The modern American church has mistakenly sought to accomplish its mission through the attainment of cultural relevance by introduction of man’s ideas and methods and abandonment of unchanging biblical truth and authority in order to make the church acceptable to a culture that no longer deems itself fallen. As a result, many in the today’evangelical churches are abandoning a forthright proclamation of the gospel and replacing it with conversations about tolerance, charity, understanding, goodwill, and other noble-sounding objectives defined and dearly held by a humanistic culture. But once again we must look to the pithy writings of A. W. Tozer for wisdom and clarity. “When men believe God they speak boldly. When they doubt they confer. Much religious talk is but uncertainty rationalizing itself; and this they call “engaging in contemporary dialogue.”[1] [emphasis added]

God doesn’t have “conversations” with man about sin

Brian Houston, head of Hillsong’s twelve global churches (including one each in New York City and Los Angeles) appears to favor the conversational approach. While speaking at a press conference during Hillsong’s October 2014 conference in New York City, Houston was asked by Michael Paulson of the New York Times to clarify his statement about same-sex marriage with regard to the church’s staying relevant to modern culture.

It can be challenging for churches to stay relevant…On the subject [homosexuality], I always feel like there’s three things. There’s the world we live in, there’s the weight we live with, and there’s the word we live by. The world, the weight, and the word.

And to me, the world we live in, whether we like it or not, is changing around and about us. Homosexual marriage is legal in [New York City] and will be probably in most Western world countries within a short time. So the world’s changing and we want to stay relevant as a church. So that’s a vexing thing. You think, “How do we not become a pariah?” So that’s the world we live in.

Then the weight we live with is the reality that in churches like ours and virtually any other church, there are young people who have serious questions about their sexuality… And maybe they feel a sense of rejection there [because of homosexual feelings]…So you can have churches—not just our church, but churches—young people who are literally depressed, maybe even suicidal and, sadly…feel that the church rejected them. So there’s the world we live in, the weight we live with, and then the word we live by.

The word we live by is what the Bible says. And it would be much easier if you could feel like all of those three just easily lined up. But they don’t necessarily…For us, it’s easy to reduce what you think about homosexuality to just a public statement. And that would keep a lot of people happy. But we feel at this point, it is an ongoing conversation, that the real issues in people’s lives are too important for us to just reduce it down to a “yes” or “no” answer in a media outlet.[2] [emphasis added]

Houston felt it necessary to issue a second statement following the press conference on LGBT issues when newspaper headlines stated that his church “won’t take [a] public position on LGBT issues.” Houston stated that he had not abandoned the traditional Christian teachings that define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, but in addressing the issue the church must remain relevant to the culture.[3]

I think with the church, the message is sacred but the methods have to change for the church to stay relevant. And it’s challenging. It’s challenging to stay relevant. I mean, if we go to the one big hot topic maybe for churches … now with homosexual marriage legalized, and churches for generations, they hold a set of beliefs around what they believe the Word of God, the Bible says. All of a sudden in many circles the church can look like a pariah, because to many people it’s so irrelevant now… So staying relevant is a big challenge. I think it’s more than just singing more contemporary songs and the colors you paint your walls or whatever.[4]

Houston’s ambiguity and equivocating about homosexuality amounts to abandonment of biblical truth in order to remain relevant to the culture. This attempt to balance cultural relevance and a truthful presentation of God’s word has evolved to the point of being dangerously close to apostasy in Houston’s own church. If one doubts this assertion, one need only to read the remarks of Carl Lentz in an interview with CNN in June 2014. Lentz, pastor of Hillsong’s New York City Church, said that his church has “a lot of gay men and women…Jesus was in the thick of an era where homosexuality, just like it is today, was widely prevalent. And I’m still waiting for someone to show me the quote where Jesus addressed it on the record in front of people. You won’t find it because he never did.” Lentz wife stated in the same CNN interview that, “It’s not our place to tell anyone how they should live. That’s their journey.”[5]

If the Bible is the inerrant, infallible word of God, then no part of it is less true or less applicable than another. But this is what Lentz has strongly implied when he attempted to lessen the sin of homosexual behavior by claiming Christ did not speak against it. The Apostle Paul did condemn homosexuality in a very forthright and plain manner (see Romans 1: 18, 24-27). Paul’s admonishment regarding homosexuality is a part of the inspired word of God and is no less inspired than the writings of those who recorded the words of Christ in the gospels.

Ms. Lentz’s comment that we should not tell anyone how to live is absurd and would be laughable if her error was not so serious. One must ask what the purpose of Paul’s pronouncements on homosexuality was if he did not intend to instruct Christians (and all of mankind) on how they should live. What is Ms. Lentz’s husband doing when he preaches to the New York City Hillsong congregation? He is giving instruction on how one ought to live one’s life.

It is commendable that Lentz’s church has a lot of gay men and women attending, but without forthrightly addressing the sin of homosexuality Hillsong Church has compromised the word of God in order to maintain cultural relevance while gaining attendance and/or ministering to the felt needs of practicing homosexuals. The Bible speaks plainly about a time when truth is not taught and sin is tolerated in the church.

…preach the word, be urgent in season and out of season, convince, rebuke, and exhort, be unfailing in patience and in teaching. For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths. [2 Timothy 3:2-4. RSV]

The world is evangelizing the church

Much of the American church is desperately trying to remain relevant in the rapidly deteriorating culture. However, writing in 2001, Jim Cymbala warned that as the church confronts an antagonistic culture we need to take a look at what the church is doing. One of the things he observed was that the church is, “Letting the world ‘evangelize’ us without our realizing it…Instead of being a holy, powerful remnant that is consecrated and available to God (in the New Testament sense of the words), the world’s value system has invaded the church so that there’s almost no distinction between the two.”[6]

Oz Guinness identified the process whereby the world evangelizes the church which ultimately leads to its collapse into worldliness.

• Assumption – Some aspect of modern life or thought is assumed either to be significant, and therefore worth acknowledging, or superior to what Christians know or do, and therefore worth adopting. Soon the assumption in question becomes an integral part of Christian thought and practice.
• Abandonment – Truths or customs that do not fit in with the modern assumption are put up in the creedal attic to collect dust. They are of no more use. The modern assumptions are authoritative. Is the traditional idea unfashionable, superfluous, or just plain wrong? No matter. It doesn’t fit in, so it has to go.
• Adaptation – Something new is assumed, something old is abandoned; and everything else is adapted. In other words, what remains of traditional beliefs and practices is altered to fit with the new assumption.
• Assimilation – The outcome is that what remains is not only adapted but absorbed by the modern assumptions. It is assimilated without any decisive remainder. The result is worldliness, or Christian capitulation to some aspect of the culture of its day.[7]

In this four-step process the world infiltrates the church which leads to compromise or abandonment of the gospel of Jesus Christ. It seems that an integral part of the process in each step of the world’s infiltration begins with conversations. Whether it is homosexuality, outreach to false religions, racial problems, or some other pressing issue afflicting society, it seems that all must begin with conversations to properly identify and define problems and construct man-made solutions. In reality all of the problems that seem unique to modern culture have existed since the beginning of man’s time on the earth. That problem is man’s fallen nature as a consequence of sin. And the only solution to man’s problem with sin is his repentance and restoration to a right relationship with God through Christ’s atoning blood shed on the cross. Biblical truth is non-negotiable, and no amount of conversation among men, however sincere and well-meaning, will change this.

What are we to do with “sin”?

Many churches are compromising the gospel message through incorporation of the world’s definitions of love and tolerance. The message of many churches is that God’s love is nonjudgmental and so vast that He will overlook sin if one will only acknowledge Him. In other words, love is all that matters. If this message is true, then sin is of no consequence in determining our eternal destination. And if sin is of no consequence to God, then He does not care about how we live our lives. If sin does not matter, then Christ’s death on the cross to purchase forgiveness for mankind’s sin becomes irrelevant.

