Rick Warren’s The Purpose Driven Life was a phenomenon, selling tens of millions of copies and remaining on the New York Times list of bestsellers not for mere weeks or months, but for years. Tens of thousands of churches and organizations have participated in a “40 Days of Purpose” program, encouraging their members to read the book and implement its teachings. While several books bearing Warren’s name have been released since The Purpose Driven Life (which was published in 2002), none have been much more than condensed versions of The Purpose Driven Life. This year, just in time for the holiday season, comes The Purpose of Christmas, a book that is, if not entirely new, at least predominantly so.
The Purpose of Christmas is a gift book, meant to be purchased by Christians and given away to unbelievers as a Christmas gift. It is an extended tract of sorts, sharing the gospel message through the Christmas story. Warren first looks at the purpose of Christmas and then, through the rest of the book, suggests that Christmas is a time for celebration, a time for salvation, and a time for reconciliation. Much of what he shares is good and contains solid biblical truth. He affirms strongly that salvation is “not a matter of trying, but trusting. It’s not a matter of proving you deserve it, but accepting it by faith, knowing you don’t deserve it.” “All you need to do is accept what he’s already done for you! There’s nothing more to add. It’s grace plus nothing. … Your Christmas gift comes by grace and through faith.” “It’s not what you do, but whom you trust, that gets you into heaven.” These are all good teachings.
There is enough of the gospel in this book that I am convinced a person could read it and be saved by embracing the gospel message it contains. Having said that, however, I would like to offer a few reasons that I think Christians might be best-served by giving their unbelieving friends a different book. I say this because there is enough of a “non-gospel” in this book to confuse or to potentially leave an unbeliever with a false confidence that he has been reconciled to God.
The first issue presents itself in the book’s earliest pages. As he did in The Purpose Drive Life, Warren makes a kind of unfair appeal to providence or destiny. “It is no accident that you are reading this book. God planned your birth, and before you were even born, he knew this moment was coming. In fact, it may be that all your whole life up to this moment has been preparing you to receive God’s Christmas gift to you.” While strictly true, could we then extend that line of reasoning to every other situation in life? “It is no accident that you are beating your child. It is no accident that you are looking at pornography.” This kind of statement gives the reader a false sense of the role of God in ordaining that a person would read Warren’s book.
Warren continually makes rash generalizations about the nature of a person’s relationship with God. He makes no distinction between the love God has for his people and the love he has for those who are not his people. According to this view of love, Rick Warren must love me as much as he loves his wife and children (since he assumes that God loves the unbeliever every bit as much as the believer). Without distinguishing between Christians and non-Christians Warren says, “God is not mad at you. He is mad about you!” He goes so far as to apply promises made to God’s people to a general audience. For example, looking at Ephesians 1:4 he says “Before the world was created, God loved you.” He says that this love is known as choosing or electing, but fails to properly distinguish between those who have been chosen and those who have not. He says “God has a great purpose and a good plan for your life.” But again, he applies such promises even to those who have not turned to Christ.
As he did in The Purpose Driven Life Warren uses and abuses Scripture, seemingly using translations based more on what they say than on whether or not they accurately give the sense of the text. And so (as he did in The Purpose Driven Life) he quotes Eliphaz, one of Job’s infamous friends, as if his advice to Job is godly advice. He uses translations that take this, from an accurate translation—“in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him” to this “It makes no difference who you are or where you’re from—if you want God and are ready to do as he says, the door is open.” Such critiques abound and have been well-documented in reviews of his previous works.
Warren presents the benefits of being reconciled to God primarily in terms of personal benefit. “Wrapped up in Jesus are all the benefits and blessings mentioned in this book—and so much more! In Jesus, your past is forgiven, you get a purpose for living, and you get a home in heaven.” But what of Christ? The best gift of all is Christ himself! It is easy enough to interest people in the benefits of a relationship with Christ. Who doesn’t want to go to heaven? But this can be done without ever encouraging an interest in Christ himself.
