This article is like a supplement to
Why We Should Reject Rick Warren's Purpose Driven and PEACE Agenda
(please click) which presents the foundation and history behind Rick Warren and Purpose Driven. In other words it gives an insight into why/how things developed into what we see now and presents scriptural rebuttels to what they preach. This article will be developed as/when I have time. However, I feel I need to post something for the meanwhile, so that we all may be alerted and pass on to others.
Later I will write comparing scripture with what the New Age inspired Seeker-friendly churches, Purpose Driven, Emerging Churches preach and the main players behind this movement and the facts behind why they are new age.
(By the way for those who don't know, New Age doctrine is based upon the god within every human-being and how we all can maximise ourselves to be like God or even be god. So it encompasses all people and all religions so that we all become one with the universe. It is the BROAD way and ALL roads lead to God, whereas Jesus teaches that there is only one way to God and that there is salvation in no other name but the name of Jesus.)
Why We Should Reject Rick Warren's Purpose Driven and PEACE Agenda
(please click) which presents the foundation and history behind Rick Warren and Purpose Driven. In other words it gives an insight into why/how things developed into what we see now and presents scriptural rebuttels to what they preach. This article will be developed as/when I have time. However, I feel I need to post something for the meanwhile, so that we all may be alerted and pass on to others.
Later I will write comparing scripture with what the New Age inspired Seeker-friendly churches, Purpose Driven, Emerging Churches preach and the main players behind this movement and the facts behind why they are new age.
Just for now I will say that Purpose Driven is part of the seeker friendly approach. Certainly they are linked. Out of these two came the emerging church which Rick Warren praises and endorses. For now I leave you with this video which gives a very good background to the seeker-friendly phenomena. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtxzD-Rh_9M&feature=PlayList&p=69BA21BE82E2E67C&index=14&playnext=8&playnext_from=PL
Rick Warren's marketing approach to Christianity came from approaching new age gurus. So new age, purpose Driven, seeker friendly and emerging church are all linked together.
Rick Warren's marketing approach to Christianity came from approaching new age gurus. So new age, purpose Driven, seeker friendly and emerging church are all linked together.
(By the way for those who don't know, New Age doctrine is based upon the god within every human-being and how we all can maximise ourselves to be like God or even be god. So it encompasses all people and all religions so that we all become one with the universe. It is the BROAD way and ALL roads lead to God, whereas Jesus teaches that there is only one way to God and that there is salvation in no other name but the name of Jesus.)
Posts
19 comments:
Hello John
I am so glad this is being tackled. I listened to the message on You tube then went on to watch John McArthur deal with the philosophy of 'Pragmatism' from which has come not only 'Seeker Sensitive etc' but also Darwinism and Secular Humanism.
Also read that Bill Hybels is further away from the Bible than Rick Warren. Informative, but at the same time depressing.
I have searched for evidence of people repenting from, and leaving 'Seeking',from any or all of this error. So far nothing! I am wondering if this is the apostasy Jesus will return to?
Keep up the good work.
Here is a site I found which gives some testimonies of those who's eyes were opened.
http://www.crossroad.to/text/responses/purpose.htm
In fact, I was one such person who bought the PD book and believed it was wonderful until I got through to about 70% of the book. I struggled over his SHAPE ideas, realising it sounded new age to me.
At this point, I felt I could not read the book or trust it anymore.
Before I started reading the book I had been influenced to read it by Christian organisations (those I thought I could trust)who were brandishing his book as something amazing and powerful.
I still thought the first 70% of the book appeared okay but something felt like it was not right. I couldn't quite put my finger on it until I heard Jacob Prasch speak against Purpose Driven.
What Jacob said opened my eyes to where Rick's teachings were false. It suddenly made perfect sense why I felt uneasy with the book.
The nagging feeling I had had before must have been the Holy Spirit warning me.
I believe that truly born-again believers will like-wise be shown the error by the Holy Spirit and leave the seeker-friendly farce.
I think this could be the apostasy Jesus was referring to. Many strong watchmen believe it to be the case.
