Looking Behind the 'Purpose Driven' Sheep's Clothing

The facade is beginning to peel back from the so-called ministry of Southern California Pastor Rick Warren, author of "The Purpose Driven Church" and "The Purpose Driven Life." Unfortunately, many among his ample flock have far too much invested in him, both emotionally and otherwise, to admit their mistakes and cut their losses.

Moreover, he certainly faces no possibility of in-depth scrutiny from the "mainstream media," as his brand of "Christianity" poses little or no threat to their liberal social agenda. Yet to the degree that anyone at all questions Warren as anything less than authentic, his response is thoroughly telling as to his true character, as well as the nature of his "ministry."

Joseph Farah, editor-in-chief of the Internet news site, "World Net Daily," opened a can of worms by calling Warren to account over his fawning praise of the terrorist stronghold of Syria. While there, Warren lauded the brutish dictatorship as "peaceful," claiming that the Islamist government does not officially sanction "extremism of any kind."

When confronted by Farah, an American of Middle Eastern decent who knows too well the history of horror and tragedy faced by persecuted Christians in that region of the world, Warren immediately denied ever making such statements.

Subsequently, Farah offered as evidence a "YouTube" video from Saddleback Church, where Warren is pastor, inarguably proving Farah's statement. So Warren's church simply pulled the video from circulation and continued the denial, being unaware that a copy of the video file had been downloaded and is still in circulation. Warren's follow-up to this inconvenient circumstance is perhaps most telling of all.

In a concurrent set of moves, Warren sent a seemingly conciliatory e-mail to Farah while distributing another to his "flock," in which he characterized Farah's pursuit of the incident as nothing less than "doing Satan's job for him." Throughout this sorry episode, Farah's only error has been to suggest that Warren's disturbing behavior represents some new departure from consistency.

In fact, Warren is actually being entirely consistent. Whether his audience might be Farah himself, Syrian despot Bashar Assad or the Saddleback congregation, Warren tells each exactly what he believes they want to hear.

This pattern is the essence of what Warren is and what has made him so "successful" from a worldly perspective.

For those among his congregation who sincerely want to know the truth, the evidence is ample. Unfortunately, it always has been available, and any present "confusion" merely results from past decisions to ignore that evidence.

For example, his letter to the congregation decrying the "attack" and making his defense by invoking Scripture is barely four paragraphs long. Yet in those four paragraphs, he employs three different "translations" of the Bible. Why, it must be asked, does he not trust any single translation to convey God's message to humanity?

Could it be that he has his own message and agenda to advance, and that he has found it very convenient to utilize different wordings of different passages, not because they better convey God's purpose, but rather his own?

As Farah has refused to let this indefensible situation simply drop, Warren has responded by taking it to another realm, making personal attacks against Farah in an interview with the magazine, "Christianity Today." But once again, by so doing, Warren succeeds in revealing much more about himself than about his adversary.

Warren, who has not to date been known as any sort of standard bearer for Christian principle in the political arena, decries Farah (whose societal and moral views fall unambiguously on the right) and his ideological allies as part of a wrongful "political" encroachment on the faith.

In contrast, Warren's forays into the political realm prove, not surprisingly, to be decidedly leftist. At a recent conference on the African AIDS epidemic, Warren invited the very liberal Senator Barak Obama (D-Ill.) as a keynote speaker. He justified the inclusion of Obama, who avidly supports abortion and same-sex "marriage," on the grounds that Obama offered a worldly solution to ostensibly curb the spread of the disease through condom usage.

The morally ambiguous message conveyed by the advocacy of condoms, along with their inherent unreliability, make them nothing less than iconic to the abortion industry, which fully understands how much new business they generate. In the face of such pragmatism, one has to wonder what will be next. Perhaps Warren's church will sponsor a "designated driver's ministry" at every bar in its locale.

Appalling though Obama's inclusion in the conference may be, it is nonetheless entirely consistent with Warren's behavior from the beginning.

Leading a megachurch in the culturally disintegrating landscape of Southern California, Warren certainly knows that his prospects of maximizing the "flock" will be greatly enhanced as long as he shows proper deference to the real religion of the area, "political correctness."

In this, his Christian populism movement has proven to be far more palatable to the God-hating secularists of the surrounding communities than such stodgy, old-fashioned and "intolerant" notions as "Thou Shalt Not." And the Warren influence has been predictable wherever it can be found.

If other churches that abide in the Warren philosophy, such as Chicago's gargantuan "Willow Creek," were to truly uphold Christian values among their enormous congregations, they would certainly be a constant "thorn in the side" of their surrounding populace, acculturated into the modernism as those communities certainly are. Yet an amazing degree of compatibility and congeniality exists between the Warren Church model and the social structures of Chicago and Southern California.

The tradeoff between true Christian principle and acceptability to the locals is apparently worth the spiritual sacrifice it entails, with expanding parking lots, increasingly lavish facilities and, of course, fuller collection plates bearing witness. Meanwhile, such churches offer ever less of a worthwhile and much-needed alternative to the ailing world around them.

Ultimately, Warren gives conformist Christians, wearied from their ongoing battle with a world that is increasingly hostile to true Christian faith, an apparent "out" by offering a version that the modern world can find more acceptable while remaining in its present spiritual darkness.

Many among Warren's vast following have made the mistake, in light of his "purpose driven" ministering, of presuming, at the heart of the movement, a Christ-driven purpose. Yet as Warren's real character continues to be revealed, it is becoming apparent that members of that following are presuming too much.

