Here A Rick, There A Rick, Everywhere A Rick, Rick
This guy really gets around. In the months of January and February Rick Warren went to speak with the world’s elite at the Davos World Economic Forum; he was the featured guest at the National Cathedral in Washington D.C.; additionally, he was on The Colbert Report and Hannity’s America.
The National Cathedral seems to be operated by an Episcopal congregation with teaching that encompasses all of the ills of liberal theology. For instance, they offer a “Cathedral Pilgrimage Program” where you can engage in a contemplative pilgrimage procession and centering prayers. Prior to their Sunday service, they always invite a notable speaker to participate in a forum. The forum is billed as “Exploring critical issues in the light of faith”.
During the forum, RW did some name dropping about being with the world elites and Tony Blair at Davos. He talked about how he told the global business leaders at Davos, “If you are going to be a global business leader, then you need to understand that the future of the world is not secularism, it’s religious pluralism.” He mentioned how Christianity and Islam are growing at rapid rates and “we’re gonna have to minister in a context where we gotta learn how to live together and get along and build bridges”.
RW talks about how the “church” can get things accomplished, such as cure global poverty or hunger, better than the government and business enterprises can. He says that “nothing compares to the distribution size of the church”. In the spirit of religious pluralism, he then lumps together the following: 600 million Buddhists, 800 million Hindus, 1 billion Muslims and 2.3 billion Christians. He says, “That means if you take people of faith out of the equation, then you rule out most of the world.”
RW is using the term “people of faith”, which includes Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims and all of Christianity, and interchanges it with the word “church”. RW continues the forum by saying that the “church” has the most manpower and many don’t realize all of the social services that the “church” provides. Additionally, RW states that the third item the “church” brings to the table is local credibility. He talks about his visits to a small village, where he finds that the people of the village trust their pastor, priest, rabbi or imam more than they trust any government official.
The moderator asked him to give a brief insight into how the mainline Christian denominations could incorporate some of RW’s vitality of his ministry. RW mentioned that he would love to see a reformation in the mainline churches and that they would thrive again with tremendous growth. (Note: This reformation is not the reformation that Biblical Thought stands for, but instead involves reconciliation between evangelicals and mainline denominations.) RW wants a reformation based upon deeds and not doctrine. Never mind the fact that right doctrine leads to right living, RW wants us to go all the way back to Rome before the reformation of Luther and others to a religion that would have us earn our way to heaven by deeds.
RW talked about how the “social gospel” separated the mainline churches and evangelicals about 100 years ago. He describes the “social gospel” as only needing to reform the social structures of society and we don’t need the personal faith in Jesus Christ. It’s about making the world a better place and not needing atonement and redemption for our sins. RW calls the separation between mainline churches and evangelicals tragic and emphasizes the need for reconciliation between the mainline and evangelical churches. RW wants an integration of social morality (racism, economic justice, poverty issues and equality) and personal morality (pornography, personal salvation, building strong families and faith in Christ). He says that we need reconciliation in a pluralistic world, where “we have many other religions vying for attention, Christians don’t need to be divided. We need to be on the same team, because we share a same savior.”
Let’s switch gears now and get into a separate RW appearance at a show called Hannity’s America on the Fox News channel. Sean Hannity interviewed RW after talking about heaven and announced that RW was going to make an appearance and tell everyone how to get to heaven. Here’s a brief transcription of part of the dialog,
Sean: One of the things that I want to ask you…You said something when you were speaking the other night that really struck me. You were talking about life being over in a very short period, but really our lives go on, we drop the body and our lives go on. So that raises the question about where we go when we drop the body. Do we over-identify with our thoughts? Are we really our thoughts? Are we really what’s in our minds or is there something deep within us? And what happens when we die?
RW: Well it’s two very important questions, first, the reason we are made in God’s image means that we’re made to last forever. This life is not all there is. We say, ‘You only go around once in life, so go it with gusto.’ It’s true you only go around once in life, but that’s not the end of life. When you die that’s gonna be the end of your body, but that’s not gonna be the end of you. So that means your going to spend more on that side of eternity than you do on this side. You get 60, 80 maybe 100 years at the most. Your gonna have trillions of years in eternity. This life is really preparation for the next. It’s the pre-school, it’s the warm-up act, it’s the dry run, it’s the dress rehearsal and God says, ‘I want you to practice on earth what you are going to do forever in heaven, if you know me.’