When we see Rick Warren joining forces with Tony Blair during a time of globalisation everywhere to join all religions together under the umbrella of peace, it sounds very much like "the man of peace" mentioned in Revelation, who rises to power using the apostate religious (ecumenical) movement
Just curious when I saw John Mcarthur mentioned - I have noticed his name on ministrywatch.com and was wondering what views the previous posters have on him.
I do not have an interest either way at the moment in "checking him out" - was just curious because, I do occassionally use ministrywatch.com to check on the financial transperency of certain ministries (I feel this can also be an important tool to alerting those we care for in exposing false churches) or to see if new ones are added.
John - I believe you touched on him before briefly - I just like to know the background of people associated with certain sites. I have researched him to an extent but not thoroughly (did not seem to find anything bad) - just asking for your and Wary's opinion.
Thanks Tony
I have listened to John McArthur's ministry quite a number of times. To me he is very bible based and sound. I know some people find faults in him but these faults (to me) are only minor. I mean if we were all judged for faults which of us would stand?
The main thing is that I have not heard anything heretical in his messages and he seems a genuine and humble man of God. I know there are many watchman sites that recommend his teaching.
John M is highly respected for his Bible based teaching. However the erros I know of are not 'minor'. The Southern Baptists of the U.S. have taken him to task over some vital issues.
At present I can only remember one important issue that has him accused of denegrating Christ's Blood by saying it is 'only' a metaphor for death. This was mentioned on Shofar a little while ago. He also said that Jesus wasn't always the Son, but became the Son at His birth - definitly not right. There is more, but I shall have to jog my memory and write again. In my view, because John M has been such a help combating the Emergent stuff, others are making allowances and bypassing his errors.
My advice is 'caution' against choking on bones while picking out the good meat.
Sue
John
I really appreciate your response and I am encouraged by your testimony. It gives me hope that my son and his family will recognise the deception they have been ensnared in before it can do too much harm, especially my grandchildren.
I have just returned from Wales and I am too tired at present to check out the site, but I look forward to more encouragement tomorrow. At least my d.in law is speaking to me after I wrote my letters to Robinswood A.o.G. She hasn’t made any comments, but I can tell both she and my son, are aware, and didn’t like it – tough. I have no plans to write again, but should The Lord want me to, I will – regardless. If He wants me to walk into their midst and publicly speak out, I will, but I hope not as I am not normally that brave. (I have considered using a ‘sandwich board’ message as I walk outside the building):(
Has anyone else noticed how Warrens ‘P.E.A.C.E. plan’ fits end time prophecy? “When they shall say ‘peace, peace’, then shall sudden destruction come”!
Many thanks John
Sue.
Hi again, I too find it disturbing that quite a few of my local churches who supposedly are born again chrisitians are using Purpose Driven Life as a 'tool' in cell groups and bible study groups. Ive tried to let friends and family know that this is not something to follow, but they are being duped. I dont like the idea that Rick Warren uses translations like the Message to paraphrase scripture and where in the bible does it say that God has 5 purposes for our lives. I also think he is clearly Kingdom now philosophy and Im also concerned by the fact that he is on the board of Tony Blair's Faith Foundation - clearly ecumenical and using the premise that we all worship the same God, which is definately not the case.
Morag
Five purposes for our life?
Can you enlighten me, what ever does he mean. I don't like the idea of putting money into his lies by buying his books, so I would appreciate a heads up on this if possible. Thank you.
Sue
Hi Morag and Expected Imminently,
Morag must be referring to the Purpose Driven Life Book which discusses the 5 purposes we all have for our lives.
Rick Warren is very mixed up in New Age. The 5 purposes actually contain the New Age ideas of "self actualisation" but Rick uses "christian" words in place of New Age words, but basically he says the same things that the destiny for every one of us is divinity.
Hi John,
I was just reading through these posts, as I am still looking at some of the things John Mac Arthur has said, and I was interested to see what was posted here about him.
I just listened to him talking on a Youtube video, and it really does concern me what he says about the blood of Jesus. When I used to listen to Premier, I thought he sounded very Bible based and sound too. Anyone got any more thoughts on him?
Hi Myfanwy
In most parts, I find John McArthy biblically sound. I certainly do not believe him to be heretical or a false Christian leader.