The new concepts of love and tolerance are expressed as unconditional acceptance with the hope that someday the sinner will get around to becoming a Christian if the church is nice enough and meets his felt needs. This way is presumed to be the superior, enlightened, and preferred method to evangelize as opposed to doctrinally sound and time-tested approach that requires repentance and turning from sin.

This new way appears to fit well with Brian Houston’s goal of not becoming a cultural pariah. But we must remember that Christ was an outcast, an exile in the culture of His day, and the cross became an offense to the world because it declares that there is no other way to salvation but death to sin and self. Those preaching that the church must become relevant to the culture attempt to bypass the cross by accommodating their preaching to the opinions of those who reject the cross and God’s judgement against sin.

But the issue of dealing with sin in a hostile culture has been faced by the church from its beginning. Hundreds of thousands have died over the course of twenty centuries because they chose not to compromise on the issue of sin. Dietrich Bonhoeffer was one of those.

In 1937, the Confessing Church in Germany was under severe persecution from Nazi rulers and that portion of the German church aligned with Hitler. Bonhoeffer was a brilliant theologian, pastor, and opponent of the Nazi regime. While many of his colleagues were being arrested and sent to concentration camps, Bonhoeffer wrote a dramatic paper in which he cautioned his fellow pastors in the Confessing Church with regard to sin, repentance, and forgiveness.

Anyone who turns from his sinful way at the word of proclamation and repents, receives forgiveness. Anyone who perseveres in his sin receives judgment. The church cannot loose the penitent from sin without arresting and binding the impenitent in sin…The promise of grace is not to be squandered; it needs to be protected from the godless. Grace cannot be proclaimed to anyone who does not recognize or distinguish or desire it…The world upon whom grace is thrust as a bargain will grow tired of it, and it will not only trample upon the Holy, but also will tear apart those who force it on them. For its own sake, for the sake of the sinner, and for the sake of the community, the Holy is to be protected from cheap surrender. The Gospel is protected by the preaching of repentance which calls sin sin and declares the sinner guilty…The preaching of grace can only be protected by the preaching of repentance.[8]

Those in the church who stand against compromising biblical doctrine in the name of cultural relevance are called divisive and haters. But Paul commands the faithful to be aware of those who depart from sound doctrine and act accordingly.

I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by fair and flattering words they deceive the hearts of the simple-minded. [Romans 16:17-18. RSV] [emphasis added]

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] A. W. Tozer, Man – The Dwelling Place of God, (Camp Hill, Pennsylvania: WingSpread Publishers, 1966, 1997), p. 126.
[2] Jonathan Merritt, “TRANSCRIPT: Hillsong’s Brian Houston on same-sex issues,” Religion News Service, October 16, 2014. http://jonathanmerritt.religionnews.com/2014/10/16/transcript-hillsongs-brian-houston-sex-issues/ (accessed July 14, 2015).
[3] Jonathan Merritt, “Hillsong’s Brian Houston says church won’t take position on same-sex issues,” Religion News Service, October 16, 2015. http://jonathanmerritt.religionnews.com/2014/10/16/hillsongs-brian-houston-says-church-lgbt-issues/ (accessed July 14, 2015).
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Jim Cymbala, Fresh Power, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2001), pp. 22-23.
[7] Shane Lems, “The church’s collapse into worldliness,” The Aquila Report, July 5, 2013.
http://theaquilareport.com/the-churchs-collapse-into-worldliness/ (accessed December 3, 2014).
[8] Eric Metaxas, Bonhoeffer, (Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson, 2010), pp. 292-293.

John the Apostle began his gospel with these words, “In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the Word was God.” [John 1:1. KJV] From this single verse we can know that God and His word preceded creation. Thus, the word of God is eternal and His truth unchangeable. It reflects His holiness and commands. God’s word was given to the authors of the Bible through inspiration. Their inspired thoughts and verbalizations were recorded and man received revelation about the nature and character of God and man’s place in the story of creation, the Fall, and restoration. When we accept the Word we acquire wisdom and are given everlasting life with Him.

Because Satan is the enemy of God, he is also the enemy of God’s special created being—man. Satan is a liar and deceiver, and his first effort to break man’s relationship with God was the deception of Eve in the Garden. Words were his chosen weapon. First, question the meaning of what God had said, “Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?” After meaning is brought into question, then the big lie can be accommodated, “Ye shall not surely die.”

We can judge an age by the way it treats language. In our modern age many have abandoned objective truth and therefore the fixities of language for that of a heightened interest in semantics. Semantics deal with the historical and psychological study and classification of changes in the meaning of words and their development. Within such a semantical concept of language, words no longer reflect unchangeable truth but only perceptions or qualities which are changeable over time. In effect, words have been stripped of their meaning and are separated from the thing it represents. In this theory of language, meaning becomes relativistic and pragmatic, and ideals become hallucinations.[1] In other words, the unchanging substance of words is replaced by the current, changeable, pragmatic meanings that can be made to fit the modernists’ humanistic understanding of the age. When their understanding of the age changes, so too must the meaning of words. But if words lose their meaning, truth also becomes meaningless, and there can be no ideal.

Words matter

The belief that the Bible is infallible (unfailing and by implication without error) arises from our understanding that the scriptures were God-breathed, that is, written by human hands but under the inspiration of God. However, humanists often attempt to undermine the authority of the Scripture by pointing to the many translations of the Bible through the centuries which they say results in an almost certain decline in accuracy when compared to the original versions. Even some Christians use such phrases as “the divine inspiration and infallibility of Holy Scripture as originally given” which implies that later translations are less than infallible and therefore not as reliable. In the less faithful translations, that assumption is true. However, in every age Christians have not only pointed to the inerrancy of the Scripture, they also point to God’s providential preservation of the Scripture. If we believe that God through divine inspiration and exact precision revealed His will and intent to mankind, may we not also rightly believe that God would not allow His Word to be corrupted and thereby in His infinite wisdom sustained the accuracy of his revelation through the centuries? The answer is an unqualified yes, and we can without hesitation know His truth through the usage of standard and long-accepted translations such as the Vulgate and King James as well as other faithful modern translations.

There are numerous scriptures in the Old and New Testaments that make it clear that the Bible should not be tampered with even to the smallest degree. Moses (Deuteronomy 4:2, 12:32), Paul (Galatians 1:6-9), and John (Revelation 22:18-19) all warned that nothing should be added to or taken away from the word of God. Yet, we know that the Bible has been translated into hundreds of languages and many times within a single language. Is this a reason for concern among those relying on the Bible’s infallibility? As long as the Bible remains whole, there should be concern only when there is a change in meaning of the scriptures from that of original sources and faithful translations.

Over the centuries, attempts to corrupt the Bible have occurred in all three ways: the adding to, the taking away, and the corruption of meaning. The liberal church has been guilty of all three (See Chapter 13). For the last several decades many evangelical churches in America have tampered with the meaning of scripture and have ignored large portions of the Bible in their preaching and teaching of doctrine—a form of taking away.

A. W. Tozer wrote of the importance of the purity and soundness of doctrine.

It is the sacred task of all Christians, first as believers and then as teachers of religious beliefs, to be certain that these beliefs correspond exactly to truth.

The apostles not only taught truth but contended for its purity against any who would corrupt it.

In every field of human thought and activity accuracy is considered a virtue. To err ever so slightly is to invite serious loss, if not death itself. Only in religious thought is faithfulness to truth looked upon as fault…when they come to consideration of things heavenly and eternal they hedge and hesitate as if truth either could not be discovered or didn’t matter anyway.

We have gotten accustomed to the blurred puffs of gray fog that pass for doctrine in modernistic churches and expect nothing better, but it is a cause for real alarm that the fog has begun of late to creep into many evangelical churches.[2] [emphasis added]

In the remainder of this chapter we shall examine the ways in which the meaning of the Bible has been corrupted and how much of the Bible is being taken away by being ignored.

