Is Warren an ecumenicalist?

Keith, I appreciate very much your thoughtful response.

There is no question that there are really good things in the PDL book or that people have been saved reading PDL and/or through some other aspect of RW's ministry. That isn't the question. People have also been saved through Benny Hinn's ministry, or by watching Robert Tilton or Paul Crouch on TBN. I, myself, was saved by accidentally watching Jimmy Swaggart's program on TV many years ago, back when it was still a 15 minute program, including the music. Yet, through God's grace, today I reject much of the doctrine I heard him teach back then.

It's the Word of God that the Holy Spirit uses to save (Matthew 13), and His Word is just as powerful coming from Benny Hinn as it is from John MacArthur, provided it is not distorted or twisted by 'His High Holiness, Mr. Hinn'. The point is, all false and counterfeit teachers, to whatever degree they practice it, all use the Word and all present a good deal of His Truth. It's the small percentage of error that makes it what it is. The Mormon cult is a prime example of this.

I began investigating Warren in 2002, within a week of the release of his PDL book, after being confronted with the PD movement itself through old friends and classmates, church leaders who wanted to study the book and implement the program in their church (a sound, Biblical church). That first day a Google search found 5, count'em FIVE, documents about PD, and 2 or 3 of those were about the PDC (purpose-driven church book from the late 90's). Today, there are at least 5 books that unpack PDL and thousands upon thousands of well-researched articles that point out the errors and dangers. But in 2002-2003, it took me a whole year and over 4000 hours of hard research before I was able to arrive at a definite conclusion about it.

There is nothing radical about anything I posted, though I'm getting the feeling it may be radical around here these days. My original conclusions, in time, came to be shared by mainstream theologians and apologists across the board, and include names like R.C.Sproul, Albert Mohler, John MacArthur, Dave Hunt, Bob DeWaay, Gary Gilley, Vic Eliason, Jan Markell, Chuck Smith, Ligon Duncan, Adrian Rogers, and many others.

RW's movement, I'm sad to say, is one of the best, I think THE best, false movement there is, maybe even the best there ever has been. It's so close to the real thing that it is capable of deceiving even mature, long-time Believers. No question, there are many true Christians involved in this movement at the present time, just as there were many true Christians involved with the Promise Keepers movement at one time.

Indeed, RW affirms all of the essential Christian doctrines, or at least did at one time, as well as many of the mainstream non-essentials. But professions of doctrine are only that, professions. Professions, in themselves, do not prevent error or false teaching or prevent one from taking a wrong path and leading others down that path. Whether Warren is himself deceived, or deliberately misuses truth to support some of his controversial positions, noone I know of knows with any certainty. Personally, I suspect the former, but it really isn't that important. His cards have been played, and the rest of Christianity has no choice but to deal with them.

So, it is worth taking a good look, especially if you have family or friends who are involved and/or affected, or if you are a serious watchman of events, both religious and geopolitical, that are confronting us today, even as we speak. And certainly if you are responsible for a flock.

The sincerity of your question comes through loud and clear, and accordingly I will be happy to answer your questions one by one, the best I can. My time is very limited, so don't give up on me, I'll post ASAP, but it may be days or occasionally, a week or more. PD is a very complex, and very deep, approach to theology, in addition to being a very deep and complex organization. Rick Warren didn't put it together in one year - it took many years.

To discuss it with some degree of profitability takes time and does not lend itself well to a forum like this. It's simply too voluminous. So, out of necessity, I'll post an overview and some links to get you on the right trail, where you'll be able to read about and answer some of these things, deciding for yourself. It would be nice if all the readily available information about RW were accurate, but that's not the case. Unfortunately, there are a few of those who are RW bashers, who blast away without being able to back it up. I'll make sure you get going in the right direction and will be available to discuss things with you or answer questions along the way, however long this lasts.

So if you'll bear with me, I'll do my best to answer your questions, either personally, through my writings, or the writings of others, in order to save the time & space required by this format.

Which reminds me, I took this same approach with 'webdog' several years ago. But in the end, it wasn't worth the time as he seemed more interested in defending Warren than learning anything. Curiously, I found him to be intellectually dishonest, not interested in the truth of the matter, but only defending a position, willing to twist and turn facts rather than move forward to honest conclusions. And more emotionally attached to Warren than he should be, and apparently still is, resorting to name-calling, such as liar and hater.

So be it.

:saint:

 

First, if it walks like a duck, and quack likes a duck...

Second, I challenged every point you made, and every claim you made. It's intellectually dishonest to claim I didn't. You have clearly blasted his motives, his heart, and his approach without anything of substance. Pride is an ugly thing, and that is clearly seen by the lies I read about him. I have no special love for the man as some claim, I just get sick and tired of Christians attacking their own solely because they don't do things the way they think they should be done. He is the new poster child to attack, and if he did the things he was being attacked for, it would be a different story...but he's not. This is the same approach the religious leaders of Jesus' day took, and look at Christ's response to them.

