The Piper Warren Interview (Part 2)

I promised in Mondays post to share some thoughts on therecent interview between John Piper and Rick Warren. However, I decided to post something even better today because I think it is such an excellent get to the point article on this bewildering interview. Tim Challies has an exceptionally popular blog and with good reason. It is insightful, theologically tight, and full of discernment. Challies has also written extensively on Warren's material in previous years and has even met him in person. What Tim wrote I can say an absolutely hearty amen and amen (and I never thought I'd say that about someone from Canadia). I've said enough - let's listen to Tim Challies on this subject.

Desiring God Ministries has posted John Piper’s long-awaited interview with Rick Warren. This has brought to completion the invitation Piper extended to Warren to speak at the 2010 Desiring God National Conference. The interview was supposed to happen at that event, but in the end Warren was unable to travel to Minneapolis and the interview was postponed. The men got together on May 1, 2011 and this video is the result.

Today I want to offer up some thoughts on it. I do so because over the years I have come out as a bit of a critic of Rick Warren and his ministry. This is not something I am entirely comfortable with, but it was no surprise to me that when the interview was posted I began to receive questions; people wanted to know what I thought of it. And, frankly, I wanted to know what I thought of it. So what I intend to do in this article is simply let you into my mind as I wrestle through the interview and its implications.

Before I begin, let me say a word about critiquing Warren. Many people seem to imagine that there is some kind of a Calvinist conspiracy against Rick Warren. I will grant that there are many outrageous critics out there who seem to put Warren in the same league as Jezebel and Judas. Despite such people there are many others who have good, legitimate critiques of the man and his ministry. I think we need to be careful that we do not combine these 2 groups—that we do not ignore legitimate critiques because of the outrageous ones.

Having said that, let me tell you where my mind went as I watched and read the interview. I am very glad to hear from you whether my thinking has gone off-track or if I am just plain wrong. The comments are open and I will be reading them as I am able.

1. Awareness
I find myself aware of my youth. As I begin to think through this issue I immediately realize that both of these men are old enough to be my father and I want to be very careful that I do not play the role of the impulsive, self-assured, prideful young(er) man. The Bible commends age and maturity and this leaves me inclined to doubt my own interpretation when it conflicts with those who are older than I am. Both of these men have far more knowledge of Scripture than I do and both have much greater ministry experience. Both have obviously been used by the Lord in unique ways.

And yet their greater age and ministry experience does not mean that I cannot have legitimate concerns. I know that what was true of Rick Warren before I saw this interview is true of him still. And this means that the concerns I had before remain concerns. While I am aware of the age difference between myself and these men, I am also aware of what I am convinced are legitimate concerns.

2. Uncertainty
From awareness I went to uncertainty. I found myself grappling with this question: What does John Piper wish for people to take away from this interview? Piper knows that he is a leader within the church, one who is much admired; he knows of the concerns people have for Warren; he knows that this interview will be widely watched, dissected and interpreted. All of this means that he must want people who watch this interview to come to a certain conclusion. As far as I can tell, that conclusion is this: Rick Warren has been misinterpreted and misunderstood. The implication is that he is an orthodox brother in Christ, and that Piper is leading us to see that many of Warren’s critics are being unjust toward him.

This is one of the takeaways I am seeing in the blogosphere and in comments left right here at my web site. My friend Timmy Brister seemed to say this in an article he posted at his blog where he marvelled at the theological agreement between the 2 men. A commenter at my blog wrote “Hope you will have the integrity to comment on the interview Tim, as it shows some of your previous critiques might have been off and misplaced. Very good interview, and helpful in showing just what a sharp, Bible-loving pastor Rick Warren is.”

3. Confusion
I find myself confused with this. Now hear me say that I love John Piper. I admire him a great deal, I’ve benefitted immensely from his ministry and on the few occasions I have spent time with him, have enjoyed him on a personal level. My disappointment in no way means I am turning on him or negating all that his ministry has meant to me. I feel like I need to repeat this so it does not get lost in the noise. I love and admire John Piper.

And yet I find that I disagree with his conclusion. And here is why: I do not think he has given us an accurate understanding of Rick Warren or his ministry. It has given us a very partial understanding, one based on a very limited scope of conversation. I do not think there is any malice here or any intent to deceive. It’s just reality as I understand it.

This interview was meant to be a frank one. Piper asked Warren some of the questions that people have been wondering. He asked about the gospel, about the existence of hell, about preaching philosophy, about God’s sovereignty, about the doctrines of grace. Yet, because Piper’s questions were based almost entirely on the text of The Purpose Driven Life, the interview was narrow in scope. And because it was an “appreciative interview” it steered away from some of the book’s most pronounced concerns. The fact is, though, that there is far more to Rick Warren than this 1 book. He has written several books; he has preached thousands of sermons; he has written other things and spoken other places.