Corruption of the Bible through use of unfaithful translations

One source of doctrinal corruption that is creeping into evangelical churches occurs through the pervasive, careless use of unfaithful translations. This is particularly evident in the Church Growth movement. When Rick Warren wrote The Purpose Driven Life, he claims to have used a thousand quotations from scripture and lists fifteen translations used. He does so because he believes that all translations have their limitations.[3] Using this logic, it seems that somehow verses from these limited (and by implication “flawed”) translations can be combined to come up with truth superior to what any one of them might offer. However, the truth or falsity of his statement is not the point. The real question is how can the use of a substandard translation be justified over a translation proven faithful to the meaning and intent of the scriptures, particularly when the source is merely the written opinion of an individual in a questionable paraphrase as opposed to a translation by a committee of Bible scholars?

Warren also thinks that many readers have become so familiar with certain translations that familiar Bible verses lose their impact. However, the Bible does not need to be presented in “new, fresh ways.” Because it is the unchanging and powerful word of God, the impact on the attentive reader will not be lessened. To the contrary, many Christians often find new meaning and insights when reading long-familiar passages and wonder how those new meanings and insights were missed only to realize the Holy Spirit has opened their hearts and minds to something needed at that moment. Those revelations don’t come from fumbling between fifteen different translations.

Also, Warren often does not bother to quote the entire verse because “division and number were not included in the Bible until 1560 A.D.” It is interesting to note that eight of the fifteen translations used in The Purpose Driven Life have copyright dates in the 1990s, and all but the King James Version date from the late 1950s.[4] Little needs to be said here other than to point out that such scriptural text bites or sound bites are frequently divorced from the larger meaning and context of biblical passages, and they are often used merely to “prove” or prop up man’s opinions.

One of Warren’s favorite translations that he often uses is Eugene Peterson’s The Message[TM]. But Peterson’s work has serious flaws that fail the tests of what makes a faithful translation or even a good paraphrase. Colossians 1:16 is a significant test of Peterson’s work with regards to both faithfulness and comprehension.

For everything, absolutely everything, above and below, visible and invisible, rank after rank after rank of angels—everything got started in him and finds its purpose in him. [Colossians 1:16. TM]

For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominations, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him. [Colossians 1:16. KJV]

“Rank after rank after rank of angels”

The King James Version, Modern Language, Living Bible, Revised Standard Version, and the New International Version use the following words in verse 16: thrones, dominations, principalities (KJV); thrones, lordships, rulers, authorities (ML); kings, kingdoms, rulers, authorities (LB); thrones, dominations, principalities, authorities (RSV); and thrones, powers, rulers, authorities (NIV). However, only Peterson uses the phrase “rank after rank after rank of angels.” Compared to the five other versions, Peterson’s phrase is virtually incomprehensible and borders on gibberish. If the major test of a version’s reliability is to remain true to the meaning of the scriptures while being understandable, and if verse 16 is representative of the entire body of Peterson’s work, then The Message is an abject failure.

“As above, so below”

Although Peterson’s phrase in verse 16 is essentially meaningless, the phrase “above and below” is of far greater concern. Writing in Deceived on Purpose, Warren Smith presents a very compelling case that the phrase “as above, so below” contains strong New Age implications. All other versions mentioned in the preceding paragraph contain the words “heaven” and “earth” in verse 16. Only Peterson uses “above and below.” Peterson also uses this phrase in The Lord’s Prayer found in Matthew 6:10. The King James Version reads, “Thy kingdom come. They will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.” The Message reads, “Do what’s best—as above, so below.”[5]

Peterson’s “as above, so below” is a commonly accepted New Age maxim which holds that the transcendent God outside of the physical universe and the immanent God within each one of us are one.[6] This is blatant pantheism which was discussed in Chapter 16 and is the central belief of the New Age movement discussed in Chapter 19.

“Permeated with oneness”

Another verse from The Message that is packed with New Age connotations is Ephesians 4:6 where Paul is speaking to the church at Ephesus.

The Message reads, “…one God and Father of all, who rules over all, works through all, and is present in all. Everything you are and think and do is permeated with Oneness.” [Ephesians 6:4. TM]

The King James Version reads, “One God and father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. [Ephesians 6:4. KJV]

Peterson calls God by the name of Oneness. Christians have the Holy Spirit dwelling within, but they are not permeated by Oneness. Again, we look to the King James and the four other versions previously mentioned. None call God anything but God and Father.

Oneness is a New Age foundational doctrine and “is inextricably linked to the understanding that god is ‘in’ everything.” Smith cites two specific quotes from A Course in Miracles that have obvious similarities to The Message’s version of Ephesians 6:4. “God is in everything I see… The oneness of the Creator and the creation is your wholeness, your sanity and your limitless power.” One New Age false Christ says that, “My name is Oneness.”[7]

“Immanent”

Warren flirts with the New Age not only through various New Age-friendly translations but also in his own teaching materials at Saddleback Church. Smith quotes from one of the Foundations courses taught at Saddleback in which Warren appears to hold a New Age view of immanence.

The fact that God stands above and beyond his creation does not mean he stands outside his creation. He is both transcendent (above and beyond his creation) and immanent (within and throughout his creation).[8] [parentheses in original, emphasis added]

Immanent means inherent, intrinsic, innate, and internal. As previously noted, pantheism teaches that God is (immanent) in everything and everyone (See Chapter 16). In spite of Saddleback’s teaching materials, the Bible tells us that God does not reside in those who are not His children.

But are we picking nits and being too hard on Warren for occasionally bumping or stepping over the line where doctrinal truth ends because his audience really knows what he means? If Tozer were alive today, he would most certainly say otherwise and include Warren among those that emit “blurred puffs of gray fog that pass for doctrine.”

Taking away from the Bible by ignoring large portions

In the previous chapter it was stated that in seeker-sensitive preaching, there is an inherent conflict between preaching some themes, topics, and doctrines of the Bible and the goal of the Church Growth movement of being sensitive to the feelings and needs of the unchurched. This conflict is the principal reason many evangelical churches ignore serious exposition of major portions of the Bible that appear to not be seeker-friendly.

One example of those major themes seldom addressed with any depth by preachers in the Church Growth movement is the prophetic second coming of Christ and the end of the world. In The Purpose Driven Life, Warren cautions his readers that we should not waste time on figuring out prophecy because it was really none of their business.

Today there’s a growing interest in the second coming of Christ and the end of the world. When will it happen? Just before Jesus ascended to heaven the disciples asked him the same question, and his response was quite revealing. He said, “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.” [Acts 1:7-8. NIV]

When the disciples wanted to talk about prophecy, Jesus quickly switched the conversation to evangelism. He wanted them to concentrate on their mission in the world. He said in essence, “The details of my return are none of our business. What is your business is the mission I’ve given you. Focus on that!”…

If you want Jesus to come back sooner, focus on fulfilling your mission, not figuring out prophecy…

He (Satan) will do all kinds of good things as long as you don’t take anyone to heaven with you. But the moment you become serious about your mission, expect the Devil to throw all kinds of diversions at you. When that happens, remember the words of Jesus: “Anyone who lets himself be distracted from the work I plan for him is not fit for the Kingdom of God.”[9] [Luke 9:62. LB]

Did Jesus really tell the disciples that it was none of their business to know the details of His return and that they should get on with the mission? In order to forestall a subject that may not fit the seeker-sensitive mindset, Warren knowingly and wrongly commingles the disciples question about the signs of his coming and the end of the world with when those events would happen in order to dismiss the importance of prophecy. A complete reading of Matthew 24 leads to a conclusion that is the complete opposite of what Warren has said in The Purpose Driven Life.

And as he sat upon the Mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, say, Tell us, when shall these things be? And what shall be the sign of thy coming, and the end of the world? [Matthew 24:3. KJV]

First, the disciples’ question has two parts. Jesus spent the remaining thirty-nine verses of Matthew 24 answering those questions. All but one verse dealt with the signs of His return and the end of the world. In verse 36, He answered the first part of their question as to “when” the events would occur, “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.” There was no rebuke of the disciples for asking when He would return nor did He say that the details of His return and the end of the world were none of their business. To the contrary, in verse 42 Jesus told His disciples to “Keep watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doeth come.” How could the disciples keep watch without knowing the signs of His coming and the end of the world? They could not.

