Purpose Driven or Scripture Driven? - Way of Life Literature
Purpose Driven or Scripture Driven? - Way of Life Literature Purpose Driven or Scripture Driven? - Way of Life Literature
Warren Predict’s A “NewReformation”In his appearance before the Pew Forum in May 2005,Rick Warren predicted a “New Reformation” or a “ThirdGreat Awakening” for America. He said:“You know, 500 years ago, the first Reformation withLuther and then Calvin, was about beliefs. I think a newreformation is going to be about behavior. THE FIRSTREFORMATION WAS ABOUT CREEDS; I THINKTHIS ONE WILL BE ABOUT DEEDS. ... The firstReformation actually split Christianity into dozens andthen hundreds of different segments. I think this one isactually going to bring them together. Now, you’re nevergoing to get Christians, of all their stripes and varieties,to agree on all of the different doctrinal disputes andthings like that, but what I am seeing them agree on arethe purposes of the church. ... Last week I spoke to 4,000pastors at my church who came FROM OVER 100DENOMINATIONS in over 50 countries. Now, that’swide spread. WE HAD CATHOLIC PRIESTS, we hadPentecostal ministers, we had Lutheran bishops, we hadAnglican bishops, we had Baptist preachers. They’re allthere together and you know what? I’d never get them toagree on communion or baptism or a bunch of stuff likethat, but I could get them to agree on what the churchshould be doing in the world” (“Myths of the ModernMega-Church,” May 23, 2005, transcript of the PewForum’s biannual Faith Angle conference on religion,politics and public life).Warren’s New Reformation is not about beliefs or creeds ordoctrinal purity; it is rather about “the purpose of thechurch.”Let me see if I understand this. It is not important that achurch hold biblical doctrine and practice (e.g., it is fine ifthey hold to erroneous Episcopalian or Lutheran doctrine) or96
even that it preach a biblical gospel (e.g., it is fine if theypreach Rome’s sacramental gospel). It is only important that“churches” agree on their purpose? How can a “church” havea biblical purpose when it does not have biblical doctrine?How can it have a biblical purpose when it preaches a falsegospel?If sound doctrine is not a foundational issue, I wonder whyPaul instructed Timothy to “charge some that they teach NOOTHER DOCTRINE” (1 Tim. 1:3)? I wonder why he didn’trather instruct Timothy, rather, to go easy on the doctrineissue?Could it be that the apostle Paul’s teaching is contrary toRick Warren’s?I, for one, am certain of it!97
- Page 46 and 47: "ATMOSPHERES ARE GOING TO COMETHROU
- Page 48 and 49: to believe it myself; and that’s
- Page 50 and 51: wicked than same-sex relations? Whe
- Page 52 and 53: how sick and blasphemous this thing
- Page 54 and 55: Warren’s P.E.A.C.E. PlanSpeaking
- Page 56 and 57: “The church is not called to tran
- Page 58 and 59: Roger Oakland rightly observes:“W
- Page 60 and 61: absolutely nothing about kicking pe
- Page 62 and 63: It is a sad fact that Southerland h
- Page 64 and 65: “Now I beseech you, brethren, mar
- Page 66 and 67: Judaism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Bahai,
- Page 68 and 69: clamour for a confederacy which wou
- Page 70 and 71: American Baptist ChurchesThe Baptis
- Page 72 and 73: Dr. Frederick Anderson, secretary o
- Page 74 and 75: “Then the third day came. A stone
- Page 76 and 77: eferred to as God in the Scriptures
- Page 78 and 79: 100 “lesbian, bi-sexual, and tran
- Page 80 and 81: “Through visualization and dreami
- Page 82 and 83: Bono complains that the churches ha
- Page 84 and 85: salvation is by grace, for instance
- Page 86 and 87: Warren’s and the Ladies HomeJourn
- Page 88 and 89: Is that not what “unconditionally
- Page 90 and 91: Furthermore, if God doesn’t expec
- Page 92 and 93: article; but to a Muslim, that’s
- Page 94 and 95: Warren Doesn’t Mention JesusIn Ju
- Page 98 and 99: An Analysis of the “Purpose Drive
- Page 100 and 101: Saddleback model? From our understa
- Page 102 and 103: on Sunday to all the church body, a
- Page 104 and 105: church growth. While the contempora
- Page 106 and 107: program) then the resultant growth
- Page 108 and 109: away from the larger issue at hand-
- Page 110 and 111: unreconcilable dichotomy between fl
- Page 112 and 113: giants,” accepted his methods. Fu
- Page 114 and 115: children of Israel could have said
- Page 116 and 117: that the local New Testament church
- Page 118 and 119: etrays its weakened hold on the obj
- Page 120 and 121: e turned unto fables. But watch tho
- Page 122 and 123: Paul had no target group! All neede
- Page 124 and 125: Judge Not?The following is from our
- Page 126 and 127: ingeth forth good fruit; but a corr
- Page 128 and 129: must welcome and neither judge nor
- Page 130 and 131: the law, but a judge. There is one
- Page 132 and 133: About Way of Life’s eBooksSince J
- Page 134 and 135: ecumenical; it is charismatic; it i
- Page 136 and 137: Transformational Power of CCM. V. S
- Page 138 and 139: variety of situations, including ho
- Page 140: “The encyclopedia is excellent. T
Warren Predict’s A “NewRef<strong>or</strong>mation”In his appearance bef<strong>or</strong>e the Pew F<strong>or</strong>um in May 2005,Rick Warren predicted a “New Ref<strong>or</strong>mation” <strong>or</strong> a “ThirdGreat Awakening” f<strong>or</strong> America. He said:“You know, 500 years ago, the first Ref<strong>or</strong>mation withLuther and then Calvin, was about beliefs. I think a newref<strong>or</strong>mation is going to be about behavi<strong>or</strong>. THE FIRSTREFORMATION WAS ABOUT CREEDS; I THINKTHIS ONE WILL BE ABOUT DEEDS. ... The firstRef<strong>or</strong>mation actually split Christianity into dozens andthen hundreds <strong>of</strong> different segments. I think this one isactually going to bring them together. Now, you’re nevergoing to get Christians, <strong>of</strong> all their stripes and varieties,to agree on all <strong>of</strong> the different doctrinal disputes andthings like that, but what I am seeing them agree on arethe purposes <strong>of</strong> the church. ... Last week I spoke to 4,000past<strong>or</strong>s at my church who came FROM OVER 100DENOMINATIONS in over 50 countries. Now, that’swide spread. WE HAD CATHOLIC PRIESTS, we hadPentecostal ministers, we had Lutheran bishops, we hadAnglican bishops, we had Baptist preachers. They’re allthere together and you know what? I’d never get them toagree on communion <strong>or</strong> baptism <strong>or</strong> a bunch <strong>of</strong> stuff likethat, but I could get them to agree on what the churchshould be doing in the w<strong>or</strong>ld” (“Myths <strong>of</strong> the ModernMega-Church,” May 23, 2005, transcript <strong>of</strong> the PewF<strong>or</strong>um’s biannual Faith Angle conference on religion,politics and public life).Warren’s New Ref<strong>or</strong>mation is not about beliefs <strong>or</strong> creeds <strong>or</strong>doctrinal purity; it is rather about “the purpose <strong>of</strong> thechurch.”Let me see if I understand this. It is not imp<strong>or</strong>tant that achurch hold biblical doctrine and practice (e.g., it is fine ifthey hold to erroneous Episcopalian <strong>or</strong> Lutheran doctrine) <strong>or</strong>96
Change language