Analysis of Rick Warren’s recent interview on his Women’s Ordination stance

[Ain't Zwinglian]

This thread is divided into four parts to be issued over the course of this week.

1) Rick Warren’s basic hermeneutical errors.
2) Examination of Warren’s exegetical gymnastics.
3) Warren’s flawed understanding of SBC’s particular teaching of primary and secondary doctrines.
4) Warren’s low view of the authority of Scripture and even lower view of the doctrine of Public ministry.

Warren’s interview can be found here. Rick Warren: The Great Commission’s ‘Go and Teach’ Applies to Women

Rick Warren’s interview on the Russell Moore show (3/8/23) gives tremendous insight how Warren handles Scripture. He basically discards basic hermeneutical rules for interpreting Scripture…. one of which is “THE CLEAR TEXTS OF SCRIPTURE INTERPRET THE OBSURE TEXTS.” Warren reverses this and uses “out of context” obscure texts in the NT to allow women’s ordination, while discarding or ignoring the clear texts of what the doctrine of doctrine of Public Ministry is and who is qualified for it.

If for example I would like to teach the subject of Election in Scripture, I would go to Eph. 1 & 2 and Romans 9 first, because the doctrine of Election is most clearly articulated there.

If I want to teach on who is qualified to be a pastor in the church, who is disqualified, and who is forbidden to hold the office of pastor, I would go to I Cor. 14, Titus 1, I Tim. and II Timothy.

The reason why Warren refuses to begin his investigation on who is qualified to be a pastor in the NT is because there are hundreds of different interpretations on this subject. “Now we’re talking about difference of interpretation. Those particular passages—Titus, Timothy, and Corinthians—have hundreds, literally hundreds, of interpretations.” This is a straw man argument.

Warren doesn’t even attempt to understand the clear texts of Scripture, because there are “literally hundreds” of interpretations. In responding to this line of reasoning, couldn’t Warren’s argument be applied to any part of Scripture? After all, it is possible that any part of Scripture can have “hundreds of interpretations?”

There are not “hundreds of interpretations” to Paul’s teaching on Women’s ordination….basically two. Those that affirm Paul’s teaching and those that do not.

“There are hundreds of interpretations” motto is Rick Warren’s GET OUT OF JAIL CARD. Anytime someone criticizes him for not following Paul’s teaching…all he has to say is “There are hundreds of interpretations” on this matter and the conversation is over. And you can bet he will use this card again and again in the future.

 

[d taylor]

-
​

Galatians 3:28 and the Analogy of Faith – Grace Evangelical Society

 

[The Liturgist]

One of the great accomplishments of the SBC was restoring Biblical doctrine regarding pastoral ministry, and indeed this action and other actions to persuade the liberal churches to leave the Conference and join the American Baptist Convention saved the SBC from the devastation which happened to the mainline churches, which the SBC, like the LCMS, basically was, before making a dramatic course correction (which in the case of the SBC happened several years after it had happened in the LCMS).

 

[PloverWing]

One of the great accomplishments of the SBC was restoring Biblical doctrine regarding pastoral ministry

I had thought, from your previous posts, that you supported women's ordination. Did I misunderstand you?

 

[The Liturgist]

I had thought, from your previous posts, that you supported women's ordination. Did I misunderstand you?

Nope.

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

This thread is divided into four parts to be issued over the course of this week.

1) Rick Warren’s basic hermeneutical errors.
2) Examination of Warren’s exegetical gymnastics.
3) Warren’s flawed understanding of SBC’s particular teaching of primary and secondary doctrines.
4) Warren’s low view of the authority of Scripture and even lower view of the doctrine of Public ministry.

Warren’s interview can be found here. Rick Warren: The Great Commission’s ‘Go and Teach’ Applies to Women

Rick Warren’s interview on the Russell Moore show (3/8/23) gives tremendous insight how Warren handles Scripture. He basically discards basic hermeneutical rules for interpreting Scripture…. one of which is “THE CLEAR TEXTS OF SCRIPTURE INTERPRET THE OBSURE TEXTS.” Warren reverses this and uses “out of context” obscure texts in the NT to allow women’s ordination, while discarding or ignoring the clear texts of what the doctrine of doctrine of Public Ministry is and who is qualified for it.

