Critique of "Purpose Driven Life"

7/28/2019 Critique of "Purpose Driven Life"

1/16

Following are T.A. McMahons brief notes and comments on The Purpose-Driven Life[TPDL]as of 12/10/04. He is in the process of doing a further review of the book, to whichhe will add contents periodically. Check back for updates.

My rst intro uction to Ric Warrens oo , T e Purpose-Driven Li e, was t roug input given to me y amissionary (a former Roman Catholic) who had been unsuccessfully witnessing to his Catholic relatives. HisCatholic brother and sister-in-law borrowed TPDL from him without his offering it to them. He said it wasthe only time they were ever interested in any of his Protestant material. They loved the book, although itdid nothing to dissuade them from their Roman Catholicism. I can only surmise that what they read rein-orce t eir Cat o ic meritorious wor s orientation or sa vation. TPDL oes stress oing an su mission

to the church (or Church, in their case). The gospel presented in the book is not clearly at odds with thegospel of Rome, and therefore does not present a threat that Catholics would turn from their faith. SomeRoman Cat o ic C urc es o er TPDL an re ate c urc -growt materia s.

Generally speaking, The Purpose-Driven Lifeis a pastors dream. Rick Warren issues exhortations that mostpastors rare y c a enge t eir congregations wit , ut wit w ic most pastors wou very muc i e to avetheir members comply. Warren offers some teachings that are biblically sound when used in scriptural con-text. T roug out t e oo , t e rea er wi n many t ings to c a enge im in is wa wit t e Lor .

On the other hand, there are also a number of teachings and other content found in the book that could easily leadt e rea er away rom t e trut o Go s Wor . My c ie concern is t at t e un iscerning rea er wi uy into mucof what Rick Warren presents that is unbiblical. Given his worldwide inuence, he is sowing much error among thesheep, in spite of (and possibly because of) the good content he presents.

Additionally, I had a sense of uneasiness that transcended the particular problems with the book. I felt that Iwas being ushered into a developing program that has an agenda beyond just helping the Christian to growin his relationship with the Lord or teaching the local church to glorify God and to bear fruit as it functionsas a body in obedience to the Scriptures. Many of Rick Warrens church-growth developments are reminiscento movements wit in t e c urc uring t e atter part o t e 20t century, e.g., t e Latter Rain movementKingdom Now theology, Dominionism, and Christian Reconstructionism. All of these promoted the reli-gious humanistic idea that Christianity, through the application of biblical principles or signs and wonderswou trans orm t e eart into a para ise an t ere y convert t e majority o its popu ation to C rist.

Following are, in my opinion, some of the more troubling aspects of the book. Bear with me if some of thethings pointed out seem inconsequential. Although I purposefully tried to avoid nit picking, nevertheless

HE

PURP E

if eA Critique


2/16

some seeming nits are recorded because they reveal a tendency on Rick Warrens [RW] part that indeed hascritical consequences. For instance, if it were a rare exception that RW misrepresented a Bible verse as a prooftext or a concept e was teac ing, it wou e un air to im to ma e an issue out o it. However, e oes t atwith great frequency throughout The Purpose-Driven Life. Sadly, there are many other such nits.

In attempting to encourage t e rea er to comp ete t e oo in 40 ays, Ric Warren cites t e signicance of that time period in the Bible. However, he takes liberties by imposing his own ideas on theScriptures in order to support what he is saying. Although his interpretations give the impression of beingbiblical, often they are not. For example, he gives a list of individuals from the Bible who were questionablytransformed through a 40-day experience. That is an overstatement at best. However, he also includest e temptation o Jesus, o w ic e says: Jesus was empowere y 40 ays in t e wi erness. T is is a e -nite misrepresentation in attempting to validate one of the books opening premises (pp. 9-10).

A t oug Ric Warren seems to t e rea er to e app ying t e Scriptures, is pre erence or parap raseBible versions throughout the book is denitely counterproductive to understanding the Word of GodIn addition, his encouragement to memorize Scripture verses (normally a good thing), when applied tot e parap rase verses e ists, is not a memorization o Go s Wor at a , ut rat er someones su jectiveinterpretation of the Scriptures. Thats not good (p. 11).

On page 11 he also states, Real spiritual growth is never an isolated, individualistic pursuit. Maturity is pro-duced through relationships and community.Although I dont nd that idea in the Bible, it isa concept relatedto Genera Systems T eory, a concept contary to a i ica wor view.

The best way to explain Gods purpose for your life is to allow the Scripture to speak for itself(p. 11). RWs useo so many su jective parap rase interpretations ma es it impossi e or t e Scripture to spea or itse . ABible paraphrase is an individuals interpretation of what he thinks God is saying. Many examples follow.Page 13 presents a very o vious pro em: t e covenant signing etween t e rea er an Ric Warren servesas a contract committing the individual to reading the book. This is unbiblical, bsur (i.e., what kind ofcovenant can you have with the author of a book?), and potentially spiritually harmfu (what if the person

rea s t e covenant?).

Page 15 begins with a verse from Eugene Petersons paraphrased Bible version, The Message(Msg : A lifeevote to t ings is a ea i e, a stump; a Go -s ape i e is a ouris ing tree(Prover s 11:28). Here (an

throughout) Peterson seems more interested in poetic language than in accurately rendering Gods WordRead what the KJV actually says: He that trusteth in his riches shall fall: but the righteous shall ourish asa branch.

T is rst c apter is tremen ous y puzz ing. A t oug Warren says t e rig t t ings a out mans purpose eingfound only in God and not in himself, the drift in the rest of the book is denitely humanistic, or man-cen-

tered. Another curious item is the Purpose-Driven websites promotion of this book by mentioning numeroussecu ar organizations t at use it, suc as t e Presi ents sta , Coca Co a, Wa Mart, NASCAR, t e Oa anRaiders football team, as well as schools, civic clubs, and prisons. Did these entities seriously consider theprescript in the rst chapter that only God can reveal a persons purpose?

Although RW says the book is not about you(p. 17), much of the focus is indeed about you. He continu-a y appea s to t e rea ers se -interests.

Notice the serious distortion of Gods Word viaThe Message. Romans 8:6: Obsession with self in these mattersis a ea en ; attention to Go ea s us out into t e open, into a spacious, ree i e(p. 18), versus t e KJV For tobe carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Rick says, Every other path leads


3/16

to a dead end, using Peterson to reinforce his point. Its this kind of management language that reinforcesthe view on the part of many that TPDL is simply a how to be successful in life book. It is about becomingw atGo create you to e(p. 19).

Page 19 also reveals a major humanistic distortion of Matthew 16:25 from The Message: Self-help is no helpat a . Se -sacri ce is t e way, my way, to n ing yourse , your true se ,versus KJV For w osoever wi savehis life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall nd it. For my sake is out; Your trueself is in.

Although RW attempts to point the reader to the Bible by calling it our Owners Manual, he actually points oneto parap rases, w ic give very su jective an istorte interpretations o Go s Wor (p. 20).

