I Didn't Want To, I Promise!
I was getting ready to post about something else, when I ran accross this on Al Mohler's blog. I didn't want to comment, but have no choice.
Warren has gotten out of control, in my opinion. With his PEACE initiative, he has lost the focus on what a pastor is called to do. Now, it appears he is willing to call anyone who isn't in his camp, the enemy.
As we've seen on this blog, the term "fundamentalist" needs to be defined. Who exactly is he referring to? (To the majority of the population, I would be considered a fundamentalist because I believe the fundamentals of the Christian faith are true and believe the Bible should be taken literally as much as possible. Is Warren referring to me?)
As a decent theologian, one should see the difference between our response to Christian, Muslim, and Jewish fundamentalism. Though I may have problems with extremely dogmatic Christian sects, if they hold to an accurate gospel message, I have to accept them as brothers and sisters, regardless of what they wear or what translation they believe is authorized. I can respect the devotion of the fundamentalist Jew or Muslim, but I also have to acknowledge that my worldview requires that I see them as wrong. We are not brothers and sisters, instead I should be striving to help them see the truth.
Third, is Christian fundamentalism really borne out of fear of other beliefs? Mohler asked the same question, and I think we have the same answer: "probably not."
Not that this is intended to be a post on Christian celebrity (that is still coming), but it seems to be the culprit here too. I can't imagine the pressure of being known by others and then being asked questions. But the pressure only increases when you begin speaking on issues you really shouldn't.
(Again, I did not intend to write another "Anti-Warren" piece, but how many of these things need to add up before we acknowledge that being a Christian best seller doesn't mean it's good for Christianity.)
Warren has gotten out of control, in my opinion. With his PEACE initiative, he has lost the focus on what a pastor is called to do. Now, it appears he is willing to call anyone who isn't in his camp, the enemy.
As we've seen on this blog, the term "fundamentalist" needs to be defined. Who exactly is he referring to? (To the majority of the population, I would be considered a fundamentalist because I believe the fundamentals of the Christian faith are true and believe the Bible should be taken literally as much as possible. Is Warren referring to me?)
As a decent theologian, one should see the difference between our response to Christian, Muslim, and Jewish fundamentalism. Though I may have problems with extremely dogmatic Christian sects, if they hold to an accurate gospel message, I have to accept them as brothers and sisters, regardless of what they wear or what translation they believe is authorized. I can respect the devotion of the fundamentalist Jew or Muslim, but I also have to acknowledge that my worldview requires that I see them as wrong. We are not brothers and sisters, instead I should be striving to help them see the truth.
Third, is Christian fundamentalism really borne out of fear of other beliefs? Mohler asked the same question, and I think we have the same answer: "probably not."
Not that this is intended to be a post on Christian celebrity (that is still coming), but it seems to be the culprit here too. I can't imagine the pressure of being known by others and then being asked questions. But the pressure only increases when you begin speaking on issues you really shouldn't.
(Again, I did not intend to write another "Anti-Warren" piece, but how many of these things need to add up before we acknowledge that being a Christian best seller doesn't mean it's good for Christianity.)
posted by danny2 @ 2:05 PM
7 Comments:
At 10:14 PM,
Gary Underwood said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
At 10:50 PM,
danny2 said…
i agree.
the Bible is a best seller, and I have no problem with it. (i don't find it heretical at all.)
however, when warren's best seller doesn't include the resurrection and a man has robert schuller for a mentor and he makes careless comments like fundamentalist are the enemy of the 21st century, that's when i begin to wonder about the guy.
At 11:35 PM,
Gary Underwood said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
At 10:16 AM,
danny2 said…
response:
1) are we suggesting that if a person graduates from a certain school, then they must be ok? you'd agree theologically with every person to have graduated from grace college or even seminary?
2) you may want to read more schuller. there is a lot of universalism and inclusivism in his teaching. but, i guess in this era as long as a person says they are christian, i am obligated to believe they are. testing their teaching against the Scripture was only something to do in the apostolic era?
3) a book that claims to set people straight on the purpose for their life. a book that is so basic in nature and is claiming to clarify why we are here...i think a book like that should include the resurrection. in fact, it's perplexing that someone as "seeker aware" as warren wouldn't want to acknowledge the most time changing miracle of all time.
4) you're right. and maybe the reporter chose not to include it. but again, is Christian fundamentalism (which may include rigid rules about translations, dress or activities) nearly the same as fundamentalist muslims (who believe in killing others for the cause of their god)?
5) two thoughts:
a) i'm mean and picking on warren to point out problems i have. he should get a free pass. why? because he wrote a best seller (that means it must be accurate, right?). because he has a huge church (he must be doing something right then, huh?). because he's asked to be on larry king and sought out by the mass media (means he must be salt and light, right?)
b) yet you have no problem analyzing every point i make (which i don't mind you doing). but even though we've known each other for years, i don't get the free pass. why? because i've never written a best seller (obviously i have nothing worthwhile to say)? because our church is ONLY 300 (which of course means i haven't learned to influence my community like others)? because i'm not sought out by the media (i'm actually glad there, i probably would say something stupid).
6) you had no six, but i'm breaking 5 into a couple categories.
you're right, in the age of sound bytes, any figure has to be incredibly careful what they say. politicians get it. most athletes get it. why is the christian world some of the last to get it? dunno.
it's pretty much gotten where when robertson or falwell speaks, i'm already prepared to answer, "well, all of us christians do not feel that way." with dobson, i don't worry too much, most of what he is saying is about psychology and rarely about the Bible anyway.
but here's another question...i've seen countless interviews with warren and read some other reports by him. typically, the conversation tends to be about his church and his programs and very rarely does the conversation turn to his Savior. shouldn't that be the focal point of any conversation we have with the media. shouldn't we take captive the opportunity to present Christ?
and if the media is just out to get us, stirring up controversy and misquoting...wouldn't it make more sense to just give them a "no comment?"
At 7:19 PM,
Gary Underwood said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
At 7:55 PM,
Gary Underwood said…
Bro,
I'm sorry again for my posts. Seems like I didn't even read all of your post before jumping in to defend my purpose-driven brother.
I like Rick, you don't. It's cool.
You like the Steelers, I don't. It's cool.
Please forgive me. I must have been stressed out or something, and overreacted.
Sorry dew.
At 9:11 PM,
danny2 said…
become a steelers fan and the stress will disappear.
trust me dew. get on the bus!
Post a Comment
<< Home