Posted on 12/31/2006 8:41:18 AM PST by Gamecock
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?
It would be better to ask, could his motivation possibly be anything else?
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.)
To be accurate I said, "The Gospel does not change, the way it is presented does depending on the audience.
To the Jews Paul would use idioms from the Old Testament, the Law, and the prophets that would have meaning to them. At Athens, he used as his starting point the statues of Greek gods and the philosophy of the Stoics and Epicureans as starting points and illustrations. However, the gospel was the same and unvarnished truth that "all have sinned" and are in need of a savior, Christ the Lord.
...but go and do it! Don't just sit in church and change message, orthodoxy, doctrine, practice and into casual attire in order to appeal to the world. This doesn't convert the world...It just makes the church more worldly.
I do, however, have a problem with turning our church into a shopping mall with secular music and other trappings of the world, and so forth, and changing the Gospel message that leads to repentance and true salvation into a feel good message filled with pop-psychology (felt needs), which is no Gospel at all.
You seem to have trouble following the logical progression of your argument, so let me make it a little simpler for you. You made the comment, "There is such a thing as being "unequally yoked with unbelievers," and I do believe that Master Rick has mastered it". I simply asked the question, "when did the disciples, the twelve and the seventy, become "believers"?", because it seems that Jesus had more to do with unbelievers and appeared more comfortable with them, than He did with those with a vested interest in the religious status quo.
They ripped out the pews. Put in comfy chairs. Threw out the hymnals and replaced that with a wide screen and ONLY contemporary "worship" songs. The louder the better. The simpler - the more popular - same shallow line sung over and over again.
(I'm sure that's all in the Bible somewhere, right? Maybe in the Ur-Apocrypha? Or the "Wet Sea Scrolls" :)
Offhand, I'd say that the "Milton model" looks creepily similar to what's going on in these takeovers.
And check out the "Principles of NLP" (under "Aphorisms" heading) -- tell me if you could find these things out of place in a Warrenite assembly. (And note how it's described as "a technique rather than an organised religion"!)
The songs are referred to as "7 - 11 Songs". Repeat the same 7 words 11 times in a row.
It's just his too-cute-by-half way of saying "don't bother listening to me, your time would be more productively spent picking lint from between your toes."
It's literally THE reason for "separation of church and state"! The purpose of the clause in the 1st Amendment is to keep the state OUT of the church.
Ahhh, understood, thanks.
Bingo.
(And now I'm wondering if I missed something when I commented on your Y2K quip.)
Well isn't that special.
Pastors were told that the would be backed up by law enforcement in controlling uncooperative individuals and that they would even lead SWAT teams in attempting to quell resistance.
And that too!
Pastors were asked to make a pledge or an affirmation during the meeting to fulfil the roles ascribed to them by FEMA. They were given assurances that they would be covered by full compensation in the event of resisters injuring them during property seizures and round-ups.
Don Joe: [...If you have something to say, then spit it out...]
I've come to observe that the longer the
explanation, the less likely it is true.
Keeping away from strife is an honor for a man, But any fool will quarrel. (Proverbs 20:3)
So why do you continue to quarrel?
At first, I thought it was a jab at folks "taking this stuff seriously", but after I read your other post, I'm at a loss. Is it a joke (that went over my head)? Or do you really see some kind of pretext someone would try to use as a tie-in?
That sounded like old rehashed Y2K conspiracy stuff.
Well... since you mention it...
Shortly before Y2K, my wife's brother was required as part of his job to travel to a special "center", designed for operation if certain conditions were met. I think he used the term "end of the world"; not sure how much if any sarcasm he intended. He was NOT allowed to discuss it very much. All I know is that it was a very "high-level" operation, for a very select group of in-charge VIP types, to be swung into operation in times of severe crisis.
Since my wife's brother is a State Police officer, and his agency was the one operating this center, I tend to take it fairly seriously.
Not "quarreling"... "replying". Honest!
It is an honor to receive an honest reply. (Proverbs 24:26)
If you are saying that Matthew was not a believer at the time, please provide the biblical proof/documentation.
Please also provide documentation that his house was the same as before and that his friends, the publicans and the sinners were comfortable being there and that the Pharisees were the only uncomfortable ones.
News about Jesus and His many miracles had spread throughout the region. Large crowds followed Him. To have the desire to eat with Jesus does not mean that they were also comfortable with Him or His message.
John 6:65&66 says, "...This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him. From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him."
They liked the miracles, crowds, excitement and "full bellies"...but not the actual hard teachings and cross- carrying of a real disciple of Christ.
2 Corinthians 2:15&16 says, "For we are to God the aroma of Christ among those who are being saved and those who are perishing. To one we are the smell of death; to the other, the fragrance of life."
At best, the PD method is an ill-attempt to spread "carpet fresh" on the Gospel message to make it less death-smelly to those who are persihing in order to increase church numbers.
At worst, it is an outright attack on the Gospel message and the church.
Either way...the impact is the same and it is no good.
And once again, I'm still not interested in engaging you in that digression.
You seem to have trouble following the logical progression of your argument, so let me make it a little simpler for you. You made the comment, "There is such a thing as being "unequally yoked with unbelievers," and I do believe that Master Rick has mastered it". I simply asked the question, "when did the disciples, the twelve and the seventy, become "believers"?", because it seems that Jesus had more to do with unbelievers and appeared more comfortable with them, than He did with those with a vested interest in the religious status quo.
We're talking about the church in the beginning of the 21st century, NOT Israel before the creation of the church.
The Warrenite "everything is everything" aw-shucks stuff won't wash. Not with me, at least.
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.