Tags
Church, heresy, of purpose, preaching, prophet, prosperity, Rick, Saddleback, warren
Recently I was sent this slick little promotion for what turns out to be a biography of the life of Rick Warren entitled “Prophet of Purpose” and written by Jeffrey Sheler, a contributing editor of U.S. News & World Report. For the record, I have no doubt you’ve determined that a biography has been written on the man already, not only with your highly intellectual prowess but also from the fact that there is, indeed, a picture to the left. Well done.
I myself had no idea his life story had been written…already. Personally speaking, Rick seems a little too young for a biography just yet, but then again, whom am I to say? Regardless, there it is, available in bookstores everywhere I’m certain, for all the world to indulge in.
Now please understand I have no intention of reading the book, much less doing a review of it. Let’s just say I’m not interested, and leave it at that. However, reviews have been written, and such a thing I have come across this morning posted by Alan Wolfe at Slate.com.
Even though I’m not going to read the book, nor write a review of it, I found the review of Wolfe quite interesting. I did pick up a few things I hadn’t known about Rick, and decided to share them with you. I guess you could call this a review of the review. So be it. And, if by chance you knew these things already, indulge me, and just choke it down.
First thing I found interesting was the fact that Warren…
…hit upon his great idea in 1979 when he was 25 years old. Poring over census data and maps, he learned that the Saddleback Valley was the fastest growing section of America’s fastest growing county and therefore the best rock upon which to build his church.
Poring over census data and maps? So his motivation for starting a ‘church’ didn’t come from the Spirit’s moving him to proclaim the gospel? Hmm. Looks like selfish ambition to me, but then again, I haven’t read the book.
The next thing in the review that grabbed my attention was this:
He rushed through seminary to complete his divinity degree, then set to work, walking door-to-door to attract people to the high-school auditorium that constituted his first place of worship.
Rushed through seminary and focused on attracting people. Not evangelism, but building a following and a financial base. Now building a following is a temptation many preachers face. It’s at least understandable because it’s more common than any of us would desire.
Warren avoided the hell-and-damnation preaching associated with the South in favor of an emphasis on forgiveness and redemption, well-suited to its Southern California location.
Well that only makes sense. If you’re going to go to the trouble of rushing through seminary and work so hard attracting attention, it only makes sense that you’re going to want to avoid any uncomfortable truths from the Word of God doesn’t it? Of course.
In 1989, when Saddleback’s weekly attendance figures had reached the 2,500 level, Warren, frustrated by failed real estate deals and confining zoning restrictions, decided to exercise a little political muscle. “Sir,” he said to a country supervisor as he plopped down a book on his desk, “there are eighteen thousand names in this directory. They are all in your district and they all vote. Now, you have a problem. Either get us permission to start using that land or do something else because you’re going to have a mutiny on your hands if you don’t.” A bit of horse-trading followed, and Saddleback as we know it today—a congregation of some 20,000 members spread over eight worship sites and sponsoring countless workshops and missions—came into existence.
I’m all for determination in accomplishing goals, but acting the part of a mafioso dock-worker seems a little overboard. No mention here of prayer and seeking the Lord’s will…just Rick’s. Is it just me, or are you beginning to get a glimpse of this man’s true character?
The secret to Warren’s success is that he found people responsible for their own success in life and convinced them that it was all due to God.
This is certainly the way he talks about his own fame. “God makes the waves; surfers just ride them” is how he puts it. “Our job as church leaders, like experienced surfers, is to recognize God’s spirit and ride it.” For Warren and those to whom he preaches, worldly accomplishments matter but so does God’s grace. American and capitalist values instruct us that we rise in life due to our own efforts. Warren teaches above all that it happens because we are fulfilling God’s plan. The combination is irresistible: We can take pride in what we have become without viewing ourselves as selfish egoists.
Bravo Mr. Wolfe! I do believe you nailed it. Warren’s teachings are irresistible to some, and why wouldn’t they be? They cater to the felt needs of the lost! Think about it, you can have your pride in what you’ve become and not feel selfish about it! Beautiful.
Ok, hold it right there. This is the part that bothers me the most. Why?
The secret to Rick Warren’s success, according to Wolfe, is that Rick found successful people (read-affluent), and convinced them they were successful because they were “fulfilling God’s plan.”
That bother anyone? What about the less affluent? The poor, the hungry, the homeless? Were they fulfilling God’s plan too? Or is it that those who are not wealthy and cannot contribute materially are actually outside of God’s plan, in rebellion to God Himself?
Did Rick go after them, the middle-class? The poor?
Not according to Wolfe. He went after the money, that is precisely what I’m understanding here. He went after money from the beginning when he hatched his plan for self-exaltation. Well, the world loves it’s own, doesn’t it?
In referring to Warren’s own fame, Rick says “God makes the waves; surfers just ride them….Our job as church leaders, like experienced surfers, is to recognize God’s spirit and ride it.” Rick, whatever spirit you’re riding is not a “wave” from God, but a self-imposed delusion.