This is one example of Warren’s use of multiple translations (version shopping) to prove a point but cloud the meaning of Scripture. He used a verse from Living Bible in an attempt to link interest in prophecy with being distracted from the work of evangelism. “Anyone who lets himself be distracted from the work I plan for him is not fit for the Kingdom of God.” [Luke 9:62. LB] However, the King James reads, “And Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.” [Luke 9:62. KJV] Verses 57-62 are principally a teaching about discipleship (following Christ and not looking back to the worldly life) and not evangelism as Warren would have us believe.
______

Writing over a half century ago, Tozer’s words appear to be an apt and prophetic description of many in today’s evangelical churches.

The human mind is capable of plenty of mischief without any help from the devil. Some persons have a positive genius for getting confused and will mistake illusion for reality in broad daylight with the Bible open before them.[10]

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Richard M. Weaver, Ideas Have Consequences, (Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 1948), pp. 150-152.
[2] A. W. Tozer, Man – The Dwelling Place of God, (Camp Hill, Pennsylvania: WingSpread Publishers, 1966, 1997), pp. 181-182, 184.
[3] Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Life – What Am I Here For? (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2002, 2011, 2012), pp. 345-346.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Warren Smith, Deceived on Purpose, (Magalia, California: Mountain Stream Press, 2004), pp. 30-31.
[6] Ibid., p. 29.
[7] Ibid., p. 84.
[8] Ibid., p. 157.
[9] Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Life – What Am I here For? pp. 283-284.
[10] Tozer, Man – The Dwelling Place of God, p. 133.

The foolishness of preaching

Writing to the Corinthians, Paul described his calling as an apostle of Jesus Christ. “For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.” [1 Corinthians 1:17. KJV] In the next verse Paul explained that how preaching was received by the hearers depended on whether they were saved or lost. “For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.” [1 Corinthians 1:18. KJV]

Matthew Henry wrote that the power and success of Paul’s preaching was not based on the wisdom of man’s words

…lest the success should be ascribed to the force of art, and not of truth; not to the plain doctrine of a crucified Jesus, but to the powerful oratory of those who spread it. He preached a crucified Jesus in plain language…This truth needed no artificial dress…it shone out with the greatest majesty in its own light, and prevailed in the world by its divine authority without any human helps. The plain preaching of a crucified Jesus was more powerful than all the oratory and philosophy of the heathen world.[1]

Henry went on to say that because worldly-wise men are puffed up by their own learning and imaginary knowledge, they despised the message brought by a few lowly fishermen. They considered such preaching foolishness, but it pleased God to save those who believed by such presumed foolishness.[2]

But is the foolishness of preaching the same as foolish preaching? Remember, Paul said that preaching the cross is considered by the lost as foolishness. Therefore, we may also say that preaching anything other than the cross is a contradictory message and may be called silly or foolish preaching and not the foolishness of preaching to which Paul referred. But herein we find a dilemma. How do those that perish and consider preaching foolishness become saved? The answer is found in the work of the third member of the Trinity—the Holy Spirit. This will be examined more fully later in this chapter.

The purpose and methods of preaching

The nature of the message that God has given in the Bible is essentially declarative. The declarative nature of the Bible’s message confers on preaching its importance. Preaching reflects the fundamental means by which the Word of God is declared to a gathering of His people. Through those gatherings we encounter Jesus and fellowship with Him through his word. “It is the chief function of the sermon to unleash the word of the Lord in the midst of his people. It is the chief means by which the Lord directs, rebukes, sustains and invigorates his people.”[3] [emphasis added]

There are several methods by which one may preach or unleash the word of the Lord. We look to E. M. Bounds (1835-1913) for direction in this matter. His eleven published books center on the importance of prayer. But he talked of other spiritual things in his books which he knew to be inseparable from prayer. One of those was preaching by which he meant expository preaching.

That was true preaching—preaching of a sort which is sorely needed, today, in order that God’s word may have due effect on the hearts of the people…

No one having any knowledge of the existing facts, will deny the comparative lack of expository preaching in the pulpit effort of today. And none, we should, at least, imagine, will do other than lament the lack. Topical preaching, polemical (disputation) preaching, historical preaching, and other forms of sermonic output have, one supposes, their right and opportune uses. But expository preaching—the prayerful expounding of the World of God is preaching that is preaching—pulpit effort par excellence.[4] [emphasis in original]

If Bounds lamented the lack of expository preaching in his day, he would be appalled by the near nonexistence of it in many evangelical churches today. The absence of expository preaching is particularly notable in seeker-sensitive, Purpose Driven services.

Although expository preaching must be the center piece of preaching in the church, the intent here is not to judge preaching based on whether it encompasses entire books, just a few verses, or focuses on only one verse, whether by expository, topical, or other forms of preaching. As Nancy Pearcey points out, the problem arises when the Bible is treated as a collection of “facts” which produce a superficial interpretation of scripture devoid of metaphorical, mystical, and symbolic meanings.[5]

…by treating the Bible verses as isolated, discrete “facts,” the method often produced little more than proof-texting—pulling out individual verses and aligning them under a topical label, with little regard for literary or historical context, or the larger organizing themes in Scripture.[6]

The sharp rise in Bible illiteracy over the last half century is due in large part to at least five causes. The abandonment of expository preaching for other types, particularly topical preaching, is the major reason. A second reason is the decline in number of sermons that Christians hear from the pulpit. Thirty or forty years ago, the average evangelical church member would hear three or more messages preached each week compared to perhaps one each week at present. The church has replaced many regular preaching services with small group meetings and other religious activities that do not provide a consistent exposition of the Bible. A third contributing factor is a decline in regular attendance of church members at services where a message is preached. The fourth reason is the de-emphasis or complete elimination of a weekly Sunday morning Sunday school. The fifth reason is the replacement of hymns with their explicit doctrine-laced biblical themes with more contemporary, personalized themes. When all of these reasons are reduced to a mathematical examination, it is easy to suppose that thirty or forty years ago an average evangelical church attender may over the course of a year have heard 160 or more sermons preached and Sunday school lessons taught, all with a significant amount of Bible exposition and doctrinally-centered teaching. Today, the average church attender may hear as few as 25 or 30 sermons per year, most of which will have a much lighter, topical message with significantly less Bible exposition, doctrine, and teaching.

With this understanding of the true nature, purpose, and methods of preaching from the foregoing discussion, we shall examine the preaching that dominates modern evangelicalism in America.

Seeker-sensitive preaching

Rick Warren faults most traditional church services because he believes their messages are unpredictable in that they alternate erratically between evangelism and edification. He also believes that traditional services are poorly designed for unbelievers because they are not understandable. According to Warren, designing a seeker-sensitive service will address these deficiencies. As a result Christians will want to invite their friends which will produce a steady stream of unchurched visitors from which the church will be grown.[7]

Warren eliminates the supposed confusion of the unbeliever caused by messages of edification directed at the redeemed by designing and directing a substantial majority of his sermons as evangelical efforts to reach the crowd of unbelievers. Warren described the characteristics and construction of seeker-sensitive services and preaching.

Each week at Saddleback, we remind ourselves who we’re trying to reach: Saddleback Sam and his wife Samantha. Once you know your target, it will determine many of the components of your seeker service: music style, message topics, testimonies, creative arts, and much more.

Most evangelical churches conclude their worship service with an altar call. But many do not realize that it is a self-defeating strategy to focus the first fifty-eight minutes of the service on believers and suddenly switch to unbelievers in the last two minutes. Unbelievers are not going to sit through fifty eight-minutes of a service that isn’t in the slightest way relevant to them. The entire service, not just the invitation, must be planned with the unchurched in mind.[8] [emphasis added]

But Warren and the other Church Growth advocates have wrongly redirected the purpose of preaching from being primarily focused on the body of Christ to a weekly seeker-sensitive message aimed at the unchurched. This redirection has had a profound impact on the long-time faithful in many of those churches following the Purpose Driven model. The results of one study commissioned by a well-known mega church shocked its leadership when they discovered a widespread spiritual discontent among its most faithful members within or near what they considered to be their core group. This study will be discussed in a later chapter.