Sean: Based on your study of the Bible, what is heaven going to be like? What is hell going to be like? The bible says, ‘the eye hath not seen nor has it ever heard, nor has it entered into the hearts of men for those that love the truth.’
RW: That’s a great verse.
Sean: So describe what you think heaven is like and what you think hell would be like.
RW: Well, heaven’s going to be several things: first it’s going to be a reunion with those we love who know the Lord, second, it’s going to be rejoicing, third there’s going to be roles and responsibilities.
Sean: We have to work?
RW: We don’t like to work.
Sean: I thought it would be a vacation!
RW: Here’s the thing, the myth is that heaven is all white and clouds. Well it’s not. In the first place God created color and if this place is perfect and it’s so beautiful, why would heaven be so boring and all white? The second myth is that you’ll sit on a white cloud with angel wings and play a harp. To me that would be hell! I can’t think of anything more boring. Now you think of the most exciting thing you’ve done on earth and the sunsets and all the cool things here and you magnify that 1,000 times where there’s no brokenness. There’s no broken relationships, no sin, no sorrow. Heaven’s gonna be an unbelievable place and we will certainly not get bored there. In opposite, the bible says that hell is a place of torture, it’s a place of punishment, it’s a place where I choose. Actually, hell was not created for men. The bible says it was created for Satan and his angels.
Sean: Fallen angels
RW: Exactly, but if I choose…every day I get a choice. I could choose to go God’s way or I could choose to go my way and Satan’s way. If I walk out this door, I don’t have anybody to blame, it’s my choice.
Sean: And you think a lot of people will go that way.
RW: Oh I’m certain they do, because the bottom line is I want what I want when I want it. People ask me what is the greatest sin. The greatest sin is wanting to be God, pride, it’s pride. I want my own way. The way to be a follower of Jesus Christ is to say that ‘I give as much of myself as I understand to as much of Jesus Christ as I understand at that moment’ and then you keep growing in it.
Sean: Just promise me that there aren’t going to be any liberals in heaven, right?
RW: (Laughing)
Sean: Rick Warren, good to see you my friend.
I don’t know about you, but “giving as much of myself as I understand to as much of Jesus Christ as I understand” doesn’t mean much to me. This nonsense is not a good description on the requirements for obtaining eternal life.
My purpose in re-capping the dialog that RW had with the dean of the National Cathedral and Sean Hannity is to make the case that RW has taken one more step toward apostasy (if he’s not already there). The apostasy of RW is doctrinal and not moral, but it is apostasy none the less. He has pulled away from the preaching of the biblical gospel. Now he has lumped all of Christianity into one big mess, where you can gain atonement by becoming Jesus Christ (Eastern Orthodox). Or how about this quote from the Catholic Catechism to make your stomach turn:
Without a single sin to restrain her…she became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race” (494). “As ‘Mediatrix’ she did not lay aside her saving office, but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation” (969). Her “prayers will deliver our souls from death” (966).
RW now wants us to reconcile with the Roman Catholics and pray to the Mediatrix. This is nothing more than a device of Satan and RW is being manipulated by Satan himself (John 8:44). Furthermore, he wants us to stand arm in arm with the Episcopalians that confirm openly gay bishops and whose leader, Rowan Williams Archbishop of Canterbury, wants the United Kingdom to incorporate Sharia law into the law of the land.
RW began pulling away from sound biblical doctrine almost 30 years ago when he started Saddleback. His whole philosophy for starting his church was to ask the unbelieving heathen their opinions on their likes and dislikes of churches. RW continually tells the story about how he went door-to-door and gathered the opinions of those in his community. He should have never done this, there is no light there! (Job 38:2) Isaiah 8:20 says that the people that RW consulted “have no dawn”. They do not have the knowledge of righteousness. RW only pooled the ignorance of those within his community. The continuance of false teaching continues to this day as RW preaches a contrary gospel message (Galatians 1:8-9). His main message is to tell everyone about how God loves them and there is nothing anyone can do to make God love them more or love them less. This results in trampling the doctrine of regeneration and justification. The latest bus stop on RW’s journey to universalism is to announce to the entire world that “the future is about religious pluralism”. The next bus that RW takes may lead to mysticism or outright humanism. Who knows, he may even take Arminianism to the logical conclusion of Open Theism. He may start believing all of the good press written about him and then declare that he doesn’t need special revelation and instead offer his own thoughts or feelings as the equivalent of Scripture.
