Welcome to the online home of Tim Challies, blogger, author, and book reviewer.

Tim Challies

Challies on FacebookChallies on Twitter


November 28, 2005

In the past couple of years there have been a few books written specifically to challenge the teachings and assumptions of Rick Warren’s mega-seller The Purpose Driven Life. Some of these have also discussed other Purpose Driven material and the man who has produced this successful franchise. These books have sometimes been criticized for being alarmist or for providing an unfair treatment of the subject matter. While I, having read all of that material, generally do not agree with the criticisms, I am quite sure no one could lodge those complaints against Bob DeWaay’s new book, Redefining Christianity.

Redefining Christianity is a book that has much to say on the topics of Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Life and other aspects of the Purpose Driven paradigm. Despite that focus it would not be correct to say that this is a book about Rick Warren or about anything he has written or dreamed up. This is, plain and simply, a book about the gospel of Jesus Christ. The underlying message of DeWaay’s book, as might be deduced from the title, is that Rick Warren, despite all his popularity and success, has redefined many critical aspects of the Christian faith. He has redefined church, vision, Christian commitment, God’s wisdom, church health and even the gospel itself. This book, then, is primarily focused not on Rick Warren but on his treatment of the gospel.

Here is a concise summary of DeWaay’s thesis:

The version of Christianity that Rick Warren presents to world leaders redefines the message of the first century apostles. The key difference is that the Biblical version did not appeal to the world; it appealed only to those who were converted. Warren’s version is popular with the world. Rick Warren has designed a message that appeals to religious consumers whether or not the Holy Spirit has convicted them of their sins. He has devised a business system to mass-market this message to the world. Through his system, he has created a way for pastors to share his success. The sheer effectiveness of this system is rapidly transforming evangelicalism. This transformation is not just a transformation of practice; it is a transformation of message. The change in the practice makes it transferable across a wide spectrum of denominational and theological affiliations. The change in the message makes it acceptable to a wide range of religious consumers.

In this statement, and indeed in the book, he captures the essence of what has made the Purpose Driven paradigm so popular and the foremost ways in which this paradigm diverges from Scripture. Through ten chapters and just over 200 pages, DeWaay provides strong evidence to support his claims. Allow me to provide a brief overview of each of the ten chapters. While I rarely employ this technique in book reviews, I believe that in this case it will be instructive and will allow the reader to understand the systematic way in which the author builds his case.

  1. Rick Warren’s Ministry Philosophy. DeWaay begins by examining the men who influenced Rick Warren, and in particular, Donald McGavran who, as the founder of the discipline that came to be known as “missiology” is considered the father of the Church Growth Movement. He shows the shaky and unbiblical assumptions that form the foundation for this philosophy including the concepts of people movements and felt needs. Ultimately, the Church Growth Movement allows the unbeliever to determine the message of the church and even the mode used to deliver it. “The key idea is very simple: change the Sunday Morning church service so that non-Christians will not only attend it, but enjoy it and keep coming back.” What becomes lost in such an approach is, of course, what people most need to hear but least want to hear and that is the full gospel message. One cannot preach that message in completeness and with boldness and remain seeker-friendly.

  2. Redefining the Church. The second chapter wades into the issue of redefinitions. “Rather than clearly preaching the Gospel to all, knowing that God promised to use it in spite of its inherent offense to call forth His sheep from the midst of the world, Warren would like to change the nature of the church and its message so it appears attractive to people as they are in their unregenerate state.” Church Growth succeeds admirably in growing the visible church (those who at least appear to be believers) but, by stopping short of proclaiming the full message of the gospel, cannot do much to grow the invisible church (those who actually are believers). In this chapter DeWaay also discusses unity, showing that the type of unity called for by Rick Warren is not the same as the Bible’s concept of unity. “The redefined church of the Church Growth Movement has mostly ignored the matter of the invisible church. They use the best means available based on pragmatic tests to make the visible church as big as possible… If happy religious consumers living better lives than they had outside of the church is the test of validity, then these huge and rapidly growing churches must be right. I do not believe, however, there is anything in the New Testament that validates seeking to maximize the visible church by means that tend to strangle the invisible one.”

  3. Redefining Vision. Not only has Rick Warren redefined the church but he has also redefined the biblical concept of vision. Vision is a crucial aspect of Warren’s strategy yet, despite providing supposed biblical proof to the contrary, the way he uses this term is different than the way it is used in Scripture where it refers to a type of true or false special revelation. Within the Purpose Driven paradigm, vision is used in a business sense in which a person plans for a future he hopes to implement. Yet those who do not catch the vision of the leadership within a Purpose Driven church are considered dissenters and are often driven from the ranks.

  4. Redefining Christian Commitment. “In the Bible, Christian commitment is based on faith in Christ, and dependence on Him for grace to walk obediently in His ways… Now we have Rick Warren bringing back the hyper piety of pre-Reformation Rome through nothing less than religious oaths, touting this as a ‘reformation.’” Much of the commitment of members of Purpose Driven churches is based on covenants some of which are even declared irrevocable. DeWaay teaches in this chapter that oaths and covenants are forbidden within a New Testament context. To write such covenants and to demand them as a display of solidarity is an egregious offense against the members of a church. He highlights the irony that exists between the Reformation, where Protestants came to see that oaths were forbidden in the Scriptures, and Warren’s supposed second reformation where they are once more required.

  5. The “Gospel” According to The Purpose Driven Life. In fifth chapter the author shows how Warren continually changes or obscures the key issues of the biblical gospel. He shows that God’s purposes do not need to be discovered, for those that God wished to make available to us have already been clearly revealed in His Word. He also points out the difficulties inherent in The Purpose Driven Life which makes little in the way of distinction between believer and unbeliever, extending the same claims and promises to both groups. The offense of the gospel, for which so many Christians have suffered, has largely been removed from Rick Warren’s teachings. An incomplete gospel, one that denies key aspects such as God’s wrath or Jesus’ resurrection, is no gospel at all.

  6. How Misused Bible Translations Support a Journey of Self-discovery. Rick Warren makes much of the two thousand references to Scripture in his book. Yet it takes more than citations from Scripture to make a book biblical for it must also present the Word of God accurately and unashamedly. “Warren’s solution to the problem [of an offensive gospel] is to use his marketing acumen to circumvent the resistance of the target audience. His plan is to draw from dozens of translations (including loose paraphrases), to choose the ones that will support the motif of a journey of self-discovery (already proven to be popular with the world), mix these various Bible citations with citations of popular worldly writers that seem to be saying the same thing, and make a seamless, religious product that speaks the world’s language but appears to come right out of the Bible. Genius! The result is The Purpose Driven Life. This is the product for the Purpose Driven Church to market to religious consumers.” As has been shown by many reviewers since the publication of the book, The Purpose Driven Life is replete with Scripture used out of context or passages provided in translations that bear no resemblance to the original text. In a clear case of giving credit where credit is due, but still highlighting problems, DeWaay says the following: “One could conclude that Rick Warren is unable to do solid Biblical exegesis, and that the cases highlighted above, and many others, are caused by a simple preacher trying his best, but lacking scholarly tools, but this is not the case. On pages 195 and 196 he offers solid, well reasoned, and accurate exegesis of Romans 8:28-29.27 I was surprised when I found this quality of Biblical interpretation in a book filled with just the opposite. This proves that Warren is capable of sound Biblical interpretation and teaching when he sees fit. My question is, ‘If he is capable of expounding the truth of a passage accurately, what excuse does he have for not doing so with hundreds of other passages?’”