And as he has done often in the past, Warren turns to some awful illustrations and half-truths to emphasize what he teaches. Here is but one example: “But the baby born in Bethlehem did not stay a baby. Jesus grew to manhood, modeled for us the kind of life that pleases God, taught us the truth, paid for every sin we commit by dying on a cross, then proved he was God and could save us by coming back to life. This is the Good News. When the Romans nailed Jesus to a cross, they stretched his arms as wide as they could. With his arms wide open, Jesus was physically demonstrating, “I love you this much! I love you so much it hurts! I’d rather die than live without you!” The next time you see a picture or statue of Jesus with outstretched arms on the cross, remember, he is saying ‘I love you this much!’” Words fail me.
Ultimately, the book leads to a sinner’s prayer and Warren makes a reader’s potential profession of faith a test of sincerity. He offers a salvation prayer and writes, “When you read that, did you sincerely mean it as a prayer to God? If you did, congratulations! Welcome to the family of God!” But sincerity is an unfair test. A person may pray that prayer sincerely and still be lost and dead in sin. There must be more than sincerity; there must be a living love for Christ and an active trust in him. To welcome a person to the family of Christ, giving him assurance of his faith based only on sincerity, is to potentially promote a dangerously false confidence.
And finally, after all of this, Warren writes about his PEACE plan. As with The Purpose Driven Life we see that Warren always has a larger plan. He seeks to draw people into his programs and this book, as have all his others, serves as a gateway into Purpose and into PEACE.
And so it goes. While I applaud the idea of having a bestselling Christian author produce a book written specifically to present the gospel message and to do so in a book created specially as a Christmas gift, I am sorry that Warren did not present the gospel in its full and pure form. The Purpose of Christmas is, sadly, a wasted opportunity. It could have been so much more.
Comments (31) »
1. Curtis
November 8, 2008
1:48 PM
I’ve always known Rick Warrens theology to be dangerous at best and heresy at its worst. I wouldn’t suggest his books to unbelievers, ever, there are better books, and I don’t think people should waist their time on his material when it can be better spent on sound books. He is the poster-boy of the soft gospel, and nominal Christianity.
Many will say Lord, Lord…but He never knew them.
2. James
November 8, 2008
1:52 PM
Curits, you don’t know Rick Warren’s heart, so you really have no right to say he doesn’t have an authentic faith in Christ. Don’t be quick to make those kinds of judgments about people you don’t even know.
3. Kim
November 8, 2008
1:59 PM
Thanks for the review. Do you happen to have a good book or booklet you would recommend to give at Christmastime? Last year I gave my neighbors a copy of Desiring God’s Christmas booklet, and I am trying to find something for this year.
Thanks,
4. John Kuvakas
November 8, 2008
2:04 PM
Great insight, Tim. I agree with you whole heartedly.
The real problem with Warren’s writings and his teaching is that, at a cursory examination, they sound so good. It’s not until you get under the hood and start taking a close look at what is being said, how it’s being said and the long term ramifications it all that you run into problems. I used to spend a lot of time with folks in my congregation that ‘just don’t see anything wrong’ with Rick Warren’s message.
Fortunately, with sound doctrinal teaching and clear Biblical exposition, those instances are becoming fewer and farther between. I’ve found that I get a lot further by teaching Biblical truth rather than trying to convince people to avoid a particular author or teaching.
That being said, I’ve come to rely on folks like you to keep me apprised of what’s happening out there. It is articles like this one that help me prepare for those times when someone approaches me on a Sunday morning and says, “I’ve just read this life-changing book!” I know enough to be able to say, “Let’s talk about that this week.”
Thanks for your commitment to the truth.
5. Jeremy Hansen
November 8, 2008
2:56 PM
I was wondering what you meant by stating “Without distinguishing between Christians and non-Christians”? I realize that someone that has not accepted Christ as Lord of their life will not inherit salvation. But I always interpreted scripture such as Luke 15 and Romans 5:8 amongst others as pointing to the fact that we are truly loved and pursued by God and the only difference will be whether we are justified and saved by his blood. I would love to hear, or read some scripture (post Jesus Christ’s resurrection) that I have missed to allow you to draw such a conclusion.