Warren claims that both book exposition (which supposedly works best for edification) and topical exposition (which works best for evangelism) are important in growing a healthy church.[9] Yet Warren plainly says that the thrust of his preaching is to the unchurched on a weekly basis. As a consequence, he rarely does expository preaching, and his topical preaching cannot be expository by its very nature.

In spite of assurances to the contrary, many evangelicals lack confidence in the Bible. Bible exposition from the pulpit has been replaced by meatless but entertaining and therapeutic messages with a biblical facade. Although they may be initially interesting and temporarily comforting, such messages will over time dull the senses of the listener who develops a deep hunger for God’s word and impatience with the inconsequential and light-hearted fare which they are regularly fed.[10]

Warren’s incessant focus on getting the unchurched into the church to hear a weekly evangelistic-topical message not only perverts the primary purpose and method of preaching to the church but also fails on three other counts: content, enlisting the power of the Word, and reliance upon the work of the Holy Spirit.

Preaching the cross

At its heart, all preaching must be a preaching of the cross. Preaching must not be separated into a special set of sermons for sinners and another set for Christians. It is readily admitted there are salvation messages and messages that edify, but to segregate or pigeonhole preaching into edification or evangelism is to limit or shackle the breadth of application and power of the scriptures.

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. [2 Timothy 3:16-17. KJV] [emphasis added]

It is the Holy Spirit that prepares the heart of the listener to receive the message, whether he is saved or a sinner. Through the divine work of the Holy Spirit, a single sermon has the power to touch a multitude of people on a multitude of levels. One may need salvation, another edification, others encouragement for a variety of reasons, some for peace, and the list goes on. The preacher that through prayer has sought and is led by the Holy Spirit in preparing and delivering his message need not fret as to whether or not he has correctly assessed and targeted his audience and delivered an understandable message.

The power of God’s word v. the power of man

So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it. [Isaiah 55:11. KJV]

Warren’s belief that traditional messages are not understandable by the unbeliever devalues the power of the Word to draw the sinner to Christ. The sinner may not understand every scripture used by the minister, but the scriptures are not ordinary words but God-inspired and have power to accomplish its purposes beyond a preacher’s limited ability to articulate what he thinks God is trying to convey and the listener’s ability to comprehend.

Too often, new paradigm churches dumb down the message of the Bible and therefore make it a husk without the life sustaining core from which spiritual nourishment is found. Words, illustrations, stories, and loose interpretations are often used inappropriately and excessively to such an extent as to make the clear meaning and intent of the Bible completely distorted. Because of the cultural demand for microwaved, abridged, Cliff Notes-styled preaching that flows from modern intellectual laziness, there is a general belief among many evangelical leaders that rigorous study and expository preaching of the Bible and its doctrines is no longer necessary in our enlightened seeker-friendly age.

In seeker-sensitive preaching, there is an inherent conflict between preaching the cross and their goal of being sensitive to the feelings and needs of the unchurched. We find the correct answer to this conflict revealed in the book of Hebrews.

For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. [Hebrews 4:12. KJV]

Matthew Henry explains the work of the sword. “It is quick; it is very lively and active, in seizing the conscience of the sinner, in cutting him to the heart, and in comforting him and binding up the wounds of the soul.”[11] [emphasis added] Here we see that the Word not only accuses and cuts but comforts and dresses wounds. In the seek-sensitive church world, saccharine superficial messages attempt to massage and caress felt needs without the necessity of spiritual surgery. But the Word rightly applied cuts deeply beneath felt needs to the secret sin buried in the heart of man which Jeremiah called desperately wicked and deceitful (see Jeremiah 17:9).

The work of the Holy Spirit

Warren’s brand of evangelism effectively makes salvation a matter of works on the part of the preacher and merit on the part of the sinner. Both tend to ignore the work of the Holy Spirit in the heart of the sinner. The Holy Spirit can quicken or bring alive any message, be it of an evangelical or an edifying type, and use it to cut to the heart of a sinner. Paul said in Ephesians 2:1, “And you he hath quickened, who were dead in Trespasses and sins.” The “you” is the sinner who is spiritually dead because of trespasses and sin. The “he” refers to the Holy Spirit. By “quickening” is meant to be made alive.

But too often the sinner’s spiritual corpse is mistakenly diagnosed as being merely sick, faint, dispirited, calloused, hardened, or burnt-out. All suggest a spark of life still remains that will allow the sinner to do something to merit God’s forgiveness and return to His good graces. If only the minister can entice the sinner with the right presentation, illustrations, stories, and understandable words, he will admit to a mental awareness of his sinful condition, rededicate himself, turn over a new leaf, and try harder. But such is foolish preaching and inhibits the work of the Holy Spirit without which both the minister and the sinner are utterly powerless to lead the sinner from death to life. It is only through a clear presentation of the gospel and the convicting power of the Holy Spirit followed by repentance and abject surrender can the sinner find unmerited favor which is called the grace of God.

God’s ways cannot be reduced to a formula

Francis Schaeffer was one of the most widely recognized Christian thinkers of the last half of the twentieth century. He has said that God uses different ways in different moments of history, but he cautions that this freedom to use various ways in accomplishing His work has limits. First, in doing His work, we must live only in the circle of scripture and do what it says. We must not go outside of scripture and do what it says is sin. Second, in doing God’s work, His ways cannot be reduced to a formula. When we attempt to confine God’s ways to a formula, we rob Him of His personality, diversity, and sovereignty.[12] On the surface this would appear to be the same message as preached by Warren. However, a closer look reveals that Warren goes beyond the boundaries of this freedom within which the church and individual Christians must operate. Warren too often crosses the line with regard to accommodating and even encouraging the spirit of the world in the church. Second, and contrary to biblical commands, he had developed and maintained associations and relationships with the leadership of false and strongly anti-Christian religions. Third, in spite of all his assurances to the contrary, he has reduced God’s work and ways to a formula that has been extensively described and documented in this chapter and the last.

It would appear that Paul’s foolishness of preaching that was abandoned by the liberal church a hundred years ago is also being abandoned by many in evangelical churches today. In its place we see foolish preaching because it has little or nothing to say about the gospel of Jesus Christ, the cross, sin, forgiveness, death to self, and life eternal.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961), p. 1803.
[2] Ibid., p. 1804.
[3] Peter F. Jensen, “A Vision for Preachers,” Doing Theology for the People of God, (Eds., Donald Lewis and Alister McGrath, ( Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1996), p. 219.
[4] E. M. Bounds, The Necessity of Prayer, from The Complete Works of E. M. Bounds on Prayer, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 1990), p. 78.
[5] Nancy Pearcey, Total Truth, (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 2004, 2005), p. 301.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, pp. 251-253.
[8] Ibid., pp. 253-254.
[9] Ibid., p. 296.
[10] Jensen, pp. 219-220.
[11] Henry, p. 1914.
[12] Francis Schaeffer, “Interview with Francis & Edith Schaeffer – God’s Leading in L’Abri & Our Lives,” How Then Should We Live?, DVD – Gospel Communications International, Inc., (Worchester, Pennsylvania: Vision Video, 1977).