  7. Redefining God’s Wisdom. Rick Warren has defined God’s wisdom by making it appear to be little more than human wisdom. He often makes grandiose claims that are unsupported by Scripture and may even stand opposed to Scripture. In doing so he provides a message that is little different than the message of popular psychology and human self-discovery. He goes so far as to quote wholly unreliable sources of spiritual wisdom such as George Bernard Shaw and Anais Nin, not to mention several Roman Catholic sources. DeWaay goes so far as to provide an extensive list of instances of “Warren’s practice of combining human wisdom with poor translations or out of context Scripture that promotes his human wisdom as if it were God’s wisdom, which it is not.” Some of these include: Paul’s “secret” was a focused life; How you define life determines your destiny; There are “secrets” to friendship with God; The truth is-you are as close to God as you choose to be; You are only as sick as your secrets. “According to his own public statements, Rick Warren’s message has broad appeal, even to members of other religions. Part of the secret of his success is his ability to integrate his own aphorisms with statements from people the world admires, combining these with partial Biblical passages taken out of context, to create a hybrid message that is simultaneously marketed to the world and the evangelical church. Everyone gets something they like.”

  8. The Problem with Private Confession. In this chapter the author wrestles with a question that has often perplexed myself and many others. “Rick Warren believes the orthodox truths of the Christian faith. He has documents that say so. Insiders at Saddleback Church say that they know Warren is orthodox. However, when I read The Purpose Driven Life I saw many teachings that are very different from historical orthodoxy. How can this be?” How is it that what Rick Warren confesses when among Christians is so different from what we hear from him when given a public venue in which to speak? DeWaay teaches, with great sensitivity towards a difficult topic, that true profession must be public and consistent. It is what is publically stated, not privately confessed, that is taught by the Bible as being grounds for knowing a person’s faith. This consistency is lacking in Warren’s ministry and this has been shown in his media appearances and in much of his writing. Rick Warren “presents a disjunction between what he confesses privately to evangelical Christians, and what he confesses publicly to a worldly audience.” DeWaay provides, in this regard, the example of Peter who was rebuked by Paul for publically denying in action what he privately knew to be true - that there was equality between Jew and Gentile. A partial denial, as shown in Peter’s earlier denial of Jesus, is as good as a complete denial.

  9. The Purpose Driven Brand. The book now turns to a discussion of the Purpose Driven brand. The author shows that Purpose Driven, like the franchising models so popular in the world of business, allows a pastor of limited means, skills and capabilities, to enjoy all the success of Rick Warren. Purpose Driven is “church-in-a-box” much as McDonald’s is “burger-in-a-box.” He shows how leverage is applied to maximize the impact of the paradigm and also discusses the importance of vision casting and mission statements. I believe the following is one of the most important points made in this book: “I hope my readers see what is going on. These change agents make all the definitions, compare us to the church as they define it, declare us failures, then offer us “success” if we join their programs. Dear fellow Christians and specifically church leaders, this is American marketing pure and simple: define a problem so that you convince nearly everyone they have it, then sell them the solution. In this case the goal may not be to make money. In Rick Warren’s case, I do not think he wants money for his own benefit; I think he wants his “reformation” to succeed and go down in history as a reformer like Martin Luther. He wants to create a version of Christianity that the world loves.” “What he ‘invented’ was how to harness the latest technology, marketing strategies, management systems; couple those with a message that appeals to the unregenerate mind; then put the whole thing ‘in-a-box’ and replicate it around the world. This revival bears no resemblance to what happened in Acts. What happened in Acts was a work of the Holy Spirit through the means of uncompromised Gospel preaching. The P.E.A.C.E. plan does not depend on the Holy Spirit but on the wisdom of man.”

  10. Who Determines “Church Health,” Jesus Christ or Rick Warren? The final chapter compares Rick Warren’s definition of church health with that of Jesus Christ. Using seven churches in Revelation, DeWaay shows just how little resemblance there is. “The key Purpose Driven principles and protocols are very different from those in the New Testament that describe a church pleasing to Jesus Christ. If those of the New Testament prevail, the result is a church that is pleasing to Christ. If those of Rick Warren prevail, the result is a church popular with religious consumers in the world, but which is much different from Jesus’ ‘little flock.’”

    All of this leads DeWaay to warn:

    “Warren has so redefined the major issues (the Gospel, the Bible, the church, fellowship, worship, discipleship, evangelism, and missions), he has effectively re-defined Christianity. The new version of Christianity is popular with the world. This version has avoided the outcome that Jesus predicted to His disciples: “If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you” (John 15:19). The world loves a P.E.A.C.E. plan which promises to solve the problems they want solved. The problem is that the world hates the Gospel of Jesus Christ. May we boldly proclaim that Gospel so that God will use it to save some from His coming wrath. May we shun the lure of popularity and success offered by Warren’s redefined Christianity. It is so much better to be pleasing to Jesus Christ.”

    There will be some who will doubt the author’s motivations in writing such a book. Some will accuse him of jealousy or of nitpicking. Others will no doubt label him a troublemaker. Those who find that they doubt his intentions or motivations may wish to begin at the end, as it were, with “A Loving Appeal to Rick Warren.” The book concludes with what is clearly a sincere, heartfelt plea for Rick Warren to return to the full message of the gospel, a message he surely knows but chooses to ignore. This appeal shows the heart of a pastor. The gospel is never far from the heart and mind of a godly pastor and this is clearly the case with Pastor DeWaay. His concern is with the gospel, and well should it be. Jesus Christ has not entrused the church with a message of purpose but with an offensive gospel message of sin, wrath, punishment, death, resurrection and forgiveness. If we leave this message we have nothing to offer. If we become ashamed of the full message or deem it somehow embarrassing we have become little more than clanging gongs and clashing cymbals. The central message of this book is not Rick Warren and neither is it The Purpose Driven Life. The central focus of Redefining Christianity is the gloriously good news of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

    I believe that there is no more complete a resource available to Christians to understand how Rick Warren is changing the church through his Purpose Driven paradigm. Redefining Christianity is well-researched, meticulously-documented and overflowing with the gospel message. I commend it to you and trust that God, in His grace, will use it to convict many to stand firm in or return to the simple, offensive, powerful gospel delivered to us by the Holy Spirit through the Scriptures.

    I am not entirely certain when the book will be available for purchase, but assume it will be early in 2006. I will let you know when it becomes available.