RW tells us that God has clearly revealed his ve purposes for our lives through the Bible.Five? Are these whatGo as speci ca y ec are ? (p. 20).

In interviews, Rick has stated unequivocally that The Purpose-Driven Lifeis nota how to or self-help bookYet, it is oa e wit a t e in s o t ings t at are common to se - e p oo s. For examp e, eac c apterconcludes with a Point to Ponder, a Verse to Remember, and a Question to Consider. Throughout the

oo e gives ow to e ps suc as eeping a journa , iscovering your S.H.A.P.E, ow to ma e Gosmile, etc. Why does RW deny that TPDL is a self-help book?

On page 20, we n anot er man-centere Messageinterpretation: 1 Corint ians 2:7: Go s wis omgoesdeep into the interior of his purposes.Its not the latest message, but more like the oldest what God determinedas the way to bring out his best in us,versus the KJV But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, event e i en wis om, w ic Go or aine e ore t e wor unto our g ory: [an verse 8] w ic none o t eprinces of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucied the Lord of glory. Whereis is est in us to e oun ere?

Petersons Bible version is incredibly humanistic throughout, and that, along with RWs own humanistic over-

tures, eavi y in uences T e Purpose-Driven Li e.

RW states unequivocally: To discover your purpose in life you must turn to Gods Word, not the worlds wisdomYou must ui your i e on eterna trut s, not pop psyc o ogy, success-motivation, or inspirationa stories(p. 20)While that would bring a rousing amen to those who look to the Bible as their authority and sufciency forliving a life pleasing to God, RW hardly backs up what he says throughout the book. In fact, numerous pas-sages verge on doublespeak. On page after page, one nds Bible verses used out of context, paraphrase versionsthat drastically alter what Gods Word actually says, psychotherapeutic concepts introduced throughout, suc-cess an se -oriente encouragements a e continua y, an contra ictions (inc u ing t e recommen ationof inspirational stories over preaching) that are confusing at best, and deceptive at worst.

C apter 2 is pro ematic t roug out. RW more t an imp ies a ata istic or Ca vinistic emp asis on Gosovereignly determining every detail of a persons life (though I doubt RW is a Calvinist). In this chapter, heseems to deny the reality of free will and the resulting consequences of sin, and he also seems to have Godinvolved in the evil that pervades the world. This is nothing less than a form of divine determinism, that isthat God causes everything to take place, including blessings and sin.

On page 23 he states, God knew that those two individuals possessed exactly the right genetic makeup to createthe custom you he had in mind. They had the DNA God wanted to make you.Every plant and every animalwasp anne y Go , an every person was esigne wit a purpose in min . Suc a statement wou ave toinclude Hitler, Stalin, Osama Bin Laden, etc.


4/16

The emphasis is on you and your value on page 24: We are the focus of his love and the most valuable of alhis creation. The Bible says, God decided to give us life through the word of truth so we might be the most impor-tant o a t ings e ma e.( ames 1:18 New Century Version) However, t e KJ says, O is own wi egahe us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of rstfruits of his creatures. Hardly a valuable ormost important emphasis there. Nevertheless, RW adds, You were created as a special object of Gods love!

On page 25, RW quotes a poem that reinforces both the self-orientation and divine determinism ofTPDLIt states, You are who you are for a reason. Youre part of an intricate plan. Youre a precious and perfect uniquedesign, Called Gods special woman or man.Yourejust what he wanted to make. The parents you had were theones he chose, And no matter how you may feel, They were custom-designed with Gods plan in mind, And they beart e Masters sea .Fo owing suc ogic t en, t is must inc u e any rape or incestuous situation.

The Verse to Remember ending Chapter 2 is another example of forcing a verse to say something that it clearlyoes not: I am your Creator. You were in my care even e ore you were orn(Isaia 44:2). T is verse, quote rom

the Contemporary English Version is a poor translation at best; however, RW compounds the error by quoting itcompletely out of context. It has nothing to do with God caring for a person before he was born. Isaiah 44:2as Go a ressing t e nation o Israe : T us sait t e LORD t at ma e t ee, an orme t ee rom t e wom

which will help thee; Fear not, O Jacob, my servant; and thou, Jesurun, whom I have chosen (p. 26).

Chapter 3 opens with the very thing that RW says he rejects: pop psychology. He acknowledges Freudianpseudo-scientic concepts (unconscious belief; [people] unconsciously punish themselves) and attempts toinc u e Cain in t is y exp aining t at is gui t isconnecte im rom Go s presence. He t en tries to usethis to support the thesis of his book: That describes most people todaywandering through life without a purpose(p. 28).

In view of the promotions ofTPDL by its publisher and Saddleback Community Church listing endorse-ments rom numerous secu ar corporations an organizations t at are using t e oo , I wou e ascinateto learn what has attracted them to RWs stated objective for the reader: This forty-day journey will show youhow to live apurpose-driven life life guided, controlled, and directed by Gods purposes.Is this really meaning-

u or t e Coca-Co a Corporation an ot ers? No, not t e spiritua aspects, ut per aps t ey are g eaningother things that they believe will make their companies more successful.

On page 30, RW erroneous y p aces Isaia an Jo among t ose w o ave no purpose to t eir ives.

RW refers positively to Dr. Bernie Siegel, a New Ager who has a spirit guide and advocates occult visualiza-tion for healing (p. 31). Whats the value of using reinforcing quotes from individuals who are questionableChristians or whose lives and beliefs reject the biblical gospel? Yet Rick presents many such people through-out t e oo in support o is i eas.

Promoting the Purpose theme, RW quotes Isaiah 26:3 from Todays English Version: You, Lord, give perfecpeace to t ose w o eep t eir purpose rm an put t eir trust in you.However, t e verse as not ing to o witRWs purpose: Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whosemind isstayed on thee because he trusteth inthee (p. 32).

Warren also refers positively to Transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau and antichristian George BernardS aw (p. 32, 33).

On page 34, Rick Warren says, God wont ask about your religious background or doctrinal views. The onlyt ing t at wi matter is, i you accept w at Jesus i or you an i you earn to ove an trust im? is isunfortunate, because it presents a low view of doctrine, the very thing that Paul told Timothy would lead


5/16

to an apostate churchthe unwillingness to endure sound doctrine. Moreover, knowing what to acceptregarding what Jesus did is clearly a matter of sound biblical doctrine.

Its puzzling to read on page 48, God is very blunt about the danger of living for thehere and now nd adoptingthe values, priorities, and lifestyles of the world around us.Its puzzling because the church-growth methods heuses at Sa e ac certain y seem to re ect a opting t e va ues, priorities, an i esty es o t e wor aroun the Saddleback community in order to attract the unchurched.

One wonders how a me generation reader will respond to RW saying, God made ants to be ants, and hemade you to be you. St. Irenaeus said, The glory of God is a human being fully alive!(p. 55).