Thank you
6. Heather
November 8, 2008
3:04 PM
I noticed you said there “were better books out there” for giving our non believing friends. Can you give a list?
7. Heath Lloyd
November 8, 2008
4:21 PM
A couple of things … .
1. I have noticed Rick Warren before when given a large platform NOT sharing the Gospel. I watched him and his wife on Fox News once promoting her book on AIDS (I think) and they talked and talked, but never once said anything about Christ dying on the cross to bring hope and salvation to sinners. I waited for him to say something about JESUS, but he did not and I was disappointed. On the other hand I have seen Jerry Falwell, John MacArthur, Franklin Graham everytime they are on national TV speak clearly the message of truth. If Warren really is “America’s Pastor”, please, pastor, lift Him high.
2. As for good Christmas books, gift size, see John MacArthur’s “God’s Gift of Christmas.” It is a unique size for a book, and very handsome, a beutiful little book. The one I have was published in 2006 by J. Countryman, a division of Nelson Publishing. I don’t know if it is still in print, but it just might be what you’re looking for. Very sound and Biblical.
8. Tim Fenton
November 8, 2008
5:32 PM
I had a similar conversation with a coworker who was excited about this book. I explained to him my concerns about Warren’s powderpuff, man focused gospel. I cannot believe the “I love you this much” crap he said. I understand his point, but I don’t feel we need to add to the story, it is magnificent as it stands by itself.
9. owen
November 8, 2008
6:49 PM
I’m not sure what to write after reading your review. Once again, the man who told Larry King to his face that salvation is “only in Christ”, is being taken to task.
And a few of the comments above shock me more than I’m sure anything in this book will.
All I have to say is why don’t you try to see the big picture. Warren’s written a book telling people the true story of Christmas. Sheesh, give him a break.
10. donsands
November 8, 2008
7:15 PM
“When you read that, did you sincerely mean it as a prayer to God? If you did, congratulations! Welcome to the family of God!”
A wonder why the Lord Jesus didn’t simple speak to the rich young ruler like this. But instead said to him to keep the commandments of God so that he could inherit eternal life, which the ruler said, “I have kept all these from my youth.”
Jesus then says, “Sell all you have and give the proceeds to the poor, and come and follow me”.
Wow. Did Jesus mess up? Should he have simply said, say a simmers prayer, and you will have eternal life.
The ruler walked away sad. And sad it is when someone rejects the true good news of Jesus Christ, and this ruler had the good news standing right before him.
Did Jesus make a mistake here?
11. Curtis
November 8, 2008
7:44 PM
James said…
“November 8, 2008
1:52 PM
Curits, you don’t know Rick Warren’s heart, so you really have no right to say he doesn’t have an authentic faith in Christ. Don’t be quick to make those kinds of judgments about people you don’t even know.”
I don’t need to know his heart, God told us about his heart, it’s like the heart of every other person, deceitfully wicked. At least that’s what God says in the bible about the heart of man. The bible also teaches to expose and rebuke false teachers, and when a man or woman teaches doctorines that are opposed to the true gospel we must make a stand on the truth without compromise. I know what he’s said, and what he teaches in his church and on radio, thats more than enough to know much of what he says is heresy, albeit seasoned with truth.
Or does your bible say something different?
Don’t get me wrong, he seems like a nice guy, I just would never allow him to teach my children Sunday school, let alone from the pulpit.
This is a hard thing for me to say, but I am sick of people playing the, “you don’t know his heart”, card. I know what the bible says, that’s enough, isn’t it? I’m also sick of those who soften the gospel just enough that it won’t cut to the heart as it is intended, but it just tickles their ears.
Enough with these so called preachers who know nothing of biblical repentance, who’s interest is in felt needs, and self esteem, away with them.
