Hunter Baker at Red State has posted an open letter to evangelical pastor Rick Warren urging him to not avoid pressing the presidential candidates on pro-life issues in his August 16 "Compassionate Leader" forum to be aired on CNN (emphasis mine).:
In your news release about the candidate forum, you suggest that you will avoid "gotcha" questions. The topics highlighted in the release are poverty, HIV/AIDS, climate and human rights with a special emphasis on character and leadership rather than programmatic details.
There is much to be said for rising above partisan politics. After all, the church is on a mission from God to all the earth....
Story Continues Below Ad ↓However, there are certain issues that demand the church's involvement, issues of basic justice, issues of life and death. Perhaps the least ambiguous of those issues is the protection of babies throughout pregnancy and immediately after birth. We live in a culture that, strangely, acts as though unborn children are like genies that can be stuffed back into the bottle. We know that isn't true. We know that abortions end with little piles of bloody flesh and bone. Fetuses don't merely cease to exist. They experience violent physical death.
There are many doctrinal issues that divide Christians, but the protection of young life should not be one of them. Pastor Warren, as Protestants, we are part of a tradition that loves to point to the early church -- the young church so pure in our estimation -- still uncorrupted by the power of empire. That church, that persecuted church, was a tireless defender of life. Early Christians counseled against abortion and actively rescued infants exposed to the predators and the wild by Roman parents who vested few rights in human beings shortly after birth. A child of the wrong sex or one who looked weak could be abandoned. How strange it is that today a candidate claiming to be a Christian could oppose the Born Alive Infants Protection Act or a ban on partial birth abortion! To do so is to disclaim not only a major part of Christian teaching, but also a cultural advance in favor of protecting the weak and innocent.
Warren, seen by Time magazine last year as a potential successor to Billy Graham as "America's minister", has received positive press in the mainstream media, both for his book "The Purpose Driven Life" and for his focus on fighting HIV/AIDS and combatting global warming.
Yet in the process of currying the media's good graces by adopting stances amenable to the political Left, there is a valid concern by conservatives such as Baker that Warren will fail to challenge the NARAL-backed Obama on pro-life concerns while pressing both candidates on backing liberal policy stances on global warming and U.S. spending on international aid.
Indeed, as Time's David Van Biema reported on August 7:
A shift away from "sin issues" - like abortion and gay marriage - is reflected in Warren's approach to his coming sit-downs with the candidates. He says he is more interested in questions that he feels are "uniting," such as "poverty, HIV/AIDS, climate change and human rights," and still more in civics-class topics like the candidates' understanding of the role of the Constitution. There will be no "Christian religion test," Warren insists. "I want what's good for everybody, not just what's good for me. Who's the best for the nation right now?"
For its part, CNN very well knows Warren's aversion to focusing on traditional evangelical moral concerns, and so conservative media watchers can be justified in their skepticism about the CNN-Warren forum being anything but a homerun derby for Sen. Obama to knock liberal platitudes out of the park.
In an October 2005 article, Fortune magazine's Marc Gunther wondered "Will Success Spoil Rick Warren?" It will take til about 10 p.m. on Saturday evening to see if liberal media adulation has spoiled the California preacher.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Poverty?
August 13, 2008 - 13:08 ET by serfer62Poverty in America? Is that like middle class in europe? The poverty wars are over. Give it back to the churches..
HIV/AIDs? They want to screw themselves to death, you can't stop them It doesn't belong in presidental politics.
Climate? There's nothing to do about it. If it wants to rain, it rains.
Human rights? Its in the Constitution, just follow it.
We are talking the next POTUS. How about oil? The national debt? SSS? Reducing welfare from 47%? Supporting our allies. Getting out of the UN, NATO, Germany, Bosnia? Enforcing the Constitution on judges?
Oh, I see, then the OHbama will be severely embarrassed...
Exactly serfer,
August 13, 2008 - 14:04 ET by IamTinmanWe are in the process of hiring someone to "preserve, protect, and defend the constitution" for the next 4 years. We're not hiring an icon of moral probity although it's okay if that comes along with the package. We have religious leaders like Mr Warren to provide moral guidance and unlike followers of Islam, for example, our political leaders are not our spiritual guides.
If either of these two candidates are moral miscreants, we likely would have found out by now. What I'm interested in is, how do the candidates plan to deal with the issues so ably stated in serfers response.
When someone disparaged
August 13, 2008 - 13:15 ET by Dan The Man 2When someone disparaged Rick Warren, I usually stood up for him because all Christians are not f4rom teh same mold. But, in seein what he intends to ask the canditates and his belief structues seemed to have changed. He seems to have drifted from core Christian values and is now preaching worldly values instead of eternal values.