Doing church

To achieve the goal of balance among the five purposes (fellowship, discipleship, worship, ministry, and evangelism), Rick Warren organized the Purpose Driven church around two concepts. According to Warren, the Life Development Process is the “what we do” at Saddleback. Circles of Commitment illustrate the “who we do it with.” Circles of Commitment contain four concentric circles surrounding a core. The goal is to move low commitment/maturity people from the outer circle to high commitment/maturity people at the core.[1]

In this concept of “who we do it with,” the outer circle represents the community or unchurched where the purpose of evangelism occurs. This is a pool of lost people that occasionally attend but have made no commitment to Jesus Christ or the church.[2]

The second circle just inside the outer circle is the crowd or regular attenders and who may be believers or nonbelievers. Their commitment extends only to attendance of a weekly worship service and fulfills the worship purpose of the church.[3]

The third circle is comprised of official members, called the congregation, that are committed to fellowship. To move into this circle, one must have received Christ, been baptized, attended the membership class, and signed a membership covenant.[4]

In the fourth circle as we move inward are the committed that take their faith seriously but are not actively serving in ministry within the church. They are dedicated to growing in discipleship which includes prayer and giving. To be in this group, one must take a spiritual maturity class and sign a maturity covenant card which requires a daily quiet time, tithing ten percent of their income, and being active in a small group.[5]

The central area surrounded by the four outer circles is the core group that is considered as having the deepest level of commitment to ministering to others. The requirements for admission to this group include a third level of training; completion of a personality, skills, and gifts assessment; having a personal ministry interview; being commissioned as a lay minister at Saddleback; and attending a monthly meeting of the core group.[6]

The Life Development Process (“what we do”) is designed to lead people from the outer circle to the core through education and assimilation. The process is visually described as a baseball diamond. Each base represents a level of commitment: first base is membership, second is maturity, third is ministry, and home plate is missions. Warren described the goal of his Life Development Process.

Our goal is to help people develop a lifestyle of evangelism, worship, fellowship, discipleship, and ministry. We want to produce doers of the Word, not hearers only—to transform, not merely inform…Our ultimate goal at Saddleback is to turn an audience into an army.[7]

To describe the Purpose Drive church and its methods, Warren is fond of using military metaphors such as army, target, strategies, front line, and mission, all of which are intended to connote activity, action, and movement. Driven is an action verb whose synonyms include pushed, propelled, urged, goaded, shoved, thrust, forced, coerced, maneuvered, and constrained. When driven is inserted between purpose and church, it is here we begin to see that the restless Purpose Driven march to do church is a reflection of the humanistic spirit of the world that values and exalts the Enlightenment ideal of progress. Progress implies movement, and in one sense it implies the importance of doing as opposed to being. But the frenetic doings of the Purpose Driven church pale in comparison to the serenity and communion with Christ found in the Christian walk even when that walk may take us into the valley of the shadow of death.

Being the Church

Over sixty years ago A. W. Tozer wrote insightfully and perhaps prophetically of the deep inner confusion caused by the antagonism between being and doing. He wrote that modern civilized society, particularly in the West, was firmly entrenched in doing as opposed to being.

We Christians cannot escape this question. We must discover where God throws the stress and come around to the divine pattern.

The tendency to accept without question and follow without knowing why is very strong in us. For this reason whatever the majority of Christians hold at any given time is sure to be accepted as true and right beyond a doubt.

This is why being has ceased to have much appeal for people and doing engages almost everyone’s attention. Modern Christians lack symmetry. They know almost nothing about the inner life. They are like a temple that is all exterior without any interior.

“The accent in the Church today,” says Leonard Ravenhill, the English evangelist, “is not on devotion, but on commotion.”…Externalism has taken over. God now speaks by the wind and the earthquake only; the still small voice can be heard no more. The whole religious establishment has become a noisemaker…The old question, “What is the chief end of man?” is now answered, “To dash about the world and add to the din thereof.” And all of this is done in the name of Him who did not strive nor cry nor make His voice to be heard in the streets (Matthew 12:18-21).

We must begin the needed reform by challenging the spiritual validity of externalism. What a man is must be shown to be more important than what he does.

We must show a new generation of nervous, almost frantic, Christians that power lies at the center of life. Speed and noise are evidences of weakness, not strength…The desire to be dramatically active is proof of our religious infantilism; it is a type of exhibitionism common to the kindergarten.[8] [emphasis added]

What is the divine pattern that God emphasizes? It is being his child, loving and being loved, and sharing the inner life of the Trinity forever. We have status as a member of God’s family. Status implies being, not becoming. Being is for eternity. Doing is time-bound and only for a season that is likened to a vapor. Therefore, the emphasis must be on being to which doing must always defer. The Church Growth movement became fixated on the doing to the diminishment or exclusion of being. As a result it became excessively one-sided and therefore lacked symmetry. It has become unbalanced, the exact opposite of what it so vigorously demands. As a result much of the Bible is not taught nor even given much thought. Here we see the fundamental flaw in the Purpose Driven model.

In spite of assurances and protestations to the contrary, the Church Growth movement’s teachings and methods do compromise the biblical message by ignoring or giving scant attention large sections of the biblical narrative, twisting biblical doctrines to fit the Church Growth movement’s philosophies and methods, and an over or under emphasizing of many aspects of the biblical record. Although of great importance, the outworking of the Great Commission has been molded and massaged to justify the teachings and methods of the Church Growth movement. As a result, the focus has moved from Christ’s atoning work on the cross to the felt needs and desires of Warren’s iconic target—Saddleback Sam and Samantha.

The seeker-sensitive formula

As noted in previous chapters, the orthodoxy of the Church Growth movement and its seeker-sensitive model for doing church were inspired by the writings of George McGavran during the 1950s (See Chapters 21 and 24). Its guiding principle is that sociological research and scientific principles can be blended with biblical truths to achieve numerical growth in American congregations. These scientific principles dominate and “selected” Bible verses are used to support those principles. Invariably, as we are told, these properly applied scientific principles will produce numerical growth in any type of organization including churches. But little if any thought is given to the kind of growth that is being achieved. The type of growth desired in businesses and other organizations is not necessarily desirable in the church.[9] We need merely to return to Chapter 3 to see that the kind of growth a church experiences is exceedingly important for its long-term survival. Because of Roman Emperor Constantine’s legalization of Christianity in 313 and its elevation to the official religion of the Western Roman Empire in 381, thousands joined the church, but many were Christians in name only as the narrow gate was made wide which allowed a flood of corruptions to flow into the church.[10]

In the end, Church Growth practitioners see numerical church growth as merely a product of effective marketing. Give the customer what he wants. Customer-sensitive in the business world became seeker-sensitive in the Church Growth world. Robert Schuller’s slogan became the mantra of the seeker-sensitive church, “Find a need and fill it. Find a hurt and heal it.” Being seeker-sensitive is the heart of Warren’s Purpose Driven model and essentially drives all of its activities. To be a seeker-sensitive, a church must survey the community so as to identify its needs. Next the church organizes all of its efforts around meeting the “felt needs” of its target audience.[11]

Warren justifies the satisfaction of people’s “felt” needs by which he means their “heart” needs because it can attract large crowds. He is correct. Churches do grow by appealing to and feeding people’s felt needs. He claims Jesus ministered to the felt needs of the people in order to attract large crowds. However, Jesus’s purpose was not to attract large crowds, but when crowds came anyway, he certainly did not preach a seeker-sensitive message. Jesus’ focus was on the will of God and not numerical growth.

In the seeker-sensitive churches, felt needs are assumed to be legitimate but are often merely diversionary measures used by Satan and his forces to defeat the human soul. As previously noted, the source of man’s felt needs comes from his heart, but the heart is a most unreliable source. As Jeremiah recognized, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” [Jeremiah 17: 9. KJV] This is contrary to the cry of humanistic psychologists, “Get in touch with yourself. Follow your heart.” Aren’t seeker-sensitive churches encouraging the same mindset by focusing on every hurt and whim of the audience?

The seeker-sensitive mindset of church leaders has effectively embraced the humanistic psychology movement of which Abraham Maslow (1908-1970) was one of the principal founders. Maslow developed a hierarchy of human needs to which man must ascend to achieve purpose and happiness in life. According to Maslow, the pinnacle of human needs is reached and satisfied when one becomes self-actualized by achieving a maximum degree of their inborn potential. The next lower need is self-esteem which connotes confidence, achievement, respect of others, and respect by others. It is only when we descend to the third level do we see any mention of relational needs such as love, belonging, friendship, family, and sexual intimacy.[12] But his hierarchy of human needs fundamentally conflicts with the human universal of the primacy of relationships in motivating human beings.