If for example I would like to teach the subject of Election in Scripture, I would go to Eph. 1 & 2 and Romans 9 first, because the doctrine of Election is most clearly articulated there.

If I want to teach on who is qualified to be a pastor in the church, who is disqualified, and who is forbidden to hold the office of pastor, I would go to I Cor. 14, Titus 1, I Tim. and II Timothy.

The reason why Warren refuses to begin his investigation on who is qualified to be a pastor in the NT is because there are hundreds of different interpretations on this subject. “Now we’re talking about difference of interpretation. Those particular passages—Titus, Timothy, and Corinthians—have hundreds, literally hundreds, of interpretations.” This is a straw man argument.

Warren doesn’t even attempt to understand the clear texts of Scripture, because there are “literally hundreds” of interpretations. In responding to this line of reasoning, couldn’t Warren’s argument be applied to any part of Scripture? After all, it is possible that any part of Scripture can have “hundreds of interpretations?”

There are not “hundreds of interpretations” to Paul’s teaching on Women’s ordination….basically two. Those that affirm Paul’s teaching and those that do not.

“There are hundreds of interpretations” motto is Rick Warren’s GET OUT OF JAIL CARD. Anytime someone criticizes him for not following Paul’s teaching…all he has to say is “There are hundreds of interpretations” on this matter and the conversation is over. And you can bet he will use this card again and again in the future.

Warren will now use three obscure examples from the NT to establish women’s ordination: The Great Commission, The Day of Pentecost and Mary Magdalen. I am only going to comment on the Day of Pentecost.

Warren states “On that day at Pentecost, we know women were in the upper room. We know women were filled with the Holy Spirit; we know that women were preaching in languages that other people couldn’t [understand], to a mixed audience. It wasn’t just men—women were preaching on the Day of Pentecost.”

Were women present on the day of Pentecost preaching and prophesying as Warren claims? The answer is there is NO EVIDENCE any of the 120 present in the upper room were present on that day except the twelve disciples now called apostles.

Review of Acts 1; Prior to Jesus ascension, He told them Gathering them together, He commanded them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait for what the Father had promised, “Which,” He said, “you heard of from Me; 5 for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.”

Then the disciples go into Jerusalem to the upper room and we have a listing of the 120 present: 1) each disciple by name, 2) women, 3) Mary 4) others and 5) Matthias and Barsabbas Justus, of whom Matthias was chose to replace Judas. Luke now calls the Matthias and the Eleven for the first time “apostles.” (1:26) And they drew lots for them, and the lot fell to Matthias; and he was added to the eleven apostles.

Acts Chapter 2: I will admit there is ambiguity who is present in Jerusalem Pentecost morning. This is due to the usage of third person plural verbs without mentioning gender. “and they were all gathered together.” Does the “they” refer to some the 120 or just to the 12 disciples now called apostles?

Evidence from Acts 2 indicates that only the 12 disciples now called apostles are only present when the Holy Spirit descends upon them with the pillar of fire and the ability to speak known unlearned languages. This is evidence by:

1) the text explicit states “only Peter and the eleven” (Acts 2:14) were present speaking in tongues.

2) countering the accusation the Apostles are drunk, (Acts 2:15) Peter states "these men are not drunk." The οὗτοι is a plural masculine demonstrative pronoun only referring to males. If Luke wanted to refer to “both men and women not being drunk” he would have used Ταῦτα the neuter form of the pronoun. And if Luke only wanted to refer to women as in “these women are not drunk” he would have used αὗταί or the feminine form of the pronoun.

3) After Peter preaches his first sermon, the response was (Acts 2:37) Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brethren, what shall we do?” Contextually, only the twelve disciples now apostles are present.