American and capitalist values instruct us that we rise in life due to our own efforts. Warren teaches above all that it happens because we are fulfilling God’s plan. The combination is irresistible: We can take pride in what we have become without viewing ourselves as selfish egoists.
Bottom line is this. Rick warren teaches that, if you’re successful, you rose to that success in life because it was God’s plan. Well, there is an element of truth there, since nothing happens in any life outside the providential workings of the Creator.
However, and this is important. Rick is dead wrong, if Wolfe is right, in convincing people that they “can take pride in what we’ve become without viewing ourselves as selfish egoists.”
Do you not see the deception being proclaimed by this false teacher? Rick warren is a prophet alright, but a false one, and for this reason among many:
Rick Warren is convincing millions that they can feel good about themselves, and their wealth, because they are obviously fulfilling God’s plan, while Warren sets aside the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and neglects to tell folks that ‘feeling good’ about oneself is antithetical to biblical Christianity. (Pride is a sin Rick, in any form. Read your Bible.)
More than that, Rick Warren has tapped into a perfect combination of deception and flattery of man, resulting in wealth, fame and glory, not only for Saddleback, but for Rick himself.
Prophet of Purpose, indeed. But what if the purpose of this man is to lead many to Hell?
A review of a review? Interesting concept. Why let little things like facts, or actually reading the book, stand in the way of ad hominem attacks. Better to vent out of ignorance. (Grace indeed.)
Mr Sheler,
Thanks for your comment, and for stopping by. For the record, if there are an absence of any facts, then it seems the author is the one who is venting ‘out of ignorance’, or, as I like to more accurately say, out of a lack of knowledge.
I quoted you, or actually, Mr. Wolfe in his review and what he presented as facts. If they are not facts, by all means, let us all know that he is mistaken and misrepresented you accordingly. If he did represent your book truthfully, then I have merely taken what he has presented as fact insofar as the book is concerned. If Mr. Wolfe has misrepresented the book by stating things erroneously, then by all means tell him, and the world. If what Mr. Wolfe has stated, and I have quoted in this article, are indeed facts, then they represent a man whose teachings need to be less admired, and more opposed openly.
Joel
While you and I stand in total agreement concerning Mr. Warren, Mr. Sheler makes a good point about reviewing a review. I as well as you find no compelling reason to read a book about Rick Warren and believe that he indeed has perverted the gospel in many ways.
At the same time can you imagine me writing a review of your blog, then having another blogger reviewing my review of your site even though they had never been to 5pt salt? We are to ‘destroy speculation’ reviewing a review merely promotes speculation.
Good job on this site, but I would say this post is below your typically high standard.
Jay,
First of all, Mr. Sheler’s objection was not that I did a ‘review of a review’. He only called it ‘an interesting concept’. His unspoken objection was that I didn’t buy his book and actually read it. His spoken objection was clear. Mr Sheler made the claim I did not use facts, when actually, Mr. Wolfe (the reviewer) has read the book and wrote an excellent review of it, using facts from the book itself I assume.
There was no ‘lowering of standards’ here.
Thanks for your comment – Joel
The only grounds someone has for endorsing or critiquing a review is whether or not they have read the book. Reviews are meant to give you info as to whether or not the book is worth reading. Making a decision based on a review is perfectly OK and exactly what their purpose is. You cannot call a review ‘excellent’ unless you know the reviewer excellently communicated the contents of the book, moreover you cannot know the contents of the book unless you have examined its contents by reading it.
Not looking for a battle here, there are weightier matters at stake. Open Criticism of Warren is a good plan, and we don’t need to read this biography to do that. Again, you do good work on this site, but you’ve made a illogical jump by commenting on a book by using the review. Arminians can make a good case for Arminianism if they read an Arminian’s review of the bible, and quote passages without context.
Jay,
First, I was not reviewing the book. Don’t miss that point. If I had been, your objections would have a footing. Also you said “The only grounds someone has for endorsing or critiquing a review is whether or not they have read the book.” Think about what you just said brother. I can’t critique a review of a book without reading the book reviewed? Why not? Who made the rules, or as you put it, ‘the grounds’? If I have knowledge of the subject of the book, who are you to say I cannot comment on the subject mentioned?
You say I cannot call a review ‘excellent’. Why not? I liked it, and thought it was well written, and I am free to say so aren’t I? Now what’s your objection? It seems you may be trying to impose untraceable rules upon my freedom of speech. Listen, when you say I’ve made ‘an illogical jump by commenting on a book by using the review’ you are proving my point that you have missed it, the point that is. I’ve done no book review here, and made no comments on the book itself, but I have expressed my thoughts on Rick Warren.
Joel- After reading your last comment and looking over your post again I stand corrected, and offer my apologies. I would still stand by my comments about critiquing a review… though I recognize now that is not what you were doing.