Don’t you see what is happening to the “church”? It is filled with nonbelievers because of this watered down message. I don’t mean the true church, not the bride of Christ, she is alive and well, though still imperfect. I’m speaking about these buildings that fill ever Sunday after Sunday, and then perform some of the most wicked forms of idolatry, they don’t know God. They worship a God not found in the bible. One that suits their religousness, one they are comfortable with, one thats nothing but love, no justice, no wrath, no hell, that is a false god, not Jesus Christ.
My heart aches for the Rick Warrens, Olsteens and Jakes, everytime I hear them teach, I am saddened that they have gone so far from what the bible teaches, some to more of a degree than others, but it is not the historical doctorines. I know the fate of every man that follows their teaching and does not have saving faith nor biblical repentance, and it grieves me deeply.
Say what you will about my intentions, or my motive, but I assure you it is one of love and concern, and for nothing more than the glory and honor of God and His Son.
12. Curtis
November 8, 2008
8:06 PM
Heather said..
November 8, 2008
3:04 PM
“I noticed you said there “were better books out there” for giving our non believing friends. Can you give a list? “
The Miracle of Christmas, John MacArthur
God’s Gift of Christmas , MacArthur
Come, Thou Long-Expected Jesus, Crossway
Seeing & Savoring Jesus Christ, John Piper
In Christ Alone, Dr. Sinclair Ferguson
Christ in Christmas, Various
Anything Edwards.
Martyn L. Jones wrote much on the incarnation.
The Coming of the Kingdom, Herman Ridderbos
Expositions on Matthew, I would suggest Spurgeon, Calvin, or Luther and Matthew Henry.
13. Steve
November 8, 2008
8:56 PM
Curtis [re: post 12]: you’d really give your non-believing friends Ridderbos on the Incarnation? Or Jonathan Edwards? I love Ridderbos and Edwards, but surely there’s something a bit easier for non-Christians to digest.
If I were asked to name 3 books for non-believers (not specifically on Christmas), I’d give them CS Lewis (Mere Christianity), Tim Keller (Reason for God), and NT Wright (Simply Christian). Michael Green also has a couple of shorter books on apologetics that can be helpful for some audiences.
14. Curtis
November 9, 2008
4:53 AM
Steve, you’re right, when I first started my list I was thinking of unbelievers, but then began to think of a long list of authors and preachers who have written so excellently on the incarnation of Christ that I forgot my audience. Thanks for pointing that out. :)
I suppose for unbelievers I could still suggest from my initial list:
The Miracle of Christmas, John MacArthur
God’s Gift of Christmas , MacArthur
Come, Thou Long-Expected Jesus, Crossway
Seeing & Savoring Jesus Christ, John Piper
Christ in Christmas, Various
15. Steve
November 9, 2008
7:48 AM
My heart sank when I saw the word “Purpose”. It could mean only one thing: the Warren marketing machine, like some ghastly, voodoo undead creature, still stalks the landscape.
I’ll not venture a guess as to the intentions of America’s Pastor. I’m sure he means well, like Joel Osteen. But in the trail of his vapid books lie the wreckage of churches broken by the foolishness of his “purpose driven” programs and lazy shepherds thoroughly corrupted by pastor.com. I have experienced these things up close and personal and it is my contention that the man has done at least as much harm as good.
And now another book. Deliver me, O Lord.
16. Ron
November 9, 2008
8:22 AM
Regarding “Ultimately, the book leads to a sinner’s prayer and Warren makes a reader’s potential profession of faith a test of sincerity. He offers a salvation prayer and writes, “When you read that, did you sincerely mean it as a prayer to God? If you did, congratulations! Welcome to the family of God!” But sincerity is an unfair test. A person may pray that prayer sincerely and still be lost and dead in sin. There must be more than sincerity; there must be a living love for Christ and an active trust in him,” I have some thoughts.
Now, I am no fan of Rick Warren, nor do I endorse ‘magic’ prayers and altar calls. I stand in firm opposition to ‘easy believism (sp?).’ I have recently ‘discovered’ the reformed (Biblical) doctrine of soteriology and embrace as a hill I would die on. That being said to give context as to where I stand, ‘if’ the prayer Warren models embraces repentance and trust in Christ and such prayer is offered from a sincere hearts desire, what else is required? I love Jesus and I trust Him, but I know my love and trust in Him is woefully inadequate when compared to the Messiah’s worthiness of love and trust. My love for Him and my trust for Him grows as I grow in sanctification. So, how much love and trust is required to step into the Kingdom?
