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.

Rick Warren published The Purpose Driven Church in 1995. Preceding the title page were forty-one endorsements written by many well-known luminaries spanning both the evangelical and non-evangelical spectrums. These included pastors such as Adrian Rogers, Pastor of Bellevue Baptist Church, Memphis, Tennessee; Jack Hayford, Pastor of The Church On The Way, Van Nuys, California; Robert H. Schuller, Pastor of The Chrystal Cathedral, Garden Grove, California; and Eddie Gibbs, Associate Rector of All Saints Parish, Beverly Hills, California. Denominational officials included Ken Hemphill, President of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary; Jim Henry, President of the Southern Baptist Convention; Henry J. Schmidt, President of Mennonite Brethren Biblical Seminary; Archibald Hart, Dean, School of Psychology, Fuller Seminary; Thom S. Rainer, Dean, Billy Graham School, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary; Elmer L. Towns, Dean, School of Religion, Liberty University; Jerry Falwell, Chancellor, Liberty University; and Bill Bright, President of Campus Crusade for Christ International. Also endorsing the book was Leonard Sweet, Dean of Drew Theological Seminary.[1] Sweet professes to be an evangelical but is leading supporter of the New Spirituality, aka “New Age Spirituality”. Sweet has distilled the pantheistic teachings of many New Age leaders into what he calls quantum spirituality which “bonds us to all creation as well as to other members of the human family.”[2]

Two decades after the book’s publication, many are seeing the damaging effects of the Purpose Driven model of doing church on American evangelicalism. How can this be when only twenty years earlier, many respected and doctrinally sound leaders in the evangelical church placed a glowing stamp of approval on Warren’s book and his methods? First, we must remember that in 1995, Rick Warren was a rising star in the evangelical world; however, he and his methods were not widely known throughout the evangelical church. Warren’s Saddleback Church was growing rapidly, but most Christian leaders had not delved beneath the surface of his philosophies and methods to determine what drove its growth. Second, it is a natural and common practice for well-known Christian leaders to give a “hand-up” to energetic young pastors that appeared to be destined for stardom. Robert Schuller had a similar “hand-up” from each of the leaders of the two broad currents of American evangelicalism. In 1957, internationally renowned Norman Vincent Peale preached from the top of a concession shack for Robert Schuller whose church was located in a drive-in movie theater.[3] In 1970, while Schuller’s was still in the earlier and less doctrinally-deviant days of his ministry, Billy Graham encouraged Schuller to go on television with his ministry.[4]

Growing up on a dairy farm, I was naturally an expert on the freshness of milk. There were two tests to determine if milk was “blinky” which meant that it was close to being soured. The first test was to smell the milk. Although it may not have smelled sour, there were occasions when it still seemed that there was something just not quite right about the milk. This called for a second test—the milk had to be tasted. Although the milk may not have soured, the taste test would determine if it was blinky. A mere sip could cause one’s eyes to blink because of its assault on the taste buds. Another reason for the use of the term “blink” arose in more superstitious times when one supposedly blinked under the gaze of an evil eye. In those less enlightened eras, evil influences also were believed to have caused milk to be bewitched or turned sour by witchcraft.[5]

Twenty years ago Rick Warren’s purpose driven message and methods were not well-known but had been newly explained in his 400 page book. For many the book had passed the smell. Yet, some perceived that there may be something not just quite right about Warren’s message and methods but were inclined to give him the benefit of a doubt. In other words, they didn’t want to judge Warren’s work without all the facts. It deserved a taste test.

Blinky milk is not served to drink, but it is not thrown out either. It is used for making breads, biscuits, and cornbread but must be cooked at high temperatures that eliminate potentially dangerous bacteria. Although passing the smell test, it is almost certain that many of those endorsing Warren’s book did not totally agree with his message and some of his methods but were willing to withhold final judgement until a taste test could be done. Like blinky milk, if Warren’s message and methods did not pass the taste test, perhaps there may still be some potential for good to come from Warren’s efforts. In addition to fresh milk and blinky milk, there is a third stage in which milk becomes curdled or soured. Curdled milk has not only separated, but the solids have settled to the bottom of the container as curds. Curdled milk is harmful to humans and cannot be consumed. It must be thrown out or fed to the livestock.

After twenty years, it has become obvious to many that the Purpose Driven Church model has changed the direction of the evangelical church in America. There are some good things that have come from portions of Warren and the Church Growth movement’s message and methods, but there has been preaching and innovations which over time have proven to be misinterpretations or misapplications of scripture. Warren and his Church Growth peers have roused a lethargic and disinterested evangelical church that since the 1960s has slumbered through or ignored the message of Christ’s great commission because of a hostile, humanistic culture. But in their zealous effort to make disciples, they have failed to understand that the mission is to the sinner and not the unchurched. Warren and his peers have also called attention to the needs of the hurting masses outside the walls of the local church. But in practice this has often become a retro-social gospel focused on social justice, poverty, and building an earthly kingdom instead of building His kingdom that is “not of this world.”

Far more grievous and disturbing than misinterpretation and misapplication of the scriptures, Warren and other Church Growth ministries have allowed into the evangelical church the spirit of the world and many heretical New Age philosophies. These philosophies have mixed with and curdled the sincere milk of His Word. But the Bible says, “As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the Word, that ye may grow thereby.” [1 Peter 2:2. KJV] To understand what the Bible means by sincere, one need only look at its synonyms: genuine, honest, truthful, and authentic. Real kingdom growth comes from no other source.

The Church Growth-Purpose Driven message offers many counterfeits of the Bible’s doctrines and teachings. A counterfeit may work for a while but doesn’t perform as well as the genuine article. Over time defects appear that are not covered by a guarantee from its maker. The once-valued diamond and gold-plated ring is found to be merely a bit of glass mounted on a gold-toned band. The knife made of cheap metal quickly loses it edge. A cheap imitation of a hardened-steel wrench can’t stand the pull of the mechanic. But counterfeits are not only defective and disappoint, they can be life-threatening. So it is with the Christian whose eternal life with God is threatened by New Age counterfeits of biblical doctrines and teachings. It is in this area that the efforts of Warren and many others in the Church Growth movement have caused the greatest concerns. Because of the curdling effect of New Age poisons which have been mixed with the biblical message in many evangelical churches, the Church Growth-Purpose Driven message has greatly weakened or destroyed the integrity and effectiveness of those churches that have embraced its message.

