Skip to comments.
This evangelist has a 'Purpose'(Rick Warren easy belivism alert)
USA Today ^
| July 21, 2003
| By Cathy Lynn Grossman,
Posted on 07/21/2003 7:31:49 PM PDT by anncoulteriscool
Edited on 04/13/2004 1:40:56 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
LAKE FOREST, Calif.
(Excerpt) Read more at usatoday.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Miscellaneous; US: California
KEYWORDS: evangelism; faith; purposedrivenlife; rickwarren
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-65 next last
*****I'm not going to get into a debate over the non-essentials. I won't try to change other denominations. Why be divisive?"****
Yes, attracting a crowd is more important than doctinal purity.
To: anncoulteriscool
"Yes, attracting a crowd is more important than doctinal purity."
I think we have to remember that "doctrine" is merely what we think we believe about God. "Doctrinal purity" then, is just that the other guy believes exactly what you do... nothing more, nothing less.
2
posted on
07/21/2003 7:39:16 PM PDT
by
bcoffey
To: bcoffey
Ah, yes, spoken like a NY Times editorialist.
To: anncoulteriscool
Doctrinal statement, please.
To: anncoulteriscool
"Ah, yes, spoken like a NY Times editorialist."
Why, you don't even know me!!!!
I'd be glad to discuss my comment with you, if you'd like. There are some important implications in these kinds of statements that we usually don't realize.
5
posted on
07/21/2003 7:42:54 PM PDT
by
bcoffey
To: Ruy Dias de Bivar; anncoulteriscool
Yeah, where did the guy go wrong?
(I can think of a few, but I'm not so sure that my impressions aren't just that: my impressions and preferences.)
6
posted on
07/21/2003 7:43:26 PM PDT
by
borkrules
To: anncoulteriscool
Yet Warren's pastor-training programs welcome Catholics, Methodists, Mormons, Jews and ordained women. "I'm not going to get into a debate over the non-essentials. I won't try to change other denominations. Mormons? Jews? Why not Muslims too? When you start including the cults and false or incomplete religions, you are the way to compromise...and that is not pleasing to our Lord.
To: anncoulteriscool
I highly reccommend "The Purpose Driven Life". He wants to attract a crowd to God, not himself.
8
posted on
07/21/2003 7:44:48 PM PDT
by
Ahban
To: LiteKeeper
That statement about Mormons and Jews being included at the full level is crap that needs be verified before being believed. I've had a lot of exposure to Warren's materials and he is not a feel-good-tolerant-anything-goes kind of preacher. As the article says, he is clear in his theology. I don't fault him for allowing other faiths to participate, but I'm quite sure they would disagree with what he teaches.
9
posted on
07/21/2003 7:51:28 PM PDT
by
mongrel
To: bcoffey
I think we have to remember that "doctrine" is merely what we think we believe about God. "Doctrinal purity" then, is just that the other guy believes exactly what you do... nothing more, nothing less. And you can substantiate these statements how? "Doctrine" is what we "merely" believe about God? "Doctrine" is the historically accepted body of teaching about the Faith.
Jhn 7:16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.
Jhn 7:17 If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or [whether] I speak of myself.
Act 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
Rom 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
1Ti 4:6 If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained.
2Ti 3:16 All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
I don't see anything is these verses which indicates "doctrine" is merely what we believe, and "doctrinal purity" is the other guy agreeing with us.
To: LiteKeeper
" And you can substantiate these statements how? "Doctrine" is what we "merely" believe about God? "Doctrine" is the historically accepted body of teaching about the Faith. "
Please explain the following:
- In the early 19th century, Christians used the Bible to justify slavery.
- In the 20th century, Christians used the Bible to justify believing in the inferiority of women.
- In the 21st century, Christians used the Bible to ... [fill in the blank]
Those doctrines were merely what people believed... proven wrong over time. Our "doctrines" today are subject to the same fallacies of human logic and insight that those were. (And remember, there are at least 1,200 distinct doctrinal statements out there defining Christian churches.)
Your turn! :)
11
posted on
07/21/2003 8:00:39 PM PDT
by
bcoffey
To: anncoulteriscool
President Bush and his wife, Laura, and advisers such as Karl Rove and Karen Hughes have read it. So have the chaplain for NASCAR, LPGA golfers and enough book shoppers to propel it to 23 weeks on The New York Times' advice best-seller list, several as No.1, and months on USA TODAY's Best Selling Books list. Any biblical teaching that makes the NYT best sellers list of 23 make me wonder what people are really getting out of it. Are they getting feel good doctrine, or are they getting the burden of sin lifted from their souls.
As Paul said in 2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
I don't know enough about this Church to make any intellengent comments about it, but it all sounds too easy.
IMHO
12
posted on
07/21/2003 8:03:44 PM PDT
by
Fzob
(Why does this tag line keep showing up?)
To: JZoback
(((( North to South ping )))))
13
posted on
07/21/2003 8:08:44 PM PDT
by
Fzob
(Why does this tag line keep showing up?)
To: LiteKeeper
"When you start including the cults and false or incomplete religions, you are the way to compromise...and that is not pleasing to our Lord."
I don't think he compromises. Yes, he says that he welcomes "Catholics, Methodists, Mormons, Jews and ordained women" to study in his training programs. But if they come, they are going to hear the basic principles of the SBC. It hardly sounds as though he's compromising on the essentials of the faith. Reread the article.
"All his senior staff sign on to the SBC's doctrines, such as the literal and infallible Bible and exclusion of women as senior pastors. [...] Warren does draw absolute lines theologically. It's Jesus or hell. "Every human being is created by God, not everyone is a child of God," he writes in Life."
14
posted on
07/21/2003 8:10:41 PM PDT
by
EdJay
To: EdJay
I agree regarding his theology - but I personally draw the line at training cultists...and that is what I think Mormonism is. I would never allow them into the training. It only feeds their wrongheadedness about being Christians - which they are not!
To: anncoulteriscool
I'm sorry, but if you ain't Robert Tilton, you ain't nothin'!
16
posted on
07/21/2003 8:21:17 PM PDT
by
gcruse
(http://gcruse.blogspot.com/)
To: Ahban
I highly reccommend "The Purpose Driven Life". He wants to attract a crowd to God, not himself. I, too, highly recommend THE PURPOSE DRIVEN LIFE. I don't, however, recommend his pastor-training program...if he deems the number of gods we believe in as "non-essential."
To: bcoffey
In the early 19th century, Christians used the Bible to justify slavery.
In the 20th century, Christians used the Bible to justify believing in the inferiority of women. And it was also Christians that led to the overturning of those beliefs...there is such a thing as Doctrine, and then there is the doctrine of men - false teachers who pervert the Word of God. But the essentials of the faith remain: Jesus Christ, Son of God, died and was raised from the dead to take away our sin, and offer us eternal life. Most of those "1200 distinct doctrinal statements" agree with that doctrine. There is only one Gospel - Paul said if any teach another Gospel he is not of us. There was, and is, tremendous doctrinal agreement - not 1200 "distinct" doctrinal statements.
To: EdJay
Warren does draw absolute lines theologically If he does, he didn't communicate it well in this article (or he was misquoted).
Even aside from whether or not Mormons, Jews, etc. are welcome in his training sessions, to indicate that he believes the line that divides to be "non-essential" is not a very theologically savvy thing to say (or fail to clarify).
To: LiteKeeper
Jesus ate with sinners... He gave his message to all. If Warren was in some way compromising scripture then he should be faulted, but only if he is changing the Bible to accommodate others.
20
posted on
07/21/2003 8:26:20 PM PDT
by
tutstar
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-65 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson