Comments on: Lessons in Creativity

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 01 Jul 2005 17:28:42 +0000

george mair links are now operational at abanes.com. also included now is my first article that responds to Todd Wilken, lutheran radio talk show host of Issues, Etc. on KFUO. also the articles in my Lighthouse Trails Research Project series are now up.
RAbanes

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 11 Jun 2005 15:21:34 +0000

Thanks for the update!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 11 Jun 2005 00:35:31 +0000

My web site is finally beginning to go up now.
I have my new page of the Religious Information Center set up (see http://www.abanes.com/ric.html)
LINKS WILL SLOWLY BEGIN APPEARING
the major link now working on this opening page is the main page on Rick Warren at
http://www.abanes.com/rickwarrenmain.html. included are topics:

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 13 May 2005 17:40:08 +0000

Dear Victor,
I read with great interest your comments, and with all due respect, please allow me to provide some information that might be helpful in the discussion. Forgive me if I sound blunt, but I am actually writing in a fairly light-hearted tone (one that may or may not transfer clearly over to this forum).
V: about Saddleback, it is hardly the biblical model that is laid out in Scripture. Saddleback has it backwards in making the weekend church service cater to the unbeliever.
response: actually, this is an odd rumor that contains all sorts of loaded language. What do you mean by “cater to the unbeliever.” This kind of verbiage implies that the services are unbiblical, entertainment-oriented, soft on sin, devoid of the gospel, etc etc etc. Such is not true. Do you know what “seeker-sensitive” means, as it is used at Saddleback? (I do not speak for any other so-called “seeker” church). The facts are these (at Saddleback, at least).
– messages always include some kind of call to Christ
– God in Christ reconciling the world to Himself is presented as the ONLY way of salvation in the next life and peace/joy in this life.
– seeker-sensitive means being considerate to visitors and running the service in a way that will not distract from the message or the experience (for example, not making lengthy church announcements during the service that are irrelevant to visitors).
– explaining biblical concepts during the sermon that are understandable to non-believers unfamiliar with Christianese (or in-house Christian lingo).
– offering life application teachings that ALL attenders (Christian and non-Christian) can take with them during the week and start living out.
As you can see, such things are not catering to unbelievers as you seem to be implying, and as has been rumored. Have you ever been to Saddleback? Attended any conferences? Or listened to at least a sampling of service messages? And how exactly would you document that Saddleback has it backwards by supposedly catering to unbelievers (and all that such language implies).
V: Can you show from Scripture this is how it is to be done?
response: well, as you mean it, or seem to mean it, there is indeed no biblical support. but that is really moot since the kind of catering you imply is not what happens at saddleback.
V: I don't think it can be done, especially when Sunday church meeting finds its root in Sabbath observance in worshipping God.
response: i think this is a double-edged sword, my friend, and you ought be careful since it can be used to slice to bits just about every church now existing. If you really wanted to carry your argument out consistently, we all would have to find a temple to go to on Sabbath (which originally was Saturday, BTW). Or, we should all meet in people's homes since there were no “churches” as such among the earliest Christians, nor were there than pipe organs for music (a worldly invention), not to mention those worldly little morsels of bread we now use for communion

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 13 May 2005 00:39:52 +0000

actually the URL is now
http://abanes.com/warrenpressrelease.html
R. Abanes

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 20 Apr 2005 06:11:51 +0000

Richard Abanes, a former staff member at Saddleback, has authored a new book examining the Purpose-Driven Life (apparently “Purpose-Driven” is trademarked). The book will hit shelves this July. Here's the press release:
http://abanes.com/RickWarren.html
Richard said this about it in a public email this morning:
“In July, when released, it will once and for all present my official position on:

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 19 Apr 2005 23:00:34 +0000

Hi T.O.,
I'm glad that my arguments has given you food for thought. I pray that it will help sharpen your thoughts, whether you agree or disagree with my analysis. Perhaps you will have more for me to feed on after you have done your study and analysis.
Hi Han,
Just because good came out of it does not justify it's theology. There are plenty of books out there with horrid theology, but any good that comes from it does not justify its teachings. Got Koran? Got Bhagavad Gita? I'm sure people who follow these books claim their teachings must be doing something right.
In Christ,
Victor
P.S. Greedo didn't have a chance

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 19 Apr 2005 16:39:30 +0000

I heard that the Purpose Driven Life book hepled that lady convince that killer to turn himself in peacefully.
Must be doing something right, I figure.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 19 Apr 2005 15:17:10 +0000

Victor,
Thank you for you analysis of my arguments, you have denfinatly given me food for thought. Your arguments are the best so far.
I have done my best to represent my church where I see they stand. Pastors at my church may say that I have stated some things incorrectly.
But some good questions are raised as to the biblcal nature of the 'seeker-sensitive' style. I have enjoyed the banter as I knew the audience I would get from here.
Not fully conviced of the arguments, as I still feel there are general assumptions,(not only in the way Saddleback is viewed, but the way biblical church is also viewed) I will look into scripture more.
Please pray that I may gain wisdom and discernment; that it may be for all believers and for all churches.
Thanks again,
T.O.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 19 Apr 2005 10:44:33 +0000

Hi,
I hope I am not out of order by jumping into this subject. I've read the comments from T.O. and the other guy, and I just finished reading STR's article. Forgive me if I may be too blunt and long-winded in my commentary.
From just what you have said, T.O., about Saddleback, it is hardly the biblical model that is laid out in Scripture. Saddleback has it backwards in making the weekend church service cater to the unbeliever. Can you show from Scripture that this is how it is to be done? I don't think it can be done, especially when Sunday church meeting finds its root in Sabbath observance in worshipping God. Church finds its “shadow” in the Sabbath and if the Sabbath worship of God was exclusive to the believers, how much more so with the Sunday service? To change the corporate worship of God for the believers to a time of evangelism for the unbeliever is to turn the church on its head. Murdock and B.A. have read some of my posts on another site, and so they have read this a few times from me: the ultimate pragmatism for the Christian is relying on the firm foundation of God's Word and the power of the Gospel. Saddleback cannot claim to be standing on God's Word while it follows an unbiblical model of church. True, Saddleback may be prospering, but prosperity is not the measure of how well a church is being a church. The standard of measure is Scripture.
A few comments on things you have written:
“Now at our church we do show movie clips (cussing edited) or slide shows, I wouldn't say that we are conjuring emotions (although I am sure that some would say so).”
On the contrary, since the church service is catering to the unbeliever, the use of such movie clips and slideshows is for the purpose of conjuring the emotion of comfort.
“Not all people need the heavy elements of deep theology and apologetics to have a relationship with Christ.”
This is the equivalent of saying that wives don't need to know their husbands intimately in order to have a relationship. Forget how his mind works and the implications of his thoughts. Wives just need to know that they are loved without knowing what love means to their husbands. Sorry, that just doesn't fly. All of God's people need to know their God intimately. All of the church needs to know their Christ intimately.
By the way, if you argue that you were talking about unbelievers, your context wouldn't allow it since you follow up with:
“Now don't get me wrong… what these believers do grasp needs to be scripturally correct…”
Anyway, moving on…
“I find that most people are moved by the character of the Spirit (love, fellowship, generosity, etc.) than by heavy handed theology. But there are those people out there that need theology and apologetics (myself included) in order to be fed spiritually.”
Are you implying here that most people don't need to be fed spiritually with theology and apologetics? Seems like “fire insurance” theology to me.
“The time to grow deeper is during the rest of the week. Church is not just a Sunday thing.”
Since Saddleback has made the weekend services to cater to the unbeliever, believers have no choice but to try to grow deeper during the rest of the week. But is this really efficient? Most people work during the week, so their time is already pressed as it is. So for most people, the yoke of growing deeper during the week is heavy. But lo and behold, here comes Sunday, when most people are off from work. The yoke of growing deeper is light, but alas, Sunday service is catered to the unbeliever. Can't find anything too deep there. What about Sunday school and other classes on Sunday? This may be speculation, but I'm sure Saddleback doesn't want the unbelievers to just go off so quickly, do they? I wouldn't doubt that most programs on Sunday are also catered to the unbelievers. So much for the light yoke for the believers.
“And I feel it is essential to have these weekend services reach out to the unbeliever, and of course without sacrificing our 'christian culture' for 'the culture of the world.'”
But feeling has nothing to do with it. You are either Scriptural or not. And when you are not Scriptural, then you are sacrificing “christian culture”.
“How do you speak to contemporary culture? After all didn't Paul, as a tentmaker, try to find common ground with those who he was to share the gospel with? Don't missonaries to tribal villages find a common narrative already in their culture to show the relavance of the Bible stories to there life?”
You are projecting the individual efforts of outreach onto the church's function. The church's function is for the discipling of Christians. This includes the preaching of the Word, the distribution of the sacraments (definitely not for unbelievers), and exercising church discipline. Outreach is done in the public square in the marketplace of ideas, not in the church.
“I think the message of purpose is good as a starting point. The message of Love is key. And I see both as Biblical.”
Can you show Scripturally that “purpose” is a good starting point? I think not. Just read the Epistles. The encouragement to go and do good usually falls towards the end, not in the beginning. What is found in the beginnings are teachings (usually to counter errors in the church). “Purpose” as a starting point may be good to you, but it is unbiblical.
“I think a lot of generalizations are assumed about “Purpose Driven” church ministry.”
Apologistics ministries like STR don't have to assume. They just have to measure the