I would advance, and I know we are in agreement on this, that sincerity does not save in and of itself, but a sincere prayer and plea to God, based on a true understanding of salvation -repent and believe/trust in Christ- is sufficient unto salvation.
A heart that is forgiven much loves much. As a believer grows in understanding of the Cross, one grows further in repentance, in brokenness over sin and in one’s love for Christ.
In closure, what worries me more about Warren and many others in the evangelical world in general and church growth movement in specific is that much is being made of how much Jesus makes of us. The understanding of the scope of the fall is woefully inadequate and such leads to an inadequate understanding of the horror of sin and the wonder of the Incarnation and the cross. We are often sadly lead, too, to make much of the gifts rather than making much of the Giver of gifts.
Thank you for letting my thoughts ramble ;-)
In His grip,
Ron
17. Martin James
November 9, 2008
9:12 AM
Interesting.
18. peacebringer
November 9, 2008
11:40 AM
Thanks for the review. I think we will see more and more and more of folks talking “this close” to the truth of the Gospel and ending miles away. The focus utimately on the ungodly and globalist “PEACE” plans, shows true intent.
19. halo
November 9, 2008
11:49 AM
Challies:
You criticized this statement by Warren:
“It makes no difference who you are or where you’re from—if you want God and are ready to do as he says, the door is open.”
But surely that is true from a Calvinist perspective - it is an indication of God’s sovereign working in your heart that you ‘want God’ and are ‘ready to do as he says’. Those are clear signs of grace.
20. Laura
November 9, 2008
3:34 PM
Once again Tim you seem to have dug deeper and found “untruths” that we need to be wary about in Rick Warren’s books. As for Books to give this Christmas…I hate to toot my own horn, but I have a book out appropriate for Christmas entitled, “Come to Me”. It’s about the life of Christ, through the eyes of His mother. You can see reviews for it here http://www.authorlauradavis.com/reviews.htm
21. wanting to know more
November 9, 2008
6:50 PM
I would like to know why “Words fail you.”
Could you please, in a future post, explain to someone who has been taught this line of thinking for 30 years just why it is so very wrong?
22. Tom
November 9, 2008
11:16 PM
No one can describe the destruction this superficial gospel does unless they have been delivered from it and look back at the carnage. To say that what Warren offers is even close to the gospel would be a mistake. The idea that all we have to do is give mental assent to the truth of something to make it real is wrong. Almost everyone believes in God and many if not most believe in the historical facts of Calvary. But the way the gospel is presented is wrong for several reasons. 1. To use heaven or hell as a motive is not found in the Bible. While traveling in third world countries I noticed something about the believers there. The idea of praying a prayer so they could go to heaven was foriegn to them. Their desire was to know Him. They were seeking a relationship not a fire escape. 2. The gospel today in most places is over simplified to the point that all a person has to do is agree with it. No repentance. No change at all. All you have to do is believe and stay where you are and live the way you’ve always lived. Paul said that Christ came to destroy the body of sin that sin would have no more dominion over us and we would walk in a newness of life. This does not describe the majority of professing Christianity today. The gospel is so watered down that it has no power in people’s lives. There is no death to sin, no death to self, and no resurrection power that was manifested in the early church. 3. The attempt Warren makes to apply biblical principles to anyone is typical of a person trying to transform themselves. It is no different than the Judaizers in the early church that were attempting to bring about spiritual results in their life through physical means. The contrast is that when salvation is presented right and a person has a genuine conversion, the Spirit of God transforms that individual and all of the Law and commandments of God are begun to lived out in a person’s life from the inside out as the Spirit transforms that individual through the renewing or their mind. Someone like Warren does more harm than good because he gives people false hope and they struggle through their whole life wondering why they don’t “feel” right or “act” right or why they have such a hard time living the christian life. We shouldn’t sympathise with people like this. I realize that God is in control and he said don’t bother the tares lest you cause harm to the wheat also. Let them grow together and He will separate them when it is time. However, Paul said that if he or anyone else came preaching a different gospel, let them be accursed. The gospel Rick Warren is preaching may have the outer trappings of truth but it does not produce spiritual fruit in vast majority of the lives it reaches. Just a few thoughts. Not worth much but having lived in churches for over 20 years that propagated this superficial gospel, I have seen first hand the havoc it has wreaked in peoples lives. Had not God sought me out and revealed these thing s to my heart, I would still be there.