November 24, 2005

My neighbors to the South are celebrating Thanksgiving today, an event we celebrated six or seven weeks ago in Canada. Thanksgiving is a much more important celebration to Americans than it is in my country and that is something that makes me just a little envious. Americans know how to celebrate; I wish Canadians would learn from them.

What follows is an amazing Thanksgiving Proclamation, made by one of my heroes, Abraham Lincoln, in the year 1863, in the very midst of the Civil War. Reading a proclamation of this sort it is amazing to consider that many people are casting doubt upon Lincoln’s faith and character (not to mention his sexuality!). Americans have a rich heritage to celebrate today. I hope many heed the powerful words of this great man that they use this day to offer “up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings.” Not the least of these blessings is the relative peace that exists today and was so terribly lacking when Lincoln penned these words.

By the President of the United States of America.

A Proclamation.

The year that is drawing towards its close, has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever watchful providence of Almighty God. In the midst of a civil war of unequaled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign States to invite and to provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere except in the theatre of military conflict; while that theatre has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union. Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defence, have not arrested the plough, the shuttle or the ship; the axe has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well of iron and coal as of the precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased, notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege and the battle-field; and the country, rejoicing in the consiousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of freedom. No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and one voice by the whole American People. I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next, as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens. And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to His tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty Hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquillity and Union.

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the City of Washington, this Third day of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and of the Independence of the Unites States the Eighty-eighth.

By the President: Abraham Lincoln

November 22, 2005

A few years ago I was handed a copy of The Purpose Driven Life and told that I really ought to read it. I knew almost nothing of Rick Warren or his Purpose Driven material, so decided I would read this book that, judging by the shelf space it had been given at the Christian bookstore, was “the next big thing” for Evangelicals. It turned out to be a bestseller in a class all its own, selling over twenty five million copies. As I read the book I became increasingly concerned with what I was reading and provided several articles and reviews that expressed this concern. These articles became part of the foundation for this site. In the years and months since then I have become known as one who is staunchly opposed to Warren and his teaching.

It has been quite a while since I have written anything of any real substance about Warren so I thought it would be helpful for me to reassess what I believe about him. This may help clarify my position. I have decided to present to you my three primary concerns with Rick Warren, his ministry and all things Purpose Driven. These concerns are: Warren’s ongoing abuse of Scripture, the all-encompassing nature of the Purpose Driven programs and Warren’s ecumenism.

I do not wish to indicate that these are the only concerns I have with Warren, nor do I wish to indicate that there is nothing beneficial happening because of his ministry. I merely wish to express what I feel are three serious, overarching concerns that Christians should be aware of because of Warren’s increasing profile as America’s pastor and as a leader of the Evangelical church.

Warren’s Ongoing Abuse of Scripture

When I speak to people about The Purpose Driven Life or when I read reviews of this book or any of the Purpose Driven material, a constant theme that emerges is a concern over Rick Warren’s treatment of Scripture. This is, to say the least, a major concern.

Rick Warren claims that he quotes the Bible over 1,200 times in the text of The Purpose Driven Life. To do so, he uses fifteen different translations and paraphrases. Appendix 3 contains his rationale for this and he provides two reasons for the number of translations. The first is that in any single translation “nuances and shades of meaning can be missed, so it is always helpful to compare translations.” The second is “the fact that we often miss the full impact of familiar Bible verses, not because of poor translating, but simply because they have become so familiar” (author’s emphases). He believes this will “help you see God’s truth in new, fresh ways.” (author’s emphasis)

While I agree that some translations are clearly superior to others, even on a verse-by-verse basis, and further agree that it is helpful to compare translations, Warren’s logic is faulty as the two reasons he provides contradict each other. If a translation introduces something in a new and fresh way it will necessarily introduce new nuances and shades of meaning. The way to remove nuances and shades of meaning is to use as literal a translation as possible so that the words are God’s alone and are not interpreted by the translator. The author can then exposit the text, clarifying what might require clarification. This is nothing more than the traditional means of teaching what the Bible says. This is similar to the form Jesus used where He said, “You have heard it said…but I say.” He took what was unclear and made it clear.

Warren is also correct that after a while verses can lose their full impact. I know that this happens to all Christians and it is to our shame. But rather than use poor Scripture translations, a teacher should help the reader focus on the fact that as a Christian he should love the Bible as God gave it to us. As with David, God’s Law is to be our delight day and night and not something we grow tired of. Changing the translation does nothing to remedy this problem if the translation is inaccurate.

I would not be nearly so concerned about the use of multiple translations if Warren was consistently choosing translations that were close in meaning to the original manuscripts. The unavoidable fact is, though, that Warren consistently chooses translations that say what he feels needs to be said, regardless of the real meaning of a verse. A clear example of this is seen in his use of Proverbs 29:18 which, in one of his Ministry Toolbox updates, he provides in the King James translation: “without vision the people perish.” He uses this verse in an attempt to prove his statement that “To accomplish anything you must first have a mission, a goal, a hope, a vision.” Every other translation of Scripture provides a more clear translation such as “Where there is no prophetic vision the people cast off restraint” (ESV). Warren sought out the one verse that says what he wanted to say even while every other translation rendered the verse more clearly. In doing so he has certainly not clarified any nuance or shade of meaning. Rather, he has introduced one.

There is a serious impact to Warren’s use of so many translations in that it speaks volumes of his view of the inspiration and sufficiency of Scripture. While I am sure Warren would affirm the plenary inspiration of Scripture, the reality, as proven by his misuse of Scripture, is that he must 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. This introduces a very serious concern with his ministry.

Despite a great volume of criticism about his handling of Scripture, Warren seems to have done nothing to remedy this concern. His recent writings and interviews are filled with the same volume of translations and mistranslations of Scripture.

Beyond the problem introduced by the large number of translations there are some passages where Warren uses the Bible extremely carelessly. Perhaps the clearest example of this is in chapter 10 where he discusses the blessing of surrendering to God. As support he quotes Job 22:21 as saying “Stop quarreling with God. If you agree with him, you will have peace at last, and things will go well for you.” When we look at the larger context of this passage we see that these are the words of Eliphaz, one of Job’s infamous friends. We see that Eliphaz is giving Job poor advice which God later condemns. Warren knows better than this!

A second example is Isaiah 44:2. This is used in the heading of the second chapter and is rendered “I am your Creator. You were in my care even before you were born.” The author chooses to quote only the first part of the verse. The second part, we see, goes directly against what he wants to say. It reads “Do not fear, O Jacob My servant; And you Jeshurun whom I have chosen.” When viewed in the proper context we see that this verse applies only to a specific group (which is, once again, the Israelites). This does not mean that the verse has no relevance to us, but to suggest that it applies directly to the reader of The Purpose Driven Life is clearly wrong.

There are at least fifty similar examples where the author uses Scripture outside of its context or assigns a foreign meaning. When Scripture is not used in the way God intends, this sort of inconsistency is inevitable. Warren’s ongoing abuse of Scripture is my primary concern with his ministry. Just as we would doubt the love of a husband who abuses his wife, so we must wonder at Warren’s love of Scripture if he is so willing to abuse it.

