Should we bring unbelievers to Church?

SBC, at least no one can say you sidestep issues instead of dealing with them.

Further, one doesn't have to be the one with the most discernment to recognize the obvious loons like Warren. Thanks though.

 

at least no one can say you sidestep issues instead of dealing with them.

You know the Proverb -- you don't answer fools according to their own folly.

Name a real issue and I will deal with it as directly as you desire.

By the way you might want to rethink accusing someone of sidestepping an issue when you failed to answer a direct question in the previous post. Do you pastor?

 

SBC,It is funny you used to have the mindset that we do now....We were at one time(this was 6-7 years ago) open to Rick Warren's book and read it with great anticipation,only to be very concerned with the message and content with his book(PDC).

 

SBC, I have posted multiple times in this thread. You don't answer because you don't have an answer.

For example: you claim that 1 Cor. 14 is an example of unbelievers in the church and even a justification for "seeker" services.

It has already been pointed out that Paul is giving a hypothetical and even is discussing what the unbeliever would think as he observes the edification of believers, not some weak attempt to reach the lost.

I pastor in an unpaid position. Not that that has anything to do with this.

 

SBC,

You are a skilled debater. Unfortunately, as yet you have failed to back your arguments up with Scripture. Instead, you've mocked Molly based on allegations that she is merely parroting someone else's beliefs. You've completely failed to deal with DD's biblical arguments on "seekers." As best I can tell, your case is build on your inside info on Saddleback, MacArthur, Dever, etc. You'll have to forgive those of us for whom these experiential arguments ring hollow.

If you could provide one example from Scripture of an evangelistic sermon preached to an assembly of believers or even a command to preach an evangelistic message to an assembly of believers, I would be very grateful. Otherwise, it should not surprise you that some of us see things differently. Until then, I would request that you stop belittling those who don't have all your personal relationships with prominent people, and are forced to resort to Scripture instead.

 

Agreed, but I'm still going to invite family and friends to Church (although not in lieu of a personal witness).

HankD

 

I only used 1 Cor 14 to show that unbelievers were present in the gathering of believers. I did not use it as a justification for seeker services. As a matter of fact, I was very clear to show that most here agree that there is nothing wrong with having an evangelistic outreach event for the sole purpose of sharing the gospel with unbelievers. The only difference of opinion is the frequency and timing of such events (which again demonstrates inconsistency).

Actually it does explain a lot.

Are you saying you had no predispositions toward PDC before reading the book? If I remember your past posts correctly, you were already heavily influenced by MacArthur and others when reading the book.

You have also shown repeatedly that you mis-read the gist of the book. You made the common mistake Warren warns against and believed Warren was proposing a model of "how to do church" for all churches.

 

I won't presume to answer for SBC, and certainly have my hopefully respectful disagreements with him, but I think the princiople of preaching the whole counsel of God is sufficient warrant to preach an evangelistic message in church. It is certainly not precluded from the assembly of believers, because it reminds the believers once again of hte greatness of their salvation.

Out of all the arguments put forth, I would respectfully say this is among the weakest.

 

Arguments for what? I am not trying to legitimize seeker-services from Scripture. That is not my responsibility. It is the responsibility of those who denounce them (although we have seen they don't actually denounce them - only the frequency of them) to show they are unbiblical. There is no question the purpose of the church involves evangelism. The disagreement exists on how that is to take place. Actually I don't disagree -- the members of the body are to be the primary witnesses. So it is your responsibility to show how seeker-services are condemned in Scripture.

I have also answered your posts regarding Paul's emphasis on edification. So I am not sure what you are talking about.

Molly has said her thoughts are influenced by others. I only mock her insistence that those who differ from her are somehow less spiritual or concerned about discipleship.

I missed that conversation and thought Larry handled it well.

Seekers is merely a term that represents unsaved sinners. I have discussed this issue before.

I have never argued that we should be preaching primarily evangelistic sermons to an assembly of believers. My point from page one is that the preaching's purpose is to edify the believers and to present the gospel to unbelievers. Preaching the whole counsel of God involves the gospel.

The example of the apostles from Acts thru Paul always included the gospel.

Who is belittling and mocking now?

The only reason these names were even mentioned is b/c they were brought up in the discussion.

Lighten up. All is fun and games on BB.

 

Just so we all know, who are you addressing here?