I would say one cannot critique a historical work without having any knowledge of history it attempts to portray. ‘Excellence’ is determined not only by the production quality but also the accuracy. My point was that you cannot determine the accuracy of a review without having knowledge of what is reviewed. (What is mean is that reviews were never meant to be critiqued) Nonetheless what you have posted is not a review so you have correctly asserted that my argument has no footing.
Take the last word on this, thanks for taking the time to engage me. We ought to now move on to more important matters than whether or not reviews ought to be critiqued. It was foolish of me hop in on this in the first place.
Blessings in Christ,
Jay Miklovic
The problem is, your argument is based on Wolfe’s summary of a text that you have not read, and, thus, lacks the benefit of knowing the background, context, and multitude of additional facts that the book contains. Wolfe’s summary is reasonably accurate as far as it goes. But you are drawing conclusions based on an incomplete picture (a review) and, as a result, your argument is skewed. How can you assume, for example, that Warren did not pray mightily and seek divine guidance as he prepared to launch his church, simply because Wolfe did not choose to include that information in his review? Had you read the book you would see that much more went into that process than what Wolfe’s summary relates. Had you read the book, you also would know that Warren was not out to simply “attract people” and build a personal following, to use Wolfe’s phrase. Winning people to Christ was always his number one objective.
Rick Warren has plenty of flaws and shortcomings, which you also would discover if you were to read the book. He certainly is not immune to criticism. But to base your criticism of Warren on a summary of a summary seems not altogether intellectually honest.
Jeff,
Tell you what. I am certain, without question, your book contains background, context and ‘a multitude of facts’ that I am unaware of. No question. However, I do not draw my conclusions on Rick Warren on the basis of whether or not I have read either your book or Mr. Wolfe’s review of it. There’s no need. There is ample evidence apart from either you or Mr. Wolfe that Mr Warren is a man whose teachings are to be avoided because they are unbiblical.
Having said that, and seeing how much you wish I had actually read the book itself, I will actually do a review of your book if you will kindly send me a copy. I promise I will read it cover to cover, and, in the end, I promise you I will do my own book review, ‘fair and balanced.’
Go to the contact page of this site and let me know.
- Joel
I made an error and posted a comment to this article on the other bit on Warren – Prophet of Purpose. Sorry about that, chief.
Joel. I responded to what you wrote here regarding Alan Wolfe’s review, not to whatever preexisting conclusions you may have based on other information regarding Rick Warren. Go back and reread your original post. You quoted Wolfe on Warren on several points and then offered judgments on Warren based on what he wrote, or failed to write. You framed your argument around the structure and content of Wolfe’s review, playing off of his words and attempting to use its formal shortcomings (it was an argumentative summary of a book) to advance your views. You used the review as if it were a primary source of information on Warren, which it was not, and that is a specious form of argument.
Feel free to review the book. You can get one at Amazon for $15.63.
Jeff,
Interesting conclusion. But you are wrong. As for the book, I think I made myself clear in the post, but thanks for the sales pitch. I wouldn’t pay one red cent.
Jeff,
I agree with your position. It seems you could care less if someone attacks your book. But someone attacking your book by using a review as their source of information about your book is what’s annoying, and I can see your point. This would be like critiquing a football game based on hearing the score. It’s not even judging a book by its cover. It’s judging a book by someone’s thoughts about the cover.
Honestly, I probably won’t read your book because Rick Warren doesn’t interest me at all. But I can completely understand your frustration.
Joel, aren’t the web hits and the ability to provide people with a strong defense of your faith worth forking out 15 bucks to give a solid, factual review of a book? Does not someone risk bearing false witness through the method you’ve used here?
I’m not attacking your beliefs, but I’m questioning your methods.
Joshua,
First, show me where I once attacked the book. Just once. I’ll wait. Secondly, ‘the people’ already have a strong defense of the faith, it’s called the Bible. Thirdly, you’re implications for a desire of web hits is unwarranted, to say the least. Fourthly, what ‘method’ have I used that would both cause someone to bear false witness, and worse, have the audacity to blame 5ptsalt.com? Lastly young man, the author will not get a penny from me for his book, and in case you haven’t gotten it by now, I offered no review of any book today. Now, what is your objection?
Joel
I am not reviewing the book or reviewing a review… I am just commenting that the answer to Rick’s success is the gullibility of Americans and their lack of Bible knowledge! Relevant Rick seems to be a huckster to me.
If I had just said that in the first place, I could have saved my Excedrine, lol. Amen!
Old Ricky boy gives me the impression of a used car salesman from Van Nuys who is trying to sell me a 1978 Chevy Nova… “it was driven by a little old lady from Pasadena who only drove to church on Sunday and it was down hill both ways…”
I noticed the word “Providential” in the re-review of Rick’s book. Do I sence an alliance to Johnny McCarther? Just a hunch, but never the less, there’s a guy who knows the power of marketing his latest book. Am I right??????????