As the interview drew to a close I saw that many of the predominant concerns I have with The Purpose Driven Life as well as Warren’s wider ministry went unaddressed. Let me speak to just 2 of them. And I think this is the crux of what I am saying in all of this—we do not have to change our critiques of Rick Warren based on this interview. What he said in this interview simply does not correlate to the facts of his books and ministry.

A Theological Chameleon
One of the most common critiques of Rick Warren and one of the most important is that he is something of a chameleon. There is a kind of pragmatism to him where he will be A and Not A depending on the context. I have little confidence that in a different context Warren would have answered the questions the same way. I am not saying that he outright lied to Piper, but simply that his track record shows that he adapts to fit the context.

Warren has been lauded in the secular media for speaking for a long time to a large group of Jewish leaders without ever using the name of Jesus. He is now being lauded by Calvinists for affirming the doctrines of grace. He has received praise from Roman Catholics. After all, he recently wrote the introduction to a special edition of TIME magazine that celebrated the life of Mother Teresa. This introduction praises the woman and holds her up as a model of Christian virtue. There Warren tells about a handwritten note by Mother Teresa that adorns the wall of his office. He proclaims that Mother Teresa “offered the same unconditional love our Savior did. By being the hands and feet of Jesus, this petite Albanian nun became one of the great evangelists of the 20th century.” He declared her “exhibit A of a true hero—a saint.” Mother Teresa, though, was a Catholic of Catholics, a devout follower of her church. She was also a universalist and one who saw no reason to seek to convert people to the gospel.

I think I am right to be confused here, right to ask questions. How do the doctrines of grace allow for an ardent Roman Catholic, one who denied those doctrines as anathema, to exemplify the Christian faith, to be a true hero—a saint? Surely I am not the only one who sees a contradiction. Surely I am not wrong to balk at Warren teaching Jewish rabbis how to increase the strength of their congregations.

Warren gave all the right answers in this interview, but I am not at all convinced that they reflect what he truly believes at all times and in all contexts. And certainly his ministry does not appear to bear out the kind of theological underpinnings that would reflect the theology he espouses here. Where is the influence of Edwards? Where is the monergism? Where do we see a belief in total depravity consistently applied in any of his books?

Use of Scripture
Another very common critique of Rick Warren and his books concerns the use of Scripture. Throughout The Purpose Driven Life he consistently and unapologetically tears verses from their context and applies them haphazardly, relying on a long list of translations and paraphrases to do so. Examples abound and would probably number in the hundreds; these are very well documented and very widely known.

Piper spoke to Warren about Scripture but stopped short of asking about his use of Scripture. If I were to preach in my church and Scripture as Warren does, I would be rebuked and I would deserve the rebuke. If a man stood in the pulpit of Bethlehem Baptist Church and used Scripture as Warren does, he would be rebuked as well, I am convinced. We do not want men to learn from Warren how to preach, how to use Scripture! He does not treat the Word of God as the very words of God. He can speak of his indebtedness to Edwards and Spurgeon and others, but his preaching shows very little of their influence.

These are just 2 critiques that remain unaddressed—very important critiques that seem to get to the heart of what he truly believes.

4. Unconvinced
There is still a pronounced gap between what Warren says in this interview and what he says elsewhere. And there is just as large a gap between what Warren says here and what his ministry bears out. Saying all that he said and affirming all that he affirmed is not enough; he also needs to show it. But he has not done that. The reason everyone was so surprised that Warren is Reformed is that he has never given us any reason to imagine such a thing. As Michael Horton wrote in a review of The Purpose Driven Life, “Judging by The Purpose-Driven Life, Pastor Warren’s theology seems to reflect run-of-the-mill evangelical Arminianism, especially with its emphasis on the new birth as the result of human decision and cooperation with grace. There are also heavy traces of Keswick ‘higher life’ teaching throughout the book.” What he says in this interview is not at all consistent with what he has shown through his ministry. So why would we believe that it’s true?

Now hear me say that the fact that his theology is “run-of-the-mill evangelical Arminianism” does not mean that he is not a Christian; it does not mean that he cannot be a godly man or a good pastor. But it does mean that it is not Reformed, because A cannot also be Not A.

I love John Piper (I already said that, right?). I’m glad that he has risen to a position of leadership within the church. But this interview has not at all convinced me to retract what I believe about Rick Warren. I firmly believe that those who have respectfully offered measured critiques of Warren and his ministry—substantial and important critiques—have done so for good reason. And those reasons remain.

Go On To Part 3
Go Back To Part 1

"Dream Theology" - Rick Warren's Sermon At Desiring God (Part 14)

The following commentary corresponds to the following video from 45:46 to 54:13



This section includes the standard fare of man centered moralisms, absence of God's Sovereignty, self promotion, self serving use of bad Bible translations, and your stock standard Rick Warren Scripture twisting. Most of these things have been covered ad infinitum in this series but I thought Daniel Neades had some helpful insights into Rick Warren's "dream theology". How ironic that Warren would choose to close out this nightmare of a message with his self-invented dream theology.