On page 58, RW makes a seeker friendly attempt at presenting the gospel. One never gets the essential truthnecessary for salvation that humans are sinners under condemnation and face Gods wrath and separation fromHim orever in t e La e o Fire. T ere is no exp anation o w y it was necessary or Jesus to go to cross. RWexplains nothing about the cross that is related to divine justice and divine love. Instead, he states that thosewho havent received the Gospel and are not in line with Gods purposes for them are just existing.RW quotes Jo n 3:36 rom T e Message: W oever accepts an trusts t e Son gets in on everyt ing, i e comp eteand forever!(p. 58). This is an interpretation that makes an obvious appeal to the esh. Furthermore, it leaves

out t e negative remain er o t e verse: an e t at e ievet not t e Son s a not see i e; ut t e wratof God abideth on him.

A t oug t e rst sentence in C apter 1 o TPDL state , Its not a out you, t e emp asis on you (t ereader) has been apparent and now rears its head with a vengeance in Chapter 8: the moment you were borninto the world, God was there as an unseen witness, smiling at your birth ( . 63).[W]hen you fully understandt is trut , you wi never again ave a pro em wit ee ing insigni cant. I you are t at important to Go , an econsiders you valuable enough to keep with him for eternity, what greater signicance could you have?(p. 63).

This is the gospel of self-esteem that elevates mankind and diminishesGods innite love by implying thatthe object of His love must have value, worth, and signicance. No. Thats a man-centered doctrine. God is

ove. To ove somet ing or someone ecause o its va ue or in erent wort etracts rom Go s per ect oveby subjecting it to a value system: Therefore, God loves me because Im worth it. To the contrary, Jesus wentto the cross for His enemies (Romans 5:10)hardly an endeavor related to value, worth, and signicance.

Another of RWs church-growth marketing strategies is to attract the unchurched by offering various stylesof worship music that appeal to them. Yet on page 66 he writes, [Worship] isnt for our benet! We worship forGods benet. When we worship, our goal is to bring pleasure to God, not ourselves.

RW quotes Romans 12:1 rom T e Message: ta e your every ay, or inary i eyour s eeping, eating, going-towork, and walking-around lifeand place it before God as an offering. How does one make ones sleeping an

offering? Beyond that rather odd addition by Peterson, a literal translation says that ye present your bodies aiving sacri ce, o y, accepta e unto Go , w ic is your reasona e service (KJV).

TPDL often presents a view of God that has its origins in the mind of man, not the Scriptures (which cer-tainly teach us about the unfathomable love of God). It is both anthropomorphic and humanistic, describingGod from a human point of view for the purpose of making manfeel good about himself. Does God smileon peop e? No itera trans ation te s us as muc . Yet RW as oun some versions to support is i ea: Maythe Lord smile on you(Numbers 6:25, New Living Translation p. 69). Smile on me your servant; teach methe right way to live(Psalm 119:135, The Message (p. 69). The Bible says, Noah was a pleasure to the Lord.(Genesis 6:8, Living Bi e) RW a s, Go sai , T is guy rings me p easure. He ma es me smi e. I start ovewith his family(p. 69).


6/16

RW tells us that there are ve acts of worship that make God smile (p. 70). Here we have anotherset of how to principles to support an erroneous concept. He then states that God smiles whenwe trust im comp ete y, a ing (anot er i ea not oun in Go s Wor , t oug e imp ies it isin Hebrews 11:7) that Noah pleased God even when it didnt make sense. RW then has his read-ers use their imagination with his help: But Noah, when I look at you, I start smiling. Im pleased with

your i e, so Im going to oo t e wor an start over wit your ami y (p. 70). Noting t at Noaobeyed with the principle of wholeheartedness,RW comments, It is no wonder God smiled on Noah.

On page 74, Rick Warren quotes from the New Living Translation stating, The Bible tells us, the steps of thegodly are directed by the Lord. He delights in every detail of their lives (Psalm 37:23). He delights in every

etai o t eir ives is a umanistic a ition to t e Scriptures.

RW also seems to be encouraging the readers self-orientation and self-esteem: You only bring [God] enjoy-ment y eing you. Anytime you reject any part o yourse , you are rejecting Go s wis om an sovereignty in creat-ing you(p. 75).

On page 75, Warren says, W en you are s eeping, Go gazes at you wit ove, ecause you were is i ea. He oveyou as if you were the only person on earth.

The focus on self is pushed to the point of perverting the gospel: If you want to know how much you matterto God, look at Christ with his arms outstretched on the cross, saying, I love you this much! Id rather die than livewit out you(p. 79).More: God wants to use your unique personality. Rather than its being diminished, surrendering enhances it (p80).

RW adds interpretations of Scripture that go beyond what the text says or implies. Referring to Luke 5:5,w ic as not ing to o wit t e sense o w at t e Lor instructe t e iscip es to o, e writes, S r-rendered people obey G ds word, even if it doesnt make sense. Moreover, he implies (the potentially dangerousidea) that the Lord would have the believer submit to the irrational.

Again, his commentary on Mark 14:36 using the New Living Translation does harm to the intent of Christsprayer in the Garden of Gethsemane, and most particularly distorts the gospel itself. sus didnt pray, God,i youre a e to ta e away t is pain, p ease o so. He a a rea y a rme t at Go can o anyt ing! Instea e

prayed, G d, if it is your best interest to remove this suffering, please do so(p. 81). Literal translations use onlythe word cup, not adding suffering. The former implies Christs impending separation from His Father;the latter, His physical sufferings, which many erroneously believe were payment for the sins of mankind.

T roug out TPDL, RW continua y ee s t e rea er ou espea (i.e., persuasive contra ictions) in appea -ing ways. For example, as weve pointed out, this book is not about you yet the focus is more often than

not on you. Warren talks about fully submitting to God, telling us to put Christ in the drivers seat of youri e an ta e your an s o t e steering w ee w i e at t e same time n ing a verse t at imp ies retainingautonomy for self: am ready for anything and equal to anything to him who infuses inner strength into me, thais, I am self-sufcient in C rists sufciency (Philippians 4:13 The Amplied Bible), (p. 83).

On page 84, RW quotes Bill Bright, who makes a contract with God: from this day forward I am a slave ofC rist. Again, one won ers ow wou corporations t at RW te s us are usingTPDL suc as NASCAR orCoca Cola relate to that?

RW a es in Cat o ic contemp ative prayer tec niques, w ic or er on t e occu t an Eastern me i-tation, quoting Catholic mystic Brother Lawrence and his bookPracticing the Presence of God(p. 88).


7/16

Furthering the problem of opening the door to the pantheism (God is in everything) of Eastern mysti-cism, RW quotes Ephesians 4:6 from The New Century Version: He rules everything and is everywhere andisin everyt ing (p. 88). T e KJ rea s: One Go an Fat er o a , w o is a ove a , an t roug a , an inyou all [i.e., believers].