The full title of Warren’s book is The Purpose Driven Church – Growth Without Compromising Your Message or Mission. But after much research and in light of the examinations and conclusions discussed in previous chapters, it is this author’s considered belief that Warren has compromised and damaged the mission of the church through misinterpretation and misapplication of scripture. Additionally, Warren’s strong associations and interactions with leaders of false religions and his associations with and endorsement of New Age leaders and their books have damaged the integrity of the church and given cultural legitimacy to the enemies of Christ and the church.

The statements of the author should not be taken at face value. Rather, the reader must do his own taste test of the Church Growth-Purpose Driven message and methods which will be conducted over the next several chapters. In performing this test we must follow the example of the Bereans and not the Thessalonian Jews. Acts 17:1-9 describes Paul and Silas’ days in Thessalonica. As was his custom, Paul went to the synagogue and for three weeks argued with the Jews from the scriptures that it was necessary for Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead. A great many were persuaded—some Jews, some Greeks, and not a few of the leading women. But other Jews who were jealous of Paul incited the wicked rabble rousers, gathered a crowd, and created havoc in the city. They eventually attacked the home of Jason, Paul’s host. The brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away for their own safety. They went to Berea and again to the synagogue.

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few. But when the Jews of Thessalonica had knowledge that the word of God was preached of Paul at Berea, they came thither also, and stirred up the people. [Acts 17:11-13. KJV] [emphasis added]

The Bereans did not uncritically accept what Paul preached to them but checked Paul’s message against the scriptures. In the next several chapters the philosophy, tenets, practices, and methods of the Church Growth movement as preached and practiced by Rick Warren, Bill Hybels, and other Church Growth leaders will be examined in the light and context of the scriptures as has already been done with regard to the ministries of Norman Vincent Peale and Robert Schuller.

This is not about Warren and Hybels. It appears that, like Peale and Schuller before them, they are sincere, good, and caring men with personal integrity and a professed love for God, but those things are for God to judge. However, the Bible tells us to beware of many seemingly well-intentioned men and women who for a variety of reasons bring heresy into the church and cause multitudes to go to hell for want of a truthful witness. We cannot beware unless we are aware of those coming to us with pleasing words but peddling a blinky or curdled message.

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. [Matthew 7:15-23. KJV]

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1995), pp. 1-4 (unnumbered).
[2] Warren B. Smith, A “Wonderful” Deception, (Magalia, California: Mountain Stream Press, 2011), pp. 103-104.
[3] George Mair, A Life With Purpose, (New York: Berkeley Books, 2005), p. 108.
[4] Robert H. Schuller, My Journey, HarperSanFrancisco, 2001), p. 293.
[5] “blinky,” Word Wizard. http://www.wordwizard.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=18809 (accessed November 2, 2015).

Rick Warren is a fourth-generation preacher. His great-grandfather came to Christ in Charles Spurgeon’s church in England. Following training in Spurgeon’s college, Spurgeon sent him to America to become a circuit-riding preacher. Warren’s father was a lay-preacher who specialized in planting and (literally) building churches. Born in 1954, Warren spent most of his growing-up years in Redwood Valley, California, where during his teenage years aspired to be a guitar-playing rock star. While working at a Christian summer camp in 1970 just before beginning his junior year in high school, Warren began thinking that perhaps God wanted him to be a preacher. In 1972 he entered California Baptist University in Riverside and held many revivals and crusades throughout California during his college years.[1]

In 1973 Warren traveled to San Francisco to hear W. A. Criswell speak at a conference. Criswell was the pastor at the First Baptist Church of Dallas which at that time was the largest Baptist Church in the world. Warren met Criswell and cherishes the memory of his laying hands on Warren and praying that God would bless him.[2]

Warren married Kay Lewis in 1975, and upon graduation together in 1977, they moved to Fort Worth, Texas, to attend Southwestern Theological Seminary where he earned a doctorate in December 1979. During the summer before his final classes were to be completed in December, they had decided to plant a new church in California. They left Texas and arrived in Orange County’s Saddleback Valley on January 2, 1980.[3]

Robert Schuller and Rick Warren

Before their move, Rick and Kay Warren made one other trip to California in 1979 to attend one of Robert Schuller’s Institute for Church Growth seminars. Before going, Kay Warren was skeptical about Schuller’s non-traditional approach to ministry. But after arriving, she stated that Schuller won them over. “He (Schuller) had a profound influence on Rick. We were captivated by his positive appeal to nonbelievers. I never looked back.”[4] In later years Warren claimed the so-called “profound influence” referred only to Schuller’s creative ways in building a nontraditional church and some of Schuller’s statements about the unchurched. Warren repeatedly denies that the “profound influence” included being influenced by Schuller’s doctrinal teachings. Warren admits that he spoke at Schuller’s Institute three times. The first was to give his testimony in 1984/1985. The next two engagements dealt with church growth, but Warren stresses that he did not preach nor speak at any of the Crystal Cathedral’s weekend services. But in 1991 at the invitation of Schuller, the Warrens gave their testimony at a Sunday morning service at the Cathedral.[5]

Schuller and Warren would have other contacts over the years. In 1991, Schuller birthed the idea and helped found a coalition of major Protestant churches to provide food for the Russian people living in near-famine conditions. Schuller’s idea became the Churches United in Global Mission (CUGM) which sent eleven thousand food packages to Moscow which was followed by a second shipment in March 1992.[6] Warren served on the CUGM Council along with many other prominent church leaders.

In 1995, Schuller wrote a laudatory endorsement of The Purpose Driven Church.

I’m praying that every pastor will read this book, believe it, be prepared to stand corrected by it, and change to match its sound, scriptural wisdom. Rick Warren is one all of us should listen to and learn from.[7]

Warren breaks with Schuller

Warren’s biographer claimed that Schuller had always been supportive of Warren and that the mutual respect that each man had for the other was exhibited through numerous friendly conversations and expressions of best wishes. But on Warren’s side of the relationship, something happened to sour the friendship between Schuller’s 1995 endorsement and Warren’s open break with Schuller in 1998. Warren’s biographer described Warren’s professed reason for the break.