Maslow’s theories of human motivation are based on the humanistic worldview. They fail as human motivators because they dramatically diminish the importance of relationship in favor of self. Apart from physiological and safety needs which are creational givens, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is upside down as it reflects human nature and leads to a false worldview. The societal disorder that permeates the entire planet is a result of this widely held humanistic worldview which has elevated self above relationship. The whole of the seeker-sensitive movement’s dedication to meeting the felt needs of people taps into the humanistic spirit of the world and its devotion to self.

The great god of entertainment

Not only does the seeker-sensitive church attempt to meet the felt needs of their audience, they also attempt to meet their felt wants. Udo W. Middelmann cuts to the heart of the matter in his stinging indictment of many evangelical churches in America.

In the course of a very few decades much of the church has embraced the way of mass culture in its drive to reduce everything to play and attractive entertainment. It has bowed to the demands of a consumer society and offers a message that more often distracts for the moment than comforts for the long run. Adjustments in content and form to match the perceived needs of future possible converts eat away at the content necessary to understand God, the fall of man, and redemption. Marketing priorities preside. The product is matched to the customer’s expectations. There is little room for the doctor to prescribe the medicine or for God to set forth judgment and conditions for redemption.[13]

In his book Storm, Jim Cymbala echoes much of what Middelmann said with regard to the reasons for the decline of the American evangelical church. Many blame the decline on forces outside the church including failed political solutions and a decaying secular culture that is increasingly hostile to the message of Christ and His followers.[14] Certainly these are contributing influences, but the Church has survived far worse in its 2000 year history. Therefore, the modern evangelical church cannot blame the world for the church’s failures because

…we simultaneously mimic the ways of the world in hopes of packaging our faith into “Christianity Lite”—a spiritual candy we can toss at nonbelievers rather than confronting the hostile reactions that can occur when we proclaim the real gospel of Jesus Christ. Pandering to the culture with prepackaged truth nuggets hasn’t made us more effective; it has made us ineffective. [15] [emphasis in original]

Tozer recognized this trend in the early 1950s and wrote that religious entertainment is in many places is rapidly replacing the serious things of God with the “full approval of evangelical leaders who can even quote a holy text in defense of their delinquency.”[16] Tozer compared these carefully-programmed services with the New Testament model.

So the fast-paced, highly spiced, entertaining service of today may be a beautiful example of masterful programming—but it is not a Christian service. The two are leagues apart in almost every essential. About the only thing they have in common is the presence of a number of people in one room.[17]

The battle between Christianity and the forces of Satan is described in Ephesians 6:12. It is a spiritual conflict with an army of evil spirits headed by their commander Satan. They are the spiritual rulers of the world who energize the ungodly, oppose the will of God, and attack the believers of this age. They are a vast and highly organized empire of evil. [18] With cultural decay abounding in every facet of society, there never has been a period in American history when there has been such a desperate need for mature Christians to do battle with the forces of Satan. But to our great harm and dismay, a vast number of believers have reverted “to spiritual childhood and clamor for religious toys.”[19]

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1995), pp. 130-131.
[2] Ibid., p. 131.
[3] Ibid., pp. 131-132.
[4] Ibid., pp. 132-133.
[5] Ibid., pp. 133.
[6] Ibid., p. 134.
[7] Ibid., pp. 143, 145.
[8] A. W. Tozer, The Root of the Righteous, (Camp Hill, Pennsylvania: WingSpread Publishers, 1955, 1986), pp. 83-86.
[9] Marshall Davis, More Than A Purpose, (Enumclaw, Washington: Pleasant Word, 2006), pp. 23-24.
[10] B. K. Kuiper, The Church in History, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1951, 1964), p. 27.
[11] Davis, pp. 28-29.
[12] Neel Burton, M.D., “Our Hierarchy of Needs,” Psychology Today, May 23, 2012. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/hide-and-seek/201205/our-hierarchy-needs (accessed September 18, 2014).
[13] Udo W. Middelmann, The Market Driven Church, (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 2004), p. 124.
[14] Jim Cymbala with Jennifer Schuchmann, Storm – Hearing Jesus for The Times We Live In, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2014), pp. 14-15.
[15] Ibid., p. 15
[16] Tozer, The Root of the Righteous, p. 33.
[17] Ibid., pp. 105-106.
[18] Commentary on Ephesians 6:12, The Full Life Study Bible, King James Version, ed. Donald C. Stamps, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 1990), p. 439.
[19] Tozer, The Root of the Righteous, p. 34.

In The Purpose Driven Church Rick Warren writes that Christians are obligated to remain faithful to the unchanging Word of God but also must minister in an ever-changing world.[1] To accomplish this Warren developed a structure and process for doing church which he claims will allow it to continually adapt and adjust to a continually changing culture. These processes and methods are designed to be seeker sensitive, culture-friendly, and acceptable to the unchurched. As culture changes, old methods are disposed of and new methods are plugged in without harming or compromising the message. But is this true? If Warren is wrong, the widely-accepted assumptions and methods of the Purpose Driven Church will have critically if not mortally wounded evangelicalism in America and many other parts of the world.

Balance is everything in the Purpose Driven Church

Warren’s solution rests on creation of new churches and transformation of existing churches into new paradigm churches “that are driven by purpose instead of other forces.” The new paradigm churches must impose two essential elements. To become a new paradigm church, the first essential is that the church must be looked at through the lens of five New Testament purposes: worship, evangelism, fellowship, discipleship, and service. But mere recognition is not enough. He further states that God intends for the church to be balanced in advancing all five purposes. Therefore, the second essential requires the new paradigm church adopt a process for fulfilling the purposes of the church. When this process is followed, the church will focus equally on its five New Testament purposes. Warren assures those following his formula that “your church will develop the healthy balance that makes lasting church growth possible.” If a church becomes a new paradigm church, it will be healthier, stronger, and more effective by becoming purpose-driven.[2] In other words, the five-fold purposes of the church must be in equilibrium for the church to be healthy. For Church Growth practitioners, the details used to achieve the goal of equilibrium are found in the process of fulfilling the purposes of the church.

Preaching is an example of one of the processes used in pursuit of balance that dominates new paradigm churches. Warren advises pastors to “preach on purpose.”

To produce balanced, healthy believers, you need to plan a preaching schedule that includes a series on each of the five purposes over the course of a year. A four-week series related to each of the five purposes would require only twenty weeks. There would still be more than a half a year to preach on other themes.

Planning your preaching around the five purposes of the church does not mean you must always be teaching about the church itself. Personalize the purposes! Talk about them in terms of God’s five purposes for every Christian.[3]

Warren’s fetish for balance does not stop with preaching. Programs are designed to fulfill each purpose. Church departments are organized around purpose-based teams. Two months on the church calendar each year are dedicated to a special emphasis on each purpose. Staff members are hired to fill purpose-based job descriptions. Christian education is centered on creating a lifestyle that will focus on the five purposes of the church.[4]

During the church’s two thousand years of existence, one wonders why God did not reveal Warren’s techniques of balancing the five purposes of the church and his very precise and structured process for achieving those purposes in the church. Where is it found in scripture that the five purposes of the church should be balanced in both church organization and execution of its mission? Warren must supply unequivocal and biblically sound answers to these two questions to retain any credibility for his claims that church health is dependent on achieving this magical balance. But he has not done so for those answers do not exist.

What Warren cannot support with scripture he attempts to support by pointing to results. Here Warren endeavors to justify his claims by quoting the apostle Paul who said God will judge whatever we build on the basis of whether it will last. “The fire will test the quality of each man’s work. If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward.” [1 Corinthians 3:13-14. Version not disclosed] Warren points to his own success as living proof that the principles of balance and process work because Saddleback church has not only survived but thrived.[5] He also points to the successes of other purpose-driven churches. But Warren speaks of crowds and financial success which are temporal. Paul spoke of the eternal. There are many churches and media ministries that have the appearance of success through attendance, revenues, and praise of men but in truth are spiritually and doctrinally bankrupted and will not survive time and eternity.