RW presents prayer mantras verging on vain repetitions: One way is to use reat prayers t roug out t eday, as many Christians[actually Catholic mystics] have done for centuries. You choose a brief sentence or a simple

phrase that can be repeated to Jesus in one breath: You are with me. I receive your grace. Im depending on you.I want to know you. I want to know you. I belong to you. Help me trust you. Pray it as often as possible so it isrooted deep in your heart(p. 89).

More references to promoters of contemplative mysticism: You must train your mind to remember God.Bene-dictine monks use the hourly chimes of a clock to remind them to pause and pray the hourly prayer(p. 89).

On page 90, we have another example of doublespeak. After endorsing Catholic mysticism and contemplative meditation techniques, RW confuses the reader by giving a denition of biblical meditation (also on page190), w ic is t e antit esis o contemp ative me itation.

We a so see many instances w ere RW contra icts t e goo t ings t at e says y w at e oes. He te s t ereader, It is impossible to be Gods friend apart from knowing what he says. You cant love God unless you knowhim, and you cant know him without knowing his Word (p. 90). However, he gives the reader versions thatare c ear y not is Wor . Moreover, t e w o e t rust o t e C ristian contemp ative movement is to nowGod experientially, notthrough studying the Bible.

Page 94 egins wit anot er se -esteem-encouraging parap rase verse t at a s a wor not oun in anyliteral translations: God said to Moses, All right. Just as you say; this also I will do, for I know you well and youare specia to me(Exo us 33:17- T e Message. Go oesnt te Moses t at e is specia to Him. In t e KJVHe tells Moses that he has found grace in His sight and that He knows him by name.

RW egitimizes or t e rea er t e very pop psyc o ogy e as sai we are to reject: I is i e y t at you neeto confess some hidden anger and resentment at God for certain areas of your life where you have felt cheated ordisappointed. He seems to validate psychotherapys were all victims orientation: People often blame Godor urts cause y ot ers (p. 94). T roug out t e oo , RW o ten re ers to urts, w ic is t e psyc o-

logical counseling industrys mantra for attracting clients, e.g., your problems are not your fault, but ratherstem from hurts youve suffered. He refers to Christian pop psychologist William Backus, endorsing hisFreudian hidden rift with God as the key to psychological and spiritual wellness. He then gives credenceto psychologys discredited ventilation technique: but releasing your resentment and revealing your feeling ist e rst step to ea ing.

RW has a penchant for picking verses from Bible versions that make them more acceptable to the esh.Compare is use o T e Amp i e Bi e wit w at t e KJ says regar ing intimate e ows ip wit Go inPhilippians 3:10: My determined purpose is that I may know Himthat I may progressively become more deeplyand intimately acquainted with Him, perceiving and recognizing and understanding the wonders of His Personmore strongly and more clearly.Now the KJV That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, andthe fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death. The verse of RWs choice addspurpose an rops t e e ows ip o is su erings.

At the end of Chapter 12, RW is summing up his thesis of developing a friendship with God. However, hecites a supportive verse (1 Timot y 6:21) rom t e Living Bi et at cou nt e urt er remove rom w atthe text literally says: Some of these people have missed the most important thing in life they dont know God.


8/16

Paul is warning Timothy (and us) that for the sake of his life in the faith he needs to avoid the philosophiesand pseudo-sciences of the world by which some have had their faith undermined. Its ironic that RW givesno t oug t in is oo to t e nee or iscernment, an t us no Scripture verses, yet w en e oes cite adiscernment verse, he completely misapplies it (p. 99).

On page 101, RW says, To wors ip in trut means to wors ip Go as e is tru y revea e in t e Bi e.W i ewe would agree, sadly, TPDL seems to be prohibiting that for its millions of readers.

For Rick Warrens sake, one would like to think that more than one person wrote The Purpose-Driven Lifebecause of the continual contradictions. Youd hope that its the product of two or more people having com-munication pro ems. I not, it raises t e issue o eit er ignorance or integrity. How can one write some veryhelpful biblical statements and then seemingly reverse himself on the next page? For example, he states thatGod-pleasing worship isdeeply doctrinal (p. 102), then cites worship that is experiential, ritualistic, andmet o o ogica . He rejects wors ip t at ocus[es] on our ee ingsyet cites avora y t e ee ings-oriente wor-ship ofsensates, ascetics, and contemplatives (p. 103).

RW va i ates any an a in s o re igious ritua s, met o s, an means o eve oping a c oser re ations ipwith God: Gary [Thomas] discovered that Christians have used many different paths for 2,000 years to enjoy

intimacy wit Go .In is oo Sacre Pat ways, Gary i enti es nine o t e ways peop e raw near to GoNaturalists are most inspired to love God out-of-doors, in natural settings. Sensates love God with their sensesand appreciate beautiful worship services that involve their sight, taste, smell, and touch, not just their ears.Tra itiona ists raw c oser to Go t roug ritua s, iturgies, sym o s, an unc anging structures. Ascetics pre er tolove God in solitude and simplicity. [Yet on page 130, RW contradicts this by stating that The Bible knowsnothing of solitary saints or spiritual hermits isolated from other believers and deprived of fellowship.]Activistove Go t roug con ronting evi , att ing injustice, an wor ing to ma e t e wor a etter p ace. Caregivers oveGod by loving others and meeting their needs. Enthusiasts love God through celebration. Contemplatives love Godt roug a oration. Inte ectua s ove Go y stu ying wit t eir min s(pp. 102, 103).

RW on various translations and paraphrases: It is so much easier to offer clichs in worship instead of mak-

ing t e e ort to onor Go wit res wor s an ways. T is is w y I encourage you to rea Scripture in i erentranslations and paraphrases. It will expand your expressions of worship (p. 104). In addition to the problemswith paraphrases already noted, the use of such a Bible makes it nearly impossible to be a Berean (Acts17: 10-11) or to recognize soun octrine. W y? Because it is not a itera trans ation o t e meaning o t ewords from the Hebrew or Greek but rather an interpretation by an individualof what he believes God is say-ing. UsingThe Messagefor example, you cannot read a verse and say, This is what Gods Word says. Thebest you can say is, This is what Eugene Peterson says that Gods Word says. In order to be a Berean (whosearched the Scriptures daily to see if what the Apostle Paul was teaching them was true), one would have to

ave a itera trans ation o t e Bi e an compare it wit w at Peterson wrote.

RW says, One thing worship costs us is our self-centeredness. You cannot exalt God and yourself at the same timeyou e i erate y s i t t e ocus o yourse .However, w i e t at is true, it is a so inconsistent wit RWs use omusic that appeals to the lost in order to attract them to church, as well as his afnities for the humanistic,self-oriented verses and practices he lists in his book (p. 105).

On page 108, RW quotes two Roman Catholic Mystics, St. John of the Cross and priest Henri Nouwen. Bothrepresent t e a se gospe o Rome, a vance mysticism, reject t e aut ority o Scripture a one, an eny sa va-tion by grace alone through faith alone, in which RW says he believes (p. 120, 121). What then is the value forthe reader in quoting them?

