I am surprised that you are surprised:)
If you look back at my posts, I never raised any concern over Warren's presentation of the Gospel, in the PDL.
I can rejoice along side of you that the Gospel was preached, and even that your relative testified to accepting Christ, but Phillipians 1:18 doesn't excuse the actions/motives of those, with bad motives, who are being referenced.
And if you look at the specific issues I raised, none of them were related, at all, to style. They were, however, related to content.
The New Testament is clear about avoiding, and refuting, false teachers...but Warren endorses them (In the PDL and on www.pastors.com). This is not an issue of style.
Is this not a problem for you?
If not, why?
Warren uses paraphrases (The Message, The NLT) that distort the known content of scriptural passages and then makes false conclusions (look at The PDL related to the John 4 passage that I mentioned previously...This is a clear distortion of God's Word). This is not an issue of style.
Is this not a problem for you?
If not, why?
The PDL pages 9-10 make false statements and false conclusions about fourty days and uses "bad examples" (your term) in an attempt to support the false statements and false conclusions (and what is a Spiritual Journey?). This, along with the use of paraphrases, is not an issue of style.
Given that we are to correctly handle the Word, is this not a problem for you?
And...It is a pastor's duty to feed and protect the sheep. Endorsing false teachers, and their teaching, and distorting the plain teaching of Scripture represents a failure to fulfill this duty.
I can't agree to disagree on these items (not even agreeably)...They are unacceptable and completely unrelated to issues of style...Saying that these issues are only related to style is like saying Sen. Obama at Saddleback is only style related.
We know, from Scripture, that wolves will be sent in among the Church and that Satan masquerades as an angel of light and his demons as workers of righteousness...How are we able to discern the difference between the masquerading wolf and the Truth (this is an important question)? Regards,
From everything I can tell you don't have a problem with the statement of faith at Warren's Saddleback church. This is the core of what is taught by Warren. Because you didn't comment on it earlier I don't know where you stand on the statement of faith. What is your opinion about the statement of faith at Warren's church?
I'm glad to hear you rejoice the gospel message is preached in the PDL. I wasn't sure where you stood here.
Many Christians break theological issues into primary and secondary issues.
How would you define a primary theological issue?
How would you define a secondary theological issue?
Would you say your concerns with the PDL are primary or secondary theological issues?