Warren continues stating from the Pentecost text, “Yep, in the church, everybody gets to pray, everybody gets to preach, everybody gets to prophesy.” Warren is dead wrong about women preaching in this text, praying in this text, or prophesying in this text.

However, Warren is partially right...everyone gets to pray and everyone gets to prophesy, but per Paul's statements elsewhere NOT EVERYBODY GETS TO PREACH A SERMON.

 

[PloverWing]

Nope.

What "Biblical doctrine regarding pastoral ministry" did you see restored in the SBC, then?

 

[NBB]

Even when some may say women can't be ordained, God is using them in great ways in ministry, so if God is using them then what we are going to say against that.

 

[FireDragon76]

One of the great accomplishments of the SBC was restoring Biblical doctrine regarding pastoral ministry, and indeed this action and other actions to persuade the liberal churches to leave the Conference and join the American Baptist Convention saved the SBC from the devastation which happened to the mainline churches, which the SBC, like the LCMS, basically was, before making a dramatic course correction (which in the case of the SBC happened several years after it had happened in the LCMS).

The SBC is declining, especially in the past few years. It's lost millions of members since the early 2000's. People increasingly aren't buying into that brand of religion.

The LCMS is hardly any better, it's also on a downward trajectory, albeit a somewhat slower pace. Having listened to plenty of conservative Lutherans in the past, it's not hard to understand why.

 

[The Liturgist]

The SBC is declining, especially in the past few years. It's lost millions of members since the early 2000's. People increasingly aren't buying into that brand of religion.

The LCMS is hardly any better, it's also on a downward trajectory, albeit a somewhat slower pace. Having listened to plenty of conservative Lutherans in the past, it's not hard to understand why.

The decline, or lack thereof in the case of the LCMS, WELS, etc, in these churches does not compare to the decline in mainline churches, where the UCC and Episcopal churches, among others, have lost tragic numbers of members, forcing one diocese in the latter to sell its cathedral some years ago.

 

[FireDragon76]

The decline, or lack thereof in the case of the LCMS, WELS, etc, in these churches does not compare to the decline in mainline churches, where the UCC and Episcopal churches, among others, have lost tragic numbers of members, forcing one diocese in the latter to sell its cathedral some years ago.

Most of the decline in the past forty years has been due to aging membership, and was largely predicted decades ago, not sudden defections.

In the past few years, Americans that identify as "Mainline Protestant" have increased, whereas those identifying as "Evangelicals" have decreased.

 

[The Liturgist]

Most of the decline in the past forty years has been due to aging membership, and was largely predicted decades ago, not sudden defections.

In the past few years, Americans that identify as "Mainline Protestant" have increased, whereas those identifying as "Evangelicals" have decreased.

That’s simply inaccurate. While the UUA has increasing membership, decreasing membership has remained the trend in mainline protestantism.

Now regarding the designation “Evangelical”, this is an overbroad term, and utterly inapplicable to denominations like the LCMS except in its historic meaning, before it was co-opted by non-denominational and non-liturgical conservative low church Protestants who place extreme emphasis on the idea of being born again, for example, the SBC.

Now it is true SBC membership has taken a hit, but this was due to an abuse scandal and several other problems that afflicted them.

These tragedies do not negate the superb accomplishment of the SBC and another denomination to suffer a severe abuse scandal, the Roman Catholic Church, both of which have managed, despite the impact of these scandals, to retain a devoted membership which in both cases rallied around the Pro-Life movement, which distressingly I have learned that several of the mainline Protestant churches actually opposed.

 

[hedrick]

Most of the decline in the past forty years has been due to aging membership, and was largely predicted decades ago, not sudden defections.

In the past few years, Americans that identify as "Mainline Protestant" have increased, whereas those identifying as "Evangelicals" have decreased.

I saw that survey too. I believe they classified Protestants who didn’t identify as evangelical as mainline. It’s an interesting trend, but not necessarily connected with actual mainline denominations. I think the real problem is that all of us are failing to convince young adults that there’s enough value to the church that it’s worth participating. Conservative churches are doing a bit better than liberal ones, but they are still not doing well.

