Posted on 07/26/2004 1:57:27 PM PDT by Lasher
Would like to know if there are any other Christians out there that have not swallowed Rick Warren's version of the Gospel. I left my "seeker-friendly" Church after much prayer and ponder, and it took several months to make the split. I still must speak with my former pastor about this, so until I do, I will not name my former Church. I have noticed that most who follow the "Purpose Driven" material are emotionally attached to it, much like true Christians are emotionally tied to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Worthy to keep in mind on this and other threads re Rick Warren as well as other issues:
Psalm 38:20
They also that render evil for good are mine adversaries; because I follow the thing that good is.
Proverbs 17:13
Whoso rewardeth evil for good, evil shall not depart from his house.
It doesn't appear to me taht you know much about glorifying God AT ALL.
BTW, you, as usual, don't seem to have a clue about me.
***BTW, you, as usual, don't seem to have a clue about me.****
I think RW has a better clue about you than you do.
How many copies has Piper sold?
Beats me. It is pretty popular among the young crowd anyway.
At Amazon:
PDL is #9
Piper's book is #3035
I am not surprised. Fad Christianity tends to beat out orthodox.
Brother, what's the difference between the Westminster Catechism's conception of the "purpose" of man, and the purposes that the PDL says we were created for?
1. You were planned for God's pleasure 2. You were formed for a family 3. You were created to become like Christ 4. You were were shaped for serving God 5. You were shaped for a misson (of evangelism)It almost seems to me as if the Westminster's Catechism's opening question is based of the same nucleus that the Purpose-Driven Life is - and the same basis that Piper's Desiring God (his magnum opus) draws from.
AMEN!
For the vast majority of people, Wassen is very readable. The same cannot be said concerning most of Piper's writings.
One should not readily discount as too simple the readable in favor of the more difficult. Being harder to read and understand is no virtue in and of itself.
I almost think that if Christs sermon on the Mout was printed for the first time, some of the posters here would claim that it was 'seeker friendly' and not true to the 'true faith'. The Sermon on the Mount is laid out is very simple and easy to understand words.
That's most assuredly not true.
I GUESS WE HAVE TO POST THIS AGAIN!
THIS IS ALL PART OF THE PDL,PDC MOVEMENT.
Fact= Carl Jungs personality profiling is being used
http://www.abrahamic-faith.com/James/personality-profiling.html
Warren is using Eastern Mysticism ie; Yoga Contemplative prayer
http://lighthousetrailsresearch.com/warrentwo.htm
Now, there you go again! Trying to be reasonable and Biblical.
You should know that's heresy on such a thread!
/sar
Too likely true about the Sermon On The Mount.
Sigh.
"PROVE TO ALL OF US . . . ."
I find Piper very readable. But, that is me I guess.
Perhaps the Puritans have conditioned me, but he seems much easier than Edwards, I will say that much...lol.
A wonderful post at post #47
of God's miraculous moves in hurricane devastations in FLA etc. is available at:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1376709/posts?page=47#47
Not sure why you pinged ~me~ to your post. Then again, I've read your posts, so I'm not really interested in finding out.
Thanks for the offer.
Thought maybe you could get a laugh out of the Benny HInn clip.
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.