 

First Question:

I am more familiar with the Purpose Driven Church(PDC), so if you do not mind shall we address it first? The overall message of the book is that too many churches dirft aimlessly going through programs, methods, or nothing. They just show up at the scheduled time and do what ever it is that they have done for years. As a evangelist and temporary/substitude preacher for years, I have witnessed this first hand. RW's PDC challenges us to think about how we do church. What do we gather for? Why do we do the things we do? What do we do that works? What do we do that doesn't? Why doesn't it work? There is absolutley nothing in the book that states what doctrine, worship style, music, or any other aspect of worship you should use. Those choices are left for the reader to discern through study of the scriptures.

I hear preachers in our denomination often preach on "not to foresake the assembling of yourselves" but have never heard anyone, other than myself, preach on why. So the first question is ;

"What is so wrong or dangerous about this?"


By the way, the last paragraph directed at webdog was uncalled for and irrelevent. Attacks like this by so many on the board just weaken the credability of the poster. How can I consider the advise of a brother or sister who can not conduct themselves in kindness on a web forum? I have no problem continuing in a public forum but if you would rather continue the discussion in private you can PM me and I will send you my email. Maybe that will reduce the temptation to lash out at anyone.

 

It would seem to me that a more straight forward way of answering this question is to first define what you mean by the term. Maybe we need to have different terms for the two types of ecumenicism that are discussed here.

 

Maybe so.

I'll try to define it if nobody else will. But why don't you give it a shot? Then at least we could respond directly to the OP. I know what it means to me, but have no idea what it means to others.

And my idea of it could be wrong.


:saint:

 

Nothing.

There are many good things and good ideas in both PDC and PDL. And from the movement at large.

?????????? Are you serious?

After being repeatedly called a liar, you thought this response, below, was harsh???

Whatever.

:jesus:

 

Nuff said, just drop it. Not interested.

 

The originator of the thread should define the terms. You can take it either way.

 

I tell you what - neither am I, pal.

Because I have no clue where you're coming from. I thought you were sincere.

I don't know what's happened to this place, but it's no place I want to be. It's getting worse, not better, since I left in '06. I thought I'd give it one more shot, but the answer is clear - this board has become a waste of time. Sad. I've had some great discussions here in the past, and learned a lot. But I guess that's all over, and will just accept it.

No hard feelings.

God Bless You All.

~~~

 

The Bible says.........
2 Corinthians 6:14
“Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?”

2 Corinthians 6:17
“Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean [thing]; and I will receive you,”

Ephesians 5:11
“And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove [them].”

So it comes down to:
(1) Who is an unbeliever?
(2) And what does it mean to be “yoked together” with them?

Although I have no trouble with the first question, some people here might have.
But the second question, is a little more difficult.
--------------------------------------------------
I once have a professional baseball player ask me(after a service), if his association with the team, was being yoked together with unbelievers?
(I didn’t give him “my” answer, because the Lord may have said something to him in the service about it: So I said that he should take it to the LORD in prayer; And if God told him to find another job, than be obedient.)

Another Christian friend, has told me, that he was convicted by the Lord, that his membership in the NRA, was “being unequally yoked together with unbelievers,” so he ended his membership.
--------------------------------------------------
Clearly, different people, will have different opinions about this:

But the bottom line, is being obedient to the Lord’s voice!

 

I always thought that being yoked with an unbeliever referred to being married to an unbeliever. However, I see from the following commentary by David Guzik that it has a broader interpretation.

ii. In what ways had the Corinthian Christians become unequally yoked together with unbelievers? How can we do this? Certainly by marrying an unbeliever and this is the most common way this principle is applied. “A very wise and very holy man was given his judgment on this point: ‘A man who is truly pious, marrying with an unconverted woman, will either draw back to perdition, or have a cross during life.’ The same may be said of a pious woman marrying an unconverted man. Such persons cannot say this petition of the Lord’s prayer, Lead us not into temptation. They plunge into it of their own accord.” (Clarke)

iii. But Paul means much more here than only marrying an unbeliever. It really applies to any environment where we let the world influence our thinking. When we are being conformed to this world and are not being transformed by the renewing of your mind (Romans 12:2), we are joining together with unbelievers in an ungodly way.

 

I don't understand your reasoning. Certainly Jesus came to bring a sword meaning that believers would be set against unbelieving members of their own families. Is that the point?

 

In any event the sword does not signify that Jesus supported war. That was my point.

 

Sorry for the late responses but we suffered another power outage.

I didn't intend it to be so. Please forgive me if you found it offensive. I would just like to discuss the points and drop the bickering.

From what i have read of RWs books he leaves the mechanics up to the church. The PDC does not give the mechanics or doctrines, it merely encourages one to seek God's will for your church and pursue it.

I believe the church service should be spirit led and not programmed. There is room in the PDC concept for this. In fact, it has challenged me to closer observe the Spirit's leading.

 

No argument there.