 

[FireDragon76]

I saw that survey too. I believe they classified Protestants who didn’t identify as evangelical as mainline. It’s an interesting trend, but not necessarily connected with actual mainline denominations. I think the real problem is that all of us are failing to convince young adults that there’s enough value to the church that it’s worth participating. Conservative churches are doing a bit better than liberal ones, but they are still not doing well.

Alot of Mainline Protestant churches are still dealing in an older American religious paradigm. John Nevine and Philip Schaff started the Mercersburg movement to try to bring a sense of European-style catholicity to American Protestantism, but most American Protestant churches rejected that sort of theology for Revivalism, and later, the Social Gospel. Both were heavily moralistic movements. And now the culture is more moralistic than Christianity ever could be, so it's not clear what use mainline religion is to alot of people outside the Church.

 

[The Liturgist]

Alot of Mainline Protestant churches are still dealing in an older American religious paradigm. John Nevine and Philip Schaff started the Mercersburg movement to try to bring a sense of European-style catholicity to American Protestantism, but most American Protestant churches rejected that sort of theology for Revivalism, and later, the Social Gospel. Both were heavily moralistic movements. And now the culture is more moralistic than Christianity ever could be, so it's not clear what use mainline religion is to alot of people outside the Church.

Mercersburg theology was influential and worked, like Scoto-Catholicism in the Church of Scotland, because of a desire for liturgical beauty. What the people want are churches whose teachings are consistent with Sacred Scripture, even where scripture disagrees sharply with contemporary opinion, for example, on the issues related to human sexuality and abortion, and they want that experience in churches that stress liturgical beauty, hence the success of the Traditional Latin Mass communities, the Anglo-Catholic Continuing Anglican churches, most of the Orthodox churches (the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North America being a rare and prominent exception).

 

[The Liturgist]

Were women present on the day of Pentecost preaching and prophesying as Warren claims? The answer is there is NO EVIDENCE any of the 120 present in the upper room were present on that day except the twelve disciples now called apostles.

Having seen the Cenacle, or rather both possible locations for it (the one favored by the crusaders, with Gothic architecture, which the Jews claim as tomb of King David, and the Muslims for something else, and also the more likely candidate, the Syriac Orthodox Monastery of St. Mark, I find myself doubting the Cenacle could accomodate 120, especially given that the Jews of the first century had adopted the Greco-Roman custom of dining in a triclinium.

 

[FireDragon76]

I used to go to a Continuing Anglican church for a year or so in my early 30's. You can't convince me that's genuinely attractive to most people. I've never been in a sadder place, speaking of churches. All the clergy were brewing with resentments of various kinds. Sure, the worship was beautiful, but the atmosphere overall was not healthy for spiritual growth.

 

[The Liturgist]

I used to go to a Continuing Anglican church for a year or so in my early 30's. You can't convince me that's genuinely attractive to most people. I've never been in a sadder place, speaking of churches. All the clergy were brewing with resentments of various kinds. Sure, the worship was beautiful, but the atmosphere overall was not healthy for spiritual growth.

I’ve been in several mainline churches and even an Eastern Orthodox old calendarist parish that had problems like that as well. What you describe is not a uniquely Continuing Anglican problem. Rather its a problem with clergy formation, development and supervision.

 

[FireDragon76]

I’ve been in several mainline churches and even an Eastern Orthodox old calendarist parish that had problems like that as well. What you describe is not a uniquely Continuing Anglican problem. Rather its a problem with clergy formation, development and supervision.

I've been to alot of different churches, and the CA church stood out the most. The only other one that came close was an Orthodox church full of ex-Evangelicals.

 

[The Liturgist]

I've been to alot of different churches, and the CA church stood out the most. The only other one that came close was an Orthodox church full of ex-Evangelicals.

Ok, well, that has been the exact opposite of my experience.