But by the late 1990s, Warren had begun to notice that something was amiss at Schuller’s church. As he told me, “I got a bunch of information about him, and then I also started seeing him have all kinds of nonbelievers speaking at this church.” Then, Schuller had bestselling author Stephen Covey—a Mormon—speak at his church. This shocked Warren: “I thought, This isn’t right. How am I supposed to explain to all the ex-Mormons in my congregation why in the world Schuller has a Mormon up there talking?”[8] [emphasis in original]

The 1998 break with Schuller began with Warren’s resignation from the CUGM Council. “I must resign from the CUGM Council, I am afraid that the Crystal Cathedral’s ministry is going in a very different direction than Saddleback Church”[9]

When the break came, it had been nineteen years since Warren first attended Schuller’s church growth conference in 1979. Warren had spoken at three subsequent conferences and at the Crystal Cathedral in 1991. He also served on Schuller’s CUGM Council until 1998. Warren claims that the break with Schuller occurred because he had been noticing something “amiss” at Schuller’s church, had gotten “a bunch of information” about Schuller, started seeing many non-believers speaking at his church, and finally was “shocked” to find a Mormon had spoken at Schuller’s church. Had Schuller’s doctrines, actions, and church really changed that much and had “gone in a different direction than Saddleback Church” in a short span of time between the book endorsement in 1995 and the break 1998? Either Schuller had made a remarkably fast divergence from what Warren viewed as sound doctrine or Rick Warren was exceedingly disingenuous in denying that he had an earlier understanding of Schuller’s suspect theology. In either case, Warren was guilty of being incredibly naïve or lacking in even the smallest degree of spiritual discernment as to Schuller’s doctrinal positions given their long friendship and interaction. This raises the question as to the real reason for the 1998 break.

Schuller’s connections with various New Age spokesmen and promoters were well known before the 1980s and prior to Warren’s 1979 attendance at Schuller’s Church Growth school. One example was Schuller’s widely known and publicized association with prominent psychiatrist Gerald Jampolsky, a well-known teacher and practitioner of the New Age based “A Course in Miracles.” Jampolsky appeared on Schuller’s Hour of Power television broadcast on several occasions where Schuller introduced him as a fellow Christian. Jampolsky claims that his own spiritual awakening came as the result of an encounter with Indian guru Swami Baba Muktananda.[10] It is undeniable that the foundational teachings of “A Course on Miracles” are New Age and pantheistic in origin.

• The recognition of God is the recognition of yourself.
• When God Created you He made you part of Him.
• There is no sin; it has no consequence.
• For Christ takes many forms with different names until their oneness can be recognized.
• The journey to the cross should be the last “useless” journey.[11]

In his 1982 book, Self Esteem-The New Reformation, Schuller praised Jampolsky for his “profound theology.”

I am indebted to Dr. Gerald Jampolsky, a guest on our “Hour of Power,” for helping me to see what is not only great psychology, but is profound theology. Obviously, there can be no conflict in truth—when psychology is “right on” and theology is “right on,” there will be harmony and both shall be led to higher levels of enlightenment.[12]

Also obvious is that Schuller had no problems with Jampolsky’s “A Course in Miracles” theology and its New Age-pantheistic teachings. In 1985, “A Course in Miracles” study groups were meeting in Crystal Cathedral classrooms at the same time as evangelical ministers were being taught the principles of Church Growth at Schuller’s Institute for Successful Church Leadership. It also must be remembered that Warren was first invited to speak at the Institute in 1984/1985.[13] Schuller’s involvement with Jampolsky and his New Age beliefs was a long and public association covering a quarter of a century from his first appearance on the Hour of Power before 1982 to after an appearance on October 2004.[14]

A second example of Schuller’s involvement with New Age teachers is his connection with well-known surgeon Bernie Siegel who worked with the terminally ill. In Love, Medicine, and Miracles, Siegel wrote that he had an “inner guide” named George who helped him with his work. George was a bearded, long-haired young man who Siegel claims to have met while in a session of directed meditation. Siegel was on the board of Jampolsky’s Attitudinal Healing Centers and had endorsed “A Course in Miracles.” The opening page of Schuller’s 1995 Prayer: My Soul’s Adventure With God included Siegel’s warm endorsement of the book which Siegel said “…reaches beyond religion and information to what we all need—spirituality, inspiration, and understanding.” Writing in The Purpose Driven Life in 2002, Warren also quoted and praised Siegel as “one who has found the true purpose of life.”[15]

The Ken Blanchard Episode

Rick Warren also had his own entanglements with New Age advocates. One such occurred in 2003 when Warren introduced his 5-step-Global P.E.A.C.E. Plan in which Saddleback Church would focus on “…bringing a blessing to the entire world” through Planting churches, Equipping Leaders, Assisting the poor, Curing the sick, Educating the next generation.[16] To accomplish the “E” or equipping leaders step, Warren solicited help from two well-known authors, one of whom was Ken Blanchard, famous author of The One Minute Manager and founder of Lead Like Jesus. According to Warren, Blanchard would be “helping train us in leadership and how to train others to be leaders all around the world.” Warren called Blanchard a fellow Christian, and Blanchard himself pointed to people like Norman Vincent Peale and Bill Hybels who were instrumental in helping him turn his life over to the Lord in 1987-1988.[17]

But something Warren did not tell his congregation was that Blanchard was undeniably a New Age sympathizer and had endorsed and written the forewards to many New Age books in the years following the claimed turning of his life over to the Lord. As the P.E.A.C.E. Plan was being implemented and publicized over the next two years, Blanchard’s involvement as Warren’s go-to guy for training leaders became more widely known and some in the evangelical community began questioning Warren’s involvement with Blanchard and his New Age leanings.[18] Even after being publicly made aware of Blanchard’s New Age beliefs and endorsements, Warren attempted to separate Blanchard’s past from his current efforts on behalf of Warren’s P.E.A.C.E. Plan.

Ken is a new believer—a new creature in Christ. He should not be held accountable for statements or endorsements he made before he became a Christian. And he’s just learning now.[19]

Warren’s defense contradicts Blanchard’s own statements that were known to Warren. Two weeks after Warren had introduced his plan to the Saddleback congregation in November 2003, he appeared with Blanchard at a Lead Like Jesus celebration and listened as Blanchard described how he became a Christian fifteen years earlier.[20]

In 1998, Warren had sought to distance himself and the Purpose Driven movement from Schuller and his obvious connections to the New Age. Now, through Warren’s own decisions and efforts to advance his P.E.A.C.E. Plan, he had once again linked the Purpose Driven movement with New Age leaders and their doctrines just as Schuller had done throughout his ministry. Schuller remained unapologetic and true to his beliefs. However, for Warren it was imperative that his claimed evangelical and doctrinal credentials remain spotless and not thought of as compromising the message and mission of the church.

Before The Purpose Driven Church exploded in popularity following its publication in 1995, Rick Warren was just another Church Growth guy who had been successful at building a mega church. But now he ascended to a new level and became the mega-star spokesman for the Church Growth movement. His every word and action would be open to scrutiny. Within three years after his book’s publication, it becomes apparent that Warren’s long association with Schuller and his blatant New Age beliefs and doctrines would damage Warren and the Purpose Driven movement. Thereafter, he sought to distant himself from Schuller.