Moreover, after endorsing these Catholic mystics whose tradition advances the experientia with its emphasis on


9/16

spiritual intuition, emotions, and feelings, on the next page RW writes, The most common mistake Christiansmake in worship today is seeking an experience ather than seeking God. They look for a feeling, and if it happens,t ey conc u e t at t ey ave wors ipe .Fait , not ee ings, p eases Go (pp. 109, 110).

On page 120, RW says, Baptism doesntmakeyou a member of Gods family; only faith in Christ does that.Theon y i ica con ition is t at you e ieve. A t oug w at e says is i ica y true, nevert e ess Purpose-Driven Li eseminars for the purpose of growing churches are offered to and held at Roman Catholic Churches whose congre-gations mustbelieve that Baptism is necessary for their salvation or be condemned to hell. How does he reconcilethat? How do they?

RW a mits to our se -centere nature,yet seems o ivious to t e se -centere in uences an even encour-agements throughout his book (p. 123).

He pus es t e i ica teac ing on re ations ip to an extreme, ma ing it more important t an octrineWhy does God insist that we give special love and attention to other believers? Why do they get priority in lovingBecause God wants his family to be known for its love more than anything else. Jesus said our love for each other noour octrina e ie sis our greatest witness to t e wor (p. 124). Wit out i ica octrina e ie s, we cantknow how to live a life pleasing to God, and therefore our witness would be no different than any reasonably

mora ost person.

RW says, Relationships must have priority in your life above everything else.God says relationships are what lifeis a a out (p. 124,125). Jesus too anot er view o re ations ips in Lu e 12:51-53. His trut transcen stemporal relationships (John 17:17).

RW quotes Mot er Teresa avora y on page 125. W y? S e a so e ieve t at Baptism an goo wor s werenecessary for her to be saved.

Chapter 17 continues emphasizing relationships, but in this chapter, RW stresses church membership andcommitment. While your relationship to Christ is personal, God never intends it to be private. In Gods family

you are connecte to every ot er e iever, an we wi e ong to eac ot er or eternity(p. 130). On page 132RW writes, The church is Gods agenda for the world. Jesus said, I will build my church, and all the powers of hellwill not conquer it. Time will tell, but there are subtle indications that RWs church-growth program and Pur-pose-Driven agen a are moving in t e irection o ear ier C ristian movements w ose goa s were to itera ytake over the world for Christ, from the charismatic Kingdom/Dominion theology to the non-charismaticReformation-related Christian Reconstructionists.

Page 137: You become a Christian by committing yourself to Christ, but you become achurch member y com-mitting yourse to a speci c group o e ievers. No. T e c urc ist e Bo y o C rist, o w ic one ecomes amember when he or she is born again.

RW ex orts e ievers to meet toget er in sma groups: T is is w ere rea community ta es p ace, not in t ebig[church]gatherings. If you think of your church as a ship, the small groups are the lifeboats attached to it.(p139) While this can have much value, as he has indicated, there are also some caveats that he doesnt mentionSome of the down sides include the potential to more easily manipulate and transform the thinking of peoplewithin a small group environment, especially if it is not truly autonomous from the control of the churchits connecte wit . Goo t ings suc as re ations ips, accounta i ity, community, etc., ave t e potentia tobecome vehicles for manipulation when they inuence people to compromise the truth of Gods Word forthe sake of maintaining relationships or for the welfare of the community.

Once again, RW ventures into the psycho-babble realm with the victim-oriented view of dealing with


10/16

emotional hurts and demonstrating authenticity: Of course, being authentic requires both courage andhumility. It means facing our fear of exposure, rejection, and being hurt again. Why would anyone take such aris ? Because it is t e on y way to grow spiritua y an e emotiona y ea t y(p.140).

RW psychologizes James 5:16, looking to The Messagefor support: Make this your common practice: Confess yoursins to eac ot er an pray or eac ot er so t at you can ive toget er w o e an ea e (p. 140). T is as to owith becoming transparent by conding your sins to others, not simply confessing your sin to the one againstwhom you have sinned.

Again RW endorses the psychological concepts of authenticity and transparency. He promotes a feel-ings orientation: Sympat y meets two un amenta uman nee s: t e nee to e un erstoo an t e nee tohave your feelings validated. Every time you understand and afrm someones feelings, you build fellowship(p141). Its very difcult to keep from accusing Rick of doublespeak throughout his book. He declaredear ier is rejection o pop psyc o ogy in avor o Go s Wor yet w ere in Scripture o you n t eneed to have your feelings validated?

C apter 19 is a a out eve opinga ea t y, ro ust community (p. 145), a concept Eugene Petersons T eMessagemanages to nd in James 3:18: You can develop a healthy, robust community that lives right with God

an enjoy its resu ts on y i you o t e ar wor o getting a ong wit eac ot er. Heres t e verse in t e KJVAnd the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace. Nevertheless, RW emphasizescultivating community.

The humanistic characteristics ofThe Messagecome through again (James 5:16): No more lies, no more pre-tense. Tell your neighbor the truth. In Christs body were all connected to each other, after all. When you lie to oth-ers, you en up ying to yourse (p. 147). Compare t is wit James 5:16 in your Bi e to see i it even ints atwere all connected or you end up lying to yourself.

RW again promotes a covenant, this time covenanting mixed with psychological concepts: If you are amember of a small group or class, I urge you to make a group covenant that includes the nine characteristics of bibli-

ca e ows ip: We wi s are our true ee ings (aut enticity) (p. 151).

RW introduces the bogus psychological concept ofventilation as a biblical concept: As David did with hispsa ms, use prayer to venti ate vertica y(p. 154).

RW offers instructions in ministering to others that have more to do with psychologist Carl Rogers than theApostle Paul: Focus on their feelings, not the facts. Begin with sympathy, not solutions. Dont try to talk people out ofhow they feel at rst. Just listen and let them unload emotionally without being defensive. Nod that you understandeven w en you isagree. Fee ings are not a ways true or ogica (p. 155).

Again, RW leans heavily upon the The Message, with its humanistic perversion of the Word: Youre blessedw en you can s ow peop e ow to cooperate instea o compete or g t. T ats w en you iscover w o you rea yare, and your place in Gods family(p. 157-158). This is supposed to be Matthew 5:9, written in the KJVasBlessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. No self-discovery here!RW pushes relationship beyond the biblical teaching into the management (systems theory) concept for rec-onciliation, the end being compromising Gods truth: Emphasize reconciliation, not resolution. It is unrealisticto expect everyone to agree a out everyt ing. Reconci iation ocuses on t e re ations ip, w i e reso ution ocuses onthe problem. When we focus on reconciliation, the problem loses signicance and often becomes irrelevant(p. 158)How does this affect doctrinal differences related to the absolute truths of Gods Word?

