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

What does this have to do with Rick Warren and being purpose driven?

 

When Paul said that he was all things to all people, what did he mean?

He meant that apart from the offense of the Gospel itself, he left people no excuse to make for rejecting the Gospel. He kept the Law with the Jews so that they could not reject the Gospel on the basis of his not keeping the Law. He ate pork with the Greeks so they could not reject the Gospel on the excuse that Christians had weird dietary laws. And so forth.

It's been a while since I read The Purpose-Driven Church. How do the church growth people use this passage?

 

IMO,and preach the Word may have a different perspective,but what I have seen from the book and churches that have adopted this church *growth* philosophy is that they will do *whatever it takes* to reach a saddleback sam or whatever target group they see as their group to reach. Whatever is takes is a dangerous attempt on how to do church,since scripture should be the focus of all we do or teach.

They see this verse as a mandate to be whatever will make seekers more comfortable or make them feel right at home...forgive me if I am wrong,but since when did the church need to make lost people feel good????

[ November 08, 2002, 04:16 PM: Message edited by: Molly ]

 

There are five purposes of our lives.

1.) To worship God

2.) To fellowship with believers.

3.) To disciple Believers.

4.) To minister to others.

5.) to Evangelize the lost.

So what is the problem?

 

And....a few of you have asked me if I have actually ever read the book....now,I will ask you,have you? I mean,have you really READ it? Some of you did not even realize that teaching was a main emphasis of the book! Awww,come on.... That is the seeker sensitive view that diminishes great doctrines of the church like the doctrine of man,God,sin,etc. It brings church down to a level where we can all jive with it...And,it is unbiblical IMO.

 

Like I have stated before,some things in his book are okay and have some truth in there,that doesn't mean everything in the book is okay.

The problem is,we don't know Truth,so we can not discern false from true in so called christian books. We need more scripture so we can do this.

 

You say this as if it m menas they comprimise the gospel. As if they are telling people what amounts to tey don't the kind of salvation other churches are preaching, all they have to do is come to his church and enjoy themselves and they go to heaven. I just don't believe that is true.

I'm sorry I don't know what you see in the book, but it is obviouly what you want to see. This is nothing like what we are starting in opur church. The doctrines on who God is, sin, who man is are no differrent now, nor are they in our new members material we have just written up. They are very strict and conserative.

 

Why do we have to keep batting this topic around, it seems like at least once a week this comes up. No one so far has changed their minds on where they stand, and they aren't likey too either. It just causes a fuss everytime it comes up.

 

Katie,

I didn't bring it up,when it is,I will probably comment on it....it is an accepted way to *do* church,I just see many concerns.

About the doctrines I mentioned,if we hold true to the doctrines I mentioned,a church can be nice,it can be welcoming,warm and authentic,because that is how christians should be....but,seeker sensitive? Never can those 2 exist...sound doctrine can not match with seeker sensitive.

What happens is the view of making church appealing to the lost,the word is weakened,and dumbed down,and the holiness of God is not as important as it should be. The believers suffer because they are being taught how to *reach* others and not taught on living true to Holy scriptures....they are taught what is important is having your needs met.

This is not *my* argument...if you type in some of these issues on the Purpose driven church,you will se MANY conservative christian folks speaking their concerns as well. I've read many articles on it online and off.

You are right,people have their minds made up and what seems right to man has been accepted...whatever works is fine(pragmatism)...and the downgrade continues on.

 

God pity those pastors and Christian leaders whose main objective is the growth of their organizations and whose main concern is lest their "boats be rocked." -- J.C. Ryle

 

You have to love J.C Ryle. Such wisdom!

 

I did not say that you had been the one to bring it up, I can see that. I only said do we need to keep debating this as none of us are going to change theri mind, and it just casues problems evreytime.

Basically it comes down to nothing more then opinions. Your opinion is you don't like it, it seems becasue it(those in the program) seek to find the lost and tell them the gospel, in a manner different from what you are used to. Some people don't like anything that isn't old fashion(not necessarily biblical, just old and comfortable). Jesus and the apostles did a lot of seeking out the lost with the gospel. Somehow you asssume that this means people who do likewise are changing the gospel somehow.

 

Katie,with all due respect,it has nothing to do with how it's always been done or being old fashioned....It is a biblical issue to me. I see that people have different opinions,you are right about that. But,this is a fundamnetal section of the board,where I would think most should be like minded fundamentally on scripture. I guess I am suprised there are some who are *fundmamental* and support Rick Warren's church growth philosophy. Let's remember,Jesus said He would grow His church,I believe those words,so I need not rely on Mr. Warren's plans,schemes,or things that he thinks work. I will depend on scripture to be the test on what a church should be.

 

As one of the regular "defenders" of Rick Warren on this board, I will simply say no one has ever shown where Rick Warren has compromised the gospel in any fashion. Until that happens, all the opinions regarding his methods are simply that: OPINIONS. We will note them and move on. When someone can legitimately show where Saddleback has sacrificed in any way one of the fundamentals then we can talk. Until then ...

 

The same goes for those that think it is fine...give scriptural evidence that the early church was *seeker sensitive* please.....Until then.....

 

What this means is we don't have to do evangelisim, we don't have to share the gospel. We don't have to do anything to take the gospel out to a dying world. Well, someone should tell all those missionaries that.

I agree, I've asked several times to show where the gospel has been comprimised, and never get an answer. Apparently there is none. So far all I've seen is opinion with no scripture.

The entire N.T. shows them going out finding people and telling them about Jesus. And I am sure that if someone from the neighborhood came and said I want to hear what it is going on, they let them listen to the preaching, come in and worship. So do we just wait for them to want to hear the gospel, or do we find them(unbelievers) and bring them in as scripture tells us too(the parabale of the wedding feast no one showed for, they sent out to bring people in). Good grief, the gospel isn't just for christians, if it were none of us would be here.
Been waiting for those scripture for a month now.

 

Exactly,Katie,they went "out" to tell others about the gospel,they did not go out and invite friends to church,they told them about the gospel out side of *church*,so backwards to what most churches do today. We invite our lost friends to church and hope they like it,this is the way the world does church and is not like the early church.

If you think I am saying we should not share the gospel,you have misunderstood all of my posts. I believe God's way is for believers to go out ,share the gospel with those who need a saviour,they are saved and then we invite them to church. The church then remains pure and we see growth in a biblical way,by doing things God's way. I have stated all this before,but will again for the purpose of clarification,so that nothing I have said will be misunderstood.