Five years later Warren’s association with Ken Blanchard was but one of a series of events and issues that called attention to a much larger threat to his Purpose Driven empire. These events were being described in several books published in 2004-2005 which forcefully and accurately described the Purpose Driven movement’s connection with the New Age. Not all of the books were critical of Warren and the Purpose Driven movement.

The Most Inspiring Pastor of Our Time

There are many stories of famous people who have had their portraits painted but wish to destroy the finished canvas because it reveals something beyond the outward likeness. Even if the likeness is astonishingly accurate, the sum total of the painter’s efforts, unconsciously perhaps, may reveal an unflattering characteristic or nature of the subject.

As an author, George Mair had this same experience but in book form. Mair is an author of numerous books, a syndicated newspaper columnist, radio talk show host, and broadcaster. While attending Saddleback Church for over two years, he wrote a highly flattering biography published in 2005 and titled A Life With Purpose – Reverend Rick Warren – The Most Inspiring Pastor of Our Time. Good biographers attempt to give perspective by placing the life of the subject in the flow of events, interaction with his contemporaries, and amidst the history of the times. Mair did this in his biography of Warren by talking about the church in America, the Church Growth movement, the influences of Norman Vincent Peale and Robert Schuller, the New Paradigm Church, and modern religion in America.[21] Upon completion and before the book went to press, Mair claims to have contacted Saddleback’s “chief attorney.” Mair stated that he had wanted the manuscript to be made available to Warren for review. After waiting several months and receiving no response from the attorney, the book was published by Berkeley Books, a subsidiary of the Penguin Group.[22]

Shortly after Mair’s book was released, Lighthouse Trails Press picked up on the association of Warren with Ken Blanchard. On April 19th 2005, Lighthouse Trails issued a press release that raised serious questions about the wisdom of Warren’s association with Ken Blanchard and its New Age implications. On May 31, Warren emailed Lighthouse Trails and expressed his great displeasure with their April 19th email in particular and George Mair and his book in general.[23] Within a few hours, Richard Abanes, Warren’s soon-to-be new biographer and apologist, had posted Warren’s email on the Internet. What followed was a campaign by Warren and his associates to discredit his critics, and George Mair became the target of the massive Purpose Driven forces. Although Mair had attended Saddleback for two years, Warren’s now public email was a surprising and brutal blow to Mair.

George Mair, an unbeliever, evidently wanted to make a quick buck turning out a book on me, at the peak of the popularity of The Purpose Driven Life…Since he is not even born again, he certainly wouldn’t understand theology, what I believe, or even the basics of our ministry.[24]

Warren’s critics answered

Immediately, Warren turned to a former staff member of his church to write a book addressing the claims of his critics. The small 142-page Rick Warren and the Purpose that Drives Him – An Insider Looks at the Phenomenal Bestseller was written by Richard Abanes and published before the end of the year. In reality, the book was not about Warren’s best sellers but a defense of Warren and the Purpose Driven movement as shown by the single endorsement at the front of the book.

Abanes has done a great service by setting the record straight on Rick Warren and Saddleback. Warren has a strong commitment to the core doctrines of the Christian faith and an unmistakable passion for reaching the lost, equipping pastors, and strengthening local churches. “Purpose-driven” is not New Age, it’s New Testament.” James K. Walker, President, Watchman Fellowship, Inc.[25]

In his 1998, Warren supposedly learned a “bunch of information” about his long-time friend and who had been having a number of non-Christians speak at his church. Nothing was said about the New Age influences that had been evident for many years. However, the endorsement on the very first page of Abanes’ book revealed the real reason for Warren’s break with Schuller—fear that the Purpose Driven message would be associated with Schuller’s strong links to the New Age. But by 2005, those New Age influences on the doctrines and methods of the Purpose Driven movement could no longer be hidden as several books were published which documented those New Age associations.

The concerns about the teachings of the Purpose Driven movement extend far beyond infiltration of New Age and Eastern religions’ teachings and practices into evangelical churches. But the greatest threat remains the influence of the Purpose Driven movement’s humanistic worldviews on the leadership of many evangelical churches in America.
______

In Chapter 3, it was noted that the enormous importance of doctrine (dogma, creed, belief, principles, and teachings) can be seen throughout the 2000 year history of the Christian church. Warren also recognizes the importance of doctrine as he keeps reminding us of his reverence for the unchanging doctrines of the Christian faith. However, Warren is highly sensitive and resentful when there is a thoughtful examination, comparison, or criticism of the teachings and methods of The Purpose Driven Church, and he and his defenders are prone to attack the character and Christianity of professed fellow Christians who attempt to do so. This is not a biblical approach because the scripture tells us that we should compare spiritual things with spiritual things [See: 1 Corinthians 2:12-13] This we shall do over the next several chapters with regard to the teachings and methods of The Purpose Driven Church.

This is not about Rick Warren but the biblical soundness of his Purpose Driven movement. It is vastly important that Christians make this examination because of Warren’s tremendous influence upon American evangelicalism and the importance and influence of those same American evangelicals on the rest of the world’s Christian churches.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Richard Abanes, Rick Warren and the Purpose that Drives Him, (Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House Publishers, 2005), pp. 36-38, 40, 46.
[2] Ibid., p. 40-41.
[3] Ibid., p. 41, 45-46.
[4] Warren Smith, Deceived On Purpose, Second Edition, (Magalia, California: Mountain Stream Press, 2004), pp. 103-104.
[5] Abanes, Rick Warren and the Purpose that Drives Him, pp. 100-102.
[6] Robert Schuller, My Journey, (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 2001), p. 264.
[7] Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1995), p. 3 (unnumbered).
[8] Ibid., p. 102.
[9] Abanes, Rick Warren and the Purpose that Drives Him, pp. 102-103.
[10] Marshall Davis, More than a Purpose, (Enumclaw, Washington: Pleasant Word, 2006), p. 154.
[11] Warren B. Smith, Deceived On Purpose, pp. 88-89.
[12] Robert H. Schuller, Self Esteem-The New Reformation, (Waco, Texas: Word Books, 1982), p. 123.
[13] Warren B. Smith, A Wonderful Deception, (Magalia, California: Mountain Stream Press, 2004), p. 28.
[14] Smith, Deceived On Purpose, pp. 97-98.
[15] Davis, p. 155.
[16] George Mair, A Life With Purpose, (New York: Berkeley Books, 2005), pp. 186, 190-194.
[17] Smith, A Wonderful Deception, pp. 52-54.
[18] Ibid., p. 55.
[19] Ibid., p. 61.
[20] Ibid.
[21] Mair, p. iii (unnumbered).
[22] Smith, A Wonderful Deception, p. 68.
[23] Ibid., pp. 55, 59.
[24] Ibid., p. 60.
[25] Abanes, p. 1 (unnumbered).

