Posted on 12/31/2006 8:41:18 AM PST by Gamecock
See Post #595 and consider the context.
Don Joe's quote: "After all, he's already on record as saying that people have to convert to Islam when in prison."
Actual quote: (Warren) said Nichols' conversion stemmed more from necessity – "You gotta convert to Islam if you're (going to survive) in a prison" – than belief.
Parenthesis added by me for clarity.
From post 595 in this thread:
After all, he's already on record as saying that people have to convert to Islam when in prison,What???? Somehow I missed that comment from Warren. If so (and I'm not doubting your truthfulness) then he is even more troubling that I thought, and I was already troubled by him.
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/local/article_1286106.php
Here's a snip from that link:In initial news reports, she failed to mention the methamphetamine she gave her captor. Also little publicized was Nichols' subsequent conversion to Islam. Despite Smith's admission, Warren said the drug had no effect on Nichols' decision to surrender himself. Instead, he said it was an example of how "God uses imperfect people." He said Nichols' conversion stemmed more from necessity – "You gotta convert to Islam if you're in a prison" – than belief.
Sounds like Warren was referring to the practice of self-preservation in that quote. Convert to islam or become a target.
I think some have forgotten Warren is a man like so many other men. He is not God and should not be treated as such, his chosen path is to speak the word of God, not the word of Warren and unfortunately it's become too little of the former and too much of the latter.
I say this from watching him preach as well as interviews he has given. One thing I respect about Billie Graham, he never allowed his celebrity to outshine the Word of God he was here to deliver.
Well of course that's what he was referring to.
Sounds like Warren was referring to the practice of self-preservation in that quote. Convert to islam or become a target.
I thought it was fairly obvious.
It's known, in the New Testament, as "Denying Christ", and as I recall, what goes hand-in-hand with that practice is, "If you deny me, I will deny you."
I think you are dealing with a Saddleback troll.
Scary, I clicked on the OCRegister link you gave here and up pops todays edition with a big add for Rick Warren and Purposely Driven Life book.... the man is literally everywhere, but appears especially in Orange Country.
Exactly!
It's approaching hilarity -- like knowing there was a bank robbery around the corner, knowing that the suspect is reported to be wearing the same clothing, same approx. height, features, etc., and then, when stopped by a cop, who asks if you were in the bank, replying, "Well, I won't say that I've never been in that bank" -- knowing full well that it would only increase suspicion to the redline.
The conclusion I'm drawing from scripter's dodges to your question is scripter must be a staffer, otherwise a simple no would suffice as an answer instead of the "artful dodge."
Quite a nutso tactic for some innocent kid who just happened to be walking down the street at that moment in time.
(And, since I always look out for the literal-minded, no, I am NOT comparing Warrenism to bank-robbery.)
The conclusion seems to be that he wants people to believe that he's an operative -- or, that he is, in fact, an operative, but is forbidden to "admit or deny" when questioned, and thus trying to worm his way out of it via cute word games.
I like your homepage.
I'm familiar with the New Testament, thanks. It's sad that in a prison environment weak Christians will do whatever it takes to survive at the time; unfortunately it's all too common.
Ah, the ol' quasi-ambiguity gambit. Interesting, to say the least
And it was done on purpose. Sorry, couldn't help it.
Thanks for the bonus round.
WERE you ever a staffer? And, if so, when did your staffer role terminate? (Last year? Last month? Last week? Last night? This morning?) And, if so, will your staffer role be restarted again? (And, if so, when? Next year, next month, next week, tonight, or perhaps right after you submit your reply?)
Excellent questions!
I was going to write about how I contacted Saddleback Central and told them I had to get terminated for a couple of hours, and then to re-instate me later today. But then I couldn't honestly keep the humor going.
To answer your first question above: I have never been a Warren staffer. The other questions don't apply. Great questions, though.
Your gamesmanship may be coy, but it does not serve you well, regardless of whether it's simply gamesmanship for gamesmanship's sake, or Really Bad Tradecraft.
I disagree as I'm just having fun on a slow day at work. But... perhaps I should continue: perhaps I'm interviewing with Saddleback and this is an interview test... Are they going to hire me tomorrow after the interview?
Oh, and yes, as a matter of fact, the CIA once did make vague overtures to recruit me. I declined.
Interesting. My friends thought I'd work for the CIA, but the CIA frowns on people with criminal records, even if they were found guilty of crimes they didn't commit. Sigh.
I checked your profile and read that you don't read your freepmail... so, I was going to freepmail you my answer a couple of posts ago for no reason other than you don't read your freepmail. BTW, I'm not interviewing with Saddleback and have no plans to interview with Saddleback at any time in the future.
I think Gamecock may know what I do for a living (if he remembers) and I can't see Warren using my consulting business.
Thanks thanks.
Yes, I've listened to Scripture for countless hours. PTL.
Sad, yes, very sad -- but not nearly as sad as having a putative "Minister of the Gospel" dismissing the practice as a big "so what?"
I'm familiar with the New Testament, thanks. It's sad that in a prison environment weak Christians will do whatever it takes to survive at the time; unfortunately it's all too common.
Thanks for your exhortation and testimony.
Some may take such words and feel smugly triumphant. They are foolish to take that perspective. Judgment begins with the house of God. And has begun. And will intensify.
Have worked hard applying that verse for more than 30 years. Probably more than 45 years as much as I had light to do at each stage.
Of course, many situations and folks--even spiritual leaders--sometimes especially spiritual leaders--make it difficult to apply as written--straightforwardly--which is criminal for them to make it difficult to impossible to apply, imho.
What I think is hilarious is reading posts similar to this one and Arizona Carolyn's. It demonstrates that some people may think exactly what they want to think when they only have partial information.
Please rest assured, if it helps, that I'm no Warren staffer and can't imagine that ever happening.
Frowns?
Perhaps. But, "frowns" is not equivalent to "refuses", in that Palace of Ambiguity. While I do not have a criminal record, I know of at least one (ahem) "former" operative who was recruited "smack dab in the middle of criminal activity." Seems that for certain tasks, "it takes a thief," so to speak. (In her case -- and I'm not violating any "national security" issues -- it apparently made for an ideal cold war era courier behind the Iron Curtain.)
I dunno. I have yet to hear the gospel preached clearly by Rick Warren which would result in a saving faith. And since I spend a LOT of time listening to him for someone halfway across the country, that's saying something. It should be something he does at every opportunity, but he doesn't.
He also criticizes those ministries that criticize him even though they also are bringing people to a saving faith. So is it right to criticize/judge people's teaching or not? If not, I would argue that that extends not only to religion but to politics as well and we certainly have no right to judge what these other 'christian' politicians (like John Kerry?) have to say.
I guess one of the ushers at Saddleback was complaining to Chris Rosebrough
listen here (part 1)
and here (part 2)
and here (part 3)
that it's VERY hard to get people to actually get involved. I guess it's that faith without works thing huh...
Either that or they realize that the kind of 'works' Rick Warren has in mind aren't the kind of 'works' James had in mind.
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.