This aricle courtesy of Daniel Neades from the Apprising Ministries website.

Much of modern evangelicalism seems to be fixated upon the idea that we can only progress as individual Christians and the church if we are pursing a dream or vision. This tendency is epitomized in these two claims by Rick Warren:

Nothing happens till somebody starts dreaming. What we need today are great dreamers.

Now, where exactly does the Bible teach any of this? Ah, I see we are helpfully given two Scriptures. Let’s look at those.

Where there is no vision, the people perish. (Proverbs 29:8)

Actually, that’s Proverbs 29:18, not 29:8. But, no matter. It’s easy to make a harmless mistake like that. But there’s another, more serious, problem. Proverbs 29:18 does not teach that ‘what we need today are great dreamers’. Here’s a more accurate translation, with the second half of the verse included:

Where there is no revelation, the people cast off restraint; But happy is he who keeps the law.’ (Proverbs 29:18, NKJV)

That’s better. It is now plain that this verse talks neither about our dreams and hopes for the future, nor of some leader’s ‘vision’ for a better tomorrow. No. Rather, it refers to prophetic revelation from God. And specifically, as is made clear by the second half of the verse, it is referring to the revelation of God’s Law (torah), which of course we have in the Scriptures by the prophets. Here’s a tiny snippet about this verse from a reputable commentary:

[Janzen] adds: “The conviction in Prov. 29:18a semantically and syntactically parallels that in Prov. 11:14a, ‘Where there is no guidance (tahbūlôt), a people falls.’ There can be no doubt that tahbūlôt refers to the guiding power of wisdom received from God (cp. Prov. 1:1–7), and as such is generically synonymous with tôrâ (“teaching”). Anyone capable of holding the conviction expressed in xi 14a is capable of holding that ‘where there is no vision the people fall into anarchy.’ ” In sum, hāzôn [‘revelation’] refers here to the sage’s inspired revelation of wisdom. (Waltke, B. K. (2005). The Book of Proverbs. Chapters 15-31. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament p. 446).

What Proverbs 29:18 says about this revealed Law is that, without it, people will ‘run wild’ (as HALOT succinctly puts it). In other words, this verse teaches us that God’s Law acts as a curb on the base instincts and desires of our sinful nature. This understanding is exactly in keeping with orthodox Christian doctrine, and is what Lutherans call the ‘first use of the Law’:

…the Law was given to men for three reasons:

First, that thereby outward discipline might be maintained against wild, disobedient men [and that wild and intractable men might be restrained, as though by certain bars]; secondly, that men thereby may be led to the knowledge of their sins;
thirdly, that after they are regenerate and [much of] the flesh notwithstanding cleaves to them, they might on this account have a fixed rule according to which they are to regulate and direct their whole life… (Epitome of the Formula of Concord, Article VI

Proverbs 29:18 thus has nothing to do with letting ‘God stretch your imagination’, or our need for ‘great dreamers’, but rather with one beneficial use of the revelation given by God through His prophets.

Thanks for that Daniel. Tim Challies says that Rick Warren is an abuser of Scripture and here is one classic example out of a very long and growing list.

More to come . . .

Go On To Part 15
Go Back To Part 13
Go Back To Part 1

Behold The Great Humility Of Rick Warren - Rick Warren's Sermon At Desiring God (Part 6)

The following commentary corresponds to the following video from 21:45 to 23:30



Here we see a small sampling of a lot that lies ahead. Rick Warren admonishes his audience that the one necessary quality they need to be learners, and hence disciples, and hence leaders (you know, that vast biblical doctrine of "leadership") is humility. Within the space of less than two minutes Warren makes both a clarion call to humility and a brazen statement about how he is so much smarter than his enemies. Arrogant and jerk are strong words but I can't think of anything stronger so they will have to suffice for now. I just cannot believe that Rick Warren can continually act like an arrogant jerk in these large forums and not get taken to task.

Most likely, the enemies Warren is referring to are those who have been critical of his theology and practice. Not only did Warren give an apt demonstration of his staggering humility by pronouncing himself "smarter than" his "enemies", he also dumped on his many discerning critics saying that they are people "who only learn from themselves" - lacking the clear Yoda like qualities Warren has gained through his advanced learning abilities. Unbelievable - is he that delusional that he cannot hear what he is saying? Four of Warren's strongest critics who immediately spring to mind are Michael Horton, John Macarthur, Tim Challies, and James White. So is Rick Warren saying that these guys are dumber than he is? Is he saying that they are unlearned and only read their own work? Is he saying that he is way more humble than they are? Michael Horton, John Macarthur, Tim Challies, and James White are four giant intellects who grace the evangelical landscape with outstanding biblical exposition, depth of knowledge, and razor sharp apologetics. These are not the kind of guys to shoot from the hip and when they level criticism at Warren it is not unfounded nor ungrounded. Some of that has been on display as this series has progressed revealing that they are very aware of Rick Warren's "theological content".