In his flattering 2005 biography of Rick Warren, George Mair identified the principal founders of the Church Growth movement: C. Donald McGavran, Gilbert Bilezikian, and Robert Schuller. The son of two missionaries, McGavran was born in India in 1897. While serving as a missionary to India, McGavran studied 145 churches between 1938 and 1955 to discover why some churches grow very slowly.[1] From these studies 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.[2]

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. Missionaries are called by the Holy Spirit and most are also led by the Holy Spirit with regard to which countries and areas they were to go. Now, the deciding factors for many denominations and missions organizations are dependent on sociological and demographic studies. Receptivity studies not only identify receptivity but also allow modern Church Growth practitioners to better craft their sermons to address the felt needs of the people as opposed seeking the leading of the Holy Spirit regarding the message to be preached.

Gilbert Bilezikian was born in Paris, France, and grew up under the Nazis just before World War II. He immigrated to the United States in 1961 and became a minister and teacher at Wheaton College where he developed his thoughts on building mega churches through small groups and a strong emphasis on servant ministries.[3] Both concepts have merit when used and practiced correctly. But the Church Growth movement has misused these natural biblical practices as an integral part in achieving their quest for success in church growth. As a result the Church Growth model’s hyper-organized and structured methods and focus comes at the expense of other aspects of the church and its purpose. Church life tends to become fragmented, misdirected, and regimented to such an extent that it becomes a new version of the liberal social gospel.

Norman Vincent Peale was the inspiration for the modern Church Growth movement, and he developed much of its theology and pioneered many of its practices. Robert Schuller was perhaps Peale’s greatest admirer and practitioner of Peale’s methods. However, it was Schuller that is widely considered to be the father of the Church Growth phenomenon. Schuller was the great popularizer and evangelist for the movement. Although other mega churches predated Schuller’s church, he was the first national voice, evangelist, and teacher for the Church Growth movement.[4]

Robert Schuller was born on September 26, 1926 to poor parents on a remote farm in Sioux County located in Iowa’s northwest corner near the Minnesota and South Dakota borders. Of Dutch ancestry and living in a Dutch colony, the Schullers attended the local Dutch Reformed church. In 1943 Robert attended Hope College in Holland, Michigan. Upon graduation, he enrolled in Western Theological Seminary located across the street from Hope. Hope and Western were both Calvinist in orientation and affiliated with the Reformed Church in America. In 1950 Schuller graduated from seminary with a bachelor of divinity degree, married Arvella DeHaan, a young lady from a farm near his boyhood home, and moved to his first pastorate in Chicago.[5]

In 1955, upon an invitation from church elders, he moved from Chicago to start a new work in Orange County, California. He began by renting a drive-in movie theatre for $10 per Sunday. He preached from the top of the tar-paper covered concession shack to his audience sitting in their cars. Garden Grove Community Church founded in a drive-in soon relocated to nearby land where the famed Crystal Cathedral was eventually built and dedicated twenty-five years later.[6]

Two books profoundly impacted Schuller’s theological views and his preaching style: Dale Carnegie’s How to Win Friends and Influence People and Norman Vincent Peale’s The Power of Positive Thinking. The message of these books transformed his ministry, and he began to “preach positive.” But more than the books, it was Peale himself who would have the greatest impact on Schuller’s life. Perhaps on impulse, Schuller invited Peale to fly to California and preach at his fledgling drive-in church. Schuller and much of the religious community were stunned when the internationally known Peale accepted. On June 30, 1957, standing next to Schuller on the roof of the concession stand shack, Peale delivered his trademark message of positivity. Schuller closely patterned his message and style to that of Peale. Peale’s “positive thinking” became Schuller’s “possibility thinking.”[7]

Schuller’s interest in wrapping the gospel in a positive message began in the late 1940s while at seminary. For his bachelor of divinity thesis, he chose to write the first topical and scriptural index of John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion. Calvin was a powerful force in the Reformation and founded the Reformed Church. Schuller recalled that in writing his thesis he first encountered the conflicting positive and negative interpretations of scripture. Schuller believed that Calvin’s “total depravity” of man had been dangerously misinterpreted by negative extremists who used it to cause “a strong, guilt-generating, humiliating consciousness of ‘sin’.”[8] In the course of his discussions about his belief, one professor counseled Schuller with these words.

There’s much good in many if not all humans. Every human needs help in dealing with life’s negative realities. Sin, evil, selfishness, injustice—these are life’s realities. So man isn’t totally depraved, but he’s totally incapable of saving himself from these realities! Every person needs the divine forgiveness and grace that only God can offer—and that He generously offers to all.[9]

But Schuller eventually developed his own interpretation of Calvin’s theology of sin.

I would come to define sin as primarily a condition rather than an action (though that condition is often revealed in action); an inborn absence of faith more than a turning from faith. As a result of these conclusions, I deduced that if I focused not on generating guilt, but on generating trust and positive hope, I would be preaching against sin via a creative, redemptive approach. Then I would be preaching the “Good News”…Eventually they [Schuller’s conclusions] would lead me to emphasize that we’re “saved” not just to avoid “hell” (whatever that means and wherever that is), but to become positive thinkers inspired to seek God’s will for our lives and dream the divine dreams that God has planned for us. We are “saved” so that we can go on to do good works and thus truly learn to live our lives for the glory of God. This to me was an exciting, proactive approach to the problem of sin—and it became the basis for my possibility thinking message…[10] [emphasis in original]

Here we find the bones of Schuller’s possibility thinking that also mirrored Peale’s practical Christianity. As Schuller fleshed-out those bones of possibility thinking, it embodied what was to beome the philosophy and teachings of the fully-formed Church Growth movement. Inborn sin is a condition to be dealt with therapeutically as opposed to an action requiring repentance and a turning from sin. The act of faith itself absolves sin without the necessity of an ongoing faith walk—a daily dying to self and sin. The purpose for one’s salvation is to do good works rather than having a right relationship with God. Therefore, hell is minimized or ignored altogether. Positivism emphasizes divine dreams in this life as opposed to man’s eternal destination. Through reason, methods, techniques, and pandering to self, man can proactively overcome sin whereas Schuller’s professor saw the need of every person is “divine forgiveness and grace that only God can offer.”

Essentially, the theology of Robert Schuller was centered on the self whereas the great themes of the Bible are about man’s relationship with God. Just how far Schuller’s theology of self had evolved since his seminary years is evident from Schuller’s 1982 book Self Esteem-The New Reformation.