Success has spoiled the fruit and Rick Warren has fallen from grace to the depths of sin. Perhaps he was always like this or perhaps he has fallen for teh fame and fortune. Whatever it is he seems to have abandoned God and the work he started for God.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
it's just ultra advanced
August 14, 2008 - 09:17 ET by TruthMongerit's just ultra advanced Christian evangelism
as a practictioner myself i can assure you it's hard core Jesus all the way
Journalism is the opium of the liberals
Funny "it's just ultra
August 14, 2008 - 12:44 ET by Dan The Man 2Funny "it's just ultra advanced Christian evangelism" becuase in teh OT they called them idolators. There is nothing new, as in behavior, as it has already been described in teh Bible.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Introspection
August 13, 2008 - 13:44 ET by Lakewood BobI am sure that Rick Warren will do fine. Undoubtedly, he knows that liberals cannot tolerate any degree of introspection. He will not attack the partcipants because nothing is accomplished when they insulate themselves into their protective cocoons. I believe that Warren's mission will be to have a positive effect on the audience and have them reflect on their own values.
I will pray that he is successful.
Bob you are wrong "He will
August 13, 2008 - 16:49 ET by Dan The Man 2Bob you are wrong "He will not attack the partcipants because nothing is accomplished when they insulate themselves into their protective cocoons" as there is plenty to be learned when they insulate themselves. We must expose them to teh light of the truth, becuase only in doing so will we learn their true nature. If they weasle out, then we will see their character or if they answer with a straight shot we will see their character.
Rick Warren has sold out.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Warren ought to heed what
August 13, 2008 - 13:47 ET by bigtimerWarren ought to heed what Red State is saying...they are speaking for millions of us out here.
Simple as that.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
Rick Warren of his famed "Purpose Driven Con"
August 13, 2008 - 13:57 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasRick Warren of his famed "Purpose Driven Con" will find it VERY convenient to ignore or at best minimize, morality set forth in the Scriptures.
At issue here is not only the nature of questions but WHO is Rick Warren and how did he attain the status he has within Evangelical Christianity? He did so through IGNORANCE, both deliberate and by default. The average believer is dependent upon those ordained or recognized as teachers of the Word to be diligent, weighty and well studied in both teaching and approving of other teachers.
Today's pulpit is generally filled with "Crybaby Boomers and Beyond" who compensate for their own theological and personal inadequacies through garbage and gimmicks when it comes to sound Bible doctrine. Hence the sheep consume the garbage they are fed by deliberately weak, lazy, inept, and unconscionable Ministers.
The piece of theological garbage Warren put out, "The Purpose Driven Con" was devoured by Pastors and congregations more interested in these gimmicks than sound doctrine. And to aid this were a litany of Charismaniac Ministers (a bit of an oxymoron) and their non-Charismanical Evangelical buddies. Their tolerance and often sycophantic support of Warren's novel, but grossly erring, doctrines, helped make them acceptable where they should have soundly been rejected.
People are suckered into this kind of garbage all the time. Warren is just another hustler, another con-man who is borrowing God's Holy Word and corrupting it with some magic formula and non-existent exegesis replaced by speculation and the superimposition of his own ideas and wishes.
And now someone expects this egomaniacal imposter to have integrity and take issue with a leader who is calling himself born again yet courts and even supports bodies of people who hate the morality of the bible?
The answer to terrorism IS war. Next Please!
Just out of curiosity, what
August 13, 2008 - 14:14 ET by Darth DutchJust out of curiosity, what is the bad doctrine that he is teaching? I have read Purpose Driven Life, and while I agree it is very shallow (in the sense that it does not plumb the depths of theology) and it seeker sensitive in its approach, it isn't heretical in my opinion.
Darth Dutch
There are extensive critiques of Warren's "Purpose Driven Con"
August 13, 2008 - 15:03 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasThere are extensive critiques of Warren's "Purpose Driven Con" online. To respond to you briefly would to steal from you what is best read and learned comprehensively. However, let me give you just a tiny sampling of the kind of recklessness in which Warren engages:
Rick Warren states on (page 9) "Whenever God wanted to prepare someone for his purposes, he took 40 days;
Just a mild reading of each of the relevant texts reveals this claim not only to be false but false in each case. Warren is OFFERING a GIMMICK. Hence he superimposes his GIMMICK on Scripture and misrepresents what it teaches and uses that misrepresentation to support his GIMMICK. That is called BAD DOCTRINE.
First of all none of the contexts of the events Warren cites are intended for a reader to conclude that there is some magic or phenomenon that occurs BECAUSE OF 40 days. Warren presents this number of days as somehow the key.
Secondly, these alleged "transformations" did NOT occur in 40 days. Yes, on some occasions something happened during these 40 days but Warren is self-serving and disingenuous when labeling them as "transformations" just so he can make a list to prove his fictitious gimmick.
Jesus was NOT transformed in 40 days in the wilderness, he was TESTED. More importantly Jesus didn't NEED any transforming in the first PLACE!
Secondly Moses was transformed DURING HIS 40 years in the desert where he slowly matured, not on Mt. Sinai. Yes a change ocurred on Mt. Sinai but Moses was already transformed. It didn't come in 40 days, it came in 40 years!
Warren's book is a GIMMICK. It picks and chooses things that FIT his scheme and leaves out gaps that challenge this magic formula, this gimmick plan.
I encourage you that if you indeed sense some shallowness in the material you further investigate it with reading some of the comprehensive critiques online.
The answer to terrorism IS war. Next Please!
Well, I don't think Warren
August 13, 2008 - 15:48 ET by Darth DutchWell, I don't think Warren is saying there is anything magical in the 40 days, just that biblically the number 40 does hold some significance.
Additionally, it should be noted that Warren does what is a "reverse tithe" in that he gives away 90% of his income and lives on 10%. Admittedly I'm sure that 10% is no small potatoes, but before anyone accuses him of trying to promote a gimmick to sell a book, they should look at that fact. Warren isn't doing what he's doing to get rich.
Warren's book should be critiqued, no doubt, but there are much more divisive and blatantly heretical teachings in the name of Christianity which warrant such in depth criticism.
Darth Dutch
And, by the way, the quote
August 13, 2008 - 16:09 ET by Darth DutchAnd, by the way, the quote doesn't say Jesus was transformed - it says he was empowered. Those are two very different things...
Darth Dutch
just ask those that
August 14, 2008 - 09:21 ET by TruthMongerjust ask those that criticize his theology if they are Baptist seminary grads and pastor of a 23,000 member evangelical church like Warren is:)
it they are then i suppose you could take their judgements somewhat seriously
Journalism is the opium of the liberals
You slip into Biblical
August 14, 2008 - 12:58 ET by Dan The Man 2You slip into Biblical error with this "seminary grads and pastor of a 23,000 member evangelical church like Warren is" Where does it say in teh Bible you have to be a grad of seminary or have a large church to be a good scholar of teh Bible? In fact I would trust teh word of a small congregation pastor rather than one of the mega churches. I personally belive while teh mega churches are ok, they are not Biblical.
In th mega chuches the flock can go astray easier than in a small church where accountability is harder to avoid. The Bible speaks of fellowship and closeness in a church body and the smaller churches afford this personal touch better.
All Christains should make an effort to study teh Bible and be able to understand it or at least part of it. We should all be able to look at Rick Warren and his church and be abkle to compare it to a Bible driven purpose. We should be able to compare our beliefs to anything in life the same way.
I do that in looking at Obama and he falls short of teh mark. In fact he is looking more and more like he has taken teh mark.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
FYI even Pastor Rick calls his church a mob.
August 14, 2008 - 15:31 ET by dydxFYI even Pastor Rick calls his church a mob.
95% of the time in his sermons he passionately encourages everyone to join a small group of no more than 10 (I believe 10. Could be 13) that meets every week outside of church. He frequently has small groups up on stage giving testimony to whatever pain they've gone through and worked out together or good works of wonderful impact that they have done or are still doing.
It is there, he says, is where the real church lies. In the small groups, not the mob of Saddelback.
WRONG, read again, here is what WARREN said:
August 13, 2008 - 16:11 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasWRONG, read again, here is what WARREN said:
"Whenever God wanted to prepare someone for his purposes, he took 40 days"
Warren didn't say that the number 40 days has anything "significant". He plainly stated that "Whenever God wanted to prepare someone for his purposes, he took 40 days". And the BIBLE does NOT teach that and I clearly proved his citations to support this crazy claim, to be in error. That is what Warren is asserting and that simply is NOT true.
I could care less how much MONEY Warren gives. First he is in error publishing the amount he gives. Secondly it doesn't matter. Giving money doesn't make error and unsound doctrine OKAY. Got it (I'm not holding my breath)?
More importantly and conveniently, Warren's "giving" of this 90% of the royalties goes to his OWN organization P.E.A.C.E. which does pay for his TRAVEL, FOOD, and TRANSPORTATION and so on. He takes it out of one pocket and puts it in the other. But again, so what? ERROR is not justified because someone GIVES a bunch of money. What kind of nonsense and uncritical analysis is that? Good grief.