But does Rick Warren really learn from his critics? The three most common and serious charges leveled against him would be:
1. His failure to preach the Gospel.
2. The fact that he continually twists Scripture and is overtly willing to use poor Bible translations in instances where they lend credence to his own ideas.
3. His regular failure to distinguish between believers and unbelievers when applying covenants and promises found in Scripture.

These are very serious grievances. The chorus of criticism did reach the point where Pastor Warren felt it necessary to write a book that would respond to the critics and set the record straight. He hired an apologetics attack dog by the name of Richard Abanes to harass websites and blogs that were critical of Warren as well as write the book "Rick Warren And The Purpose That Drives Him". So Rick Warren devoted a whole book to respond to the many criticisms leveled at him. And what did he have to say in response to those "big three" grievances mentioned above? Nothing - absolutely nothing! While Warren devotes plenty of energy in downplaying his friendship with Robert Schuller and his connections with the emergent church, he dances around the strongest objections raised against his ministry - in a book devoted to responding to these critics! Rick - this is not a great advertisement for how much you learn from your critics.

Tim Challies had this to say about "Rick Warren And The Purpose That Drives Him":

The single most common concern raised about Warren (at least in my experience) is his use (or misuse) of Scripture. This comes in two forms. First, Warren often quotes verses out of context or in ways that are advantageous to the point he is trying to make. He will often quote only a half of a verse if the second half does not support what he wants to say. Second, he uses poor translations and translations that say what he wants the Bible to say, rather than what God intended for it to say. There are times when this may be an honest mistake, but there are other times when it is clear that Warren has deliberately twisted a verse or taken it from its context to make it work for his purposes. Despite these two areas being of prime importance to those who are concerned with Warren's ministry, Abanes gives this no attention whatsoever. None. Not a sentence.

Another common criticism is Warren's prayer in the seventh chapter of The Purpose Driven Life. He leads the reader to pray, "Jesus I believe in you and I receive you" and then welcomes to the family of God anyone who prayed that little prayer sincerely. Yet this was before the person was provided any significant information about sin or repentance. It would be easy to assume that the person was praying to receive purpose more than to receive Christ. This is a very common criticism, yet one Abanes does not address. (online source)

All that from the man who sets new standards in humility. The pastor who is so much smarter than his critics because he learns so much from them - the very same critics who "only learn from themselves". Think about it, America's Pastor is pretty impressive. He was able to lecture us about humility, trash his opponents, and dazzle us with his smartitude all in the space of two minutes of video.

More to come . . .

Go On To Part 7
Go Back To Part 5
Go Back To Part 1

How To Do A Hermeneutical Hack Job - Rick Warren's Sermon At Desiring God (Part 5)

The following commentary corresponds to the following video from 20:50 to 21:45



Pastor Warren is now on a roll and my head is in a spin after the avalanche of information he has given out. Let's eat this elephant (no, not the invisible one in Rick Warren's living room) one piece at a time because there is no way we can digest the entire content of principle three in one sitting. This is so loaded with platitudes, cliches, moralisms, and bad hermeneutics (all filed under "Warrenisms") that I am struggling to process it all. Warren also dazzles his audience with breathtaking examples of his own immense humility. I only have time to serve up one piece of elephant today but what a vital piece of purpose driven elephant it is!

I don't think anyone is going to argue that a true disciple is someone who is constantly learning. I think it goes without saying, since a true disciple is someone who has repented of his man centered pride and knowledge, and submits to the Omniscient Lord and His inspired Word. But it doesn't take long for Warren to try and use this principle to fire a biblically incompetent cheap shot at those who dare to criticize his seeker sensitive philosophy. Here Warren contends that Matthew 11:28-30 is actually about coming to Jesus with our "felt needs" (Bill Hybels/Rick Warren language for the carnal desires of unregenerate sinners). But what does the text say:

Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light. (Matthew 11:28-30)

Though Warren's main point from this section of Scripture is "learn from me", he can't help but take a poke at his reformed critics by pointing out that the "heavy laden" and "rest" described here are "felt needs". This is a great example of Warren at his deceptive best. If you twist a verse or proof-text at high speed you get the benefit of sounding theologically impressive while you do a snow job on your audience. Warren regularly proof-texts and gets away with it. But to try this stunt at a Desiring God conference is insulting to the many faithful Bible expositors in the audience. But why can't Warren go the conventional route of finding actual biblical support for his seeker sensitive views? Because there is no biblical support. The whole seeker sensitive movement is built upon a false premise that Scripture clearly repudiates the idea in Romans 3:11 with the words "no one seeks after God"