Keep watch, because the next big undertaking of the Purpose Driven Pope is to make the City of New York into a Purpose Driven city. He has plans to train people via seminars in April of this year, in all 5 boroughs of NYC, in order to launch the 40 Days of Purpose campaign in the fall of this year. Poor NYC, they were the brunt of terrorist attacks in 2001 and now they must endure a well-oiled Purpose-Driven propaganda campaign. Lord Help Them!
27 Comments, Comment or Ping
agogley
It will be interesting to see where he ends up (theologically speaking). I can speak first hand to the ill effects of the seeker church and its theology.
Feb 24th, 2008
Bob
Its no suprise that Faux News’ Hannity (or Insannity) is a fan. Rick Warren is not only paving the way for mass apostasy but also helping to brainwash the dumbed down seeker church attendees into accepting a global empire in the name of fighting hunger, poverty, disease, terrorism, etc. So Warren is not only damaging the church as such but also working with the globalist elites to end our soverignty and quell the public’s dissent. It has now hit the mainstream that hireling preachers are becoming shills for the federal government in the name of stopping “terrorism”. They are being trained to convince their sheep to give up their second amendment right in the name of submitting to (the often taken our of context) Romans 13. The news clip below illustrates where we’re heading by the admission of hirelings that they’ve been recruited to convince others to submit to martial law. Rick Warren is just the tip of the iceberg:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDle-SWsyio
Feb 24th, 2008
agogley
Bob:
Sean Hannity is a declared Catholic. That’s why it’s no surprise to see him with Rick Warren. The rest of your post sound like a bunch of conspiracist nonsense. There is no “elite” group of people trying to erode the soveriegnty of the U.S. What you have is the continuing ignorance of the masses who desire international support and approval. It is a natural result of sin, humanism, and rationalist thinking not some secret conspiracy.
Feb 25th, 2008
Stacie H
I am to irritated with Rick Warren to contribute my own words.
Proverbs 18:2
A fool does not delight in understanding
But only in revealing his own mind.
Proverbs 18:7
A fool’s mouth is his ruin,
And his lips are the snare of his soul.
Can someone make a shirt with the Colors of the Book The Purpose Driven Life and instead of the Tree Put a Bible and then put The Grace Driven Life? Or would we be sued? He is a “Global Strategist” along with being ” America’s most influential spiritual leader” (Oh Joyous Day!) which I’m sure has helped fund him a top notch set of lawyers…
Feb 25th, 2008
Fusion!
Very sad to see that so many people have bought into this man’s ideas. The lastes issue of Rev. magazine (yep it’s called Rev.) has a picture of a church on an ocean headed towards a galcier and asks “Is this the state of the church?” Very sad that the magazine itself is probably contributing! I would hope that we in the Reformed Camp will respond with a Biblical view of social justice (and there is one: ask people like Tim Keller) and respond with the ful force of scripture. I’m praying that many more godly people rise up and start declaring what the Word of God really has to say.
Feb 26th, 2008
Bob
“Sean Hannity is a declared Catholic.”
Yes indeed he is and I agree that this partially explains his agreement with Warren’s outlook.
(i) “The rest of your post sound like a bunch of conspiracist nonsense.”
(ii) “There is no “elite” group of people trying to erode the soveriegnty of the U.S.”
I don’t quite understand why in (i) you would write off everything I said with a simple catch phrase. You say that it “sounds” like “a bunch of conspiracist nonsense” (hereafter CN). Is it safe to assume this means you don’t know with any certainty that it is what you call CN? Could you explain exactly what the criteria is for something to “sound” like CN to you?
First of all, I find it strange to see you use the word “conspiracist” or more broadly, conspiracy, in such a derogatory context. According to modern common usage, dictionaries generally define this word as follows:
“an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.”
Is it your position that such events have not and/or do not occur in human history? Does affirming the reality of such events result in CN? I assume not. If that were the case you would have to not believe in bank robberies, group killings, marital affairs, unjust wars, genocides, etc. These all happen to be by definition conspiracies.
You coupled the word conspiracy with the term “nonsense”. This implies that if an individual speaks of a conspiracy taking place, they are engaging in pointless/meaningless language or behavior.
Again, given the information above, I do not see how you could label my assertions of conspiracy as such. The only way you could label my assertions as being CN, or what should be called a non-actual conspiracy, is if you have some sort of evidence to the contrary**.
You did not, however, provide any evidence for statement (ii). I am actually quite surprised that you made such a bold proposition regarding an issue such as this. I am sure you aware that to make a claim like (ii) it would require an awful lot of investigation. You would have to know, universally that is, that no such people exist. What troubles me most about such a comment is that the article we are commenting on refers to Warren meeting with the world’s elite. By definition, George Bush would be part of the elite. Vincente Fox would be another. Hillary Clinton as well. The article specifically mentions Tony Blair as being one of the persons Warren met with. In my estimation, Blair would fall under the category of an elite individual, would he not?:
“a group of persons exercising the major share of authority or influence within a larger group: the power elite of a major political party.”
“A group or class of persons or a member of such a group or class, enjoying superior intellectual, social, or economic status”
You have flat out denied that there are such individuals attempting to end U.S. sovereignty. That is just simply not true and you provided no sources to back up such a statement. Have you seriously researched these issues? If so, what sources have you gleaned your information from? Your alternative is that the North American Union (which I’m assuming you believe is a real issue) is simply the result of citizen desires. I do not see how this is in any way incompatible with my assertion that this is a result of the elite’s plan for globalism. The reason you gave for sinful citizens being the behind this movement could just as easily be applied to sinful men like Bush, Fox, and Paul Martin. If you want to know where you can find the information that debunks your assertion, the documents are sourced here. If you want something more immediate, look into the articles that Dr. Corsi has done on the NAU on World Net Daily. You can also find relevant information at http://www.spp.gov.
The references I made to the elite are nothing new. Have you read Schaeffer’s How Should We Then Live? His last chapter deals with what he calls the “new elite” and what their worldview and plans for the masses are. Yes, he also gets into the reasons the masses will accept their adgenda (which I agree with) but under your criteria it would seem that Schaeffer was peddling “conspiracist nonsense” for saying the new elite is planning evil things.
Dr. Bob himself, in an old prophecy conference he did in San Diego, voiced concern over the “oneworlders” being in bed with the seeker churches and these seeker churches playing a role in globalization.
All I’m saying is that elites exist (you see them on TV everyday), they do want and plan to end our sovereignty, and I agree with Dr. Bob and Francis Schaeffer that the seeker churches, with all their influence and global tendencies, will play a big role in getting the dumbed down masses to go along with it.
** Furthermore, given an Augustinian view of history, it is not surprising that conspiracies can and do happen. See this article for clarification.
Feb 26th, 2008
Bob
Agogley:
I had a number of hyperlinks included in my response but they did not come out when I posted above. Here are the links I included in my text:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conspiracy
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nonsense
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/elite
http://www.amazon.com/Late-Great-U-S-Coming-Merger/dp/0979045142/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1204021020&sr=8-1
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.search&keywords=north+american+union&authorId=82&search_WND.x=11&search_WND.y=7
http://www.spp.gov/
http://butler-harris.org/archives/247
Feb 26th, 2008
erica martinez
Tell me about it…..this guy is an alumni of my school (California Baptist University) in Riverside so he comes to speak. When he comes to speak they cancel classes to attend his special “chapel service” they don’t even make him speak during a normal Wednesday/Friday service. To make matters worse I tried to get Dr. Morey to speak there, and the “Dean of spiritual Life” told me that he would think about it but Dr. Morey has judged R.W. heart and talked bad about him so he does not think so. I emailed him a few times to bring up the issue again and I never heard from him again!! They LOVE this guy. It was so horrible sitting through his chapel service!
Feb 26th, 2008
Zenas
I am convinced this man is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. He will say “Lord, Lord” but I doubt it will be to any avail. I hope I am not standing there with him.
Feb 26th, 2008
agogley
Bob: “I don’t quite understand why in (i) you would write off everything I said with a simple catch phrase.”
Agogley: Because it’s nonsense. I didn’t think you needed a detailed explanation of the word.
Bob: “Is it safe to assume this means you don’t know with any certainty that it is what you call CN? Could you explain exactly what the criteria is for something to “sound” like CN to you?”
