Rick Warren in Controversy Again: This Time over Assassinations and Home Break-ins
- Posted by: Todd
- Posted on: Mon, December 15, 2008
- Viewed 109
- (36) comments so far
So… what’s your take?
1. Would you shoot and kill an intruder in your home?
2. Should the government ‘take out’ the Iranian president
Does Rick help or hurt the cause when asked about questions like this? Should he do more or less interviews like this?
Just curious on your opinion on this one…
More here at The Christian Post.
If you liked this story, send it to a friend or post it to Twitter! http://tr.im/2apw
Should you shoot and kill a person who invades your house? And should the United States government 'take out' Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?
Well, Rick Warren is drawing fire (again) for his answers to these questions on last week's Hannity and Colmes.
Warren's comments has people talking... a writer at the Huffington Post says, "Seems to me that Rick Warren, one of the most popular Christian evangelical pastors in the nation, has some splainin’ (sic) to do to the Muslim bruthas (sic) when he speaks at the Muslim Public Affairs Council national convention in two weeks." Meanwhile, Religion News Service editor Kevin Eckstrom says, "Strikes me that Warren (who's generally an all-around pretty good guy) needs to be careful here that he doesn't slip into Pat Robertson territory (he knows better), who advocated the assassination of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez."
Comments
if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.
Wendi Hammond on Mon, December 15, 2008
I agree with Matthew Dus who said in the Christian Post:
“[I]t’s alarming to hear Warren deploying his spiritual influence in support of the ultranationalist ravings of someone like Sean Hannity,”
Warren’s foray into the African Aids pandemic it was extremely admirable. He called American Christians to become involved in something we should have been leading the way in. Lately I think he has gotten a bit off track. Anybody who agrees to such interviews should expect to be asked questions that will be unrelated to the primary mission. It’s not that he isn’t entitled to his personal opinion on these issues, but using his influence on such things is, IMO, bad stewardship.
Wendi
Brianmpei on Mon, December 15, 2008
1. No, I don’t own a gun. If he dropped his I’d grab it. If I felt that my family was still threatened I would probably use the gun and potentially even kill the intruder. But I’d never suggest that God said that was o.k.
2. NO, and it’s Warren’s complete misuse of Scripture to support that position that disturbs me - but not as much as a Christian leader being on international television calling for the assasination of an Islamic leader on the other side of the world.
3. - (I know you didn’t ask but since we’re on this topic) NO, I wouldn’t give President Bush an award that has anything to do with peace.
David Richardson on Mon, December 15, 2008
First of all, Sean Hannity is not a hateful person.
Second, as for dealing with the Iranian President: I think Warren should have left that one alone. Just focus on preaching the Word, Rick. Let the government decide on what to do with that.
Third, as for dealing with an intruder: I would hope that any husband would do whatever he had to do in order to protect his wife and children. This does not mean he is a “gun-totin’, trigger-happy redneck”; instead, it means he is taking responsibility for the well-being and safety of his family if they are physically threatened. I don’t find ANY pleasure in the thought of hurting anyone; however, I also find no pleasure in sitting on my hands if my family is in danger.
CS on Mon, December 15, 2008
“Does Rick help or hurt the cause when asked about questions like this? Should he do more or less interviews like this?”
He’s been doing a whole bunch of bad interviews recently. I logged onto BeliefNet.com over the weekend and watched the interviews they had with him, and the answers he gave were horrible at times. He said that he didn’t know whether or not people who have not heard of the name of Christ would get to Heaven. He dismissed things like hurricanes, saying that they were not a part of God’s will. Add to this his, “60 Day Trial Jesus,” statements on Hannity & Colmes, and he is digging a huge doctrinal and theological hole for himself.
—
CS
Adam George on Mon, December 15, 2008
Someone breaks into my home and threatens my family (which as far as I’m concerned, the break in is the threat), you better believe I’m gonna take them out. My family is my FIRST ministry…I will protect that at all costs.
Tweed on Mon, December 15, 2008
I read the comments made by Warren as noted in the Christian Post. Who cares what Matthew Dus thinks. Clearly he’s more interested in his own political agenda than any real Christian substance or dialogue.
There is no alarm, but the alarm he is trying to make out of a non-issue. Evil is evil. Wendi are you debating warrens comment that evil is evil? Or that what Governments role is related to evil?
Rick White on Mon, December 15, 2008
Actually, no surprise here. For the most part, Warren is probably pretty conservative on most issues. On some issues, the left will see him as an ally…yet on most, he’ll confirm the left’s belief that under all those good intentions and smiles lies a right wing bigot.
And for the record, I agree with his answers. He was spot-on regarding the role/s of government/s.
Wendi Hammond on Mon, December 15, 2008
Tweed –
In agreeing with Dos’ comment, I’m not debating that evil is evil or the government’s role related to evil. I’m agreeing that Warren shouldn’t “deploy his spiritual influence” (Dos’ phrase) in this way (though I don’t think I’d use the term “alarming”). He has very significant influence and I think getting himself into a situation (by going on the Hannity show) where he’ll be asked questions that have nothing to do with his or the church’s primary mission.
It IS the government’s role to protect the people from evil. It IS NOT the church’s role.
Wendi
Leonard on Mon, December 15, 2008
Wendi you are such a liberal http://www.mondaymorninginsight.com/images/smileys/smile.gif
I think rick get’s so scrutinized that he must watch every word. I have no trouble with self defense not being murder, but I did not really see enough on the Iranian president to think much of it. I do not think he was trying to USE his sprirutal influence in the vein of some other people but that being said, I think caution is important.
bishopdave on Mon, December 15, 2008
Wendi: “I’m agreeing that Warren shouldn’t “deploy his spiritual influence” (Dos’ phrase) in this way (though I don’t think I’d use the term “alarming”). He has very significant influence and I think getting himself into a situation (by going on the Hannity show) where he’ll be asked questions that have nothing to do with his or the church’s primary mission.”
Now wait a minute. I thought churches were supposed to be relevant to the culture. Iran’s not relevant to what’s going on in our culture?
I agree he needs to be careful, but at the same time he is allowed an opinion.
And what’s so redneck about defending your family and your country?
Brianmpei on Mon, December 15, 2008
Assasinating a leader of a government is NOT defending your country.
And what exactly is the exegesis that says that governments role is to carry out execution of the leaders of sovereign nations? If they did that wouldn’t we call that terrorism or an act of war?
michael dixon on Mon, December 15, 2008
I think that being asked “as a Christian” if I would take a gun and defend my family against a threat is a lot like Jesus being asked if he would pay taxes to Caesar. The answer, I would like always to make and always convincingly is that there is nothing of this world, of myself, of everything I cherish and value that I would put before winning one more person for Christ and kingdom. Amen, God, bless us all in these discussions to Your purposes.
michael dixon on Mon, December 15, 2008
Speaking of Amadinejad, I want to be go to heaven with him. What a win that would be for Christ and His kingdom! I think, one could even brag alittle about that one.
There is every chance that assassinating him would put Mahmoud there long before me.
Derek on Mon, December 15, 2008
why does an intruder demand a violent response? been there, done that—had an intruder in my home (apartment) while all of us were asleep—defused situation by talking them out and away from sleeping friends (roommates).
threat to my family? yes, i’ll do something, but there are other options than taking a life. does physical violence have to be part of the solution? not if i can help it.
then, as now, i’d be praying desperately.
Jim on Mon, December 15, 2008
Yes, I would do all that was necessary to stop any intruder from harming my family, even if it meant taking a life. The Bible condemns the murdering of the innocent, not the taking of life, if necessary, to protect the innocent. As my late, very spiritually mature grandmother put it, if anyone breaks into your home while you’re there, they intend to do you harm. So, what ever happens to them as a result, they have brought on themselves. As far as the gun issue goes, that is the only item that I believe you can’t have to many of-I like to collect them.
When in Seminary, we had a Chaplain/Sherrif speak to our Master’s class in Chaplaincy issues. He spoke of the time that he was escorting a prisoner to court, and the prisoner asked: “if I tried to escape, and you being a Christian, would you shoot me?” His response is classic, he told the prisoner: “I will pray for you, with you, or over you-it’s your decision to make.” I believe that answer is both Biblical and explains the position well.
Page 1 of 3 pages 1 2 3 >
Post a Comment