Posted on 03/14/2005 10:28:37 AM PST by blue-duncan
For all of you Rick Warren fans out there, did you happen to catch the interview with the Brian Nichols, ex-hostage Ashley Smith? She was reading "Purpose Driven Life" as part of her devotions and read part of chapter 33 to him and then asked him what he thought his purpose in life was. This was part of the discussion that convinced Nichols to give himself up. We should all have her boldness in the face of trials.
Bingo! They use a reference in the bible from Christ that he and his followers would be unpopular. Some of these folks take that to mean they need to be unpopular in order to fulfill the word.
I agree with you. Each of us started with milk before graduating to solid food and meat.
http://www.aomin.org/PDL.html
and here
http://www.menofhonorministry.org/MHO%20Discipleship%20files/ThePurposeDrivenLife.htm
Many churches are using Warren's work in place of the Bible - I've seen it's destruction first-hand.
I stink at making links clickable - but here are the URL's
Watch it Marlowe. You're treading on Holy Ground here. If you mention one particular Theological discourse, or its Revered Author by name, then your post is likely to get pulled. Not to be too specific, but the forbidden discourse was apparently written by some European Lawyer-turned-theologian around the mid 16th Century.
So lets have no comparisons between how some specific 16th Century Theological discourse might have worked to calm this guy as compared to Warren's populist NY Times Bestselling screed. OK?
Yes, and the Bible has been used, or more accurately misused over the centuries to cause first-hand destruction.
Regardless of one's opinion of Warren and the PDL, the point of this story remains that the book was used for good.
In that we should rejoice.
FWIW if you use no html in your post (just type it), the software will automatically make the URL a link.
>>Yes, and the Bible has been used, or more accurately misused over the centuries to cause first-hand destruction.<<
Agreed, which is why I approached Warren's work with caution. Upon further study of it, I came to the conclusion that he has a rather arrogant view of faith. Call it denominational differences, but it's dangerous for people to lap up one man's interpretation and loose theology without further study.
>>the point of this story remains that the book was used for good.<<
Initially, perhaps. But the true testimony will be if there was an honest conversion that took place because of the reading - a conversion that will bear fruit, or if it was just an emotional experience that will die in a couple of days.
Was it spiritual milk, or spiritual Parmalat?
I don't know that I've seen anyone here speculate that Nichols was "converted."
Ok, you're tied up with some maniac killer holding a gun to your head and he asks you to recommend a book that might calm his spirit. Other than the 1611KJV, what would be on your "approved" list of books to accomplish that feat?
>>"Conversations with God"<<
Ugh - I've seen that particualr piece of excrement do a world of damage as well. Talk about liberal theology - if it were any more to the left, there would have been no right-hand pages. I remember the author writing something to the effect of "God saying: I don't judge people based on how they live their lives - only if they love others with all their heart!"
Nor I. Sorry, I should have worded that better - "If it will facilitate in leading him to a point of conversion."
Hoever, it seemed that she suspected such a thing. She woman mentioned that perhaps Nichols needs to go to prison and spread the Gospel there. I submit that such a thing can't happen unless he himself is regenerated.
So - is the "good" that he stopped his spree for one brief moment, and had the clarity to turn himself in (at which point he will return to his former ways inside jail)? Or, is the "good" yet to come, meaning that in prison his transformation (if applicable) will be evident?
I don't think we know that. We may never know.
Then what were you referencing when you stated "that the book was used for good."?
That's what I'm trying to clarify.
Just very simply that it was used to diffuse the situation.
I went to the links. It appears the first link seems full of criticism without much in the way of scriptural back up. It looks to be circular in its attemtpt to make a point. The second appears to be more clear in its attempt to point out the authors problems. Even that author is quick not to discredit the whole book and in fact is almost encouraging the reading of it. Some of the arguments appear to be splitting of hairs. The example of Warren's use of the word "driven" seems to be much about nothing. There are some other points brought out that likely need clarification by Warren as to his intent in the book. However, the book in general is worded in a soft manner and there are many who prefer a hard edeged presentation on mans reason for being. In addition, we're all here to do one thing, but how we go about doing it could be vastly different. I think that's what Warren is trying to get to. He is giving the keys for a person to through prayer, study and thought find the ideal way to be of service to God and his kingdom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.