Agogley: Fine, Bob, have it your way. I was trying to give the benefit of the doubt and a chance to distance yourself from the North American Union conspiracy theory but since you’ve instead chosen to embrace the theory, I’ll dispense with the equivocation. It is, in fact, conspiracist nonsense.
Bob: “Is it your position that such events have not and/or do not occur in human history? Does affirming the reality of such events result in CN? I assume not. If that were the case you would have to not believe in bank robberies, group killings, marital affairs, unjust wars, genocides, etc. These all happen to be by definition conspiracies.”
Agogley: I expected the usual straw man arguments but this is one I haven’t heard yet. Yeah, because I don’t believe that a secret cabal composed of the world’s elite is planning the end of the United States as we know it, I must not believe in *any* conspiracy. Of course, unbeknowst to you I work for some of the “elite” government leaders and investigate conspiracies for a living.
Bob: “Again, given the information above, I do not see how you could label my assertions of conspiracy as such. The only way you could label my assertions as being CN, or what should be called a non-actual conspiracy, is if you have some sort of evidence to the contrary**. ”
Agogley: It isn’t up to me to prove you wrong. It’s up to you to prove your own statement. If you also told me there is gold at the end of a rainbow, I’d tell you that it’s nonsense. It’s up to you to prove such a statement and not up to me to prove a negative.
Bob: “You have flat out denied that there are such individuals attempting to end U.S. sovereignty. That is just simply not true and you provided no sources to back up such a statement.”
Agogley: You got it! And no, I’m not going to provide evidence to debunk such a preposterous notion.
Bob: If you want to know where you can find the information that debunks your assertion, the documents are sourced here. If you want something more immediate, look into the articles that Dr. Corsi has done on the NAU on World Net Daily. You can also find relevant information at http://www.spp.gov.
Agogley: You wrongly assume I don’t know anything about the issue. Dr. Corsi is a conspiracist (see definition at end of post). World Net Daily is not a reliable source of information and for every instance you post Dr. Corsi I can link ten sources debunking Dr. Corsi’s exxagerated conclusions. You also linked the SPP. Maybe you should actually read the website. It says “The cooperative efforts under the SPP, which can be found in detail at http://www.spp.gov, seek to make the United States, Canada and Mexico open to legitimate trade and closed to terrorism and crime. It does not change our courts or legislative processes and respects the sovereignty of the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The SPP in no way, shape or form considers the creation of a European Union-like structure or a common currency. The SPP does not attempt to modify our sovereignty or currency or change the American system of government designed by our Founding Fathers.”
Bob: “Have you read Schaeffer’s How Should We Then Live? His last chapter deals with what he calls the “new elite” and what their worldview and plans for the masses are. Yes, he also gets into the reasons the masses will accept their adgenda (which I agree with) but under your criteria it would seem that Schaeffer was peddling “conspiracist nonsense” for saying the new elite is planning evil things.”
Agogley: Coincidentally enough, I am presently reading the book. I am only in chapter 9 though and therefore, cannot specifically address the concepts presented by Schaeffer in Chapter 12. However, the overall theme of the book seems to be that wherever humanism is the root of society of government, the elite take control as a method of imposing order. I sincerely doubt that he says that the elite are secretly conspiring to take over the United States. Furthermore, you can have agreements and take actions without there being an agreement. For example, If I say that I think all houses should be painted red and you, after hearing or reading this, decide that you believe the same thing and then promote it on your own…that is not a conspiracy. That’s just two idiots simply working towards the same idiotic goal.
Bob: “All I’m saying is that elites exist (you see them on TV everyday), they do want and plan to end our sovereignty,”
AGogley: Really? They’ve said this? You have proof of this agreement?
I agree that there are elite people in society. Some, probably a minority, may actually have specific thoughts towards creating a singular government for the whole of the North American continent. Do these people meet? Perhaps. But most of the world’s elite are not intentionally trying to create some NAU. Do I think an NAU is possible? Sure? Because of some vast conspiracy? No. I simply forsee the effects of humanism. Humanism cannot provide meaning, morals, or values. Rationalists and humanist try to get there but always fall short. When they realize this, you see a total collapse of society. The ruling elite then impose authoritarian rule to effect order. Again, vast conspiracy? No. But you can forsee events as put into motion by sinful people following sinful desires.