My sense is you don't WANT to see. You are an apologist for Warren instead of being illuminated. You asked for the "bad doctrine" I gave an example and now encouraged you to read COMPREHENSIVE critiques and you argue back. That clearly isn't a question you posed in search of truth but to be combative IN SPITE of my proving Warren's error in one of MANY instances.
Yes, you can cover your eyes and ears and point to other teachers and the errors of others so you don't have to admit to or deal with Warren's. You certainly are free to remain ignorant. But know this, you remain ignorant and Warren remains in error no matter how far you run or how hard you point the other way.
The answer to terrorism IS war. Next Please!
Just want to add a few
August 13, 2008 - 17:26 ET by Darth DutchJust want to add a few small things before I sign off for the day.
First, I'm not a Warren apologist, I just said I've read the book. I also said his writings should be critiqued.
Second, my point in stating what money he gives was simply in response to what you said about it being a gimmick, as in a marketing gimmick to sell more books. And do you know that all 90% of his giving goes to PEACE? Or just some? I would expect him to give some of his money to one of his causes.
Third, doctrinally Warren holds to the historic Christian teachings, at least as far as I can tell. You can view what Saddleback's formal statement of faith is here: http://saddleback.com/flash/believe2.html.
Your main point about bad doctrine was in regards to what he said about God taking 40 days to in a person to complete His purposes; no argument from me here, God takes all sorts of time with all sorts of different people. But that isn't in and of itself heretical. And if all you have is this one small quote from his book, you don't have much. Now, if you do have more that is clearly heretical (meaning it goes against what the historical statement of faith is, similar to Saddleback's, that's another story, but I don't count what he says in one sentence of his book as heresy.)
You and I and others can rightly argue over the "non essentials" of the faith, but should stay united in the "essentials". And, as a side note, your style of argument doesn't come off as persuasive, just attacking and vindictive. You're not going to be very effective in persuading people with that style.
Darth Dutch
Sorry, one more thought
August 13, 2008 - 17:30 ET by Darth DutchYou didn't reply back to my comment about the quote saying Jesus was empowered and not transformed. Any response?
Darth Dutch
Well, in another world I
August 14, 2008 - 08:51 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasWell, in another world I would spend most of my time debating or discussing the views of others in the comments sections of various websites. Of course that is just one of a million "other worlds" I might wish for at moments. In the real world I don't always have time to stay and respond so here is another day and my hope is you will find this response.
First, your claim would actually SUPPORT what I said. Warren, with his GIMMICK labels it a period when Jesus was TRANSFORMED....WRONG...and you say he was EMPOWERED...which would contradict WARREN so even you disagree.
But for the record and with the "empowered" (from dunamis) JESUS was ALREADY empowered BEFORE the 40 days so WARREN FAILS in trying to use this example for his GIMMICK.
Look at the passage and look at verse 1, "Jesus being FULL of the Holy Ghost...was lead by the Spirit into the wilderness".
Before the 40 days Jesus was ALREADY empowered. Being full of the Holy Ghost IS the empowerment. Then at the end, v14 it says Jesus returned in the "power of the Holy Spirit" which means the period of TESTING did not DIMINISH the fullness, i.e. empowerment of the Holy Spirit that Jesus had BEFORE the 40 days.
The point of the story was that the Devil could not overthrow or diminish Christ. This has NOTHING to do with Warren's GIMMICK. Jesus was FULL of the Holy Spirit BEFORE the testing.
Luke 4
1And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness,
2Being forty days tempted of the devil. And in those days he did eat nothing: and when they were ended, he afterward hungered.
3And the devil said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, command this stone that it be made bread.
4And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
5And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.
6And
the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory
of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give
it.
7If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine.
8And
Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is
written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou
serve.
9And he
brought him to Jerusalem, and set him on a pinnacle of the temple, and
said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence:
10For it is written, He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee:
11And in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
12And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.
13And when the devil had ended all the temptation, he departed from him for a season.
14And
Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee: and there went
out a fame of him through all the region round about.
The answer to terrorism IS war. Next Please!
I'm not here to persuade you, you are happy in your ignorance
August 14, 2008 - 08:27 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasI'm not here to persuade you. You see what you want to see and are happy in your ignorance. The examples of Christ and the Apostles show that not everyone is to be pursued with the objective of persuading, sometimes a strong rebuke is what they need. Secondly, it is never my fault you fail to be persuaded by the truth, that is your fault. You're just looking for excuses to ignore the truth in front of you. Lay down your invested ego in the matter.
You can call some essential "non-essentials" to soothe your conscience but deliberate DECEPTION by Rick Warren isn't a NON-ESSENTIAL.
The answer to terrorism IS war. Next Please!
If you don't want to
August 14, 2008 - 10:48 ET by Darth DutchIf you don't want to persuade people, then why even rebuke or make an argument for your case? That makes no sense...
It's clear that we aren't going to agree and I'm fine with that. I hold by my argument that what he teaches isn't heresy in that it doesn't go against the primary tenents of the historical Christian faith.
Have a great day,
Darth Dutch
Rick Warren gives LIP SERVICE
August 14, 2008 - 11:27 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasFirst I said "BAD DOCTRINE", "ERROR" you introduced the word heresy. Obviously YOU don't listen and you superimpose YOUR ideas of what you THINK I meant onto what I REALLY said. Sorry you have so little respect honestly representing the words of others.
Secondly, one can contend for the truth without making someone SPECIFIC a target of their case. YOU jumped in and demonstrated you weren't interested in the truth and I rebuked you. That doesn't mean I quit making a general appeal to the truth for the sake of those WHO ARE interested. DUH.
But even at that, I never claimed I was here "NOT TO PERSUADE" (go read what I wrote...I won't hold my breath you have already demonstrated you don't really care to rightly recall what I write).
I said that the example in Scripture shows one isn't necessarily obligated to make persuasion their AIM with all people.. I never said I WASN'T interested in persuading. DUH...READ AGAIN. It was YOU I wasn't interested in persuading because YOU aren't interested in listening and learning so you get a rebuke.
Rick Warren gives LIP SERVICE to the primary tenets of orthodox Christian doctrine while introducing all kinds of exegetical/hermeneutical violations that lead people to gross and spiritually corrupting error. You want to hold your nose, cover your ears and close you eyes and keep telling parroting, "Rick Warren holds to the basic tenets" while he is poisoning the rest of your food? Have at it.
The answer to terrorism IS war. Next Please!
Excellent piece, Ken.
August 13, 2008 - 13:59 ET by lotrExcellent piece, Ken. Hunter Baker is to be commended (I read his open letter), and the Rev. Rick Warren would do well to consider himself admonished and act accordingly as is befitting a pastor of his stature.
If anyone is looking for Warren to ask tough questions...
August 13, 2008 - 14:14 ET by c5thenI predict they will be disappointed, especially if they are looking for moralistic and character questions. IMO Mr. Warren sees this opportunity as one where he can further enhance his standing and fame with the liberal leaning evangelical movement (I know it sounds like an oxymoron).
His book, "The Purpose Driven Life" shows he is one of those who have succumbed to the temptation to put works before faith.
I left a church because they started 'studying' that book in their bible study classes, as if it were scripture.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
Purpose Driven Money Maker
August 13, 2008 - 17:13 ET by GothampcYou are so right. I started reading that book and couldn't believe how ever so slightly the Bible was twisted. If you weren't really grounded in Bible teaching, you could easily be led astray.
If Global warming ruins the planet
August 13, 2008 - 14:34 ET by Dee Bunkwhy should liberals care - isn't it just like one big abortion? Actually - isn't it more humane? It's natural. Doesn't evolution and extinction just snuff out inconvenient life?\
If one believes in God then they believe he has control over the planet. If one only believe in Science (evolution) then no worries, some life form will evolve to survive in what ever stage the planet is in. If one believes in both then they should care more about people than the planet.
The fact that Warren cares more about climate change of which we have very little power to control, and turns a blind eye to abortion which we can easily limit shows that he is either ignorant or a fake. Does the bible focus on saving the planet or saving souls?
Religious left
August 13, 2008 - 15:04 ET by TjexciteI was asked if the religious right was dead. I replied by no. It was taken over by the religious left with the likes of Rev Wright, Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson and Barry Obama. I wish I said Rick Warren because he is the new religious left and he fits that much better. The religious right is in limbo for sometime until the new Messiah is show to be a just a simple ordinary politician.
we've been around a very
August 14, 2008 - 09:23 ET by TruthMongerwe've been around a very long time and probably aren't going away any time soon
we don't need a ton of MSM attention to get things done
Journalism is the opium of the liberals
John McCain Better Wake Up
August 13, 2008 - 17:10 ET by GothampcThis is going to be a big waste of time. Who is advising John McCain into doing this? If McCain thinks he is going to get into the good graces of Evangelicals, he's mistaken. Warren will only ask questions that are liberal in nature. Obama will sail through with his liberal answers and McCain will be left spluttering.
I dare Warren to ask Obama why he spent so much time in a church that preached racism.