RW presents unity almost militantly: It is your job to protect the unity of your church (p. 160). Nothing on


11/16

eart is more va ua e to Go t an is c urc . He pai t e ig est price or it, an e wants it protecte , especia yfrom the devastating damage that is caused by division, conict, and disharmony. If you are a part of Gods family, iis your responsibility to protect the unity where you fellowship. You are commissioned by Jesus Christ to do everything

possi e to preserve t e unity, protect t e e ows ip, an promote armony in your c urc ami y an among a e iev-ers.But for unitys sake we must never let differences divide us(p. 161). Again, how does that effect issues relatedto sound doctrine?

Conict is usually a sign that the focus has shifted to less important issues, things the Bible calls isputable mat-ters. Is it? Or cou it e a sign o concern over important issues? Longing or t e i ea w i e criticizing t ereal is evidence of immaturity (p. 162). Is it? Or could it be evidence of discernment?

RW on ju ging: W enever I ju ge anot er e iever, our t ings instant y appen: I ose e ows ip wit Go , Iexpose my own pride and insecurity, I set myself up to be judged by God, and I harm the fellowship of the church(p. 164). What of the many times the Apostle Paul judged other believers, including Peter (Galatians 2:14)?

On page 165, The Messageis the source of another psychological concept that is imposed upon the ScripturesIf a fellow believer hurts you, go and tell him(Matthew 18:15). Are we to go to every fellow believer whohurts our feelings? This is the emotional swamp of self-oriented psychotherapy.

Again, RW expresses is mi itant ex ortation to protect t e unity o t e c urc : I c a enge you to accept yourresponsibility to protect and promote the unity of your church(p. 166).

Go esses c urc es t at are uni e . At Sa e ac C urc , every mem er signs a covenant t at inc u es a prom-ise to protect the unity of our fellowship (p. 167). Will God truly bless a church that requires a member to signa covenant in contradiction to His Word?

RW reiterates: Never forget that life is not about you! You exist for Gods purposes, not vice versa (p. 173)Its ar to ta e im serious y at t is point, given a t e umanistic i eas e as intro uce . As one moreexample, he quotes The Messageon Romans 12:2 which says, God brings out the best in you, develops well-

formed maturity in you.Thats not even close to what the Scripture says! KJV: Rejoicing in hope; patient intri u ation; continuing instant in prayer.

Although RW says he is leery of subjective experiences versus the objective Word of God, he neverthelessscorns reason as an unre ia e aut ority. He gives Bi y Gra ams eap o ait as an examp e to o ow: Inthe early years of his ministry, Billy Graham went through a time when he struggled with doubts about the accuracyan aut ority o t e Bi e. One moon it nig t e roppe to is nees in tears an to Go t at, in spite o con us-ing passages he didnt understand, from that point on he would completely trust the Bible as the sole authority forhis life and ministry (p.187).

RW favorably quotes Roman Catholic visionary and mystic (published by evangelical companies!) MadameGuyon (p. 193).

God has a purpose behind every problem (p. 193). Is he saying that God has a purpose behind every sin?

On page 206, RW encourages a psychotherapeutic problem-solving method that instructs a person who isdealing with temptation to analyze his situation: ow do I usually feel when I am most tempted? his pro-ce ure is not on y contrary to Scripture (2 Timot y 2:22), ut practica y spea ing, it encourages t e minto dwell on the source of the temptation.

RW promotes t e i ea o aving someone to o a e iever accounta e. T is met o comes out o C ristian


12/16

psychology, not the Bible. He attempts to support it by again quoting James 5:16: Confess your faults one toanother (p. 212).

RW advertises his own program (heavily inuenced by psychotherapy) at Saddleback Church called CelebrateRecovery. Its a variation on the secular (completely unproven and erroneous, even occult) 12-Steps program ofA co o ics Anonymous: At Sa e ac C urc we ave seen t e awesome power o t is [psyc o ogica ] princip eto break the grip of seemingly hopeless addictions and persistent temptations through a program we developed calledCelebrate Recovery.Today the program is used in thousands of churches(p. 213).

Some problems are too ingrained, too habitual, and too big to solve on your own. You need a small group or anaccounta i ity partner w o wi encourage you, support you, pray or you, ove you uncon itiona y, an o youaccountable (p. 213-214). This is the support group approach of psychotherapy and is not supported by theScriptures. Read through the entire book of Psalms and see if there is any sin or problem too big for God toan e. Di Davi ave a support group?

RW: There is power in Gods Word, and Satan fears it (p. 215). How does that square with Satan actuallyquoting Scripture an ot ers using Scripture out o context or evi purposes?

Mot er Teresa is again quote : Ho y iving consists in oing Go s wor wit a smi e(p. 231). Sa y, Mot erTeresa believed that doing Gods work with a smile would earn her salvation.

Pop psyc o ogy again spi s onto t e pages at t e expense o Scriptures: Jaco was insecureJosep wasabusedSamson was codependentDavid had an affair and all kinds ofdysfunctional]family problems, Elijahwas suicidal, Jeremiah was depressedPeter was impulsive(p. 233).

RW returns to his deterministic and humanistic concepts: Each of us was uniquely designed, or shaped, too certain t ings.You are t e way you are ecause you were ma e or a speci c ministry.You are a custom-

designed, one-of-a-kind, original masterpiece. God deliberately shaped and formed you to serve him in a way thatmakes your ministry unique. He carefully mixed the DNA cocktail that created you.As Ethel Waters said, God

oesnt ma e jun (pp. 234-235).

Chapter 30 introduces Rick Warrens S.H.A.P.E., his main self-help tool for discovering ones purpose in lifeT e acrostic stan s or Spiritua gi ts, Heart, A i ities, Persona ity, an Experience (p. 236). T is is pure y isown creation, and in numerous ways, which will be noted, is at odds with what the Scriptures teach.

RW says that believers are commanded to discover and develop [their] spiritual gifts. Have you taken the timeto discover and develop your spiritual gifts?(p. 237). Where in the Scriptures are we commanded to discoveran eve op our spiritua gi ts? He gives no support verses.

Regarding Heart (i.e., a passion for something), RW writes: God had a purpose in giving you these inborninterests. Your emotiona eart eat is t e secon ey to un erstan ing your s ape or service (p. 238). In orninterest is a fascinating idea but without any factual basis. Even so, RW presents it as though it was fact, andthen raises it to a spiritual endeavor without the backing of Scripture.

On page 239, RW tells us that The second characteristic of serving God from your heart iseffectiveness. When-ever you o w at Go wire you to ove to o, you get goo at it. Passion rives per ection. Does Go wire aperson to love to do something? Again, this is what RW believes, and it is necessary for the development ofhis S.H.A.P.E. thesis and for discovering ones purpose; nevertheless, he gives no Scriptural proof.

Chapter 31 starts out with an implied proof text for the validity of RWs S.H.A.P.E. theory: You shaped


13/16

me rst inside, then out; you formed me in my mothers womb (Psalm 139:13 The Message. No other Bibleversion that I could nd uses the term shaped. I doubt even Eugene Peterson had in mind the concept ofS.H.A.P.E., ut you never now.