The All-Encompassing Nature of Purpose Driven Programs

Many of the laypeople who began a study of The Purpose Driven Life through a 40 Days of Purpose program had no idea that they were part of a larger effort. It is entirely possible that by the time these people received their book, the church leadership had already begun implementing the Purpose Driven programs and had been doing so for several months. I am aware of several churches where this was done without the knowledge or consent of the congregation. The leadership simply decided to implement the program and went ahead. 40 Days of Purpose was one of the first steps in introducing an entire new paradigm for doing church.

Rick Warren feels that his program is so wholly biblical that he wants to tell you what programs you church should begin, what programs should be stopped and what programs should be put on-hold, at least during the 40 Days programs. The programs extend to every area of church life. Here is what the 40 Days of Community program involves:

  1. The 40 Days of Community Kick-Off Event. This is a message preached by Warren which will be broadcast live via satellite, though churches without satellite capabilities can obtain it on DVD or VHS.
  2. Seven weekend messages and worship plans. The messages were originally preached by Warren in his home church of Saddleback Community Church. Participating pastors are to preach his messages and employ his worship plans which direct which songs to sing. The messages are based on the book of Philippians and Warren indicates they are expository in nature. (Please note that Warren’s interpretation of what constitutes expository preaching is not consistent with what historically has been considered expository. For more, see this article).
  3. The “What on Earth Are We Here For” devotional book with 40 days of daily devotional readings and journaling pages. This book also includes study guides for weekly small group study.
  4. Six small group or Sunday school lessons. These include a video which gives teaching that is then discussed by small group members.
  5. Six weekly scripture memory verses.
  6. Multiple church-wide events which will deepen the commitment of church members are make them active in their church and local communities..

Here are some underlying principles and some prerequisites for completing this particular program. Through the 40 Days of Purpose Program, Warren discovered five principles that he says will guarantee success in the upcoming Community program. Conversely, cutting out any one of these principles will necessarily damage a campaign, curtailing the results. The principles are:

  1. Unified Prayer – everyone in the church must pray for the campaign beginning months ahead of time, for there is power in unified prayer.
  2. Concentrated Focus – The church must focus on just this one program. Multiple focuses will dilute the program and reduce its effectiveness. Each ministry and each program must carry the message of the 40 Days program.
  3. Multiple Reinforcements – The program depends on many reinforcements throughout the week - church services, small groups, daily quiet times and a weekly memory verse.
  4. Behavioral Teaching – Each aspect of the program helps people become “doers” and not mere listeners. After each section there is a homework assignment, activity or event.
  5. Exponential Thinking – Exponential thinking is thinking that stretches faith. It forces leaders to look beyond what God has done before and focus instead on believing God for greater growth, greater giving and so on.

To summarize, 40 Days of Community is a comprehensive program that impacts every area of the church’s ministry for the duration of the program and very possibly beyond. Warren warns that many other programs and activities will need to be placed on hold or even cancelled if they are not part of 40 Days of Community. He advises leadership to begin to address this in advance with those ministry leaders whose areas of ministry will be affected. The program extends not just to the corporate gatherings but also to individual quiet times. In short, if a church is to be successful in implementing the 40 Days of Community Program (and the same is true of 40 Days of Purpose), the leadership is expected and encouraged to include programs that extend to every area of the church’s life. For 40 days the pastor will preach Warren’s messages or perhaps even simply show a DVD of Warren delivering the messages. Programs that are deemed unfitting for Purpose Driven philosophy will be postponed or cancelled. Small groups will study Purpose Driven material and individuals will even be expected to study Warren’s material during their daily quiet times. Even the required Scripture verses will be memorized in the translation of Warren’s choosing.

I believe 40 Days of Purpose and 40 Days of Community are unique in the long history of the church. I cannot think of any other programs that asked a church to turn itself over completely to another pastor for the duration of a program. Warren believes the Purpose Driven principles are so important and so unique, that he asks pastors to hand them his church – programs, messages, worship and even private devotions - for 40 days. At the end of that time he promises that the principles God has revealed to him will have transformed your church. It will be bigger (growth in numbers), be bringing in more money (growth in giving) and stronger (growth in small groups). He asks members of these churches to listen to his messages, his interpretation of Scripture, sing the songs he has chosen and study the topics he has outlined. Warren casts his vision for your church and then attempts to deliver that vision to you. The program is designed to infiltrate every important area of the church and remove those areas that are not deemed important. It is all-encompassing.

Rick Warren’s Ecumenism

The third great concern I have with Rick Warren and his programs involves ecumenism and a general downplaying of the importance of theology and doctrinal distinctives. By “distinctives” I refer not to doctrines that we hold to that serve only to keep us apart, but to the essential doctrines which keep us faithful to the Scriptures.

In The Purpose Driven Life Warren writes, “God warns us over and over not to criticize, compare, or judge each other… Whenever I judge another believer, four things instantly happen: I lose fellowship with God, I expose my own pride, I set myself to be judged by God, and I harm the fellowship of the church.” As we have come to expect from Evangelicals, the “judge not” admonition is given without distinction between judging a person in matters of essential doctrine or in matters of personal preference. There is a great difference between the two - a difference Warren chooses to overlook. Instead he downplays the importance of important theological disagreements and distinctions. Earlier in the book he writes, “God won’t ask about your religious background or doctrinal views. The only thing that will matter is, did you accept what Jesus did for you and did you learn to love and trust him?” While I am sure God will not ask what denomination I was part of when I died, we certainly should not downplay doctrinal views. Our doctrine is integral to who we are and how we live for Him! But, as we see, downplaying theology is necessary for his grandiose plans to succeed.

Within The Purpose Driven Life Warren quotes Roman Catholic figures such as Mother Teresa, Henri Nouwen, Brother Lawrence, John Main, St. John of the Cross and Madame Guyon. Nowhere does he warn that these people teach and believe much that is directly opposed to the clear teaching of the Scripture.

Beyond the downplaying of theology, Warren also advocates closer ties with apostate denominations such as the Roman Catholic Church. The following is an excerpt from an article summarizing Warren’s speech at a conference hosted by the Anglican Communion Network. “He urged the churches to join a ‘new reformation’ to spread the Christian faith and use the resources of ‘the universal, worldwide church of Jesus Christ in all of its local expressions’ to help the poorest of the poor. He predicted that the meeting, which brought affluent Americans together with archbishops from some of the poorest nations on earth, would be viewed by history as a turning point. ‘Now I don’t agree with everything in everybody’s denomination, including my own. I don’t agree with everything that Catholics do or Pentecostals do, but what binds us together is so much stronger than what divides us,’ he said.” He went on to say, “I really do feel that these people are brothers and sisters in God’s family. I am looking to build bridges with the Orthodox Church, looking to build bridges with the Catholic Church, with the Anglican church, and say ‘What can we do together that we have been unable to do by ourselves?’” (link). In one short sentence, “what binds us together is so much stronger than what divides us” he equates the differences between Baptists and Pentecostals or Baptists and Reformed Christians with the differences between Baptists and Roman Catholics.