 

SBC,

At the time,yes,we had been pretty familiar with John Mac and had read a number of his books. I would not say we were highly influenced at that time,we were very like minded in some areas of theology. When we read Rick Warren's book,we were beginning a new church(from a SBC former church) with a group and we were very open to learning and studying to help our church get off to a good start. We had no prethinking on him or his book at the time. We read it(my husband and I each separately)...when we talked about we had some things about it that we liked. Of course we agree with the purposes of the church....but as we begin to go back to the Word,we saw some problems....it was then that we read it again to see what exactly was bugging us. We saw many problems with is,maybe it stems back to our Calvinistic views or maybe we love God's Word so much,we appreciate seeing it exalted to the level it should be at. We felt and still do,that Rick Warren's teaching is superficial and does not promote a high view of God,His Holiness,and His view on sin. It is only from fearing the Lord that we can even try to *do* church biblically. We know we can not do it in our own strength,so we MUST depend and trust God's ways to be the best and right way. If we are trusting in man's ways,techniques,and strategies,we can easily pat ourselves on the back and say,look what Jesus has done. We must not be guilty of this.

So,(And I know you know this),we are not out to *get* Rick Warren,nor do we dismiss him as a christian and pastor,but we do disagree with his fundamental philosophy of ministry that says,whatever works we should do. It is a pragmatic view. We should not be targetting a certain people group,but instead to be ready to give an answer to anyone. We should not make a survey and see what non believers wish for church to be and then change to become more appealing to the lost,we must not make God's Word a catchy little feel good story and leave out sin,taking up our cross, and the disciplines of living godly. Being scriptural in every area of church life is key and God will grow His church His way.

This is why we(our church) does not adopt any new thing that comes along,we stick to the basics of scripture and preaching the Word. We love the lost and welcome them at anytime in our church,but are services are geared to believers. Is the gospel preached? Absolutely! The gospel is crucial to our teaching...it helps us grow and undertsnad what Christ has done for us and helps those who are not believers to see their sin.

One of the greatest things I have heard from new christian in our church is that a lady in our church had been counseling her and had told her to read a book in the Bible,she did this and realized she was not saved and wanted to be....this was not in a worship service,it was a member of our church doing what she was supossed to do,share Christ and help others see their need for a saviour. No one even knew this was going on. It didn't happen after the pastor said if you walk the aisle and pray this prayer,you can be saved....(our pastor would not say this,but I am talking about a typical SBC church.

 

Which is the whole point of the book. Whether you agree with how that is carried out does not matter. Warren does not care if you adopt his philosophy of ministry. That is not the point.

you think

And I still maintain you have not heard RW enough to make this assessment.

RW does not believe this and for you to continue to make this accusation is unwarranted.

And I respect that. But guess what? It does not make you any more correct or spiritual than a PDC model. And that is the great thing about God. He is bigger than our personal preferences.

 

SBC, has it ever occurred to you that maybe churches like Molly's really are more spiritual? Even Christ made a distinction in the spiritual level of the various churches in Revelation.

 

There are many very spiritually mature in our church,I must say. You would probably know of some of them....I am just always challenged by the wonderful families there!

But,it is not a contest and I sure do not claim to be where I need to be spiritually! I've got lots of growing to do....

But,like DD has stated,I do believe there are some who are more mature than others and churches,depending on the teaching there,will be more biblically solid and therefore mature.

 

And has it ever occurred to you that there are many Christians in all types of churches (PDC or not) that are more spiritual than you???

Again you miss the point.

Do you believe a "church" that is more "biblically solid and therefore mature" will be actively fulfilling the Great Commission?

 

Yes,because they obey(hopefully) all of God's Word and that would include those verses.

Molly

 

I know there are many Christians who are more spiritual than me. Thanks for bringing up irrelevant ideas to the discussion.

A "church" like Warren's with a flawed gospel presentation is not truly fulfilling the great commission. I don't know how that escapes you.

 

The way I see it is a group of believers,who have been fed spiritual food and have allowed His Word to grow them to maturity, will obey God's Word and make everything in His word of utmost importance. Yes,even the great commission...but remember the part of that that does say to make disciples....we do that,too.

Evangelism is importnant and taught(in my church)...it is just not what everything hangs on.

 

And I don't know how it escapes you that you do not get to determine what is flawed and what is not.

Of course you were supposed to let us know about a year ago how the gospel Warren preaches is flawed based on your firsthand research. Still waiting.

 

Molly: The way I see it

I think this is the key.

My whole point is that it seems that a church of spiritually mature Christians would be leading the way in fulfilling Christ's most central command.