(Christopher G. Adamo is a freelance writer and staff writer for the New Media Alliance. He lives in southeastern Wyoming and has been active in local and state politics for many years.)

For whatever it's worth, here are some comments about Rick Warren from a "Q&A" on Hunt's web site. The Q&A is addressed to both Dave Hunt and Tom McMahon (they're both on the radio for this ministry). TBC is "The Berean Call" -- the ministry's name.

Question: You and Tom both wrote good, factual articles in TBC and did ten radio programs about Rick Warren and The Purpose-Driven Life. Then, at his invitation, you [Dave] attended a pastors conference at Saddleback, and when you returned you seemed to have softened your position. As you know, Warren has had a column in the Ladies’ Home Journal for nearly a year. I have yet to find the gospel in any of them!

What he does present is pop psychology exactly like Robert Schuller, yet you say he has broken all ties with Schuller. Here is just one example from his March 2005 column: “Self-esteem still wobbly...? These five simple truths will show you that you don’t need to be perfect to be priceless....To truly love yourself, you need to know the five truths that form the basis of a healthy self-image: Accept yourself; Love yourself; Be true to yourself; Forgive yourself; Believe in yourself.”

This is typical of the non-sequiturs Warren offers. He promises five “truths” but gives five things to do, none of them a truth. This is pop psychology that even numerous secular psychologists and psychiatrists have refuted—and it contradicts the clear teaching of Scripture. Warren’s “accept...love...be true to...forgive...believe in yourself” blatantly opposes Christ’s “except a man deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me, he cannot be my disciple” (Matthew 16:24; Mark 8:34; Luke 9:23, etc.).

How can you say Warren loves the Lord and has a passion for souls when his actions do not support such a claim? I think many people have been confused by your apparent change from criticizing Rick Warren to apparently supporting him.

Answer: Thank you for your concern. Hearing Rick in person and talking with him face to face gave me a different opinion from the one I had formed by reading his books and watching him on video. I would still say that he is a sincere Christian who genuinely desires the salvation of souls. That he so seldom, and then usually only obliquely, presents the gospel is an inexcusable contradiction—but that can be said of many Christian leaders. Joel Osteen has built the largest church in America (30,000 each weekend) by doing the same thing!

Rick’s defenders told me that he wanted to gain the attention and trust of Journal readers before giving them the gospel—but he hasn’t done so. [See Q&A Apr. ’05.] Instead, as you say, he has given them the lies of pop psychology—again inexcusable. He can’t be that ignorant-—certainly not after reading the Bible for years. I had hoped through personal contact with Rick to help him. That opportunity seems to have passed. His huge success makes any admission of error increasingly difficult.

Rick is not alone in the promotion of psychology’s deadly selfisms. They are now common fare in the church. Nor is he alone (and perhaps not the worst) in partnering with Roman Catholics and promoting AA’s occult 12 Steps. That does not excuse Rick. But shouldn’t we question the commitment to Christ and the gospel on the part of Billy Graham, Chuck Colson, and Bill Bright (all three praised Sir John Marks Templeton and his prize for progress toward the Antichrist’s world religion and failed to give the gospel to the vast and needy audiences when they accepted that prize), J.I. Packer and every other signatory to ECT, Josh McDowell, David Jeremiah, James Dobson, and every Christian psychologist, and all who accept and promote their lies? Sadly, Rick is merely a reflection of the church of today.

I am not excusing Rick Warren. I believe he is a genuine brother who has been led into compromise in order to reach a wider audience—but with what? He seems to be only part of a compromise of biblical truth that has enlisted Christian leaders as never before in history and is playing into Satan’s plan to produce a false church for Antichrist.

In his December 2005 article, Warren encouraged Journal readers to “offer a taste of God's peace to those who’ve lost hope...by following the example of Jesus.” It was good advice for Christians, but deadly deception for unsaved readers. The Ladies’ Home Journal is one of the ten largest magazines in America with about 14.5 million readers. Millions of women who desperately need the gospel that will take them to heaven were instead treated to Warren’s P.E.A.C.E. plan to improve life on earth: “Plant faith communities [any ‘faith’ will do whose adherents are willing to follow the plan]; Equip leaders [for earthly secular tasks]; Assist the poor [for a better life on earth]; Care for the sick [but what about the soul?]; Educate the next generation [for this brief life].” We credit Rick and his wife, Kay, with having tender hearts for the physical needs of the poor, uneducated, and dying, and for good works that put many of us to shame. But we fault them for hiding the gospel from those who need it and who without it will perish for eternity!

Regards,
Star Traveler

You said -- "Mr. Hannegraff is a Godly man with a tough job. He has the
entire Bible memorized. No scandals. A good servant."

Well, there have been some well-covered-up scandals, of sorts. The Martin family isn't too happy with the Hanegraaff side of things. A lot of the staff there, from the Martin days quit in protest at what Hanegraaff was doing.

There are questions -- enough so that I stay away from promoting very much of Hanegraaff's stuff or messages or books or radio program. I'll only use anything that he has as a very last resort and if nothing else exists out there on some subject.

Martin's widow was very unhappy with things and Martin's daughter (and her husband) were not very complementary towards Hanegraaff either. I think a lot of that stuff (when it first came out) is buried now, probably in archives, somewhere. But, if you dug it all up now, it would not look good.

I could get into a big theology issue, in regards to Hanegraaff, but I won't. And that's enough for me to stay far away from him.

Regards,
Star Traveler

P.S. -- But even so, I would put Hanegraaff higher on my list of acceptable people (in terms of teaching and preaching the gospel) than Warren.

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.