Christian pragmatism

Warren’s assurances that his success is evidence of God’s blessing lead us into the realm of Christian pragmatism. Pragmatism is a philosophy that states that the “test of truth is usefulness of the idea.” In this philosophy, truth or falseness is determined by the results or consequences of an idea when it is implemented. In other words, if it works it is good. If it doesn’t it is wrong. Warren’s Christian pragmatism fits comfortably within the philosophy of humanism which was described at some length in Chapters 12 and 16.[6]

Warren absorbed his Christian pragmatism while he was a student missionary to Japan. During that time he was profoundly influenced by the writings of George McGavran (See Chapter 21) who challenged the conventional wisdom about what made churches grow.[7] Based on a series of studies conducted while McGavran was a missionary in India, he developed the concept of receptivity to measure the positive or negative response to the gospel among certain people groups. McGavran then proposed that areas of high receptivity were to receive priority in the assignment of missionaries and resources.[8]

As stated in Chapter 21, this was a dramatic change with regard to making disciples, the first part of the church’s mission as outlined in Matthew 28:18-20. By adopting McGavran’s pragmatism, many denominations and missions organizations now use sociological and demographic studies as the deciding factor in assigning personnel and resources. Ministers and missionaries once called and led by the Holy Spirit are now dependent on receptivity studies for direction. Carried a step farther, Christian pragmatism is used to select the means and methods to reach the masses. Also, such studies allow practitioners of modern Church Growth methods to better craft their sermons to address the felt needs of the people as opposed to seeking the leading of the Holy Spirit regarding the message to be preached.

Evangelical Christianity was introduced to pragmatism in the 1950s through the writings of McGavran.

We devise mission methods and policies in the light of what God has blessed—and what he has obviously not blessed. Industry calls this “modifying operation in light of feedback.”…If it doesn’t work to the glory of God and the extension of Christ’s church, throw it away and get something which does. As to methods we are fiercely pragmatic—doctrine is something else.[9] [emphasis added]

Warren paraphrased McGavran when he said, “Our job as church leaders…is to recognize a wave of God’s Spirit and ride it [and] get off dying waves whenever we sensed that God wanted to do something new.”[10] But Christian pragmatism is nothing more than a convenient way to attract a crowd with worldly, sinner-friendly methods and inevitably leads to doctrinal compromise and diminished biblical authority in a hostile culture. Warren and other Church Growth leaders will vehemently deny this assessment, but nevertheless it is the end result of his message and methods. Norman Vincent Peale’s practical Christianity and Robert Schuller’s possibility thinking were unquestionably products of Christian pragmatism. Warren’s focus on purpose-driven balance and seeker-sensitive message is merely the latest version.

Seven churches of Revelation – Unbalanced and therefore unhealthy

Warren states that the key issue for churches in the twenty-first century is church health and not growth. Growth is a byproduct of a healthy church. An unhealthy church occurs because it is out of balance. He says that church leaders are charged with the task of discovering and removing from their churches “growth-restricting diseases and barriers so that natural, normal growth can occur.” [emphasis added] Amazingly, Warren claims that, “Many of these diseases are illustrated and identified in the seven churches of Revelation. Health will occur when everything is brought back into balance.”[11] [emphasis added] This is an astoundingly conceited, brash, and foolish statement. The problem of five of the seven churches was sin and not a loss of balance in achieving the churches’ purposes. A closer examination of the condition of the seven Asian churches makes it abundantly clear that sin cannot be conquered through man’s efforts to achieve some sort of equilibrium or balance of the church’s five purposes.

In the first chapter of the Revelation of Jesus Christ, while in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, John was given a vision and instructed to write what he saw in a book and send it to seven churches in Asia. One by one, John recorded the revelation of each of their works (good and bad) and the condition of their heart.

Ephesus (Revelation 2:1-7) A typical first century church, they had many great works and had labored and endured without growing weary. Their sin was that they had left their first love. It was not a matter of rejection but neglect. Fervency and zeal for Christ were no longer present and without which they were in jeopardy. Their only hope was repentance and doing their first works again.

Smyrna (Revelation 2:8-11) Best described as the persecuted church. They suffered tribulation, poverty, and slander. They were encouraged to not fear the coming suffering, imprisonment, and for some even death because a crown of life awaited the faithful.

Pergamos (Revelation 2:12-17) It was labeled as the church where Satan dwelled. This church mixed with the world. They were faithful in spirit but filthy in flesh. They communed with persons of corrupt principles and practices which brought guilt and blemish upon the whole body. When those corrupt members of a church are punished, so too will the whole church be punished if they allow such corruption to continue.

Thyatira (Revelation 2:18-29) Although commended for their charity, service, faith, and patience, evil progresses and idolatry was practiced in the church. The church contained unrepentant and wicked seducers who drew God’s servants into fornication and offering sacrifices to idols.

Sardis (Revelation 3:1-6) It was representative of the church that is dead or at the point of death even though it still had a minority of godly men and women. The great charge against this church was hypocrisy. It was not what it appeared to be. The ministry was languishing. There was a form of godliness but not the power.

Philadelphia (Revelation 3:7-13) It was a church of revival and spiritual progress. The church had proved itself faithful and obedient to the Word. As its name implies, it was a church of love and kindness to each other. Because of their excellent spirit, they were an excellent church. They kept the word and did not deny His name. No fault was attributed to the church, only mild reproof for having only a little strength or power.

Laodicea (Revelation 3:14-19) The worst of all of the seven Asian churches, Laodicea had nothing to commend it. Its great sin was that it was lukewarm—neither hot nor cold. Its indifference arose from self-conceitedness and self-delusion. It believed itself rich and in need of nothing but in reality was wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked. Christ reminded them of where true riches may be found, without which severe punishment would follow.[12]

The seven Asian churches found in Revelation were not the only first century Christian churches. However, they were selected by God to give a timeless example and caution for His people throughout the centuries to the end of the age.

Although the Laodicean church is a description of the final state of apostasy which the visible church will experience in the last days, the reality is that all of the sins of the Asian churches have been present throughout the church age and are particularly evident in many evangelical churches and especially in the Church Growth movement in America. Fervency and zeal for Christ are fading in many churches. As a result they have replaced their first love with human wisdom in their efforts at doing church. Because of an accommodation of the spirit of the world, Satan has been allowed to find a home in many churches. Although many are faithful in spirit, they are filthy in the flesh. They commune with persons of corrupt principles and practices and have brought guilt and blemish upon the whole body. Some churches deliberately ignore unrepentant and wicked seducers and idolaters in their midst. Others are clothed in hypocrisy and maintain only a form of Godliness but not the power. Lastly, many are lukewarm and indifferent which arises from self-conceit and self-delusion.

How utterly absurd for Warren to blithely claim that the “diseases” of the seven churches of Asia Minor were due to lack of balance and that their leaders need only to discover and remove “growth-restricting diseases and barriers so that natural, normal growth can occur.” No sound-minded, biblically-literate Christian can seriously believe that Warren’s prescriptions of a balance of purposes and application of culturally relevant methods of doing church can somehow rid itself of sin and the spirit of the world with which the church has wrestled for two thousand years.

It is the church’s modern mindset of the victimhood of man from which it began calling sin a “disease.” From this mindset, the church embraces the illusion that a healthy (balanced) church using the right man-created processes and methods can treat the disease of sin to which man has fallen victim. This deluded mindset is the end result of the therapeutic gospel’s message and methods. True church health is a result of repentance, turning from sin, obedience to biblical doctrines, and rejection of the spirit of the world.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1995), p. 55.
[2] Ibid., pp. 80-81, 107.
[3] Ibid., pp. 149-150.
[4] Ibid., pp. 141, 143, 147, 148, 150.
[5] Ibid., pp. 46, 80-81.
[6] Ibid., p. 29.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Stephen Parker, Church Growth Crisis – The decline of Christianity in America, (Oklahoma City, Oklahoma: Forever Family Publications, 2011), p. 27.
[9] Marshall Davis, More Than A Purpose, (Enumclaw, Washington: Pleasant Word, 2006), pp. 96-97.
[10] Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, pp. 14-15.
[11] Ibid., pp. 16-17.
[12] Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961), pp. 1970-1974.