However, he does teach "Lordship salvation". There seems to be a number of different strands within Lordship teachings. Some forms of Lordship salvation may well be close to heresy.
Some say that JM traches that you cannot be saved UNTIL Jesus is totally Lord of your life. I don't know if he ACTUALLY teaches that or whether people are exaggerating this. If he teaches that, I would have to agree it is heresy. Why? Because our salvation would become "works" based.
I take (as an example of the majority of the Bible's teaching) "He who BEGAN a good work in you will bring it to COMPLETION UNTIL the day of Christ". No-one can truthfully say that Jesus is totally Lord of our life UNTIL the day of Christ. It is an ongoing work of the Holy Spirit.
So if JM teaches that we can be perfect now BEFORE we are saved, IT IS HERESY.
I think the point JM is making is that we cannot be saved if we have not presented our whole being to Jesus asking Him to come into our hearts and save us body soul and spirit, ie our repentance needs to be REAL with Godly sorrow for our sins.
Paul wrote that "Godly sorrow brings about repentance". Without Godly sorrow for sin, how can anyone truly repent? Asking Jesus to be our Lord and Saviour does not mean that Lordship happens immediately, but Jesus will abide within us by the Holy Spirit that very moment we ask Him into our hearts. From that moment He starts a work of sanctification which is a lifelong work.
That is what I think JM is saying. If so, I agree with that.
I have just watched a video from John McArthur on his account of the blood of Jesus.
It seems that JM is one of the most misrepresented teachers of our time (like Paul Washer) because they preach repentance which such fervour. A lot of carnal christians are discomforted with their approach because it unsettles them, so they react often untruthfully.
I have also been accused of untrue things. It is difficult to stomach lies and lying mud DOES tend to stick.
Anyway, here is John Mcarthur's rebuttal against the accusations.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9470k9b2iVg
However, I am not sure, yet, whether JM is 100% accurate regarding his view on the blood of Jesus. BUT, it sorts of makes sense! It also opens up a greater revelation of Jesus in the OT sacifices.
Just think, everytime the animals were slaughtered, with blood everywhere, filling the altar, God was telling us that His Son would die in the same way, ie without the shedding of blood (in this violent way) the sacrifice would NOT be enough. The sacrifice that saved us required His whole flesh AND blood to be poured out on the altar.
Nothing but ABSOLUTE sacrifice and total committment to our redemption, would be enough. Just as in the OT sacrificial system, the Death of Jesus was TOTAL with blood everywhere.
That is the picture I get when listening to JM on that video.ie it isn't JUST the blood that saves us but the WHOLE TOTAL sacrifice of Jesus. The blood has ALWAYS represented the cleansing,healing, sanctifying work of the sacifice of JESUS.
As I said above, I am still not completely convinced yet, but it DOES make sense when considering the teachings of the WHOLE bible.
For example "He was wounded for our transgessions, He was bruised for our iniquity, surely He bore our sorrows and by His stripes we are healed". No mention of blood in those words. It doesn't say "His blood saved us". In fact if you read the WHOLE of Isaiah 53, you will find there is no specific mention of the blood. However, it DOES describe the WHOLE TOTAL submission , surrender and sacrifice of Jesus.
which would obviously include the blood too
Jon Mac is hypercalvinist began lordshipsalvation and its heresy so if you think him not understood and say he is ok then you are one as well as him so I am gone lurkin from outta here man. Repent don’t mean feeling sad at sin that’s not true man thats hypercalvins lordship of law not the bible of grace of GOD
Hi AnonGone
I have never studied John McArthur's teachings. I have simply only heard some of his audios. I DO NOT know the full extent of what he believes. Simply, I haven't found anything seriously wrong in what I have heard (so far). I have, however, heard what others have said about him. IF IT IS TRUE (as "Wary" mentioned) that JM teaches that Jesus BECAME the son of God at His birth, then I will have to say that there IS something wrong with JM's doctrine.
You may wonder why I do not check JM out thoroughly. I will explain why I haven't.
My blog tries to focus on GENERAL apostasy/ecumenical issues. Any individual leaders who get on the ecumenical bandwagon I WILL be concerned about. I simply do not have time to check out every single teacher. There are too many out there.