Although Chapter 1 sets the premise that this book is against self-centeredness by opening with, Its not abouyou, C apter 31 opens wit , On y you can e you, an t en continues wit a se -esteem- ui ing appeareinforcing the A for Abilities in RWs S.H.A.P.E. thesis: If you dont make your unique contribution to theBody of Christ, it wont be made (p. 241). You are a bundle of incredible abilities, an amazing creation of GodPart of the churchs responsibility is to identify and release your abilities for serving God(p. 242).

RW pus es t e a i ity part o is t esis rom a sur ity to t e precipice o eresy: A o our a i ities comefrom God. Even abilities used to sin are God-given; they are just being misused or abused. The Bible says, God hagiven each of us the ability to do certain things well(Romans 12:6 New Living Translation). Since your naturaa i ities are rom Go , t ey are just as important an as spiritua as your spiritua gi ts. T e on y i erence isthat you were given them at birth(p. 242). Romans 12:6 doesnt say, your natural abilities are from God.The verse is referring to spiritual gifts: Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to usw et er prop ecy, et us prop esyaccor ing to t e proportion o ait (KJ . Moreover, no scripture te s usour natural abilities are just as important and as spiritual as [our] spiritual gifts.

On page 242, RW states, Part of the churchs responsibility is to identify and release your abilities for servingGod. This is a major development at Saddleback and includes spiritual gifts assessments and personalitypro ing ( ot questiona e eva uations at est), yet t ere is no i ica support or Ric s statement.

RW claims, God gives some people the ability to make a lot of money (p. 243). Although that may be true, he takesa verse out o context in attempting to prove is case. He quotes Deuteronomy 8:18 rom t e NIVRemem ethe Lord your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth.But in context, God is speaking speci-ca y to Israe : But t ou s a t remem er t e LORD t y Go : or it is e t at givet t ee power to get wea t , t athe may establish his covenant which he sware unto thy fathers, as it isthis day. It is misleading to use this verseto say that the ability of some individuals to make money is God-given.

RW continues to contradict his Its not about you premise: You are the only person on earth who can useyour abilities. No one else can play your role, because they dont have your unique shape that God has given you(p. 243).Here RW offers a solution to a spiritual problem with no biblical support: To discover Gods will for yourlife, you should seriously examine what you are good at doing and what youre not good at (p. 243). However, inChapter 35 he seems to contradict himself: God has never been impressed with strength or self-sufciency. In

fact, he is drawn to people who are weak and admit it(p. 273).

RW further expands his Ability concept: God doesnt waste abilities; he matches our calling and our capabilities.

Warren lists writing grant proposals among God-given special abilities(p. 244). Would that involve lookingto t e government or a secu ar en owment organization or un s to o Go s wor ?

Again, the humanistic, self-esteem-building approach emerges (in spite of the oft-repeated declaration thatthis book is not about you): We dont realize how truly unique each of us is.Your uniqueness is a scientic

fact of life. When God made you, he broke the mold. There never has been, and never will be, anybody exactly likeyou(p. 244, 245).

RW launches into the Four Temperaments (a concept rooted in the occult, and which even psychologyrejects as ogus) an ot er persona ity t eories. He egins wit a paragrap ea ing: Using Your Persona ity(p. 244).


14/16

Under this heading, RW continues with this theme: God made introverts andextroverts.thinkers andfeelers.The Bible gives us plenty of proof that God uses all types of personalities. Peter was sanguine. Paul was ac o eric. Jeremia was a me anc o y.T ere is no rig t or wrong temperament or ministry.Your persona itywill affect how and where you use your spiritual gifts and abilities(p. 245). These mythical classications andconcepts are an obvious distortion of the Scriptures.

RW promotes the bogus personality concepts taught by others: Today there are many books and tools that canhelp you understand your personality so you can determine how to use it for God(p. 246). He encourages the readerto contact Saddleback Community Church for Discovering Your Shape for Ministry, which includes a Shape iden-tication tool[including Spiritual gift assessments and ability inventories](Notes section, p. 332). Howeverater on pages 250-251, e reverses imse : Spiritua gi t tests an a i ity inventories can ave some va ue, ut t eyare limited in their usefulness. Many books get the discovery process backwards.

RW seems to va ue past experiences (t e E in S.H.A.P.E.) over t e preac ing an teac ing o t e Worespecially the painful experiences: What problems, hurts, thorns, and trials have you learned from?.If you reallydesire to be used by God, you must understand a powerful truth: The very experiences that you have resented orregrette most in i e t e ones youve wante to i e an orget are t e experiences Go wants you to use to e p ot -ers. They are your ministry! (pp. 246-247). This ispsychologizingthe church. RW seems to have no reservation

in exp oiting t e Scripture to t at en : Pau un erstoo t is trut [o s aring ones urts an pain u experi-ences], so he was honest about his bouts with depression.If Paul had kept his experience of doubt and depressiona secret, millions of people would never have beneted from it(pp. 247-248).

RW quotes Aldous Huxley, the founder of the Human Potential Movement and a drug advocate (p. 248).

RW sums up is gi ts, a i ities, an persona ity concepts: Using your s ape ( ow Go as s ape you orservice) is the secret of both fruitfulness and fulllment in ministry. You will be most effective when you use yourspiritua gi ts an a i ities in t e area o your earts esire, an in a way t at est expresses your persona ity anexperiences(p. 248). This is Rick Warrens conjecture, not the teaching of Scripture.

Again: T e est use o your i e is to serve Go out o your s ape. To o t is you must iscover your s ape, earn toaccept and enjoy it, and then develop it to its fullest potential(p. 249). No. Rick Warrens S.H.A.P.E. program isa mixed bag of the very things he denounced on page 20: the worlds wisdom, pop psychology, success-moti-vation, an inspirationa stories [o pain u experiences] a ong wit istortions o t e Scriptures, umanisticself-centered inducements, and myths paraded as truth.

Chapter 32 is all about assessing your gifts and abilitiesThe best way to discover your gifts and abilities is to experi-ment with different areas of service (p. 250). Am I more introverted or extroverted? (p. 251). RWs concepts areui t arge y upon a mixture o a se t eo ogica , p i osop ica , an psyc o ogica i eas o eterminism: Go as

predetermined everything; everyones fate has been determined; a persons characteristics are determined. Com-

mon sense is enough to disprove such ideas. True spiritual gifts excepted, how much of our talents, abilities, andpersona ity c aracteristics are earne , eve ope , or even pro uce y sin? One cou ma e a strong case ornearly all of them being learned, developed, or sin related. People with physical handicaps can and do achieve farbeyond their inborn limitations. People typed as introverts or extroverts change. Hundreds of examplescould be given to refute the deterministic myths RW has been using to support his S.H.A.P.E. program.

Nevert e ess, RW continues: Since Go nows w ats est or you, you s ou grate u y accept t e way e asfashioned you.Your shape was sovereignly determined by God for his purpose, so you shouldnt resent it or rejecit.You should celebrate the shape God has given only to you(p. 252).