During an earlier appearence at the Pew Forum, Warren said, “The first Reformation actually split Christianity into dozens and then hundreds of different segments. I think this one is actually going to bring them together. Now, you’re never going to get Christians, of all their stripes and varieties, to agree on all of the different doctrinal disputes and things like that, but what I am seeing them agree on are the purposes of the church. … Last week I spoke to 4,000 pastors at my church who came from over 100 denominations in over 50 countries. Now, that’s wide spread. We had Catholic priests, we had Pentecostal ministers, we had Lutheran bishops, we had Anglican bishops, we had Baptist preachers. They’re all there together and you know what? I’d never get them to agree on communion or baptism or a bunch of stuff like that, but I could get them to agree on what the church should be doing in the world.” During the same appearance he said, “ ‘I’m not a politician, I’m a pastor,’ he asserted, and then noted that if evangelical Protestants teamed up with American Catholics, ‘that’s called a majority.’” Once more Warren has chosen to overlook theology in order to building bridges between all denominations, regardless of their beliefs.

Warren is willing to overlook critical theological differences that strike to the very heart of the gospel in order to press forward toward his goals. When a person is willing to overlook the differences between Protestant, Roman Catholic and Orthodox theology, I have to wonder what he truly believes. What does he understand of justification if he is willing to push away such distinctives as being of lesser concern than what is shared between Protestants and Catholics? Warren shows that he is willing to let go of the gospel.

November 22, 2005

This week’s King for a Week award goes to Rebecca who posts her Everyday Musings at Rebecca Writes. A year or two ago I said of Rebecca’s site, “…if I could recommend one, and only one, blog to people that would edify them the most, I would have a difficult time choosing any other than Rebecca’s.” I think that is still true. The quality of what she posts continues to amaze me. I always benefit from reading her site and commend it to you. For the next week the last five headlines from Rebecca’s site will be posted in the left sidebar of my site. I trust you will enjoy read her articles as much as I have.

I am now accepting nominations for King of the Week. If you have a site you would like to nominate, feel free to do so by clicking on the “suggest” button below the King of the Week box.

November 15, 2005

This week’s King of the Week honor goes to a newcomer to my blogroll. I actually met Marc, proud proprieter of Purgatorio when I was at the Desiring God conference last month but did not realize at the time that Purgatorio was his project (I’m a bit dense that way). With tens of thousands of new blogs beginning every day, it is rare that one comes along that is very different from the rest. Purgatorio is different. Very different. Short on text but long on photo essays, this site is a fascinating glimpse into the trends and fads within Evangelicalism (and occasionally beyond). Marc must spend hours scouring Google images to find all of these pictures.

Here is Marc’s introduction to the site:

“The topics posted on PURGATORIO are simply things that are present in Christian culture or a sub-culture. They are not something I necessarily agree or disagree with (although my biases and opinions will most likely show). Some of them will be more controversial, some silly, some sad and some just plain stupid. Some topics will be hot buttons, or pet peeves, or things close to your heart. So please comment! Humorous takes, serious takes, biblical takes, judgmental takes, can’t we all just get along takes, pontificating know-it-all takes, angry bile-filled vitriolic takes… but please no naughty words or blue humor.”

So for the next week, the last 6 headlines from Purgatorio will be available in the left sidebar of this site. I trust you will enjoy getting to know Marc and will be both amused and disgusted by his studies of contemporary Evangelicalism.

November 15, 2005

This morning I began to read the book of 1 Kings. Earler this year I had read through the Old Testament up to the end of 2 Samuel and, after spending some time in the New Testament, I decided to pick up where I had left off. As you know if you read this site on a regular basis, the topic of Bible translating has been much on my mind of late. As I read through the first three chapters of 1 Kings I found myself continually struck by the beauty of the language as it is translated in the English Standard Version. While I do not know how to read Hebrew, I often hear people speak of the poetic nature of the language which leads even the prose to have poetic qualities. It seems to me that the ESV does an admirable job of capturing that.

I have come to love those little literary devices, the metaphors and phrases used by the ancient writers and feel that they add so much to the reading of the text. Without a translation that accurately rendered these sayings we would lose so much of the flow and meaning of the text. I love language and the English language in particular. While I have always enjoyed using words and studying language, I found that my love of English was forged during the time I spent studying other languages, primarily those from which English is derived - Latin, Greek, and to some extent, French. I also studied linguistics and, of course, the English language itself. I came to love understanding how people use words to craft ideas. There is a good reason that people continue to study Shakespeare in high school despite increasingly antiquated language. Shakespeare was a master of the language, a master word crafter, and it benefits anyone to learn from his example. The same is true of Dickens or any other number of authors. What I learned is that words are important. Who would want to read a modern translation of Shakespeare? We would be left with nothing but a second-rate story. And author’s words are important. That may come as no great surprise and may even seem obvious, but the translators of dynamic equivalent translations would have to disagree, at least somewhat, as their translation philosophy proves that they feel ideas are more important than words.

As I read three chapters this morning I was struck by how much beauty there is in the prose of the Old Testament and I found myself profoundly thankful to have access to a translation that accurately renders the metaphors and phrases used by the original authors. Let me provide you with a few examples. I am going to use the ESV as my standard essentially-literal translation. I do this not necessary to indicate that it is superior to the others within the category, but simply because it is the translation I use for my devotional and study work.

Let’s begin with 1 Kings 2:2 where King David gives his final wishes to his son Solomon. The ESV renders this “I am about to go the way of all the earth. Be strong, and show yourself a man.” The other essentially literal translations agree with this translation as the NASB, KJV and NKJV are all very similar. There are two constructs here that I feel are essential to the text. “I am about to go the way of all the earth,” and “show yourself a man.” Let’s see how several other common translations render this particular verse:

  • “I am about to go the way of all the earth,” he said. “So be strong, show yourself a man.” (NIV)
  • “I am going where everyone on earth must someday go. Take courage and be a man.” (NLT)
  • “My son, I will soon die, as everyone must. But I want you to be strong and brave.” (CEV)
  • “I’m about to go the way of all the earth, but you—be strong; show what you’re made of!” (Message)

As we see, the NIV renders the verse in a way that is consistent with the original text. The NLT deviates a little bit, expanding the meaning of “the way of all the earth” to “where everyone on earth must someday go.” It also says, “be a man” rather than “show yourself a man.” The CEV further interprets the verse, removing any sort of literary device in both parts. The Message does a little better, maintaining the first half of the verse but removing the “show yourself a man.”

What is lost in the NLT and the CEV is the metaphor “the way of all the earth.” It is an important term, beautifully poetic, and surely one that is worth some time in meditation. There is a depth of meaning to that phrase that is clearly missing in words like “I will soon die, as everyone must.” Readers of the NLT and CEV have no access to this phrase and miss out on the wonderful opportunity to meditate upon it and learn from it.