A major world problem since the beginning of the Protestant Reformation in 1517 is that Christian thinkers have not formulated a well-rounded, full-orbed, honestly integrated systematic theological system. What we need now is an integrated systematic theology that will allow for a naturally evolving, noncontrived, and nonmanipulated spawning of second generation theological positions. The evolving theologies must reveal (not contrive) viable, nonvariable principles relating human problems beyond the salvation of a solitary immortal soul.

I contend that most, if not all, of the social, political, and religious problems facing our world reflect theological defects. The imperfect theology of the Protestant Reformation was really interested primarily in the “salvation of shameful, sinful, wicked, rebellious souls from eternal hellfire.” Salvation was offered, very correctly, by divine grace, not by human works. When our theology started with the salvation of a human commodity called “a soul” from “hellfire,” we found ourselves sincerely unable to relate that doctrine of salvation to other human conditions that demanded theological answers.[11]

Schuller believed the church should understand and be committed to meeting the deepest felt needs of human beings. He was correct in saying that the deepest of all human needs is salvation from sin and hell. However, he defines sin as, “Any human condition or act that robs God of glory by stripping one of his children of their right to divine dignity.” He elaborates by saying, “Sin is any act or thought that robs myself or another human being of his or her self-esteem.” He further describes “hell” as the “…loss of pride that naturally follows separation from God—the ultimate and unfailing source of our soul’s sense of self-respect.”[12] Schuller has said self-esteem is “pride in being human” and is the “single greatest need facing the human race today…When a human being’s self-esteem is stimulated and sustained…in a redemptive relationship with Christ, we are truly saved from sin and hell.”[13]

What Schuller was saying is that man is saved from sin and hell through self-esteem and pride in being human. But if by a redemptive relationship he means that man was saved through the atoning work of Christ, Schuller cannot at the same time mean that man was saved through stimulating and sustaining his self-esteem and having pride in being human.

In an attempt to distinguish between what Schuller called theological positivism and theological negativism, he contrasted the teachings of Jesus and the Apostle Paul. He said that, “Paul railed against sin, but if you read your New Testament as I did, you’ll see that Christ never called anyone a sinner. His ministry was the teaching of peace, love, and joy.”[14] Based on his belief that the style and content of Christ’s preaching and teaching were superior to Paul’s, Schuller has undeniably implied that some portions of the scripture are more inspired, more infallible, more reliable, and more truthful than other portions. But the Paul said, “All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” [2 Timothy 3:16. KJV] Perhaps if Christ had said these words instead of Paul, Schuller could have accepted the so-called negative theology of doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness.

How does Schuller reconcile his beliefs that contradict the Bible? Schuller claims that the Eternal Word transcends the written Word, and that, “Christ is the Word made flesh. Christ is the Lord over the Scriptures; the Scriptures are not Lord over Christ.” He states that biblical inerrancy is not the most critical issue facing Christianity but a distraction from a higher, healthier issue: the Lordship of Jesus Christ…So Christ must be accepted as Lord over the Scriptures.”[15] But the Bible, the written Word, tells us, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” [John 1:1. KJV] Said another way, the Triune God is the Word, and God cannot be higher than Himself.

Schuller prescribes an evolving, second generation theology that goes beyond salvation to supply answers to “other human conditions.” In spite of his assertion that salvation comes by divine grace and not human works, he immediately prescribes an evolving theology dependent on the works of man.

Schuller’s doctrinal heresies are legion throughout his many books. Schuller’s claims and prescriptions are amazing if not breathtaking for most Christians and especially students of the Bible. The Protestant Reformation was centered on the authority of the scriptures alone and that men are saved by faith in Christ alone. Schuller’s call for a new Reformation sweeps all of that aside as he essentially questions the sufficiency of the Bible to answer the basic questions of life and the power of the atoning blood of Christ for the salvation of man.

Schuller’s call for a New Reformation has been echoed by other leaders in the Church Growth movement. As one reads and researches the teachings and theology of the leaders of the Church Growth movement and their respective churches, it becomes very evident that Robert Schuller’s beliefs have heavily leavened their doctrines, teachings, practices, and techniques. This has occurred not only through his many widely-read books but especially through the Robert Schuller Institute for Successful Church Leadership.

In 1969, Schuller began teaching other ministers his Church Growth concepts through a series of lectures at the Institute. He taught that big churches were better at winning lost people. Small churches were better at serving the churched members and denominational purposes. His message was that regardless of the denomination, his methods could be applied and church growth would follow. He encouraged churches to drop denominational labels and call themselves community churches. Services, sermons, and activities were to be programmed to appeal to the spiritual needs of the unchurched. “Mission theology doesn’t begin with ‘good’ believers teaching ‘bad’ unbelievers how sinful they are!…What they need to learn from us is that we can and will help them by introducing them to Jesus Christ. He will then lead them in becoming persons of positive-thinking faith, hope, and love!”[16]

Many insist that if Robert Schuller’s methods for building mega churches work, they must be approved by God. Certainly, his methods have worked in many churches. His success and that of his students in building mega churches is not disputed.

*Bill Hybels – Willow Creek Community Church, Illinois
*Rick Warren – Saddleback Community Church, California
*Bishop Charles Blake – West Los Angeles Church of God in Christ, California (one of the largest black churches in the world)
*Frank Harrington – Peachtree Presbyterian Church, Atlanta, Georgia (largest Presbyterian Church in America)
*Sundo Kim – First Methodist Church, Seoul, Korea (largest Methodist Church in the world)[17]

By many standards, the Church Growth movement has been wildly successful. But the doctrinal underpinnings and methods of Peale’s practical Christianity, Schuller’s positivity thinking, and the philosophies and teachings of many mega church pastors such Bill Hybels and Rick Warren are heretical in many respects. These deviations from sound biblical doctrines and practices will be examined in some detail in the following chapters.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] George Mair, A Life With Purpose, (New York: Berkeley Books, 2005), pp. 65, 101.
[2] Stephen Parker, Church Growth Crisis – The decline of Christianity in America, (Oklahoma City, Oklahoma: Forever Family Publications, 2011), p. 27.
[3] Mair, p. 103.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Robert H. Schuller, My Journey, (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 2001), pp. 3, 6-7, 125-126, 147.
[6] Mair, p. 106-107.
[7] Ibid., pp. 106, 108.
[8] Schuller, My Journey, p. 126-127.
[9] Ibid, p. 127.
[10] Ibid., pp. 127-128.
[11] Robert H. Schuller, Self Esteem – The New Reformation, (Waco, Texas: Word Books, 1982), pp. 145-146.
[12] Ibid., pp. 13-14.
[13] Ibid., pp. 19-20.
[14] Schuller, My Journey, p. 126.
[15] Schuller, Self-Esteem – The New Reformation, p. 45.
[16] Schuller, My Journey, pp. 291-292.
[17] Ibid., p. 472.