Bob: “** Furthermore, given an Augustinian view of history, it is not surprising that conspiracies can and do happen. See this article for clarification”
Agogley: Augustine wasn’t talking about an ACTUAL conspiracy where two or more people meet together to accomplish a goal. Augustine was stating that ALL unregenerate are in a conspiracy against God because they all hate God and move towards that goal. Additionally, he indicated that demonic influence provided some unity in thought an actions between unregenerate of all nations and generations. This isn’t a conspiracy in the traditional sense, but rather an explanation for the similarities observed in unregenerate men. Obviously, people from different eras cannot have literally “conspired” against God since they never knew each other.
Definitions:
Conspiracist: one who believes in conspiracy theories.
Conspiracy Theory: A conspiracy theory usually attributes the ultimate cause of an event or chain of events (usually political, social, pop cultural or historical events), or the concealment of such causes from public knowledge, to a secret, and often deceptive plot by a covert alliance of powerful or influential people or organizations. Many conspiracy theories imply that major events in history have been dominated by conspirators who manipulate political happenings from behind the scenes.)
Feb 26th, 2008
V
Bob and Agogley – Have you seen Dr. Morey’s seminar called, “The Christian and Conspiracies”?
I checked it out before and Morey is saying the Christian shouldn’t be into that kinda thing. They have 3 products on it including a video/DVD
Peace,
V
Feb 26th, 2008
agogley
V:
As I write your initial, I’m reminded of the Sci-Fi miniseries I watched as a kid…
On to business: I am aware of the seminar (since I get the crusaders mailings) but haven’t purchased the materials yet (it’s on the list but not near the top). My understanding is exactly what you said, “Christians shouldn’t be into that kinda thing” which, of course, is entirely my point.
Feb 26th, 2008
Reformed Mama
Aw, what a surprise…Cal Baptist…who has also given us at least one Eastern Orthodox priest as a Prof! Shame on them!
Feb 26th, 2008
Fusion!
I might add that I have my own two cents on Mr. Warren and the similarities between him and an apostate Scholar names Bart D. Ehrman. Check it out here:
http://letmypeopleread.blogspot.com/2008/02/what-do-they-have-in-common.html
let me know what you think. It’s a little long.
Feb 27th, 2008
agogley
Fusion:
Some of the crique is exactly what I noticed when I was attending a seeker church. I brought the Bible with me and looked up the verses. I was shocked because the verses weren’t even close sometimes. It wasn’t that the sermon was necessarily wrong, but the quotes of Scripture weren’t accurate. Several translations were used, most frequently the looser versions. But even then, they verses had to be cutoff or ripped from their meaning. Then we would do Bible studies and discuss what God had revealed to us about the Scripture we read. I started to ask questions…”So each time we read the same verse we are going to find it means something different? How do I determine if that meaning is correct? Is it possible that there is only one meaning and the others are our own folly?”
My questions didn’t go over so well.
Feb 27th, 2008
Mike Morrow
Rick Warren and all these friendly seeker churches I believe is preparing for the One World Church.
Feb 29th, 2008
Denise
Rick Warren’s selling something—that’s why all the talk show appearances. I ain’t buy what he’s selling, though.
I was called “judgmental” and “critical” for telling one of the pastors at my former church that Rick Warren is a false teacher, that all that he touches is poisoned, and that he’s motivated by money.
The irony is that this same pastor started our meeting at church with a quote from Mormon business-growth guru, Steve Covey.
We’re no longer at that church.
I’m grateful for one thing: the more Warren flaps his jaw, the more his dark heart is revealed. Six months ago, it was far harder to enumerate why Warren was so heretical because his problem often was all that he did NOT say (no mention of repentance in PDL for example). Now, its easier b/c he’s getting more bold in his heresy.