Warren wrote a book
August 13, 2008 - 18:16 ET by DelsaAn interesting book.
It is not the Bible. It is just an interesting book. A self help sort of book.
His 4o day reference is whatever.
Personally, I don't think he will be a hard hitting interviewer and I don't think he will push back with follow up questions.
McCain and SOBama will NOT even be on the stage at the same time. Whoever goes first, will have the edge.
Personally, it will tell me a lot if McCain goes first.
It will tell me a lot about Warren.
If he gives the clean up position to SOBama it will tell me a lot.
Warren should be nothing to argue about.
He wrote an interesting book.
Oh no, not another one of
August 13, 2008 - 18:23 ET by bigtimerOh no, not another one of those seperate interview/questions type of thing....I thought it was going to be a debate...silly me.
Seriously doubt if I will even watch it, let alone remember to...the last one I tried to watch was so booooooring.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
Wow...so much ill will here towards Pastor Rick.
August 13, 2008 - 20:35 ET by dydxBeen a long time reader here....since the very, very beginning...and I also go to Saddleback Community Church...and, believe it or not....I also have tickets to go to the debate this Saturday. I might not be able to make it (have to show up at 2:30pm), but I'll try.
The way I see it...although presendential debates are few and far between, they are still at least 3 more other than this one scheduled. One more for the veeps. This one is unique being that it's at a church and not at a university like the others and that it is being moderated by a pastor and not some so-called "objective" journalist. I don't expect it to be like the others.
I've been to church on the Sundays before elections. I was a little disappoint at first when I got no guidance from Pastor Rick as to whom I should vote for. I remeber the sermon before the '04 election when all he said...right before we left...that we should remember that the church believes all life is sacred, even the unborn. He may have said something that alluded to the election...but he never said it outright and he certainly never endorsed any candidate. I got a feeling that he truly didn't want to be too political.
I do know that he met with Bush many times...that Bush even calls him "Ricky," and that he does regard Bush fondly...so he very well may be a closet Republican...I don't know, but it really doesn't leak out in any of his sermons.
So I do think that he is really trying to be fair and balanced on this...but remember he is just an ordinary guy that has ended up doing extraordinary work. He even says so himself. He knows that fame can corrupt and he tries not to be influenced by it. Again...I know because it comes out once in a while during sermon. He knows that he is no intellectual giant...and it's okay with him. You guys just don't get that he's just an ordinary guy...and for people to get bent out of shape because they think such and such issue will or won't be addressed is dissappointing, funny...and I guess somewhat expected. Pastor Rick is really trying not to be too political...he's trying to reach the candidates on a different level. We'll see this Sat. what that level is. <b>Many here seem to want him to be to the <i>right</i> what Jermiah Wright is to the <i>left</i></b>...but Pastor Rick really isn't that kind of person.
Remember...for just an ordinary guy he's done an incredible amount of great work. He built his church just for people who don't go to church...and it works. You call what he does as "gimmicky," "shallow," "loosely theological," etc... but the bottom line is that man and his church has done more in one month than many of the negative people here will ever do in 10 lifetimes. I've snorkled with a man I met in Cancun who went to Saddleback for training and now has is own church in Cancun. The man and his church has done a lot of good...a lot of good.
When the tsunami's hit, a mention of it at the end of a sermon...in passing...about something to the effect of "think a pray for the victims" raised a million dollars for relief. When Katrina hit the church sent droves and droves of people to help with "mud outs," rebuilding, etc... A few years ago we took a gimmicky campaign of "40 days of community" and managed to raise enough food to feed the homeless in Orange County three square meals for 40 days. The amount of food raised smashed the existing record by 2-3x or more. Hundreds of tons of food was raised.
Many times a collection isn't even passed out. They even say that if you're visiting Saddleback then please don't feel obligated to contribute, the collection is only for members of the church. When they do talk of tithing (once a year, before Thanksgiving), they emphasize that if you feel pressure to give...then DON'T GIVE. Pastor Rick says that you should never give when you feel pressure (by church or anything else). Only give willingly.
So...does this sound like a man that's engulfed by greed? Or power? Or a man that's out to "con" people? Sure...disagree with his approach..but to go ad hominem on the man says more about the attacker than it does about the attackee.
I go to his church, hear his sermons, and even bring people when I can. I'm also what they call a "seeker,"...meaning I still have issues embracing all of Christian / biblical doctrine...and guess what? Saddleback even encourages me to continue seeking and to never stop until I'm ready to stop. I didn't even read his books until a year or so of relatively steady attendance. So...call me what you want, but I am certainly not sycophantish nor a blind, devout acolyte of the Rick Warren machine. I'm willing to be deeply dissappointed in him if deserved, but I really haven't seen a need to be so far.