Another example comes only one verse later. 1 Kings 2:3 continues David’s instruction to his son. David exhorts Solomon to follow God and “walk in His ways.” The ESV translates the verse as “…and keep the charge of the LORD your God, walking in his ways and keeping his statutes, his commandments, his rules, and his testimonies, as it is written in the Law of Moses, that you may prosper in all that you do and wherever you turn.” Let’s see how other translations render “walking in his ways.”

  • …and observe what the LORD your God requires: Walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses, so that you may prosper in all you do and wherever you go, (NIV)
  • Observe the requirements of the LORD your God and follow all his ways. Keep each of the laws, commands, regulations, and stipulations written in the law of Moses so that you will be successful in all you do and wherever you go. (NLT)
  • Do what the LORD your God commands and follow his teachings. Obey everything written in the Law of Moses. Then you will be a success, no matter what you do or where you go. (CEV)
  • Do what GOD tells you. Walk in the paths he shows you: Follow the life-map absolutely, keep an eye out for the signposts, his course for life set out in the revelation to Moses; then you’ll get on well in whatever you do and wherever you go. (Message)
  • The term “Walking in his ways” is a wonderful metaphor for living a life that honors God. We seek to emulate Him by following carefully in the footsteps of God. I am reminded of a song by the Smalltown Poets, “Call me Christian,” where they sing, “As a boy I’d put my steps / In my brother’s bigger tracks / To match his stride / And just like that I follow Jesus / Jesus is my guide.” That type of imagery is absent from the New Living Translation as well as the CEV. The Message is quite close and the NIV is, once again, accurate.

    Moving along we come to 1 Kings 2:9. David asks Solomon to exact revenge against Shimei, a man who had cursed David. “Now therefore do not hold him guiltless, for you are a wise man. You will know what you ought to do to him, and you shall bring his gray head down with blood to Sheol.” The metaphorical phrase here is “bring his gray head down with blood to Sheol.” Again, this is a wonderfully descriptive phrase that has more meaning than simply “kill.” Yet several translations provide only this meaning.

    • But now, do not consider him innocent. You are a man of wisdom; you will know what to do to him. Bring his gray head down to the grave in blood.” (NIV)
    • But that oath does not make him innocent. You are a wise man, and you will know how to arrange a bloody death for him.” (NLT)
    • Now you must punish him. He’s an old man, but you’re wise enough to know that you must have him killed. (CEV)
    • But neither should you treat him as if nothing ever happened. You’re wise, you know how to handle these things. You’ll know what to do to make him pay before he dies.” (Message)

    The NIV does a good job, only changing Sheol to grave. The NLT writes about a bloody death. This seems to miss the point for the verse is not primarily concerned with the mode of death, but with the reason for the death. The Message misses the mark altogether. Neither the NLT, the CEV or the Message see fit to render the word “grey” or “hoary” (as the King James renders it). Is that not a word God placed in the text? Is it not an important word? I do not understand why they would knowingly remove a word God saw fit to include.

    One of the most beautiful and oft-repeated phrases in the Old Testament is found in 1 Kings 2:10. “Then David slept with his fathers and was buried in the city of David.” Several essentially literal translations render “slept” as “rested” but the meaning remains the same. The Bible Knowledge Commentary says of this verse, “The picturesque phrase rested with his fathers beautifully describes David’s death and suggests that his activity did not cease forever. Indeed, the bodies of all believers who die simply ‘rest’ until they are resurrected to live with God and serve Him eternally.” David entered a temporary rest as he, along with the rest of Creation, awaits the final consumation. Here is how other translations render that verse:

    • Then David rested with his fathers and was buried in the City of David. (NIV)
    • Then David died and was buried in the City of David. (NLT)
    • David was king of Israel forty years. He ruled seven years from Hebron and thirty-three years from Jerusalem. Then he died and was buried in Jerusalem. (CEV - combines verses 10-11)
    • Then David joined his ancestors. He was buried in the City of David. (Message)

    The NIV remains consistent with the text. The NLT and CEV say simply that David died. The Message extends the verse by saying that David joined his ancestors, something that is a bit of a stretch but at least somewhat true to the meaning of the verse. The NLT and CEV do not allow their readers to see the beauty of “resting with his fathers.” Instead, David simply died. What a tragic loss! Readers of these translations will not see any hope beyond the grave. They will not know that David has gone to be with his fathers and that he is merely resting. Once more, are these not words that God deliberately placed in the text? Should readers not have access to them?

    In 1 Kings 2:12 Solomon has assumed his father’s throne. In fact, according to an essentially literal translation, “Solomon sat on the throne of David his father, and his kingdom was firmly established.” While the meaning of the phrase “sat on the throne of David his father” is clear, meaning that Solomon succeeded his father as ruler, there is an interesting sense of continuity in the original words. Doing more than simply replacing his father, Solomon actually assumed his throne. This may seem a small distinction, but I feel it is important nevertheless. It is similar to verse 3 (above) where David exhorted solomon to walk in God’s ways. Now Solomon is sitting on his father’s throne. Let’s see how other translations have rendered this verse:

    • So Solomon sat on the throne of his father David, and his rule was firmly established. (NIV)
    • Solomon succeeded him as king, replacing his father, David, and he was firmly established on the throne. (NLT)
    • His son Solomon became king and took control of David’s kingdom. (CEV)
    • Solomon took over on the throne of his father David; he had a firm grip on the kingdom. (Message)

    Once more the translations are varied with the NIV being most literal and the CEV straying furthest from the text. The NLT, CEV and Message see fit to explain the verse while the NIV, along with the essentially literal translations, leave the words as they are. Through reading a literal translation we can picture Solomon ascending his father’s throne and taking over his responsibilities. This imagery is foreign to the dynamic equivalent translations.


    As I indicated earlier, I was grateful this morning that I have access to such a solid translation of Scripture. While I do not know Hebrew, I still have access to an accurate translation of the author’s original words, complete with the phrases, words and metaphors that set one author apart from another. I have access to the full meaning, or as close as I can come without access to the original language, of what was written so long ago. I simply can’t understand how anyone would be satisfied with anything less.

    November 14, 2005

    The Passion of the Christ was a major marketing success. But it was more than that. It was an astounding, shocking success that few people felt was possible. It was, after all, a movie filmed in a dead language focusing on a dead man whom most people in the world hate. It was overtly Christian in both theme and content and pulled no punches in expressing the deeply-held, politically incorrect religious views of one man. Yet it made an enormous amount of money and will go down in history as one of the greatest marketing and financial success stories in Hollywood history.

    So how was it that this movie came to be such a success? While there are certainly many factors involved, the primary factor was, quite simply, marketing. Astute marketers came to the realization that the Evangelical world was dry tinder just waiting for a spark.

