Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Terriergal

"Did Paul allow the Judaizers to get away with what they believed then?"

No, but specifically, how is RW doing that? I am just not seeing it yet.


535 posted on 01/12/2006 11:54:29 AM PST by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 481 | View Replies ]


To: RobRoy
No, but specifically, how is RW doing that? I am just not seeing it yet.

Have you read PDL?

You will not find the Gospel accurately represented there... seriously. As a believer, your mind may fill in the gaps left by the writing...but leaving gaps isn't a privilege we have, as Christians entrusted with communicating the Gospel. I'm not expecting you to suddenly say "hey you're right"-- it took me quite a while.

I read it myself several years ago, and said 'hmph. What's the big deal?'

I didn't think of it again for a few years. There were a few questions about what he was trying to say, yeah, but that happened in every book. It seemed like Christianity 101 to me and I wondered why it was so popular. I didn't really recommend it to anyone because I thought it was so shallow, but I didn't condemn it. It only alerted me to the fact that if this kind of thing was such an astronomically big hit, what kind of state must the church at large be in??

I honestly did not think about it again until I saw my pastor pulling political games (I would not have seen it had I not been involved in a subcommittee either) and on expressing my frustration to another council member, was informed that Pastor was all caught up in Purpose Driven Church and a lot of that stuff didn't seem scriptural to him.

So first thing I did was borrow a copy (this book was only given to the council to read as a kind of 'idea generator'-- or at least that's all they'll admit to) and granted, the church was deemed seeker-sensitive from the time we joined. I didn't know what that meant, and it sounded good. But we had different definitions of what it meant and that is the hitch. You have got to be sure you're understanding each other. And that is where Rick's teachings fall short. They are exceedingly vague and in the practical working out of these teachings you suddenly find out that you were not in agreement at all with the church. And then, the ones in power have been given carte blanche to cast you out as a sinner (a la matt 18) because you don't support the ministries of the church.

When I read purpose driven church I knew it was wrong from the start, because in so many places Rick seems to be saying two mutually exclusive things, but like politicians so famously do, in a way that most people will hear (and understand) what they want to hear (and understand) and leave the rest as just 'well, I know what he meant.'

In searching for more information on PDC, I found many critiques of PDL as well, and that got me quite concerned about it as well. Of the two, it's hard to decide which one I think is worse... PDC enables believers to pursue their agendas regardless of opposition, as long as they've convinced themselves their agendas are 'of God.' It emphasizes numbers and demographics in a very worldly way. Christ went out to find the ONE lost sheep, leaving the 99 in the fold. He didn't go to where there were lots of sheep in hopes he could snag a few.

Now, PDL is dangerous for a different reason. I read Warren Smith's _Deceived on Purpose_ and found there is an alarming connection (if not formally, then theologically) with Robert Schuller, who I don't think can even be considered Christian any more. But because Schuller isn't mentioned, what is essentially Schullerism is slipped under the door for many conservative Christians who read Rick's PDL. He also uses many 'new age' terms from the new age 'bible' "The Message," inviting in new agers who then think their beliefs jive with Scripture.

It is incrementally changing the church for the worse. People think to themselves "when they try to push X sin (for example homosexuality) as normal, then the church has gone astray." trouble is, that doesn't happen overnight. It happens incrementally by eroding the foundations of clarity of teaching. (a closely tied phenomenon is 'verbicide' which we all see happen every day by equivocating liberals equating "abortion" with "freedom of choice") This muffling of clear gospel preaching is what Rick is doing. I don't think he means to, and I find him to be genuinely likeable. I also find him to be extremely careless in how he builds on the foundation laid.

1 Cor 3:10-15 "By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as an expert builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should be careful how he builds. For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man's work. If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames.

577 posted on 01/12/2006 12:58:25 PM PST by Terriergal (Cursed be any love or unity for whose sake the Word of God must be put at stake. -- Martin Luther)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 535 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson