Dear John,

<br>

YOU: “Richard we are never given the right nor the approval to declare someone has acquired salvation, especially as many churches today do it”
<br>
ME: Oh, dear, here we go again. I certainly made no suggestion that i can see into the hearts and minds of every single person in the world or at Saddeback or at your church or anywhere else who has ever said they were a Christian or accepted Christ as savior. I was speaking loosely, and informally, as most NORMAL people do when they simply say, “so and so became a Christian” or “X amount of people accepted Christ as their savior this easter.” See? Simple. I was merely saying that as a result of Saddleback and Purpose Driven, many people (as far as I have seen and experienced, APPARENTLY, per many professions followed up by fruit indicative of true repentance, according to verbal testimony and public affirmation of the essential doctrines of the historic orthodox Christian faith) have accepted Christ as Lord and Savior. Better???? Are their some insincere professions in PDC churches? Sure, just as their are in Calvary Chapels (a LOT by the way), Lutheran Churches, methodist Chruches, Pentecostal Chruches, etc etc etc.
<br>

YOU: “when someone responds to an altar call and says a “Sinner’s Prayer”.
<br>
ME: Well, this is an assumption on your part. I never said that this is the point on which I was basing my statement. We don’t even have altar calls at Saddleback. That’s more of a Calvary Chapel thing. I was basing my statement on CHANGED lives that are indicative of repentance and an acceptance of Christ as Lord and Savior. Sure, that might often begin with something like a sinners prayer, sometimes not. My actual view, then, and the intent of my comment (see above) renders invalid your “altar call” remark as well as your statement about my so-called “assumption.”
<br>

YOU: Something all might benefit from is a willingness to examine correction and examine oneself to see if they truly are in the faith. That is not a common trait when one is promised they have eternal security because they once said a prayer Richard.
<br>
ME: Agreed. You raise a straw man. I never said it was based on just saying a prayer (see above). That is an assumption on YOUR part. The so-called sinner’s prayer is certainly said at Saddleback, and Calvary and a million other churches (hyberbole meaning a lot of churches), and we give the benefit of teh doubt to those who pray such a prayer. But there also are teachings in PDC and at Saddleback about holiness, walking uprightly before God, correct doctrine, Bible study, prayer, service in the church, etc etc etc—hallmarks of a true and abiding faith (this is called maturity/sanctification).
<br>

YOU: You truly are evidence of that exhibited by your demeanor in discussion after discussion, forum after forum. When one cannot bring themselves to call sinners to repentance how dare they go so far as to declare them righteous in God’s sight.
<br>
ME: You know, I fear this may be fruitless, but for the benefit of readers.  Here, let me help—SINNERS MUST REPENT!!!!!!!! Better? I’ve said it througout my whole ministry and in my books (several on Christian doctrine, apologetics, and cults—you might want to check them out). And Rick Warren teaches it, too, as does Saddleback. The documentation is there.
<br>

YOU: Finally Richard, contrary to your faulty assumption that RW detractors have not listened to RW enough - I have subjected myself to far more of his public appearances than I would ever care to admit and there is one common thread that runs through eash and every one - that is one of declaring the “impact” and “accomplishments” of RW and PD but the near non-existence of a declaration of the gospel of Jesus Christ. I would credit RW for his unwillingness to cower to Charlie Rose and deny Jesus is the One way - but would have been moreimpressed had he not simply said “I’m believing Jesus is right” but would have come right out and say it - Jesus IS the ONLY way.
<br>

ME: Ahhhh, here we have the truth. What you and so many Warren detractors don’t like has relaly little to do with truly spreading the gospel. You want cookie-cutter Christians and leaders who say and do everything like you--period. Don’t change the approach, don’t change the words used, don’t change the way it’s always been done. That is the truth. Well, sorry. God said don’t change the gospel—not the way you communicate the gospel. So, you’re doingyour own thing at this point. Warren was putting the stress on Jesus, saying that Jesus said he is the only way, and Warren believes that. This is why our views are caleld FAITH!!! Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen. We have never seen heaven, never seen Jesus, never touched God. I live by faith. Jesus said blessed is he who has not seenbut who believes. That would be us. You want the freedom to express your faith your way and in your words, but you deny that freedom to others who want to share and express it using different words and approaches (WITHOUT changing the gospel truth). That is not what we are called to do. You do err, not knowing the scriptures, in my opinion.
<br>