I simply only have time to collate together names of those who have aligned themselves to Rome/Babylonic religion and to the apostate global emerging church (when I say "emerging" I mean the emerging church PLUS all the other groups who are emerging as "apostate").
To me, it is far worse to become part of the global apostasy ie returning back to old Babylonic religion which was inspired by satan by the phrase "you can be like god". The global apostate religion is all about returning to the tower of Babel as "one people united" to become gods in rebellion against the ONE TRUE GOD.
I am not saying that false teaching of any kind is not serious. IT IS serious, but tackling individual false doctrines in great detail is not the priority of this blog.
I may (occasionally) write articles against some false teachings but it is not the blog's aim to do specific expose's on individual teachers unless they have ecumenical or apostate links.
I do not believe JM has such links. Please correct me if I am wrong.
If anybody has specific concerns about a Christian leader, I advise that you first check out my list of teachers (as determined by the ecumenical/new age/apostate groups they belong to). If they are not on my list, then do an internet search on them to find out (for yourselves) if what they teach is sound or false.
My problem is that NONE of us can (hand on heart) say that they are 100% spot on in ALL their interpretations of the Bible. If a teacher teaches on "grey" doctrines, such as eschatology (ie doctrines which no-one can be 100% certain about because it still carries a certain amount of mystery)they may get it wrong but that doesn't make them a false teacher because they may be preaching from a pure heart.
I am not prepared to judge such people over grey doctrines. If JM has gone beyond the grey and is teaching clear heresy, I ask you to judge that for yourselves. You may be correct.
I simply do not have time to fully investigate every single such teacher.
However, if you DO HAVE the time, please send me your proof and I will check it out. BUT, I will only read/watch it if you can assure me that it contains clear CAST IRON proof, eg a video of him speaking it from his own lips. If the teaching from any such leader is CLEAR heresy then (if appropriate) I will highlight it on the blog.
By the way, AnonGone is it not a little immature to make your comment and then depart without (at least) giving me a chance to reply to your comments?
BTW
"feeling sad about sin" is DEFINITELY not what Paul was referring to when he said "Godly sorrow brings about repentance. Please read his words again:
"yet now I am happy, not because you were made sorry, but because your sorrow led you to repentance. For you became sorrowful as God intended and so were not harmed in any way by us. Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret, but worldly sorrow brings death. See what this godly sorrow has produced in you: what earnestness, what eagerness to clear yourselves, what indignation, what alarm, what longing, what concern, what readiness to see justice done." 2 Cor 7:9-11
Godly sorrow is M U C H more than feeling sadness for sin. Godly sorrow CHANGES us inside and outside and It produces a steadfast, earnest determination to get right with God. Godly sorrow is orchestrated by the Holy Spirit. We CANNOT produce that sorrow by simply "feeling" sad.
If we could produce THAT Godly sorrow, it would be "works" done by our own strength. NO! It is the Holy Spirit working in us by GRACE to change us.
My dad said keep away from other gospels like hpercalvin lordshipsalvation, its another gospel and thats so bad. JM started it and its dead wrong its of law not grace and salvation dont just mean being saved, its todowith them of us what is now saved being got right and made hole againwith GOD and not with to be saved at the start, I dont know what imature means I had to look out here for this but thats it from me.
Hi AnonGone
I am so glad that you hang around long enough to see my reply. Would it be possible for you to ask your dad to say something here about the subject?
Let me encourage you to check things out for yourself. Study the Word to see (for yourself) if what your dad is saying is correct.
We are told in Acts that EVEN the apostle Paul was checked out to see if what he was saying was scriptural. It says "the Berean Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica. They studied the scriptures DAILY to see if these things (which Paul was preaching)were true". These Bereans were commended for doing those things.
We should NEVER carry a second hand experience (ie follow the faith and experience of others) but should have a direct FIRST HAND experience, faith and personal relationship with Jesus. This means seek Him through prayer and through His Word PERSONALLY. BE A BEREAN.
As I say, it would be good to hear from your father. It sounds like he knows what he is talking about.
God bless
Post a Comment