[Terriergal]

hmmmm.... I thought he was one of the 'good guys'?

[blackie]

I say to Rick:

Matthew 7:1-3 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)
Public Domain

Matthew 7
1Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

3And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

[Godebert]

Now he wants to use his growing influence - and wealth - for an ambitious global attack on poverty, AIDS, illiteracy and disease.

He's concerned about AIDS but doesn't mention abortion? Is this guy a Christian or a Hollywood elitist?

[P-Marlowe]

After reading this article over several times I cannot help but see that the contradictions in his statements are legion. First he claims he wants to take the church back to the 19th century, yet he keeps trying to change all the churches that are still "stuck in the past." If he wanted to take the church back to the 19th century he'd break up his own church and set up a couple of hundred neighborhood churches. The neighborhood church was the cornerstone of the 19th century church. If he admires it so much, what is he doing trying to remake Christianity in the model of his 21st century "campus"? I don't get it.

Next he chastises the modern church for not getting involved in "social action" like abolishing slavery and child labor, but he refuses to recognize that the fundamentalists he detests are the ones who are on the front lines in the war against Abortion, a war he does not appear to be all that concerned with.

Rather than focusing his efforts on his own church and problems he can actually solve with his church's influence, instead he seems to be interested in global concerns as if the wealth of his church is sufficient to solve problems that all the money in the world has been unable to solve up to the present. There are plenty of ministries that are doing that work. Rather than transforming his ministry into a "purpose driven" "World Vision" organization, he should simply encourage his flock to support World Vision.

I think Warren stepped on the wrong toes when he went after the fundamentalists. I number myself among them. I may not agree with all of them theologically or soteriologically, but I admire their zeal and their unwavering committment to the gospel of Christ.

/rant

[hellinahandcart]

I'm glad you posted this. Kind of explains why we were no longer really welcome at my husband's church after the new Purpose-Driven Preacher arrived.

He did drive us out. Came to visit us at our home and talked to us for nearly two hours, drawing things out of us. Then used the things we had confided in him against us. Now I see it was all just to get us to leave. He didn't want our type there. He wanted ameners and nothing-matterers in the pews.

We've been looking but I am beginning to despair now of ever finding a place to worship, that hasn't been contaminated with bad theology and bad music. It's not fair. I was baptised less than 4 years ago, and suddenly, just when I need it most, there's not a church around that I can stand to sit in for very long. Makes me want to stop looking and stop trying.

I might as well. Going to church breaks my heart now, whereas opening the Bible does not. Maybe I should just stick to the Book.

[DoNotDivide]

Sounds like the world's ecumenical leader is in the building.

[JCEccles]

Just what we need. An evangelical proponent of socialist liberation theology. This is the same dry hole Jummy Carter ended up at.

[metmom]

But, powerful as churches can be in working for the powerless, they can't succeed without governments and nongovernmental organizations, Warren said.

He really lost me here. I totally disagree with him. Christ will built HIS church and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it. We don't NEED the government's help.

[zbigreddogz]

The title of this is very misleading.

The man is right on in several areas:

A. He's right, Christianity shouldn't be associated with only one party or the other. While I feel that the Republican party is the most consistent with the teachings I find in the Bible, they aren't always right, and besides, saving souls always needs to be the first priority.

B. He's 100% right about poverty, AIDS, homlessness, orphans and the like. In my view, the government intervention is in large part the unpaid dues of the church, which should be leading more on these issues. Of course, there is a reverse effect, in that some of the reason the church isn't leading on these things like they should is because of the government, but there can be no doubt that far too often the Church has not lived up to it's responsibility on these things. Faith based initiative? Fine, but we can't wait for it, we need to start on it now.

[LiteKeeper]

Pulp Fiction

[Gumdrop]

Christians are among the top providers of charity in the country. I happen to be a Catholic. Where does this man get off saying that we are known for what we are against? He sounds like a microphone for Hollywood and the main-stream media.

[chesley]

As long as he wants to do these things through private, rather than public, means, I have no problem with it. But I willing to bet it doesn't go that way, 'cause we've been down this road beofre.

[Zionist Conspirator]

Not just personal salvation, but social action. Abolishing slavery. Ending child labor. Winning the right for women to vote.

Needless to say, it has been quite a while since I read anything in the "new testament," but I don't recall women's suffrage being a big topic. As a matter of fact, I don't recall anything about suffrage (or "democracy") at all.

[sauropod]

for review.

[Rocky]

I will avoid forming too strong an opinion about Rick Warren based on this article. That he groups Christian fundamentalists with Islamic fundamentalists is disturbing. He may be defining fundamentalism differently than most of us would, but he should be mindful of how his words will be received. If he is trying to sound inflammatory, he has succeeded.