unless by a living faith you accept and assimilate the Christ, trusting in his sacrifice (broken body and shed blood) as the only ground of your salvation, you do not possess everlasting life” (New Testament Commentary of John, by William Hendriksen).
Although RW did not elaborate on the steps that he takes people through from “come and see” to “come and die”, the biblical mandate is that the new Christian must start with “come and die”. The new Christian must have a new relationship with his sin. We must count ourselves as dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus (Romans 6:11). Romans 6:7 says, “he who has died is freed from sin.” The new Christian will struggle with sin that remains, but will no longer struggle with sin reigning over him. If the power of sin has not been broken and someone is living under the dominion of sin as a way of life, then scripture tells us that person will not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-11).
Where are the Bereans? Why do people like Scott Hodge and Chris Elrod listen to RW and not search the scriptures to see if what he said is true? Let God be found true even though every man be found a liar! (Romans 3:4)
13 Comments, Comment or Ping
Stephen Macasil
Drew, this is the third or fourth article in a row in which you have thoroughly demonstrated that the chasm between RW’s teaching and the teaching revealed in Scripture is as wide as the gap between East and West (NBA Playoff season language!).
Thank you for your labor brother! Whenever you sit down to type, know that God will be glorified and His people will be blessed. Keep ‘em comin’ man!
May 14th, 2008
Frank
Excellent article, Brother Stephen. Rick Warren’s claim that our Lord went from a “come and see” invitation to a “come and die” one amounts to an accusation that our Lord used bait-and-switch salesmanship.
If our Lord had done that (it’s called lying), He couldn’t be our sinless Savior.
May 15th, 2008
Frank
Oops! I attributed the fine article to the wrong person. Sorry about that, Brother Drew.
May 15th, 2008
Drew Kerr
That’s a good point Frank. Bait and switch seems to be a good tactic for the church growth guys.
May 15th, 2008
Reformed Mama
That’s right Drew…I’m going to…gasp…pat you on the back (sorry Mr. Knuckle)! You wrote another excellent post my friend.
As I was telling you last night, I am so glad our church is not either of the types the Purpose-driven Pope (I think you coined that) puts forth. What a blessing to have a Biblically sound ekkelsia.
God’s grace Drew…
May 15th, 2008
Denise
I could hardly read this article. Not because of Drew (I’m glad he wrote it), but because of the subject.
My first hurdle: his lack of remedial grammar knowledge in speaking.
“You don’t have to not grow spiritual people.”
“And they go, ‘Where we gonna go Lord? We got no place to go.’ ”
Huh? Isn’t that a double negative? What is he trying to say? Someone please teach this guy to speak decent English!
My second hurdle: Man-centered foolish garbage. In Warren’s world:
YOU get people closer to Christ- I guess the Holy Spirit does not.
YOU get them to know Christ – I guess the Holy Spirit does not.
YOU get them to grow in Christ – I guess the Holy Spirit does not.
YOU get them to serve – I guess the Holy Spirit does not.
YOU deepen them spiritual – I guess the Holy Spirit does not.
YOU get the credit, God does not.
Seems to me Rick Warren doesn’t need the Holy Spirit in his “church”.
It is GOD Who is the ONLY One Who draws, convicts, keeps, and teaches HIS own (John 6). NOT Warren, or his minions, books, programs, strategies, processes, psycho-heresy nonsense. The Spirit of Truth shall draw HIS own into all Truth. A biblical church will have biblical shepherds to proclaim the Truth from Scripture. Scripture is what the Spirit of God uses to sanctify us and to know the Truth.
Warren and thus Saddleback learned well from Billy Graham: people can be saved not knowing of Jesus Christ. Although not hearing of Jesus Christ, they are walking in the light. http://www.saddlebackfamily.com/maturity/fullstory.asp?id=5534 Wow! This is contrary to Romans 10:9-10; John 8:24,58, John 14:1;Acts 4:12 for starters. HE has proclaimed Himself, His name, and HIS salvation, both in the OT and NT.
He signed the letter of common ground with the Muslims a few months ago, agreeing that Allah is God. This is rank heresy! Go here for examples of Warren’s universalism: http://www.crossroad.to/Excerpts/books/in-name-of-purpose/18-0ne-god-many-paths.htm#10 .
*SIDE NOTE*
Btw, the Exponential Conference is nothing but Emergent Church Movement garbage. You might want to note who all showed up to hold hands together. Tim Keller’s one of them. So are other major Emergent ecumenical leaders. http://www.exponentialconference.org/ I did some research on those guys. They are wolves in sheep’s clothing. Beware! While they will spout *some* truth, its mixed with error, so they are those who SECRETLY SNEAK IN among you, teaching heresy, not the pure truth of Scripture.
*Back to my hurdles to get through the piece on RW*
Another hurdle: Psychobabble
His “strategy” is code for manipulation to get the numbers, used to cause fear (where in the world does he get his stats anyway? And who determined they speak the truth?) and to impress….which leads to my next hurdle:
Pride
Every single time I ever read a Rick Warren interview or article, he always boasts about how his “church” (its NOT a church, its a social club to help God-haters feel cozy) does it right and has been doing it right for ____ years; how large his church is; how he and his wife “reverse tithe”; how many small groups his church has; etc.
Lastly:
I don’t know if Warren shared how he deals with “resisters” of his anti-biblical direction and method of PDL in his interview (that’s not a Happy Thought and would turn off his audience in a heartbeat), but here’s a snippet of this great pastor who has done it right for 28 years:
“When a human body is out of balance we call that disease…. Likewise, when the body of Christ becomes unbalanced, disease occurs…. Health will occur only when everything is brought back into balance. The task of church leadership is to discover and remove growth-restricting diseases and barriers so that natural, normal growth can occur.” http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/04/4-purpose-resisters.htm
May 15th, 2008
Chris Elrod
Drew
There is an old saying about assuming…in this case it fits you like a glove. You do not know me…have never met me…and was not in the room with Rick Warren before or after the interview. However, you make an assumption about what I believe…do not believe…and what I discern from my conversation with Rick Warren. The assumption is that I agree with every answer he gave…when in fact…I do not.
Over the course of three days Scott Hodge, Todd Rhoades and myself were granted access to many different types of church leaders…some well known such as Andy Stanley and Rick Warren…others not so much. We asked literally hundreds of questions and received hundreds of answers. Some of the answers I agreed with…some I did not…and still some I am trying to discern whether they jive with Scripture. However…at no time…have I ever stated that I agreed with every answer given…particularly when it came to the conversation with Rick Warren. I was grateful for the time he gave us…appreciated his candor in answering the questions…and was surprised that he put no parameters on the kind of questions we asked him (unlike some of the other guys we interviewed). However that does not mean that I was in agreement with any or all of his answers.
In future please do not make assumptions about me…or what I do or do not believe when it comes to Scripture. It just makes you look like…well…as the old saying about assuming goes…
Chris Elrod
May 15th, 2008
Stephen Macasil
Chris,
Did you agree with RW when he said the secret to church growth was cupping your hand under your armpit and squeezing out flatulance sounds?
Did you or will you publish what you did and did not agree with?
May 16th, 2008
Chris Elrod
Stephen
Obviously you were not in the room either during the interview. There had been several people sitting next to Rick Warren before the interview started. They were asked to move across from him by some of the Exponential leaders so as not to distract during the interview. Rick felt a little uncomfortable with him on one side of the table and fifty people on the other. He made a joke about feeling like a circus act…people watching him for entertainment…and the cupping the hand under his arm was part of that joke. It was a light moment…not a serious doctrinal statement..by a person that appeared to be a little nervous in the situation he was in. Having been in the room…and knowing what was taking place…I’d prefer to give him some grace..as well as points for a sense of humor. Some of the people we interviewed took themselves very seriously…
As for your second question…no. The Elders at my church that I’m accountable to know what I did and did not agree with concerning Rick Warren…as well as the flock that I shepherd. They are the only ones that need to know.
Chris Elrod
May 16th, 2008
Samuel Garcia
Good article,
A note about chronology that I thought was absent from Warren’s statements and your own. The only gospel that is probably truly choronological is John. So appealing to some sort of progressive call to a deeper commitment may be unfounded. Still, I would strongly affirm that Jesus differently depending on the circumstances and the individual and crowd he spoke to as is evident in many places (i.e., Samaritan woman for one). This, I think, has been a struggle for the church in our day.
You also said Drew, “Although RW did not elaborate on the steps that he takes people through from “come and see” to “come and die”, the biblical mandate is that the new Christian must start with “come and die”.”
Well of course! And I think RW would agree with you. What he’s saying though is that there is an elevation of commitment and one’s understanding of God once you have already become a Christian. I would still embrace RW as a godly brother in Christ, since honestly in the big scope of things, his teachings are not bad enough to even consider labeling heresy.
May 16th, 2008
Stephen Macasil
Chris,
As a former comedian and current pastor, I was hopeful that you would, to quote your own words, give me “some grace..as well as points for a sense of humor.” I was going for a “light moment.” Hopefully you’re the only one that missed it. I still think it was funny
But since you would rather take the straight up and down approach, let me ask you something. You said: “The Elders at my church that I’m accountable to know what I did and did not agree with concerning Rick Warren…as well as the flock that I shepherd. They are the only ones that need to know.”
Since Titus 1 clearly states that you (as a pastor) have a *particular* accountability that is beyond the scope of the supposed accountability that you have inferred in your response to my second question, please tell us how you can avoid the charge of having an active role as a heresy aggregator by violating the following:
“He [Chris Elrod] must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.” (v.9 ESV)
Do the Elders at your church (to whom you are accountable to) approve of heresy aggregators in their congregation or in their pulpit?
May 16th, 2008
agogley
My problem with RW, is that sometimes his words sound fine. But the actions don’t produce fruit.
May 18th, 2008
Jean Cauvin
Hello,
Via the fruits of doctrine Rick Warren relays, would we say he is on his way to hell or on his way to heaven?
Now I know that nobody knows ultimately. So we don’t have to go through that roller-coaster. However, the judgement of the saved is simply the affirmative assessement verses the negation of the unsaved via the same assessment. The analysis is the same for both so hypocrites can’t say we should not talk about those going to hell but those going to heaven is fine. It’s like what my grandma use to say, “don’t talk ill of the dead.”
Hopefully I eliminated the roller-coaster on this issue. Via the doctrines of Rick Warren, is he going to hell or is he a brother in Christ? Morey often says Christians can have pagan ideas and still be Christians. That’s not what I’m asking.
I’m asking if the doctrines construed by Rick Warren by definition reveal his spiritual standing an enemy with God and thus outside of the Christian faith?
Just curious as to what others on here think.
Jean Cauvin
May 18th, 2008
Reply to “Did Jesus Turn Up The Heat OR Did Jesus Continually Bring The Heat?”