23. A Questioner
November 10, 2008
7:46 AM
I wonder what a non-Christian would think if reading the tone of the comments section. Aren’t we called to breath grace in our speach?
24. owen
November 10, 2008
9:43 AM
Tom, give us an example of the churches you lived in the first 20 years of your life. Not the church names or pastors’ names, but denominations and theology.
I grew up in a Methodist church. But what they preached was not close to what Warren is preaching.
25. Curtis
November 10, 2008
4:55 PM
23. A Questioner
November 10, 2008
7:46 AM
“I wonder what a non-Christian would think if reading the tone of the comments section. Aren’t we called to breath grace in our speach?”
They’d probably think something similar to the unbeliever who reads the words of John the Baptist, Paul or Jesus Christ, they hate it, the bible speaks more sharply, and with more discriptive language.
26. Tom
November 10, 2008
7:55 PM
Owen, I would rather not bring denomination into it because that is really irrelevant. The doctrine and the way it is presented is the issue. What has happened in our generation is that the gospel has been so simplified that all that remains is the outer shell of what the biblical gospel is. This shell has no power to change peoples lives and and is just a facade of what the true gospel is. It sounds good, but what it produces is an illusion. An illusion , as you know, has the appearance of being something that it is not. That being said, just like the pharisees of old, christianity today is guilty of cleaning up the outside of the cup with no real inner change. Jesus has some very strong language for these people. All the gospel is after today is a mental assent to the truth without having repentance or any work of the Holy Spirit. The same way Adam bypassed God’s way and attempted to become spiritual through physical mean, men today do the same thing by bypassing the Holy Spirit, praying a prayer and then trying to learn how to live the christian life, all in their own power. This only produces outward change. Nothing inward. The churches I was in for 20 years had all the right terminology, maybe all the right motives, but not the right method of salvation. Salvation has been reduced to OUR actions, OUR sincerity, OUR faith, OUR responsibility. We act, and God reacts. God is the author and the Holy Spirit is the agent of salvation. There is so much more that needs to be said on this subject. To dabble with an answer like this is to not do justice to what God has taught me in the last 10 years. Let me just say that the gospel today, and especially with men like Warren, Osteen, and others, has been simplified to the point that it is all psychological and doesn’t even need God to carry it out. All I have to do is believe or give mental assent to it and then go about to live my life the best I know how. God understands. If this is all there is to it, then why did Jesus die? He died to deal sin a death blow so that having that dominion of sin destroyed in our lives, we could then walk in a newness of life and have the power to then know Him, which is how HE defined eternal life. Owen, I apologise for getting lengthy, but this doesn’t do justice to what is wrong with the gospel that is being preached in most places today. Matt 7 says that most people that think they are going to heaven when they die, are not. That is the most tragic verse in the Bible. Not marginal christians but people that prophesied and did many wonderful things IN HIS NAME. So sad. I would be glad to discuss this with you if you care to email.
27. owen
November 11, 2008
9:26 PM
Tom, Thanks for your thoughts. I’ll share a few comments here, but don’t really have time for an extended email discussion (my OT and Greek class are sucking a lot of my time :-)
1) The only reason I mentioned denomination is that it gives a person “some” idea of what type of teaching a person sat under. Even though in my own Methodist background there were conservative and liberal churches, there were certain things you could count on as being held to….infant baptism, women pastors, and pretty liberal views towards social moral issues (homosexuality, abortion, etc.) I agree though that it is the preaching and doctrine we should look at, not the denomination. The denomination does give one an idea though of what you dealt with.
