Rick Warren opposes fundamentalism

I have been involved in this dialogue, discussion, and debate many, many, many times with leaders from both sides of the issue. My argument remains the same ... since the NT provides no prescription on how and when the purposes are to be carried out, there is no strong biblical argument against using seeker services as entry points for unbelievers. Every person I have debated on this subject agrees that there is nothing wrong or unbiblical with having church events planned specifically for the purpose of evangelism. So again it comes down to a preference on the how and when of fulfilling the purposes.

 

How thorough can you be in a 30 min. sermon once week on Sunday or even if they came to church each day? You would not even come close to teaching them what they need to know. Teaching as we know it is an American/European idea not what Jesus did. Jesus trained his diciples and sent them out two by two. He commanded them to make disciples. Know of any churches doing that?

 

Some pretty serious allegations. I hope you would have proof of this before making this kind of statement.

 

Peter Drucker's man-made dialectical machinery is a fundamental - foundational - part of the of the purpose-driven model. That's why corporations are interested. Drucker's systems have been used by major corporations for many years. They certainly don't mind if their employees get their ears tickled a little bit with PDL as long as it WORKS.

Interestingly enough, Drucker is one of Rick Warren's mentors that he has not tried to distance himself from, as he has from Schuller, for example. He says he goes to Drucker every year for a 'checkup or update' (my paraphrase), and has for some time now.

 

Name some of those management theories.

 

I learned from the best, Zig Ziglar, back in the 1970s. He was the master. The rest are just shills.

 

What do you think they were doing when evangelizing and praying for boldness? Their marketing strategy was their life in Christ. But if one notices where Paul went he will see that Paul went to the marketplaces and busiest sea ports. He certainly did not share Christ in the desert where nobody resided. Jesus was around crowds at times. He was not a hermit.

 

Some pretty serious allegations. I hope you would have proof of this before making this kind of statement. </font>[/QUOTE]What does that tell us about the listener and critic?

 

Why is it a bad thing to use basic management principles? Leadership carries many of the same basic principle regardless if its secular or sacred.

 

Just a humor break...

http://www.sacredsandwich.com/photo23.htm

 

A leader is one who has followers. You cannot lead without leadership skills. The sharpest critics are those who claim to be leaders but they have no followers.

 

A leader is one who has followers. You cannot lead without leadership skills. The sharpest critics are those who claim to be leaders but they have no followers. </font>[/QUOTE]I think Jesus forgot to tell the disciples and Paul that they needed management principles and leadership skills to preach the gospel. Just think how many more they would have got saved if they only knew the truth :rolleyes:

 

A leader is one who has followers. You cannot lead without leadership skills. The sharpest critics are those who claim to be leaders but they have no followers. </font>[/QUOTE]First, follow the Christ model of leadership: You cannot lead if you don't know how to follow. "The first shall be last...." Second, embody the Christ model of leadership: Servant leadership. Serve the people you lead, and it'll amaze you what they'll do for you.

Sometimes the sharpest critics are those that lead. Maybe some day I'll tell you about myself.

You also previously asked about those management theories; from PDC, page 50-51, Total Quality Management. Page 82, the inset talking about purpose: Identify the corporation's vision and mission statements. Pages 100-101, how to write a vision/mission statement. Page 108, inset talking about growing people with a process: Continuous Improvement, focusing on the process of a quality product rather than the product. Chapter 6 talks about personalizing the purposes of the church; known in some management circles as "internalizing the vision and mission." Smatterings of Business Process Reengineering throughout.

 

Oh, and why is it 'bad' to use basic management principles? It's not, per se; in fact, it's not a bad idea to study and see where you could improve yourself (continuous improvement again ).

The part that bothers me is where I see people take a management principle and support it with scripture, rather than use scripture as the principle. I know that sounds like I'm arguing the definition of "is", but please give it some consideration. The military, for example, is trying to run itself like a business. And while there are some fantastic business practices that the military should follow, especially in the area of acquisitions, the military's basic function precludes being able to run like a business.

Consider the first examples of Jesus as the leadership model; Luke 2:51 shows us that "He was subject unto them" (His parents). Jesus' first leadership example? Follow. Luke 2:52 gives us His second leadership example: learn and grow.

After that, the disciples start getting involved.

So my point is, when was the last time you saw a leadership book/guideline/dissertation that identified followership as the first step to leadership?

 

Rick Warren obviously doesn't oppose ca$hflow:

http://www.inplainsite.org/html/purpose_driven_pyromarketing.html

 

the whole process reminds me of "shining deer". you go out into deer territory and shine a flashlight or headlights - when a deer faces the light - they are blinded and can't move - hence the expression - deer in the headlights look. For the hunter - BLAM! - target falls and is dead. For the christian who has been targeted as the hunted - they are just as blinded, just as immoveable, and take just as deadly a fall. apathy and ignorance is not bliss - it's deadly.

 

There's nothing wrong with organization, management, or leadership in the church, of course. But the worldly 'machinery' we're talking about here is much more than that.

One of Rick Warren's mentors, Peter Drucker, is a 96 year old communitarian mastermind whose work is behind much of the organizational transformation taking place in the world today as well as much of the purpose-driven machinery. He is obviously pleased with the success of PDL and calls Rick Warren "the inventor of perpetual revival".

Some of the methods are talked about in this article here - a long article, I'm afraid, but note the first paragraph and the chart at the bottom for a broad overview of just how much transformation this 'system' is capable of:

PURPOSE-DRIVEN PROCESS

This pragmatic system works, both in the world and the church, and can even produce the "excellence" the world is so thirsty for these days (a fact which must make another Warren mentor, Robert Schuller, very happy as he said last night on Larry King Live, in response to a question regarding his position on gay marriage: "I am addicted to excellence, totally committed to excellence. That's where I'm coming from. It's a different position on this and any time there's a controversy, choose the interpretation that is more excellent").

Actually, this elaborate, and extraordinary, system of excellence and concensus would be a great thing in the church, I suppose, if it were only possible for men to save anybody.

 

I think I heard Rick Warren playing this song on a guitar?

They say the best things in life are free
But you can give them to the birds and bess
I want mon a hon ney, that's what I want
I want mon a hon ney, mon-ney
That's what I want

 

Perhaps Warren is the consummate con artist. :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

 

So you claim to know the man's heart? Just another empty statement in regards to Rick Warren.

[ January 25, 2006, 09:58 PM: Message edited by: blackbird ]