Have you ever met someone who is not a Christian and yet "feels the need" for the imputed righteousness of Christ? Lost sinners are dead in sin (Ephesians 2:1) and unable to perceive what their true spiritual needs are - unless the Spirit of God does a supernatural work in that valley of dry bones (Ezekiel 37:1-10, John 6:44). What a sinner feels and desires is always at odds with what their real needs are (hello - Romans 3!). Any good commentator will point out many vital truths from these verses in Matthew 11 but you won't find anyone describing "rest" and "burden" as the felt needs of an unregenerate sinner. On the contrary, John Macarthur, in his commentary on Matthew 11:28-30, had this to say:

There is an echo of the first beatitude (Matthew 5:3) in this passage. Note that this is an open invitation to all who hear - but phrased in such a way that the only ones who will respond to the invitation are those who are burdened by their own spiritual bankruptcy and the weight of trying to save themselves from keeping the law. The stubbornness of humanity's sinful rebellion is such that without a sovereignly bestowed spiritual awakening, all sinners refuse to acknowledge the depth of their spiritual poverty. That is why, as Jesus says in v27, our salvation is the sovereign work of God.

No this is not nit picking. This is just one small example that draws attention to a continual pattern of behavior and we need to watch out for it. Tim Challies has rightly pointed out that:

Warren has proven repeatedly that he does not and will not honor the Bible. He preaches from the Bible, he knows vast amounts of Scripture and I’m sure he loves studying the Bible. But his ministry makes clear that he does not truly honor it in the way he uses it. I hardly even know where to begin here. Turn to any of Warren’s books and you will see that this is the case. Time and time again he has misused and abused the Bible. Years ago I read The Purpose Driven Life day-by-day and blogged my way through each chapter. I looked up each and every Bible reference. And in almost every chapter I found that Warren had used Scripture poorly, stretching its meaning, choosing translations that, more than being true to the text, furthered his intended meaning. This is the way he always has used Scripture and the way he continues to today. Turn to just about any review of his books and you’ll find multitudes of examples.

John Piper, on the other hand, has a long history of ministry in which he seeks to extend the utmost care to the Bible. He preaches verse-by-verse, carefully expositing the Word of God, seeking to be absolutely faithful to the text. And few preachers have done a better job of this over a long pulpit ministry.

The contrast between these two preaching styles and, even more so, these two ways of using the Bible, could not be more stark. John Piper honors the Bible, Rick Warren very often does not. What frustrates me is that I know Warren knows better! For some reason he does not seem offended by what he must know is his own misuse of the Bible. (online source)

I only covered a small portion of video today but addressed a big part of Rick Warren's modus operandi. Something that we need to be aware of and to warn undiscerning sheep about . . . and bury our heads in bewilderment at why John Piper would invite Rick Warren to come to this conference and serve up his usual hermeneutical hack job. "America's Pastor" would do well to heed his own advice here - never let up on learning - and heed the counsel of the many faithful expositors who have called on him continually to stop twisting Scripture in order to make it endorse his pragmatic consumer driven philosophies. It is God's Word - not a cheap buffet!

More to come . . .

Go On To Part 6
Go Back To Part 4
Go Back To Part 1

Confusing Indicatives With Imperatives - Rick Warren's Sermon At Desiring God (Part 4)

I don't know why it is, but there are some great Christian leaders and thinkers who just seem to be unwilling to take Rick Warren to task. No one said boo to him at Desiring God - at least publicly. Why is this? Is he a sacred cow? This hurts many of us who have watched in censored silence as our churches have been invaded by the Purpose Driven juggernaut. This is the major reason why I am embracing this task, to take a closer look at the "sermon" Rick Warren preached at Desiring God. From it we can learn much of what is wrong in the world of mainstream seeker sensitive evangelicalism. We can also sharpen our discernment skills as we grasp the cleverly packaged man centered theology. And there is also the issue of Warren being held to account. I am just a small voice, but I hope that a bigger voice might find this ball, pick it up, and run with it. I am also aware that many small voices can make a loud noise. So if this series is resonating with you, please feel free to use it to sound the alarm in your local churches.

The following commentary corresponds to the following video from 13:55 to 20:50



Principle 2: Guard Your Mind From Garbage
Here we see an example of Warren's love for obscure, unusual, or faulty Bible translations that support his premise. This is exposition upside down and we need to watch out for it in our local churches. In this particular instance of Proverbs 15:14 from the New Living Translation it doesn't deviate too far from the Hebrew meaning. But Warren has a propensity for treating Scripture and the many various modern translations as a giant buffet that he can pick and choose from as he pleases. Warren has been roundly criticized for this in the past and refuses to respond or relent. This very issue became a problem as my old church dived into the Purpose Driven program and continually had to deal with heavily twisted Scripture particularly emanating from paraphrase translations.

For example, on page 68 of The Purpose Driven Church, Warren uses a verse from The Living Bible to biblically substantiate his conviction that intelligent Christians should be open to “new ideas”: “The intelligent man is always open to new ideas. In fact, he looks for them” (Proverbs 18:15).