2) There is the accusation that many evangelical churches area preaching that “mental assent” is the same as “believing in Christ for eternal life”. However, I think even Warren would disagree with you on this (Osteen might not though). We know the Biblical word “Believe” doesn not only mean mental assent. And acutally the English word does not mean it either. How many people would think “mental assent” was meant if they were asked if they, “believed in communism” ? None of them would. They would know you were asking if they felt communism was a morally right form of government not that they just knew about it or understood it. Most people, if pressed, understand that the word believe is more than mental assent.
3 While it is dismaying that preachers like Osteen preach fluff and don’t really present the Gospel, which I would define as trusting in Christ for forgiveness and eternal life because of his death, burial and resurrection, I also see the danger in “adding” to the Gospel conditions that the Scripture does not. I think that is the danger of much Lordship preaching today. Not only does it point to the changed life of the beliver, it adds conditions other than “faith” to what a person needs to be saved.
4) I would love to see Warren’s reaction to some of the accusations in this thread. I think he would say most of them are completely unfounded.
I have MUCH more problem with the conditions added to a person becoming justified by a book like, “Hard to Believe” by MacArthur than I do with anything I’ve seen from Warren. I think he reflects a position of over-reaction to preachers like Osteen.
Anyway, I know that’s not the perspective of most who would post here; but thought I’d share it anyway.
Blessings, Owen
28. Tom
November 11, 2008
11:31 PM
Owen, I appreciate your thoughts. Although I wouldn’t try to decide anyones salvation for them because it is personal. To say that Lordship is “adding to the gospel” I don’t think is accurate. Our problem is trying to break down and define every aspect of salvation and then try to measure people against it. Although in your thinking you may have received enlightenment that allows you to define certain things yet how God brings that to bear in your life is personal. To try to over simplify the gospel like Warren, Osteen , and others do is to take the work of the Spirit out of it and puts all the responsibility on the person. No man can come to me except the Spirit draw him is accurate. To say that because I don’t want to go to hell and I do want to go to heaven is proof that I am being drawn I don’t think is accurate either. Salvation is not “to heaven” or “from hell” although these may be side issues or benefits, they are not the motives of God’s heart. One of the main issues in churches today that this “soft” gospel produces is that it does not deliver a person from the dominion of sin and is presented as being alright because after all we are just sinners saved by grace. Owen, this was not God’s intent with the gospel. Rom 6:6 says, “Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with [him], that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.” One of the evidences of salvation is that sin no longer has dominion in a person’s life. To say that Lordship is a requirement or that this victory over sin is a requirement is not accurate. Lordship is not a requirement, nor is victory over sin. To say they are requirements again tries to bring salvation down to man’s level and make him the author and finisher of it. These are not requirements but they are evidences. To say that it is perfectly acceptable to acknowledge the truth of the gospel and still live a life where sin still dominates my life is to deny what the scripture is teaching. The reason this is so prevalent today is because of how it has been presented for well over 100 years. But any thinking person can see that the gospel being preached today, for the most part, is not producing what the Bible teaches in the lives of the “believers”. I realize that there are differences of opinion and mine is not an argument. Jesus said “He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” Most will not and will continue to try to reconcile and explain away why their life does not add up to what the Bible teaches. But some sincere seekers will hear and it is to those that I offer these thoughts. thanks.
29. owen
November 12, 2008
12:05 PM
Tom,
Just a comment on your statment. You said…
“To say that Lordship is a requirement or that this victory over sin is a requirement is not accurate. Lordship is not a requirement, nor is victory over sin. To say they are requirements again tries to bring salvation down to man’s level and make him the author and finisher of it.”
But that is exactly what the Lordship position does. It adds to faith things like, “life commitment, sacrifice, immediately turning from every sin, serving the Lord, etc”. It confuses issues of conversion with Christian growth.