Really..for those haters / negative vibers....just go to a few of his services and then judge the man. I think you can even get the audio tapes somewhere on the web. I'm pretty sure you can watch 'em too, but you might have to be a member to do so.
If I have the time mebbee Sat. I'll post my thoughts and impressions of the debate. I may be dissappointed or pleasantly surprised or both. ...Dunno...we'll see...
Fair enough DYDX
August 13, 2008 - 21:08 ET by Cool ArrowI know him by only what I've seen of him on Glenn Beck.
We all have expectations of this debate, and most are hoping this isn't a whitewash over social issues fraught with platitudes, generalities, and noncommital rope-a-dope. We know Sens. Obama and McCain will take that approach.
But RedState has a point. Pastor Rick can bow to Obama's demands that abortion not be discussed, or he can listen to the voice that tells him all children are important.
Warren's handling of this discussion will speak volumes about what purpose drives his life.
I ♣ my seal
Exactly Cool
August 14, 2008 - 07:55 ET by lotrExactly. Sorry, but it would be a glaring sin of omission for him, a professed disciple of Christ and shepherd of a large flock, to stick his head in the sand and not ask about abortion. The fact that there is even a question that he wouldn't reduces his moral stature quite considerably. A little, frail, poor nun in Calcutta apparently had more bravery.
"What is taking place in America is a war against the child. And if we accept that the mother can kill her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another." -- Mother Theresa at National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, D.C. attended by President and Mrs. Clinton, Algorista, et al., February (1997)
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
Barabas Obama
August 14, 2008 - 08:02 ET by Cool ArrowAs I said in another post. This isn't a battle over Obama's soul, it's a battle over America's soul.
If America shouts "give us Barabas" at the ballot box, it is with eyes wide open and defiant.
I ♣ my seal
Let's see, anyone OBJECTING and CRITICIZING Warren's con "hates"
August 14, 2008 - 09:13 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasI go to his church, hear his sermons, and even bring people when I can.
I'm also what they call a "seeker,"...meaning I still have issues
embracing all of Christian / biblical doctrine...I'm willing to be deeply dissappointed in him if deserved, but I really haven't seen a need to be so far.
Really..for those haters / negative vibers....just go to a few of his
services and then judge the man. I think you can even get the audio
tapes somewhere on the web. I'm pretty sure you can watch 'em too, but
you might have to be a member to do so.
_______________________________________________
Let's see, anyone OBJECTING and CRITICIZING Warren's work is a "hater" and "negative viber" though you claim you are willing to be "deeply disappointed" in Warren if he deserves it. Yet you have not found a need to be so far though you admit that you have "issues" embracing all of Christian doctrine.
Pal, you are a mess that needs to be quiet until you settle on what you believe and quite preaching to others about why they shouldn't CRITIQUE Warren's work when YOU yourself STILL have issues with Christian doctrine.
In your little world, you get to have issues but others don't since their issue might be with the person YOU just happen to prefer as the one you listen to? What a hypocrite.
Secondly, you conveniently label those who disagree with Warren and CRITIQUE his ERROR as "haters" and those with "negative vibes" so you don't REALLY have to approach the reality that he just might be in error. How disingenuous to say you are willing to be disappointed but when anyone who brings possibly disappointing critiques YOU label them a "hater". What garbage.
No one is arguing what Warren might have RIGHT. Even a broken CLOCK is right twice a day. The arguments and issues are with his GRAVE ERROR. You apparently have no clue the consequences of a Bible teacher that engages in exegetical/hermeneutical error. But then why should that be surprising, Warren could give 2 cents toward exegetical/hermeneutical integrity.
The answer to terrorism IS war. Next Please!
you remind alot of that
August 14, 2008 - 09:30 ET by TruthMongeryou remind alot of that trach dude that used to storm around here
these are some remarkable insights you have about other people
even Jesus Himself doesn't rebuke a brother like this
so how are you able to come to all of these judgements?
are you a Dr. of theology like Warren is?
Journalism is the opium of the liberals
LOL GAT you got it wrong
August 14, 2008 - 15:22 ET by dydxYou know...I never said that anyone OBJECTING and CRITICIZING Warrens's work is a hater. Though I never called you a hater / negative viber I admit your post and others came to mind.
It's not your OBJECTING and CRITICIZING that makes you a hater, GAT. It's you. Others reading this know exactly what I'm talking about. Look how you got really bent out of shape to my post and how really bent out of shape you are with Warren. I mean really, really bent out of shape. I bet there are many here who, as I did, imagined your face veins bulging with ichor due to your dangerously high systolic reading.