But what is the literal translation of this verse? In the King James Version it reads: “The heart of the prudent getteth knowledge; and the ear of the wise seeketh knowledge.” If you look knowledge up in the Hebrew it means knowledge! And the knowledge that true Christians pursue is the eternal unchanging counsel of God found in Scripture.

Tim Challies had this to say on the very subject of Warren's handling of Scripture and penchant for bad Bible translations (especially if they support his agenda):

Warren has proven repeatedly that he does not and will not honor the Bible. He preaches from the Bible, he knows vast amounts of Scripture and I’m sure he loves studying the Bible. But his ministry makes clear that he does not truly honor it in the way he uses it. I hardly even know where to begin here. Turn to any of Warren’s books and you will see that this is the case. Time and time again he has misused and abused the Bible. Years ago I read The Purpose Driven Life day-by-day and blogged my way through each chapter. I looked up each and every Bible reference. And in almost every chapter I found that Warren had used Scripture poorly, stretching its meaning, choosing translations that, more than being true to the text, furthered his intended meaning. This is the way he always has used Scripture and the way he continues to today. Turn to just about any review of his books and you’ll find multitudes of examples. (online source)

There is a serious impact to Warren’s use of so many translations. It shows his view of the inspiration and sufficiency of Scripture. It seems that he does not believe that the Bible as God wrote it is sufficient for people today. He must believe that a very loose paraphrase like The Message can impact people in a way that the real translations cannot. He shows that he is not a faithful expositor of the Bible. (online source)

Anyway back to principle 2 - guarding our minds from garbage. In much the same way that a broken clock gets it right twice a day so too Rick Warren occasionally makes good points. We do need to guard our minds from the corruptions of the outside world that seek to permeate our lives. Warren does make excellent points about television and other influences, counseling wisely that we can be "so open minded that our brains fall out". But again, a subject like this is well served with a strong focus on human depravity, God's Holiness, and constantly seeing the kindness of Christ in His finished work on the cross.

Warren does dish out plenty of advice here and gives some strategies for guarding our minds, but as usual, his moralism gets in the way of a Christ centered solution. The best example of this is when he turns to personal ministry success as a major motivating force in this goal of guarding our minds. He certainly anticipates the objection that I would give - God calls for faithfulness rather than successfulness. But he makes a complete hash of his rebuttal to this objection by saying that we are called to faithfulness plus fruitfulness. The fact that Warren equates success with fruitfulness is debatable in and of itself. But I want to zero in on a far bigger issue here - Warren's understanding of conversion. This is another example of Warren confusing the imperative with the indicative. He is telling his audience that the imperative is to bear fruit whereas Jesus described fruit as an indicative when He said "by their fruits you shall know them". Luther understood this when he spoke of the distinctions between faith and works when he pointed out (my paraphrase) that the fruit does not make the tree but the tree makes the fruit. Fruit is a valuable indicator of whether a persons faith is genuine. Let's go back to Jesus quote in Matthew chapter 7 (which interestingly is the same chapter where we find the oft used/oft abused "judge not lest ye be judged"):

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. (Matthew 7:15-20)

The faithful are the fruitful. Jesus also said to produce fruit in keeping with repentance (Matthew 3:8) - in other words, genuine repentance produces genuine fruit. I am laboring the point here but it is of critical importance and lies at the heart of Warren's bad understanding of conversion and the distorted gospel it produces. Mathematically stated it looks something like this:

Warren's formula is faithfulness + fruitfulness = purpose driven success
Jesus' statement is faithfulness = fruitfulness

If Warren understood this then he would withdraw a lot of his books from sale, change his preaching, and treat unfruitful church goers with a Gospel related solution rather than giving them more moralistic advice. Warren would be well served at this point to shut up and sit in the audience being taught by John Piper. False conversion is perhaps the greatest crisis that lies beneath the gleaming surface of most seeker sensitive churches today. Making the narrow gate into a wide gate might get more people through the door but it doesn't put more fruit on the tree.

Speaking of confusing indicatives and imperatives - perhaps we should stop seeing Warren's "success" as an imperative to creating a healthy church culture. But instead treat Warren's "success" as an indicative of an unhealthy church culture - cancerous some would say.

Stay tuned . . . more to come . . .

Go On To Part 5
Go Back To Part 3
Go Back To Part 1

Tim Challies v Phil Johnson: When Real Christians Contend With Each Other

There are quite a few ugly rows going on right now. There are certainly fights worth fighting and heretics that must be exposed. When Brian McLaren denies penal subsitutionary atonement, Tony Jones says homosexuality is a valid Christian lifestyle, and Rob Bell embraces universalism then real Christians must pronounce "Anathema" over them and strip them of their sheep outfits. But when the lines of demarkation drop below the level of heresy and false teaching to matters of preference and opinion our conversation should be seasoned with graciousness and love. The Lord Jesus said that "By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another" (John 13:35).