Feb 29th, 2008
Thaddeus Williams
I’m curious with all the biblically in-tune criticisms leveled at Rick Warren here, how many of us defender of the faith have come anywhere near to motivating affluent oc Christians to give a rip about things like the AIDS crisis in Africa on the scale that Warren has? Believe me, I have my fair share of criticisms about the doctrinal wishy-washyness endemic to Saddleback church (not least of all the claim I heard from their pulpit that, and I quote, ‘God doesn’t care if you’re a Mormon or a Muslim, as long as you love Him.’…surely the God who desires to be worshipped in spirit and truth cares profoundly if you think He’s a mere exalted man or sanctioner of infidel slaying). But for all the important criticisms that can and should be made (and in a spirit of love), I wonder how many of us combine our contending for the faith with an honest prayerful look at our own hearts, asking whether we have heeded the repeated biblical call to social action, the frequent commands (not suggestions) to combat not only heresy but also oppression, injustice, and social corruption in a way that makes our supremely Just God more famous and glorified in the world. How bout we match every criticism we level, with a loving action that reflects something of God’s concern for the poor and oppressed. Just a thought, After all, just as orthopraxy without orthodoxy is heresy, so orthodoxy without orthopraxy is hypocrisy.
T. Williams
Apr 15th, 2008
Reformed Mama
Wow…that’s quite a statement…”God doesn’t care if you’re a Mormon…” I hadn’t heard that one!
Let us not forget that a Biblical world view given as a gift from God to His own whom He has Saved should produce righteous fruit (ie widow and orphan care, the sick, the jailed etc). This is why we work so hard here to bring to light false teachers, false doctrine etc. We pray God’s blessing to those who come here that their eyes would be opened and their hearts be made Scripturally healthy and that we may all be about the Fathers business.
Apr 16th, 2008
Travis
Well i think ww are in for a good show, the most excellent teacher Rick Warren iis going to be dishing out questions on faith to the Presidential nominees. Grab your pop corn and be prepared to weep and laugh.
Aug 14th, 2008
Travis
8PM Eastern
You Guys watching this? This should be interesting, A BLT and a Southern Baptist, getting questions thrown at them by an False teacher.
Aug 16th, 2008
Travis
Well Rick decided to misquote scripture on intelligence but doo not haave the exact quote….I looked through all different translations, NLT, Message, NIV etc. and not such scripture exisits, on intelligence in context of what rick said.
Anyone have the quote?
Also this quote
Here is another mis quote “to much is given much is required”
Luk 12:44 “Truly I say to you that he will put him in charge of all his possessions.
Luk 12:45 “But if that slave says in his heart, ‘My master will be a long time in coming,’ and begins to beat the slaves, {both} men and women, and to eat and drink and get drunk;
Luk 12:46 the master of that slave will come on a day when he does not expect {him} and at an hour he does not know, and will cut him in pieces, and assign him a place with the unbelievers.
Luk 12:47 “And that slave who knew his master’s will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, will receive many lashes,
Luk 12:48 but the one who did not know {it,} and committed deeds worthy of a flogging, will receive but few. From everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more.
Luk 12:49 “I have come to cast fire upon the earth; and how I wish it were already kindled!
Aug 16th, 2008
Stephen Macasil
Hi Travis,
I missed it. So what was he saying about intelligence?
Aug 16th, 2008
Travis
He made a comment about intelligence and said “scripture says” but I didnt get the quote because I was searching for the scripture but could not find the scripture any where.
Everything was very vegue as far as scripture and “worldview” goes, even though it was suppose to be about thier worldview, I dont know if they represent thier personal worldview.
Im searching for the quote
Aug 16th, 2008
Glen
I think that he is quoting Prov 12:15, I just can’t find the version. Here is a YouTube for it (at 2:45 into the clip).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsmAu1UbmPM&feature=related
I think this is also a very interesting position to take as a Christian. Last night Obama claimed that he is a Christian and a follower of Christ. With that in mind now watch Obama’s answer to this question.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NHG3_FoB24
Aug 17th, 2008
Jean Cauvin
Hello,
We all know the alternative name for Rick. I think we should denote the alternative since it conveys his theology and thus character.
I’m sure Morey has already used that name in private.
Jean Cauvin
Aug 17th, 2008
Sir Aaron
I think we should be careful when we judge a man’s character. These seeker types tend to be extremely sincere in their beliefs. Obviously, I agree he is sincerely wrong, but I’m not sure I can question the man’s character.
On Obama…Christian? Hah! I don’t think the abortion issue is complex from either a scientific or theological view. And considering his past statements which are extremely radical on abortion, I have serious doubts about this man’s faith. At least when it comes to faith in my God.
Aug 17th, 2008
Reply to “Here A Rick, There A Rick, Everywhere A Rick, Rick”