Norman Vincent Peale and the Church Growth movement

Norman Vincent Peale’s practical Christianity is often credited with being the forerunner of the of the modern Church Growth movement. The popularization of his philosophy and methods was left to a later generation. Peale’s philosophy and methods grew out of his wholehearted belief in the humanistic concept of the perfectibility of man.[1] As seen in the previous two chapters, Peale’s theology was heavily imbued with his belief that through his own efforts man could improve his life and overcome life’s obstacles either through self-realization or through getting in touch with the god within. Although he believed in the perfectibility of man, Peale’s ministry was focused on discipling rather than perfecting members. He believed that people should be brought into membership “in anticipation that education would subsequently reveal to them the fuller implications of a richer, more self-conscious faith.”[2]

The major focus of Peale’s ministry was winning members. This involved door-to-door canvasing, use of various advertising techniques, weekly radio broadcasts of his sermons, rented auditoriums for special services, and adoption of other business techniques to further church development. Sunday services were planned to perfection. His messages were upbeat, theologically liberal, inspirational, and sprinkled with references to Emerson and the social environment. Although altar calls gradually disappeared, the message continued to point to the transforming result of a personal relationship with Jesus and the church.[3] For Peale, it is apparent that his listeners were to find that personal relationship, “a richer, more self-conscious faith,” through education as opposed to repentance and forgiveness of sin at an altar.

Church Growth movement and the mission of the church

Christ said at the time of his ascension forty days after His resurrection, “Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always to the close of the age.” [Matthew 28:19-20. RSV] There are three parts: evangelism, baptism, and teaching. Evangelism is making disciples through preaching (and witnessing) the gospel of Christ. Baptism is a public statement that one accepted Christ as his savior and has surrendered his life to Christ. Teaching is follow-up which is accomplished by preaching, teaching, and worship.

Disciples are not made by the effort of evangelism but by the Word of God. Evangelism is the tool or means of delivering the life transforming message (good news) of Jesus Christ. But at some point in the mid-twentieth century there arose a belief that the original biblical concept of evangelism could be improved upon. New methodologies and strategies were developed to sharpen the tool of evangelism in making disciples for Christ. This came to be known as the Church Growth movement. It is not a single group, organization or denomination but a set of ideologies that have been adopted by the majority of evangelical churches in America.[4] This ecumenicalism is possible because the churches and ministers who subscribed to the Church Growth movement are interested in methodologies and strategies for accomplishing the mission of the church as opposed to doctrine. Their message is that a church can adopt Church Growth methods and practices to grow their individual churches while keeping their doctrines. This sounds good, but a closer look reveals the devil is in the details.

Paul told the Corinthians that it was the gospel by which they were saved (See 1 Corinthians 15:1-2). But when the Church Growth movement attempted to sharpen the tool of evangelism, it fundamentally changed its focus from delivering the transforming power of the Word to growing the church through human efforts.[5] This resulted in a major change in definition of the mission of the church from making disciples to growing the church.

Defenders of the Church Growth methods and strategies may claim this distinction is merely a matter of semantics—that the end result of growing the church is the same as making disciples. This is not so. Recall what happened to the early church in the fourth century (See Chapter 3). Christianity was legalized in the Roman Empire and became the professed religion of Emperor Constantine. Christianity was now seen as the avenue to material, military, political, and social success. 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.[6]

A second defense by the advocates of the Church Growth movement is that their methods are effective in attracting people to their churches so that the gospel can be delivered and people can be saved, baptized, and taught. They cite impressive numbers with regard to membership, attendance, and participation in various church activities to prove the effectiveness of their methods and strategies. But in the final accounting of a person’s life, it is not their church attendance, membership, or participation that determines their eternal destiny.

The problem with many churches using Church Growth methods and strategies is that it is often accompanied by preaching that is watered-down, incomplete, or inaccurate. Christ’s call to a death to self and sin at the foot of the cross is often masked by feel-good messages of love and forgiveness with little or no cost and without a call to holiness. As a result, the lives and lifestyles of many Church Growth “converts” bear little evidence of change or conformance to the teachings of Christ. Many seekers falling into the all-inclusive nets of churches following the Church Growth model resemble the unregenerate second generation Puritans of the late 1600s. These Puritans were not in full communion but remained members in a halfway covenant which resulted in a mixed membership that had lost the purity of a separated regenerate church.[7]

There is nothing fundamentally wrong with many of the Church Growth methods and activities in themselves. Christian fellowship, breaking of bread, and concern for the needs of one’s fellow brothers and sisters in Christ is normal and biblical. Some of the Church Growth activities and methods have been used by traditional churches for decades and were not intended to be the high-powered generators of church growth in themselves. To be successful, Church Growth practitioners must add a large measure of accommodation of the spirit of the world that injects subtle but fundamental changes to the preaching, teaching, and doctrines of the New Testament.

The culture-driven church

The Church Growth movement continually attempts to find better ways to accomplish the redefined mission of the church—church growth rather than making disciples. Church Growth advocates say churches must use the right bait to attract and capture members. As the tastes and interests of a culture change over time, the church must change the bait to match the new tastes and interests of both its current members (consumers) and target audience outside the church. Hence, the focus and message of the church is dictated by the prevailing culture as opposed to the timeless prescriptions of the Bible. As culture changes, the membership-oriented church must change in order to accommodate and stay relevant to the culture. Over time the parade of changes accumulate to such an extent that the church loses its Christian identity and becomes a powerless, syncretic form of Christian paganism.[8] In his letter to Timothy, the Apostle Paul wrote of the coming apostasy in the last days in which men and women who once knew Christ would reject or abandon their faith. Paul described these Christians-in-name-only of the last days as “holding the form of religion but denying the power of it…” [2 Timothy 3:5. RSV]

The therapeutic gospel

In the last chapter we examined the beginnings of the therapeutic gospel through Norman Vincent Peale’s blending of psychology and New Age practices into a religious mix aimed at healing the soul through self-help and the works of men. Here we look deeper into the meaning and workings of the therapeutic gospel as it has grown within the evangelical church over the last seven decades.