Recently two Christian men whom I love and respect, Tim Challies and Phil Johnson (their blogs "Challies dot com" and "Pyromaniacs" are two of my favorites), have taken up opposing positions in debating the issue of when to criticize and when not to. When godly men enter public debate I have found it to be very educational both in the tone of engagement, and in evaluating an opposing view. These men love each other and value their respective contributions to the body of Christ. They are big boys and man enough to weather each others criticism. And that is a major lesson for people who have been exposed to one too many ugly personality clashes in their local church. When we are secure in our Christian love we are liberated to speak our minds in the hope and knowledge that our true friends will sharpen and refine us with their observations and objections.

What started the debate was Tim's post called Evil as Entertainment where he stated among other things that:

I want to say a word today about watchblogs or discernment blogs or whatever you want to call them. I am referring to blogs that specialize in sharing bad news . . . Day after day they offer examples of all that is wrong in the church. They may vary what they offer a little bit, but what is true of them is that they offer a steady diet of negative content related to the church in general or perhaps related to just one person or one ministry . . . these blogs are really little more than entertainment. And once I had these blogs filed in that way in my mind, their popularity and their draw began to make much more sense to me. They are really just a spiritualized form of YouTube or any other site that entertains by sharing what is gross and base and negative and that does so for the sake of entertainment. There is really no value in watching boys do stupid things on skateboards and laughing when they crack their ankle bones in half; there is really no value in watching the worst pastors in America preach to the worst churches in America. Such sites offer evil as entertainment.

Phil Johnson then responded with Turning a Blind Eye to Evil is Evil Too where he agreed on some points and disagreed on others. Johnson pointed out that:

identifying what I see as the key difference between healthy discernment and the obsessive/compulsive peevishness some of our fellow critics seem to think is the mark of real orthodoxy . . . It needs to be said that "calling people out for damnable heresies that are causing people to drift away from the true faith" is a shepherd's duty, not an option—and it can be quite edifying if done well. That said, anyone can sample my preaching ministry; I invite you all to do so. What you'll discover is that when I am speaking to the flock (as opposed to lecturing in a men's meeting or exhorting pastors in a Shepherds' Conference seminar, or writing on my blog) I employ humor and criticism very sparingly. That's because when I preach, my immediate concern is to explain the meaning of specific texts of Scripture and exhort people to apply the truth to their lives in obedience to God. This blog (Pyromaniacs) serves a totally different purpose. It always has. I make no apology for that, especially here in the gutless, effeminate, faint-hearted, hopelessly "diverse," hazy-and-hesitant subculture contemporary evangelicalism prides itself on being.

It has frankly never troubled me one bit that people who hate our theological stance dismiss us as "watchbloggers" (or worse). If someone can't see how PyroManiacs differs in tone and style from the trash-talking parodies maintained by certain bloggers whose sympathies lie at the opposite end of the theological spectrum from us, that says more about their brand of discernment than it says about ours.

Look: I agree with the gist of Tim Challies' concern. (At least I think I do. The more Tim has clarified himself, the less certain I am that we agree as much as I assumed at first. Still—)

I do think it's evil and irreverent to regard apostasy as nothing more than something to mock and be entertained by. Those who fall into that attitude inevitably mirror and amplify the very impieties they say they deplore. They tend to become petty, overly-critical, thin-skinned, and surly-sounding gossip-mongers. Ditto with the sophomoric anti-watchblogs that relentlessly parody such full-time critics, raising the stakes on the irreverence game to ever-new heights. These two opposing forces feed one another's worst tendencies, and I have no desire to participate with or encourage either side in their native forums. The comment-threads on both sides always turn into adolescent insult-contests, and it can be downright ugly. It's an embarrassment. It's also an easy trap for anyone still swaddled in unglorified flesh to fall into.

Tim, as any godly individual should, weighed up Phil's words and delivered his verdict:

I guess any writer can attest that every now and then you write something that is really, objectively good; and other times you lay an egg. Having talked it over and having read plenty of feedback, I’m going to have to say that I laid an egg on Monday. While I do not feel that what I said was wrong or unnecessary, I can see that I should have said it better. At the same time, I think it sparked some useful discussion and for that I am grateful . . . Phil Johnson wrote about how he both agrees and disagrees with me. This article really helped me see the lack of clarity in my own article (well, that and my wife telling me that Phil’s article was better than my own) . . . Most of what Phil says is most of what I should have said (or said more clearly) on Monday.

There is so much we can learn from these two godly men!

Coming to a Cinema Near You - A Movie Actually Worth Seeing

I am envious of you folk living Stateside for there is an excellent movie opening next month which I encourage you all to see. It's called "Fireproof" and stars Kirk Cameron and is brought to us by the people who made the Christian themed surprise packets "Flywheel" and "Facing the Giants". This is a movie that is not only devoid of expletives, sex scenes, and grotesque violence, but is also a film that is completely unambiguous in giving a sharp and biblically sound presentation of the Christian Gospel. Please support this film so that it might make it to Europe!