    And now the secret is out. Evangelicals are dry tinder just waiting for the strike of a match. Evangelicals are primed and ready to play a role in marketing efforts. Following on the heels of The Passion of the Christ comes The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe. In my mind, and in the minds of many conservative Christians, there is a considerable difference between these two movies. The Passion of the Christ was offensive to me for several reasons but two stand above the rest. The first was in the physical depiction of Jesus. I, and many other Christians, struggle with the depiction of Jesus in film. The second reason the movie was offensive was in the profoundly Roman Catholic beliefs expressed through the film. In fact, one can make a good argument that the movie was a visual representation of the Catholic mass. There were constant references to theology that would be affirmed by Roman Catholics but that is antithetical to Protestantism. The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe is different in these two respects as it presents only an allegorical representation of Jesus and the theology is generally consistent with biblical Protestantism.

    It seems to me that a greater number of Protestants will be eager and willing to see this movie. This is something the marketers know only too well. Quoted in an article in The Christian Post is Abram Brook, editorial writer for Leadership Magazine. “[T]hey’re using all the tactics that made ‘The Passion of the Christ’ a blockbuster,” he says. “But…we have to wonder: ‘Is the church being used?’ or more precisely, ‘How crassly is the church being used?’” Just a few days ago I was speaking to a pastor who was marvelling that a company was willing to hand him all sorts of door-hangers and posters for the movie. But of course they were willing to do this! If the pastor distributes these, he is doing valuable, target marketing for the movie! It would seem the church is being used quite crassly.

    The marketing that made The Passion of the Christ such a success is being used to promote The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe. In fact, the producers of the film hired the very same marketing firm that promoted The Passion of the Christ. Only a brief look at the shelves of a Christian bookstore will show many ways this marketing is being manifested. The article in The Christian Post says, “It’s in magazines, radio airwaves, television specials, churches, music concerts, Christian Web sites, and on scores of family-friendly books. The promotions do not scream for attention like the iPod campaign, but Disney has integrated Narnia into the cultural fabric of Evangelicals.” Narnia figures will be given away with McDonalds’ Happy Meals and there is even an action video game based on the books set to be released.

    Other marketing efforts include “ ‘Narnia Sneak Peek’ events in churches across America integrated the movie into the local church. At the Christian Cultural Center in Brooklyn, N.Y., members of the 20,000-plus congregation viewed exclusive clips, received free gift bags full of outreach material, and were treated to a special live performance by Steven Curtis Chapman. In addition, C.S. Lewis’ stepson and co-producer of the film, Doug Gresham; Walden Media President and film’s visionary Michael Flaherty; and other Narnia filmmakers discussed the making of the movie.”

    Brooks provides a valuable warning. “Whether the film is overtly Christian, as in The Passion, has Christian themes, or merely upholds values that Christians support, church leaders must be careful about endorsing Hollywood productions and the degree to which their support is expressed in their local congregations… There is, after all, considerable difference between referencing a current movie in a sermon and supplying the congregation with mass-produced study guides and small group materials.” Are there pastors who would hand the people in their churches mass-produced study guides originating from within a marketing machine? I’m sure there are. If The Passion taught us anything it is that pastors and church leaders are willing to be in the forefront of this type of marketing effort.

    It is more than a little bit ironic that the film is being released by Walt Disney Pictures. Walt Disney has certainly been no great friend of Christians and Christianity in general over the past decades. Their recent films are filled with themes that contradict the Bible. Yet it is clear that in this case they have taken an interest in The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe, simply because of the revenue it represents. This irony is not lost on the London Telegraph:

    The move is particularly remarkable because for the past decade Disney has been the subject of a religious boycott imposed by Christian organisations, who accused the company of betraying its family-values legacy by providing employee health benefits to same-sex partners, allowing gay days at its theme parks and producing what they considered to be controversial films, books and television programmes through Disney subsidiaries.

    Now the wooing of evangelicals, combined with the departure of Disney chief executive Michael Eisner - described by some religious leaders as “anti-Christian” - signals the implicit end of the boycott and the beginning of a possible money-spinning franchise for the studio, which is desperately seeking a blockbuster hit that can deliver sequels, along the lines of the Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings films. (source)

    The article in The Christian Post concludes by stating that “Brook appreciates that the opportunity exists for the church to influence the types of films that the culture’s dominant media produces, but warns that ‘such influence comes at a price.’ He is also wondering where the next Hollywood collaboration will take the Church.” These are both valid concerns. This influence does come at a price. The price for The Passion of the Christ was monetary, in the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, but also spiritual, in subjecting people to a movie that was so filled with Catholic theology and imagery as to boggle the mind of this Protestant. We can also only sit and wait and wonder where Hollywood collaboration will take the church. We can be sure that marketing companies are not standing idly by, but are seeing in Evangelical churches a vast network of marketing fodder.

    “Quentin Schultze, professor of communication at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan, suggests an even more cautionary approach. “Every social group should worry about being taken advantage of by Hollywood,” Schultze said. “Moviemakers generally are more interested in getting various groups to buy and rent films than they are in serving those groups. Christians might be more gullible in the sense that they tend to believe various religious leaders who champion or criticize the latest movies even if the leaders have not seen the films and do not have a very good ability to interpret and evaluate them. “Factor in the Christian bandwagon effect, and one can see how Christians can be taken advantage of, even as they seek to do what is right,” Schultze said.” (Leadership Journal).

    I sincerely hope this movie is used by God to draw people to Himself. While I have little hope that people will turn to God within the movie theatres (the gospel is, after all, not going to be clearly presented in the movie) I do hope that the strong Christian imagery and parallelism within the film will allow Christians to spark conversation with their unsaved friends. There is much to discuss. At the same time I hope that Christians approach this movie with discernment, being aware that it is being produced largely by unbelievers who care little for the Christian themes except for their usefulness in drawing a Christian audience to the theatres. I hope Christians think twice before consuming mass-produced marketing material under the guise of study guides and Bible studies. Above all I hope that Christians remember that The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, while a fabulous story is just that, a story. And to many, including those who are going to try to hand you posters, door hangers are action figures, it is just another product. There are marketers out there seeking to use you to promote this product. The question is, how crassly are you being used?

    November 13, 2005

    Before church began this morning I was thinking about exegetical fallacies. I’m not sure why this topic was on my mind but I was trying to think back to which of these fallacies I have written about on this site. I came up with three and promptly forgot one of them. I thought I’d collect the other two here for your reading pleasure.

    Proverbs 29:18

    The first of them is Proverbs 29:18 which you may have heard translated as “without vision the people perish.” A quick survey of my bookshelf turned up references to this verse in several books. The example I used in an article last year was taken from one of Rick Warren’s Ministry Toolbox updates:

    MY IMAGINATION INFLUENCES MY ASPIRATION. In other words, your dreams determine your destiny. To accomplish anything you must first have a mission, a goal, a hope, a vision. “Without a vision the people perish.” Proverbs 29:18. I compared this verse to several other translations:

    NIV - Where there is no revelation, the people cast off restraint
    NLT - When people do not accept divine guidance, they run wild
    CEV - Without guidance from God law and order disappear
    NKJV - Where there is no revelation, the people cast off restraint
    HCSB - Without revelation people run wild
    ESV - Where there is no prophetic vision the people cast off restraint
    AMP - Where there is no vision [no redemptive revelation of God], the people perish

    My conclusion was that, “It is possible that a brief, careless reading of one translation of the Bible could lead to confusion as to this verse’s meaning. But for anyone who rightly handles the Word of God, paying attention to the sense of the text and to the meaning of the specific words used, the meaning of this verse is obvious. This verse says nothing of the importance of having a church that is led by vision or a visionary. Ironically, this verse should underscore the importance of honoring God’s revelation, and warn those who would water it down by sloppy or deliberate misuse.”

