The Purpose Driven Life by Rick Warren

Bob Colgan,

You are correct. This is my frustration as well. I provided direct quotes and examples of incorrect exegesis and Dr. Bob doesn't address it, nor does SBCbyGrace or Johnv. They simply defend Warren without discussing the details.

For the record - I am not saying Rick Warren is a heretic in any way. I do not believe he has impure motives because I don't see evidence of that. I do believe he is caught up in a major philosophical shift in evangelicalism that, utimately, will not help the church endure the doctrinal errors of these last days.

I would like to discuss the specific errors that I've found, but can't get any interest from some folks. And, that's fine. I'll simply visit some other threads and let it go.

 

That depends upon your definition of the word "heretic."
If you define the word to mean "a person who holds religious beliefs in conflict with the dogma of the Roman Catholic Church," then you definitely did not say that Rick Warren "is a heretic in any way." HOWEVER, if you define the word to mean "somebody who adheres to an opinion or belief that contradicts established religious teaching," then yes you did. One needs only to look at the statements made the link provided on the previous page to see that.
Hey: that is your opinion. I don't have a problem with that - I simply do not agree with you, and you did not convince me.

 

You obviously ignored the request to cease with the contumely.............

 

That depends upon your definition of the word "heretic."
If you define the word to mean "a person who holds religious beliefs in conflict with the dogma of the Roman Catholic Church," then you definitely did not say that Rick Warren "is a heretic in any way." HOWEVER, if you define the word to mean "somebody who adheres to an opinion or belief that contradicts established religious teaching," then yes you did. One needs only to look at the statements made the link provided on the previous page to see that.
Hey: that is your opinion. I don't have a problem with that - I simply do not agree with you, and you did not convince me. </font>[/QUOTE]A heretic is one who denies the foundational doctrines of Christianity. I do not have evidence that Rick Warren does that. I am accusing him of interpretation and hermeneutical errors, but not heresy. I've made this clear.

 

My doctrinal statement is based on the Word of God, I would appreciate it if you would refrain from calling it "libarel garbage" especially since its not real popular. Clearly you have no interest in discussing the actual topic we attempted to address.

 

Is the only clear critique of PDL that anyone here can articulate for themselves (not from an article) that Warren uses non-KJV scripture quotes? That is not a problem for me (though his use of the Message is).

I can come up with some specific things in PDL that I don't like but it's not enough to call the book a bad book. I've been waiting for some kind of specific criticism from someone here who has read the book but so far nothing except Warren uses MV's.

 

Bob, you have said this before. In 3 or 4 sentences, please describe what you mean by "the new evangelical movement" and how PDL supports that?

 

Marcia,

I answered this by showing one example of many where Warren misinterprets Matthew 16:25. Did you read that post?

 

Again, your opinion.
Speaking as a liberal, I see radical fundamentalism as a danger.

 

bjonson, I was talking to Bob C because he has made many general statements without explaining or giving examples from PDL.

As far as the Matt 16.25 comment, I found your post -- I think I had to go back to page 3 or 4 -- and it seems the problem was that Warren used The Message. I have already stated several times that that is one of my problems with PDL. I also believe that Warren sometimes uses scripture to back up what he says but the scripture he uses doesn't do that (I even noted these in the book). But this is the exception. He does say some good things.

What I was asking for was criticism from those making general statements besides
1. PDL quotes from MV's
2. PDL quotes from The Message

As I said, I have disagreements with some things Warren says but some of the posters here have made comments about PDL being horrible without any evidence or without even sounding like they read the book.

I do not think PDL is a great book. I would say that it has good parts in it and has some good things to say, but I have disagreement on other things he says (besides the fact that he uses The Message which is one of my bigger problems with the book).

 

Bob, yes, by your definition of fundamentalism, many here who are historic IFB will be labelled neo by your apparent preconceived notions.

Here is a quote from another of the threads on new-evangelicalism that I thought was telling
It is from Dan Davey,

 

Marcia,

Got it. Thank you for your reply. I agree. His books aren't "bad", they just aren't "great." There is so much out there that is solid in its exegesis that I don't know why we need Warren's PD books. No heresy there, but too many errors such as you acknowledged for me to comfortably recommend.

 

I too, read a few chapters of PDL and quite frankly, I hated it.

Bottom line, PDL is "ecumenical movement" book. right straight from the pill of hell, designed to decieve baby christians.

a better book to read:

The Next Step - By Jack T. Chick

Now, that's a good book to read.

 

Where can I find one of these Hell pills?

I think a few of my members might have taken it


I can see RW now sitting in his study thinking: "what can I do to deceive baby Christians .... hmmm .... I know, I will write a book on discovering your purpose in life ... that will deceive straight into Hell."

 

SBCbyGRACE,

While I agree that "BornBaptist"'s post was less than charitable, I do think it is interesting that if you click on Warren's video "welcome" on the Saddleback website, you'll hear this man give his version of an invitation, which, and correct me if I'm wrong, mentions nothing of repentance.

I asked a Warren supporter friend of mine about this and he replied "Warren believes in process evangelism". I assume this means you give "seekers" a little truth at a time and then reel them in.

Personally, if my friend is right, I find no support in scripture. The "responses" that we see in Acts were pretty immediate.

Anyway, check out Warren's "invitation" and let me know what you think.

Brian