YOU: “You can now claim membership in the family of God without repentance or clear understanding of their sinfulness - well far too much damage is continually done when people read those pages of PDL and given unmerited assurance.”
<br>
ME: ohhh, I see, so now you have the miraculous ability to somehow know that everyone who reads Purpose Driven Life or goes to a PDC is accepting Christ “without repentance” or a “clear understanding of their sinfulness”? And how exactly do you know this? All the new Christians at Saddleback that I have talked to sure seemed to know they are sinners in need of grace and have repented. People who have accepted Christ from Warren’s book sure seem to know they are a sinner and needed repentance for salvation. MIght some people NOT get it? Sure. So what? That’s the way it is in every church. I said EVERY church.
<br>

In conclusion - apologetics is NOT finding fault with everything and everyone we disagree with for the sake of argument or fighting a good battle of our own self-righteousness. Its about defending THE FAITH—not a method, not a technique, not a tradition, not a way of doing stuff, not a church, not a person—THE FAITH once for all delivered to the saints. I think I have said enough. Form my end, the convo is over.
<br>

Richard Abanes

John 3:36 or Richard,

Do either one of you know if the PDL book does mention the Resurection?  I would find that without even mentioning the Resurection, it would be difficult to give a clear presentation of the gospel at all.

jack,

very quickly. i really never intended to spend so long answering all of this, but in reponse to your question, I simply picked up Warren’s book and skimmed it through abit and landed on page 120 where Warren talks about baptism: “Your baptism declares your faith, shares Christ’s burial and resurrection, symbolizes your death to your old life, and announces your new life in Christ.”

BTW, it seems to me that his reference here to “old life” would also be indicative of repentance, which is how many pastors discuss the symbolism carried in baptism with regard to showing our death in Christ, and raised to new life.

that’s all for me,

r. abanes

Peter the lies to which I am speaking, and you must be a denialist to not see them, is when a person promises someone salvation who has not repented for their sins but only responded to being led in a prayer that at best “asks Jesus into a persons heart”. There is no salvation in that prayer and you’ll have to argue with Jesus about this one, but there is no salvation without repentance. He said it, not I, “I tell you no, unless you repent, you too shall perish.” What RW says on P 57, 58 of PDL promises salvation to people for simply reciting a prayer. Never was it stated in scripture that one has assurance based on such a flimsy endeavor.It is, as I said pointless to discuss ANYTHING (fruitless) with Richard Abanes because, as you see from his dissection of my post, he takes things wildly out of their context and then attempts to dismantle a wide variety of inferences into the text. To attempt to keep up with his fertile imagination would be futile to put it mildly.Richard, it was you who said “So what?” after speaking of people who don’t make it - how could I take it any other way? BTW - it is easy to get “decisions” - unfortunately statistics show that as many as 100% of “decisions” from a wide variety of evangelistic efforts will not be following the faith even 1 year later. A major denomination had a 94% “fallaway” rate and people want to continue on in the same manners without willingness to recognize the gross error of their ways. Therein lies the heart of the issue. Enough said.

You’re fighting a losing battle here John 336.  We no longer hear a coherent arguement from you.  All I hear personally is bitterness and hyper criticism.  I think you’re going to be in for a shock when you find people in heaven that are there as a direct result (fruit) of pdl and the ministry of Rick Warren.  Quite alot of people.

And as a minister, John (which I’m assuming you are), you are every bit as responisble for your “decisions” statistic as Warren may or may not be.  Please do not insinuate that PDL is the main cause for such pathetic numbers.  I could just as easily say that bitterness between members of the body of Christ is easily as influentional in harming the cause of kingdom building.

Even if you’re right, you’re being rude...and that makes you wrong in my book.  Love is not rude.  And yes, two people can reach the entirely same conclusion about something and be in complete disagreement.  Chill out man.

I read the note about RW’s book being eastern/new age and wanted to ask if anyone knows why Chuck Smith Sr. does not have an issue with Raul Reese running a Kung Fu class out of his church?  All martial arts are rooted in eastern mysticism and meditaion.  Also is an emmerging church merely a “seeker friendly” church?  If so CC Vista is VERY EMMERGENT.  I really question the timing of all this.  Why 3-4 years after the book has come out.  Would not the Lord have revealed to Chuck Smith earlier if something was very wrong?  Has RW commented on this decision from CC?  I just wonder what the Lord thinks about all this childishness.

“If so CC Vista is VERY EMMERGENT.”

And all of Calvary Chapel can be called “seeker sensitive” in it’s roots.  Tearing up carpeting in the old days for the hippies’ bare feet, playing rock music instead of more traditional worship music, and eliminating any doctrine that would cause people to feel “uncomfortable” or give them any polarized view of Calvary Chapel.  Those are precepts that built Calvary Chapel in the first place, and that is a “seeker sensitive” model.  So the accusations from CC against Saddleback and Rick Warren are ridiculous.  CC’s been doing those things for years (Not that any of it is bad.  It has worked in both CC’s and Saddleback)