Below I have pasted Tim Challies review of the movie. Tim Challies has one of the best Reformed blogs on the web and has reviewed most books you can find in a "Christian bookstore". He is a very hard marker with sharp biblical insight so I read his review with great interest.

Fireproof is a product of the team who brought us Facing the Giants, a film produced with a budget of merely $100,000 that went on to gross $15,000,000. In this new film Kirk Cameron plays Caleb Holt, a fire chief in Albany, Georgia. While he is loved by the men who work for him and regarded as a hero in his town, Caleb struggles in his relationship with his wife, Catherine. After seven years of marriage it seems that the relationship is growing cold. Caleb finds solace in looking at pornography on the Internet while Catherine finds herself in a growing relationship with a colleague. As the couple begins to steel themselves for a divorce, and as they begin the process of ending their marriage, Caleb’s father presents him with a book and challenges him to begin a 40-day experiment he calls “The Love Dare.” Caleb decides to give it a shot, though he does so more to respect his father than to salvage his failing marriage. Struggling to show love for his wife even as she continually rejects him, Caleb calls his father and asks, “How am I supposed to show love to someone who constantly rejects me?” This gives his father an opportunity to share the gospel with him and, armed with the reality of a new love, Caleb sets out to win back his wife’s heart.

I can be excused, I think, for entering the theater somewhat apprehensively. After all, Christians do not have the greatest track record when it comes to combining great spiritual truths with sound art. But in the case of Fireproof I was pleasantly surprised. The film, though produced with a limited budget compared to most of what we see on the big screen, is very well put together. There are really no occasions where I feel a bigger budget might have improved the film, and this despite a couple of extended action sequences where I would almost expect to see quality compromised by budget restrictions. This is clearly not the case.

This is not to say the movie is without blemish. There are a few occasions when the dialog becomes just a bit stiff or stilted and this is especially true in the film’s opening moments. There are a couple of times when I feel that portions of the script could have done with just a little bit more tweaking or when a scene could have benefited from just one more take. Also, I feel that a handful of the minor characters are too weak, either through lack of development or through sub-par acting. But these are really the only downsides worth mentioning. (Is it worth mentioning that everyone in the town has a good Georgia accent except for Caleb? How is it that his father and mother both have that southern drawl and he doesn’t?)

Kirk Cameron is very solid in the lead role and was a great choice for it. He is strong throughout and at key moments, when given the chance to shine, is outstanding. Erin Bethea, who plays opposite Cameron as Catherine Holt is also very good, and this despite Fireproof being her first major movie role (and only her second role overall). Caleb’s father is excellent as a wise, loving, pastoral father. The prominent characters develop well and I found myself genuinely drawn into the story. While the movie deals with difficult and serious themes, it does not take itself so seriously that it cannot pause for a few laughs now and again.

One thing I like to evaluate in Christian movies is whether the film inserts faith themes subtly or blatantly. In the case of Fireproof the person who watches this film will walk away with absolutely no doubt that it is a Christian movie. Faith figures prominently and the gospel is clearly presented. Sinful actions and decisions are shown to have negative consequences and are eventually rebuked. While “The Love Dare” is used to draw Caleb back to his wife, it is clear that this is merely an instrument used by God to do His work. This movie is Christian by any measure. It sweeps to an ending that is powerful and emotional, stirring to tears at least several of the people in the theater with us.

I enjoyed Fireproof and am excited to know that, come September 26, a film with such a good message will be debuting on hundreds or thousands of screens across America. It is a refreshing film with a refreshing message that speaks boldly to a culture infatuated with immorality and convinced that divorce is freedom. I am grateful for this film and pray for its success.

RECOMMENDED BOOKS - TIM CHALLIES

Tim Challies lives in Canada, reads voraciously, and writes constantly at his Web site (Challies.com). He is also the author of the book, "The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment." Tim's website is one of the most popular Christian websites in the world - and with good reason. It is loaded with tremendous biblical insight and solid critique. Tim rises above the world of "watchbloggers" as he faithfully conveys His love for Scripture as the overarching theme in all of his critical treatments. Challies.com is the one stop shop if you want a sound biblical assessment of a teacher or book. Tim Challies reads a staggering number of books and you can check through his ever growing archive of reviews at discerningreader.com.


THE DISCIPLINE OF SPIRITUAL DISCERNMENT
Tim Challies
Category: Apologetics
Click Here To Order
Tim Challies' first book looks to the Bible to seek what God teaches on the subject of spiritual discernment. Spiritual discernment is a term Challies defines as the skill of understanding and applying God’s Word with the purpose of separating truth from error and right from wrong. Written for the general reader and in a way that is suitable for a wide audience, the book teaches people to think biblically so they might act biblically. It appeals for discernment, teaching the importance of this discipline in guarding the good news God has entrusted to us.