Not a bad article. He wasn’t nearly as beligerent as I had expected. He seems to have a genuine concern that he believes in.

Hmmm...very interesting.  I particularly liked the part where he plugged his own books...that were written...to take shots at another book.  Much to think about...much to be concerned about...even more to be disturbed about.

Todd,

Did you need more hits today by bringing up Rick?

I don’t get why people trash him.  I’ve been to the PDC conference and he does preach Jesus.  They have baptized over 20,000 people.  Have they not heard Ricks, “Just tell them about Jesus! message?  I’m sick of the “Church Police!”

Kevin,
20k baptism does not necessarily equate to 20k true salvations. Some of those people may have merely got wet. If you are sick of the church police you must not like the Bereans as well who checked what Paul said was in line with scriptures.

Critiquing Warren does not equate to trashing Warren. Warren markets his PD approach to “doing church” to churches all throughout the country. As with any teaching that is brought into the church, careful examination must be done to ensure it lines up with scripture. That is what Bob DeWaay has done in his book. DeWaay critiques Warren but also praises him and makes the same Gospel appeal in his book that he did to Warren in person.

Also, Kevin, read the links i gave you and give me your assesment of who should receive glory, the church and man or God.

RIck is saying that scripture supports his position that God wants the church and His body to receive glory instead of God receiving glory THROUGH the church. There is a difference. Do you agree with that?

And how do you know that all 20K baptism are true conversions? Neither of us do. But the Bible does give several instances of people turning from the faith and if you look at 1 John 2:19 it describes that as well. A changed life does not in and of itself prove true salvation. People claim watching Oprah changed their life. People claim that the mormon, islam, JW, or pick your false religion changed their life.

Again, just because someone critiques someone and tests what they say against scripture as we are SUPPOSED to do because of the vast amount of false teachers that have crept into the church today does not mean that they are being attacked.

AND it is not an either/or proposition. Just because someone practices discernment does not mean that they do not preach the gospel. One does not have to throw away sound biblical judgement or discernment in order to evangelize.

A nicely balanced article, and I think both Rick and Bob are to be commended for commencing this discussion.

Sam,

I thought RW did a great job or answering that criticism.

Peter:

“I thought RW did a great job or answering that criticism.”

I read through the response from Warren about his PEACE plan being criticized, and I would say he did a poor job.  In justifying his point about how the church gets the glory, he abused Scripture pretty badly.  Someone did a verse-by-verse analysis of his talking points, and it becomes clear that his arguments about to whom belongs the glory falls pretty short.  You can check it out at:
http://herescope.blogspot.com/2008/06/who-gets-glory-for-doing-good.html

--
CS

CS,

I disagree, because he STARTS with “I believe Jesus Christ deserves all the glory. It is the purpose of life.”

Anyway, I’m getting really weary of some of the criticisms that I find wanting more in substance all the time.

I’m glad I don’t have every single thing I say picked apart like RW does. If I did, I’d stop surfing the internet, for sure…

Leonard,
If you read the article about DeWaay’s meeting you will see the content of the invitation:

“Rick Warren’s chief of staff e-mailed back and offered to have me come only on Thursday in order to talk to Warren in person. Since the Bible says that we should be ready to give a reason for our hope in the gospel (1Peter 3:15) I decided to go. “

Bob was invited to meet with Warren in person which he did. He orginally turned down the invitation to attend the whole conference.

As far as “church police” is concerned, Paul actually did address matters in the churches AND rebuked individual churches. You are right, the Bareans did not do that to people other than Paul. But often times when people are being Berean like in their own churches they get labeled church policy, legalist, or Pharisees just for exposing false teachings.

Again, DeWaay did not discuss a matter of preference with Warren. He was concerned about the primary issue of the Gospel. It wasnt secondary matters that concerned DeWaay the most.

Peter, when people have public forums and affect such a wide range of people like Warren does, what he said should be “picked apart” as you call it to again make sure that it lines up with scripture. All too often, Warren has a tendency to throw out bible verse out of context or from whatever translation or paraphrase that better supports his own understanding.

Futhermore, i find it a bit hypocritical and disingenious to complaim about Rick Warren being picked apart when often times this website and commenters have a tendency to mock other pastors and ministries as well that Rhodes deems to be fundamentalists, legalists, etc. Look at the post on the Ipod for sale. And just look at the way this post was labeled. “Giving Rick Warren the what not..” Already it shows bias. And thats ok, Todd has a right to do so. But lets not complain about Warren being picked apart when others are picked apart on this website on a regular basis as well.

My experience is quite different, JOB.

BUT…

...you are SO right that cultural implementations of church methodology (I know that’s not all you meant, but it’s part of it) have a “shelf life”. It’s why fewer churches install an organ these days, and it’s why the way we gather and worship in a hundred years will be very different and PDL might be long-forgotten, even if folks owe at least a cultural debt to churches that were “purpose-driven” don’t remember.

The message doesn’t change. The methods must.

JOB:

“My experience with PDL has found this to be true. As with any “version” of the Gospel it has a shelf life, this too shall pass.”

I agree.  When was the last time a WWJD or Prayer of Jabez sermon was delivered?  Someone else will come along with another “new” way of looking at Scripture at some point, and PDL books will be stockpiled in back rooms of churches in 2020 or so.

However, the thing where we must pay particular attention is how these fads affect the people involved and the Gospel.  Short-term novelties used in churches can have long-term consequences when the message delivered is not true and complete.  The souls of people are in the balance.

--
CS

I am officially exhausted by the debate around Rick Warren.  Both sides present valid arguments; some more eloquently and lovingly than others.  For my taste, though, I am done with it.

I would only pose the question:

Is the message of the Gospel dependent upon the methods of man’s wisdom?

Jesus also spoke in parables. In Matthew 13:10-16, Jesus tells why he speaks in parables. Not everyone that heard these parables understood them. Surely, you do not intend to say that Jesus failed in communication because the hearers did not understand. The gospel is folly to the lost (1 cor 1:18). It is not through some method that we can turn hostile hearts towards God. It is the work of the Holy Spirit through the hearing of the Gospel that regenerates hearts. Methodology does not do this. We neuter God’s power in effect when we think the spread of the gospel relies on man’s ability or lack thereof.