Here are some things you've said just in this thread: you've called people hypocrites (valid, of course in your mind), called Pastor Rick an ego-maniacle imposter, used "Purpose Drive Con," disparaged Charismatic Ministers, called this humble poster a mess, called people suckers and sheep and sycophants and inadequacy filled, called Pastor Rick a hustler and a con-man, accused his wife of wearing red and sporting blasphemously high spiked heels, called my mom a marmoset, etc.....
Now even you should admit...the above language bespeaks more of someone whose on the "hater / neg vibe" side of the fence than someone who is merely being "OBJECTIVE and CRITICAL."
I don't give a rip about you disagreeing with his theology, approach, level of spiritual maturity, etc... It's how passionately negative you are to the man that's off-putting. And if you're not hate filled then you're at least extremely, extremely angry. Which again puts you on the Jeremiah Wright side of the fence rather than the Dalai Lama side.
You know...I'm wondering if the Dalai Lama were to host this...would you be just
as hatefu....er...angry? Would you call him a charlatan for conning
people into believing that he was actually the re-incarnation of the
last Dalai Lama? You could say that the man also has a sycophantish following, is regarding as a prophet, etc.... Do you really think he's a hustler?
There are many things that I can disagree with fellow Christians over...even to the point where I think they're misguided. There are some that believe the earth is thousands of years old. I absolutely don't agree but I respect where they are in their believes and I don't go poppin' a vein over it. Like it or not...there are many many ways that "established" christian churches interpret their holy books. Catholics believe the Communion gets transfigured and actually becomes the flesh of Christ before they consume it. Whether I disagree or not I'm not gonna go out there and called the Holy See a con-man and a liar (or is it con-men and liars?). I step back and look at the good works that they do in toto...that tells me more about them than the niglees that I disagree with. I have good friends and acquaintances who are Mormon, 7th Day Adventist, Jehovahs Witness, etc.... I've had close talks to a Methodist minister, a Church of Christ pastor, Catholic priests, etc... I take in what they say and believe, and don't go down the angry "my way or the highway" route that you seem to embrace. I realize that our spiritual journey is a personal one, and to tread on someone elses honest and grounded beliefs is just, well, unevolved.
Lastly, you have no idea of what issues I have with Scripture. I mean no idea. You have no idea to the extent or non-extent that I'm seeking. No idea as to the people I've spoken with, classes I've taken, introspection I've gone through. Not only that...you think it's hypocritical of me to point out your ugly critiques when I still have issues. That's like calling me a hypocrite if I say that I don't like criminals and crime even though I too break the law. But guess what? 99% of us break laws every day *. That doesn't mean we can't have an opinion about crime or even call a crook when you see him.
Again...it's not your umbrage that I necessarily take umbrage to...it's your attitude and approach.
COEXIST!
*going over the speed limit, rolling stops, listening to accordian music other than Wierd Al, etc...
Rick Warren of his famed "Purpose Driven Con"
August 14, 2008 - 08:53 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasRick Warren of his famed "Purpose Driven Con" will find it VERY
convenient to ignore or at best minimize, morality set forth in the
Scriptures.
At issue here is not only the nature of questions but WHO is Rick
Warren and how did he attain the status he has within Evangelical
Christianity? He did so through IGNORANCE, both deliberate and by
default. The average believer is dependent upon those ordained or
recognized as teachers of the Word to be diligent, weighty and well
studied in both teaching and approving of other teachers.
Today's pulpit is generally filled with "Crybaby Boomers and Beyond"
who compensate for their own theological and personal inadequacies
through garbage and gimmicks when it comes to sound Bible doctrine.
Hence the sheep consume the garbage they are fed by deliberately weak,
lazy, inept, and unconscionable Ministers.
The piece of theological garbage Warren put out, "The Purpose Driven
Con" was devoured by Pastors and congregations more interested in these
gimmicks than sound doctrine. And to aid this were a litany of
Charismaniac Ministers (a bit of an oxymoron) and their
non-Charismanical Evangelical buddies. Their tolerance and often
sycophantic support of Warren's novel, but grossly erring, doctrines,
helped make them acceptable where they should have soundly been
rejected.
People are suckered into this kind of garbage all the time. Warren
is just another hustler, another con-man who is borrowing God's Holy
Word and corrupting it with some magic formula and non-existent
exegesis replaced by speculation and the superimposition of his own
ideas and wishes.
And now someone expects this egomaniacal imposter to have integrity
and take issue with a leader who is calling himself born again yet
courts and even supports bodies of people who hate the morality of the
bible?
The answer to terrorism IS war. Next Please!