    You can read this article here.

    Matthew 18:19-20

    The second exegetic fallacy concerns Matthew 18 and in particular, the words, “where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.”

    My conclusions about this verse were as follows: “Where two or three are gathered in His name, He is there. What this means is that Jesus is present spiritually to validate the decision that has just been made. Jesus will help guide the church officials and give them peace that the decision they were forced to make was the right one. I see no reason to expand this verse to mean that whenever two Christians are in the same geographic location, Jesus is somehow more present there than when they are apart.”

    Read the article here.

    As I remember other similar articles I have written I will append them to this list.

    November 08, 2005

    As you have probably noticed, I’ve added a King of the Week section to this site. This section allows me to highlight the contributions of other bloggers and to pay tribute to people who have blessed (or even just amused) me through their efforts. Doug from Coffeeswirls was there by default from the beginning of the site, but I am now going to begin a regular rotation of adding a new site each Tuesday.

    So the very first King for a Week is none other than Centuri0n, aka Frank Turk, who blogs at …And His Ministers A Flame of Fire. Frank and I have had a couple of good-humored wars of words, but I have come to respect his writing a lot. It is clear that he is a James White devotee, as he seems to enjoy fighting point-by-point battles with Reformed Catholics. His site is an eclectic mixture of deep theology and inside humor. I enjoy reading it and am glad to make him King for a Week.

    November 04, 2005

    Yesterday I wrote about Bible translations, hoping to stir people to at least investigate the issues surrounding what has become a hot topic in the church. I believe that an influx of poor translations is beginning to erode the confidence Christians have in their Bibles, and unfortunately, this erosion of confidence happens with good reason. Yesterday evening I was reading Translating Truth, a book that is due for publication in the next couple of weeks. The third chapter, written by C. John Collins, provided an interesting example of translation gone awry and I thought I would share that today.

    Philosophy of Translation

    Collins quotes A.J. Krailsheimer, a teacher of French at Oxford, who translated Pascal’s Pensees into English. Here is how Krailsheimer explained his goal in this translation:

    The purpose of any translation is to enable those who have little or no knowledge of the original language to read with reasonable confidence works which would otherwise have been inaccessible to them. It does not help if the translator introduces variants of his own, instead of following as faithfully as possible the chosen original, ultimate criterion of accuracy and authenticity.

    This goal is little more than we would expect in any translation. He seeks to faithfully reproduce what would otherwise be inaccessible to the reader. He attempts to be as faithful as he can to the original, unwilling to sacrifice accuracy or authenticity by adding his own variants.

    It is interesting to contrast this philosophy of translation with Eugene Nida, the father of dynamic equivalence. Nida writes:

    To translate is to try to stimulate in the new reader in the new language the same reaction to the text as the original author wished to stimulate in his first and immediate readers.

    Note the difference between these two philosophies. The first seeks a faithful translation of the words used by the original author while the second focuses primarily on the reader and his reaction to the author’s underlying intent. What can be lost in this method of translation is what Anthony Nichols refers to as “exegetical potential.”

    This would mean in practice that a good translation of the NT will preserve a sense of historical and cultural distance…It will take the modern reader back into the alien milieu of first century Judaism where the Christian movement began. It will show him how the gospel of Jesus appeared to a Jew, and not how that Jew would have thought had he been an Australian or an American.

    A Metaphor

    Collins teaches Latin to his children and a few years ago his sister gave him a Latin Daily Phrase and Culture Calendar. In this calendar, most days have a Latin phrase accompanied by a suggested translation. There is also sometimes a literal translation given. What he found in these translations provides an interesting metaphor for the translation of Scripture.

    My Latin has gotten a little bit rusty through the years, so forgive me if my attempts at translation are not perfectly accurate!

    mutatis mutandis
    After making the necessary changes
    (lit.: Things having been changed that had to be changed).

    The literal version, which renders the Latin with fair precision, makes some sense but translates to very difficult English. A slightly better rendering might be the necessary changes having been changed or the necessary changes having been made. From there it is not difficult to smooth the translation to After making the necessary changes. We can consider this a good, essentially literal translation of the original words.

    Ubi leges valent, ibi populus potest valere
    Where the laws are good, there the people are flourishing
    (lit.: Where laws are healthy, there the people are able to be healthy).

    This translation is somewhat true to the author’s words, but does not capture the author’s intended repetition of “valere.” A better translation, capturing this literary device, would be Where laws are healthy, the people can be healthy. This example shows, then, a decent but still flawed translation. At the very least it could have been better as it was quite simple to improve the translation to still be readable while maintaining the literary device.

    Quod cibus est aliis, aliis est venenum.
    One man’s meat is another man’s poison.
    (lit.: That which is food to some is poison to others).

    Collins points out something I noticed immediately when reading this translation. The literal translation is not quite literal enough because it misses the chiasmus, or parallel between the two parts of the sentence. A better translation would be What is food to some, to others is poison. This maintains the aliis, aliis construct. So again, we have a translation that keeps most of the words intact, but ignores a literary device.

    Pares cum paribus facillime congregantur.
    Birds of a feather flock together.
    (lit.: Equals most easily congregate with equals).

    In this case the literal translation bears resemblance in meaning to the original but very little similarity in the words (which literally translate to something like Equals with equals most easily congregate). The translator has seen fit to interpret and contextualize this phrase, rendering it with a modern aphorism. Returning to Nichols’ quote, we see that this translation may capture the author’s intended meaning, but it maintains none of its exegetical potential.

    Mundus vult decipi.
    There’s a sucker born every minute.
    (lit.: the world wants to be deceived).

    This is another case where the translator has done far more than translate, but has ignored the actual words and instead translated what he feels is the author’s intent. As Collins says, “Few lay people would call these last two “accurate” translations, because the words of the original have exercised no control over the renderings.” The exegetical potential is gone and the reader is forced to accept the author’s interpretation of both the words and his understanding of intended meaning.


    I found this quite a helpful metaphor in understanding the differences between translation philosophies. The first example might equate to an essentially literal translation of the Bible like the ESV, KJV, NKJV or NASB. The second and third examples might be similar to a dynamic equivalent translation like the NIV or even the NLT. The final two examples strike me as being similar to The Message or the CEV.

    And so we return to where we were yesterday. When reading your Bible, do you have confidence that you are reading the words of God? Do you have confidence that the translator has done his utmost to faithfully reproduce the author’s words, or has he also interjected his understanding of the words? Has he maintained the exegetical potential of the Scriptures, or has he done the exegesis on your behalf?