The American psyche has been branded with the humanistic concept of the perfectibility of man and anything less than personal perfection is thought unacceptable. As a result, billions of dollars are spent annually on psychological techniques and therapies of self-help and counseling. Once thought of as help for physical problems, therapy is now applied to a host issues that are now considered psychological problems which range from personal relationships and self-esteem to the ultimate purpose and meaning of life. This concern for psychological problems has inevitably become a large part of religious thinking and concern within the contemporary church as a result of the philosophy and growing influence of the Church Growth movement.[9]

Craig Gay writing in The way of the (modern) world called this preoccupation with psychological problems very disturbing because the focus of therapy is upon “immediate relief and rehabilitation,” and the only acceptable measure of relief is “the subjective experience of well-being.” [emphasis in original] However, the therapeutic approach “provides no serious discipline for the soul.” Therapy as a means of dealing with the stresses of life often stands at odds with the formation of character and one’s duty to God and his fellow man. The therapeutic use of religion and religious faith are not the same. In the therapeutic use of religion, the individual is essentially in charge of his or her journey to a sense of well-being within. But the Christian faith focuses the believer on obedience to God and the Bible as opposed to pleasing the self. Gay summarizes the difference by quoting Philip Rieff, “Religious man was born to be saved. Psychological man is born to be pleased.”[10]

Christians may vehemently deny the humanists’ belief that this life is all there is so one ought to be happy, grab all the pleasure that one can, and live as if there is no tomorrow. However, many Christians’ affirmation of the afterlife often do not match their actions as they reach for a therapeutic fix to ease the pain of the moment when what they may really need is obedience to God and His higher purposes. Many modern Christians have acceded to the cultural wave of humanism and are preoccupied with the present experience and a quest for comfort instead of accepting the pain of self-denial and obedience to God which is linked to their eternal destiny.

It is a deception when Christian concepts and terms are employed to justify therapeutic “feel good” measures as a substitute for obedience to the Christian faith in matters of healing and rehabilitation. Gay wrote, “Faith in God through Jesus Christ and by the power of the Spirit is not a means, but is, along with hope and love, the end purpose of human existence.” [emphasis added] However, Gay cautions that the problem does not lie in therapy as such. Specific therapies are often of real benefit, but the difficulty arises when therapy is viewed as a means of dealing with the problems caused by the human condition.[11] Put another way, man is a fallen creature, and although religious therapy may make him feel better about himself for the moment, it will not change his eternal destination.

New Paradigm churches v. traditional churches

We’ve talked about the origins of the Church Growth movement and its philosophies, methods, and techniques. We’ve also described the culture-driven therapeutic gospel. But how does all of this look when it comes together in a Church Growth-oriented evangelical church in the twenty-first century?

New paradigm churches are growth-oriented, culture-driven, and therapeutic in outlook. These churches have a philosophy of ministry intentionally focused on numerical growth through the use of demographic studies from which well-defined market strategies are crafted and then implemented by modern business techniques.[12] Being market-driven, their first step is to study the demographics of the market to determine what the consumer wants as opposed to the traditional evangelical church that is soul-oriented, biblically driven, and eternal in outlook.

In “Choosing My Religion” published in 1999 by Advertising Age, Richard Cimino described the factors Americans consider when seeking a church. Cimino’s observations on the desires of consumer-minded Christians had been discovered decades earlier by Church Growth leaders. What Cimino and earlier church leaders found was that mainstream Americans had begun shopping for a God to fit their humanistic beliefs and lifestyles. As a result, their preferences had shifted from “religion” to “spirituality.”[13]

Behind this shift is the search for an experiential faith, a religion of the heart, not of the head. It’s a religious expression that downplays doctrine and dogma, and revels in direct experience of the divine—whether it’s called the “holy spirit” or “cosmic consciousness” or the “true self.” It is practical and personal, more about stress reduction than salvation, more therapeutic than theological. It’s about feeling good, not being good. It’s as much about the body as the soul…This being the United States, where consumerism is the closest thing we have to state religion, it’s very much about marketing, packaging, and promotion.

Today…religion and spirituality have become just another product in the broader marketplace of goods and services; congregants care as much about a church’s childcare as its doctrinal purity, pay more attention to the style of music than the pastor’s theological training.

Church leaders across the nation are using computerized demographic studies and other sophisticated marketing techniques to fill their pews. “Mainline churches don’t have to die,” says church marketing consultant Richard Southern. “Baby boomers think of churches like they think of supermarkets…They want options, choices, and convenience. You don’t have to change your theology or your political stance.”[14]

This shift from religion to spirituality has occurred because of the rise and eventual dominance of the humanistic worldview in all facets of American culture during the last half of the twentieth century. Whereas the dominant Christian religion in America through the end of the nineteenth century meant relationship with and obedience to a loving God, the humanistic worldview denies God’s existence and replaces Him with the god of self and its quest for happiness. However, humanism is a false philosophy and its prescriptions fail to answer the haunting questions of life. It is man’s natural inclination to seek God to find order, meaning, and purpose to life, and it is through religion he seeks to find Him. But through the seductions of secular humanism, Americans have become saturated with the consumer mentality and the belief that customer is always right. In vain, they seek a do-it-yourself, designer religion that will supply a sense of temporal well-being instead of eternal truth that only comes from the God of the Bible.

The God of the Bible demands that men die to self in order to live the life eternal. This is not a message that can be scientifically packaged and promoted by new paradigm churches focused on attracting members instead of winning the lost.

Decades ago, A. W. Tozer foresaw the eventual outcome of popular evangelism we now call a new paradigm.

If I see aright, the cross of popular evangelicalism is not the cross of the New Testament. It is, rather, a new bright ornament upon the bosom of a self-assured and carnal Christianity. The old cross slew men; the new cross entertains them. The old cross condemned; the new cross amuses. The old cross destroyed confidence in the flesh; the new cross encourages it.[15]

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Arthur Gordon, One Man’s Way, (Pawling, New York: Foundation for Christian Living, (1972, 1958), p. 143.
[2] Carol V. R. George, God’s Salesman – Norman Vincent Peale and The Power of Positive Thinking, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), p. 56.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Stephen Parker, Church Growth Crisis – The Decline of Christianity in America, (Oklahoma City, Oklahoma: Forever Family Publications, 2011), p. 13.
[5] Ibid., p. 32.
[6] B. K. Kuiper, The Church in History, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1951, 1964), p. 27.
[7] Eddy, p. 55.
[8] Parker, p. 39.
[9] Craig M. Gay, The way of the (modern) world, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1998), p. 185.
[10] Ibid., p. 186.
[11] Ibid., pp. 187-189.
[12] Gary E. Gilley, This Little Church Went to Market, (www.xulonpress.com: Xulon Press, 2002), p. 20.
[13] Richard Cimino, “Choosing My Religion,” Advertising Age, April 1, 1999.
http://adage.com/article/american-demographics/choosing-religion/42364/ (accessed October 23, 2015).
[14] Gilley, This Little Church Went to Market, p. 59.