RW promotes Christian psychologys (particularly psychologist Henry Clouds) concept of boundaries: We


15/16

all have dened roles.The word boundaries refers to the fact that God assigns each of us a eld or sphere of service.Your shape determines your specialty. When we try to overextend our ministry reach beyond what God shaped us for,we experience stress(p. 253). As proo texts, RW turns to 2 Corint ians 10:13 in t e New Living Trans ationand Hebrews 12:1 in the Living Bible: Our goal is to stay within the boundaries of Gods plan for us run with

patience the particular race that God has set before us. Neither of these verses relate to Clouds erroneous concepto oun aries ot er t an t e terms ( oun ary an particu ar race) oun on y in t ose parap rases t at RWselected (p. 253).

Given his continual misuse and abuse of the Scriptures, it is grievously ironic to note that on page 256, RWquotes 2 Timothy 2:15 as a Verse to Remember: Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a work-man w o oes not nee to e as ame an w o correct y an es t e wor o t rut .

Another running irony verging on hypocrisy is RWs acknowledgement of the worlds preoccupation with selfw ic is su t y an quite o ten not-so-su t y e to t e rea er t roug out t e pages o TPDL: In our se -serving culture with itsme-rst mentality.I am, by nature, selsh. I think most about me. Thats why humilityis a daily struggle p. 257, 266].

On page 236, RW once again looks to Petersons humanistic The Message to esteem the reader: When

C rists ows up again on t is eart , you s ow up toot e rea you, t e g orious you. Meanw i e, e contenwith obscurity (Colossians 3:4).

Again, t e se -orientation o T e Message(Ga atians 5:26): We wi not compare ourse ves wit eac ot er asif one of us were better and another worse. We have far more interesting things to do with our lives. Each of us isan original(p. 268). Compare with the KJV Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another,envying one anot er. I ont n eac o us is an origina .

Psyc o ogys se -image myt is intro uce as re ate to t e i e o Jesus. Were to t at He serve rom asecure self-image and His task of washing His disciples feet didnt threaten his self-image (p. 269).

Again, RW quotes Cat o ic priest an mystic Henri Nouwen as we as i era C ristian A ert Sc weitzer(p. 269, 270). I am perplexed as to why these individuals who reject the biblical gospel are given credibilityand am greatly perturbed over the possibility that many readers in search of truth might be encouraged tosee out t eir writings.

Whether or not RW is confused, he certainly confuses the reader. He began the book by telling us that Godhas determined everything about us and that He has gifted us with talents, abilities, personality traits, andwere to identify these and work out of our strengths: Whenever you do what God wired you to love to do, youget goo at it. Passion rives per ection.W atever youre goo at, you s ou e oing or your c urc (p. 239244). But now we are told, God loves to use weak people.God has never been impressed with strength or self-

sufciency.Our strengths create competition, but our weaknesses create community(pp. 272, 273, 278).

Again, turning to pop psychology, RW has the reader looking within or looking to hurts from the pastHe equates Pauls thorn with an emotional weakness: It may be an emotional limitation, such as a trauma scar,a hurtful memory, a personality quirk, or a hereditary disposition ( p. 273). Instead of living in denial or makingexcuses, take the time to identify your personal weaknesses. You might make a list of them(p. 274). In oppositionto re ging up t e emotiona scars o t e past, t e Apost e Pau wrote, ut t isone t ingI o, orgettingthose things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the markfor the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus (Philippians 3:13-14).

More psycho-babble applied to the Scriptures: Gideons weakness was low self-esteem and deep insecurities


16/16

.ot er peop e are going to n ea ing in your woun s. Your greatest i e messages an your most e ective ministrywill come out of your deepest hurts (p. 275). And: Ministry begins with vulnerability. The more you let down

your guard, take off your mask, and share your struggles, the more God will be able to use you.When you reveayour ai ures, ee ings, rustrations, an ears, you ris rejection.Vu nera i ity is emotiona y i erating.Humi -ityis being honest about your weaknesses (p. 276). Still more: Pretentiousness repels but authenticity attractsand vulnerability is the pathway to intimacy (p. 277).

RW quotes William James, the father of American psychology, favorably (p. 285).

RW implies that a persons eternal destiny is dependent on us (or me as an individual): There are people onthis planet whom only you will be able to reach, because of where you live and what God has made you to be. If justone person wi e in eaven ecause o you, your i e wi ave ma e a i erence or eternity (p. 285). He o ersno Scriptures to support the idea that what I do or fail to do determines a persons eternal destiny.

RW seems to ave a ow view o prop ecy or w atever reason: W en t e iscip es wante to ta a ouprophecy, Jesus quickly switched the conversation to evangelism. He wanted them to concentrate on their missionin the world. He said in essence, The details of my return are none of your business. What is your business is themission Ive given you. Focus on that! (p. 285). This is very troubling. First of all, in response to the disciples

questioning Jesus about the signs of His coming, He did not quickly switch the conversation in MatthewC apter 24. He gave t em (an us!) critica prop etic etai s an crucia warnings covering more t an ortyverses. He began by telling them to Take heed that no man deceive you. It is terribly disturbing thereforethat missing from this book, which will likely reach more Christians than any other book (other than theBi e) in t e istory o t e c urc , is any teac ing a out t e Secon Coming an t e re igious eceptionabout which Jesus Himself warned His disciples. Furthermore, there is no teaching in the book that evenhints at the need for discernment in these Last Days in which the Bible declares false teaching and apostasywill be rampant. Again, it is troubling that one nds no mention of the blessed hope, Christs coming forHis Church, His Bride.

RW declares throughout chapter 37 that ones personal testimony is the most important element in

witnessing: This is the essence of witnessing simply sharing your personal experiences regarding the Lord.Actua y, your persona testimony is more e ective t an a sermon(p. 290). Not on y oes t is o arm tothe importance of preaching Gods Word and the necessity of teaching sound doctrine, RW contradicts hisown foundational premise that we should turn to Gods Wordand not to inspirational stories(p. 20).

In support of psychological support groups such as Saddlebacks own Celebrate Recovery, RW writes, Godgives some peop e a go y passion to c ampion a cause. Its o ten a pro em t ey persona y experience suc as a use,addiction, infertility, depression(p. 293).

RW wants t e rea er to continue in T e Purpose-Driven Li e: I strong y urge you to gat er a sma group o

friends and form a Purpose-Driven Life Reading Group to review these chapters on a weekly basis (p. 307).

Ric Warren is incre i y presumptuous at t e conc usion o t e oo : Now t at you un erstan t e purposeof life, it is your responsibility to carry the message to others.In this book I have passed on to you what otherstaug t me a out t e purpose o i e; now its your uty to pass t at on to ot ers(p. 309). Sa y, muc o w atRick has gleaned from others and presented in The Purpose-Driven Lifeis contrary to the very Bible he claimsto promote.

Critique of "Purpose Driven Life"

Documents

Transcript of Critique of "Purpose Driven Life"