One only needs to read about 3 chapters of “Hard to Believe” or “The Gospel According to Jesus” or any number of books by Lordship authors to see this. Was every person in the Corinthian church lost? Probably not, but look at the sin they were in - sin such as was not named among the Gentiles. Although Paul did tell them to examine themselves, by no means did he suggest they were all still reprobate. Christians can and do sin, may not be completely obedient, may and are at different levels of spiritual progress. But if they have faith in Christ, they are born again.
I had a person challenge me about this accusation against MacArthur in our church one day. I simply handed them over 30 quotes from MacArthur’s book, “Hard to Believe” where he connected something other than faith to eternal life. (unfortunately I lost the list on my computer, I’m working at recreating it soon.)
Worse than making it too simple, they have made it too hard. Something that Scripture does not support.
What’s hard about, “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved”?
What’s hard about, “…that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
What hard about, “He that believes on me has everlasting life.”
What’s hard about, “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, …”
Yes, following Christ is hard. But being converted isn’t. It is simple faith in Christ.
I think that people like MacArthur and other Lordship people have misidentified the problem. It is not “Easy Believism” but “poor proclamation.” It’s not that the gospel is too simple - it’s that it’s absent.
Many times I’ve seen an evangelist talk for 30 minutes and never once talk about Jesus and his death, burial and resurrection and what faith in Him means. Then he gives some kind of invitation. Invitaion to what?! I really don’t have a problem with invitations, but the Gospel needs to be there.
As I said, it’s not too easy, it’s absent.
Osteen talks about Jesus, but he doesn’t tell people what Jesus did for them and how they should respond. He gives them a nice Jesus story; but doesn’t talk about his death, burial or resurrection and that people need to have faith in Christ for forgiveness and eternal life.
On the other hand I do see Warren talk about the simple Gospel. And although we might not like all his illustrations. And people might not like his lack of a Reformed approach. He does talk about Christ’s death, buriel and resurrection and having faith in the Son. And he talks about it to unbelievers in the simple way we see in John’s Gospel.
Also note, that Warren is not afraid to say the only way is through Jesus Christ. But Osteen couldn’t tell Larry King that. His comment was something like, “who am I to judge.” Thus indicating the difference between Osteen and Warren.
I’m not completely defending Warren, I have problems with him in areas. But I think MacArthur’s sin is far, far greater. The danger is not oversimplifying the Gospel but complicating it.
I could write more but I would just be continuing the rant….sorry for ranting.
30. Tom
November 12, 2008
9:53 PM
Owen, You make valid points and this discussion could take in many different “what if’s”. The problem I have with the way the gospel is presented in those cases is that it not only doesn’t deal with sin, or the truth of the gospel, it makes believing “so you can go to heaven and not go to hell” the motive for salvation. This is not accurate. I would agree that the corinthians had much carnality. The galatians as well were chided by Paul for not yet “having Christ formed in them”. Their problem was one of trying to attain spirituality by keeping aspects of the Law. Or trying to live the life of a christian without that life being in them. The reason for the sad state of our churches today is because the gospel is brought down to man’s level and not only “allows” this lifestyle. It also goes to great lengths to explain why this is normal and not to worry about it. I disagree with that. I believe the gospel was presented in truth and in power in the early church and was not changes peoples lives but was expected to produce the kind of lives that God intended. To bypass the work of the Spirit for the sake of getting to end result is to bypass the intended results that God is after. The Corinthian christians may be an example of what you say but they were rebuked and in no uncertain terms were told these things ought not to be. Not so today, sin is explained away and accepted as a normal part of the christian life. I disagree with that. Enough said……thanks for the feedback
31. Douglas
November 12, 2008
10:51 PM
Seriously? American Christians have become “lazy” with their sharing of the gospel. We would rather give the person a book and have them develop a relationship with an author they will probably never meet in the “hope,hope” that they will read between the lines and realize their hopelessness apart from God and His gospel. If the person really means something to you, take them to lunch and develop a relationship. If you want to give them a book… give them a bible.