Rick Warren doubles down and ups the ante for inclusion back into the SBC

[Ain't Zwinglian]

Last Sunday (May 14, 2023) upped the ante concerning Saddleback’s expulsion from the SBC by ordaining a woman in one their satellite churches in defiance of SBC constitution.

Warren states, “We’re challenging the ruling on behalf of millions of SBC women whose God-given spiritual gifts and leadership skills are being wasted instead of empowered for the Great Commission. We cannot finish the task Jesus gave us with 50% of the church forced to sit on the bench. Great Commission Baptists believe Jesus authorized every woman to go, to make disciples, to baptize and to teach — just as he authorized every man.”

What then are the qualifications for a woman pastor according to Warren? Spiritual gifts and leadership skills. The Holy Spirit gives spiritual gifts to all Christians, but does this mean that children and teenagers can become pastors? Paul disqualifies them as being too young.

Warren also states we must take into account leadership skills. Where is this found in Paul’s qualification listing? Warren is using the modern “CEO” model to replace the Shepard’s qualifications in Scripture. In fact, Warren volitionally rejects Paul’s criteria for the pastoral office and replaced it with his own critieria.

What is the reason why Warren rejects Paul’s qualification criteria for the pastoral office? He uses a “straw man” argument by stating “Now we’re talking about difference of interpretation. Those particular passages—Titus, Timothy, and Corinthians—have hundreds, literally hundreds, of interpretations.”

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.

For further analysis of Warren’s interpretation on the Great Commission see my thread Understanding Rick Warren….4/28/23

 

[HTacianas]

Last Sunday (May 14, 2023) upped the ante concerning Saddleback’s expulsion from the SBC by ordaining a woman in one their satellite churches in defiance of SBC constitution.

Warren states, “We’re challenging the ruling on behalf of millions of SBC women whose God-given spiritual gifts and leadership skills are being wasted instead of empowered for the Great Commission. We cannot finish the task Jesus gave us with 50% of the church forced to sit on the bench. Great Commission Baptists believe Jesus authorized every woman to go, to make disciples, to baptize and to teach — just as he authorized every man.”

What then are the qualifications for a woman pastor according to Warren? Spiritual gifts and leadership skills. The Holy Spirit gives spiritual gifts to all Christians, but does this mean that children and teenagers can become pastors? Paul disqualifies them as being too young.

Warren also states we must take into account leadership skills. Where is this found in Paul’s qualification listing? Warren is using the modern “CEO” model to replace the Shepard’s qualifications in Scripture. In fact, Warren volitionally rejects Paul’s criteria for the pastoral office and replaced it with his own critieria.

What is the reason why Warren rejects Paul’s qualification criteria for the pastoral office? He uses a “straw man” argument by stating “Now we’re talking about difference of interpretation. Those particular passages—Titus, Timothy, and Corinthians—have hundreds, literally hundreds, of interpretations.”

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.

For further analysis of Warren’s interpretation on the Great Commission see my thread Understanding Rick Warren….4/28/23

...just as he authorized every man.”

Actually I would challenge him on that statement. Jesus did not authorize every man to "go and make disciples". He authorized his apostles to "go and make disciples".

 

[BobRyan]

We are all called to make disciples of Christ as we see in Matt 28 and to teach others all that Christ has taught us.

If a 10 year old could do such evangelism I would say "go for it". The focus in Matt 28 is on evangelism - not gender.

Having said that - I have a few other areas where I do not fully agree with Rick Warren - but I do agree that everyone is called to evangelize.

 

[prodromos]

...just as he authorized every man.”

Actually I would challenge him on that statement. Jesus did not authorize every man to "go and make disciples". He authorized his apostles to "go and make disciples".

1 Corinthians 12:29-30
Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?

 

[Clare73]

...just as he authorized every man.”

Actually I would challenge him on that statement. Jesus did not authorize every man to "go and make disciples". He authorized his apostles to "go and make disciples".

Are all evangelists. . .or just some? (Eph 4:11).

That Christians are to share the gospel has come to mean that all are evangelists.

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

That Christians are to share the gospel has come to mean that all are evangelists.

Agreed. There are two different schools of thought on this matter. One says the Great Commission was only given to the Apostles, and from the Apostles by extension to all Christians. The other school says, the Great Commission was given to all Christians. I believe the latter is a better explanation.

In solving this, we must try and figure out where Jesus gave the great commission. I believe Jesus gave the commission at the Mountain in Galilee. This is presumably where Paul states that over 500 people saw the risen Christ. In all three synoptics, Jesus or an angel informs the women. ‘He is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see Him, just as He told you.’” Why Galilee?

• Far way from from the Jewish Power structure of the Temple.
• Jewish followers of Jesus probably would not have permitted to assemble in Judea.
• The disciples could move about within relative safety among their family relatives.
• Jesus spent most of his three year ministry time in Galilee.
• Depending on definition and context about 34-36 out of Jesus 39 miracles in Galilee.
• Exceedingly high number of people knew of Jesus was compared to Judea. Feeding of the 4,000 and 5,000 as examples.
• 500 witnesses of the resurrection were needed due to the fact Jesus predicted and anticipated the disciples’ persecution and deaths.

The passage of Scripture that nails were Jesus gave the Great Commission is from Matthew 28:16-18 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me."

Who were the ones who doubted? Certainly not the Apostles, as the resurrected Jesus appeared to them many times over 40 days. I believe the ones who doubted were some of the 500 witnesses gathered at the Mountain where Jesus verified his resurrection.

The fact that Matthew mentions some people doubted, argues against the theory that any of the 500 seeing Jesus was simply a hallucination born of a desperate desire to see Him.

 

[Clare73]

Agreed. There are two different schools of thought on this matter. One says the Great Commission was only given to the Apostles, and from the Apostles by extension to all Christians. The other school says, the Great Commission was given to all Christians. I believe the latter is a better explanation.

How does Eph 4:11 fit in?

In solving this, we must try and figure out where Jesus gave the great commission. I believe Jesus gave the commission at the Mountain in Galilee. This is presumably where Paul states that over 500 people saw the risen Christ. In all three synoptics, Jesus or an angel informs the women. ‘He is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see Him, just as He told you.’” Why Galilee?

• Far way from from the Jewish Power structure of the Temple.
• Jewish followers of Jesus probably would not have permitted to assemble in Judea.
• The disciples could move about within relative safety among their family relatives.
• Jesus spent most of his three year ministry time in Galilee.
• Depending on definition and context about 34-36 out of Jesus 39 miracles in Galilee.
• Exceedingly high number of people knew of Jesus was compared to Judea. Feeding of the 4,000 and 5,000 as examples.
• 500 witnesses of the resurrection were needed due to the fact Jesus predicted and anticipated the disciples’ persecution and deaths.

The passage of Scripture that nails were Jesus gave the Great Commission is from Matthew 28:16-18 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me."

Who were the ones who doubted? Certainly not the Apostles, as the resurrected Jesus appeared to them many times over 40 days. I believe the ones who doubted were some of the 500 witnesses gathered at the Mountain where Jesus verified his resurrection.

The fact that Matthew mentions some people doubted, argues against the theory that any of the 500 seeing Jesus was simply a hallucination born of a desperate desire to see Him.

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

How does Eph 4:11 fit in?

Within the wider context of the NT, I take Eph 4:11 vocationally as professional offices within the NT church. Some evangelists would be professional evangelists like Phillip. Barnabas would be another example. All Christians have vocations, some multiple vocations such as mother, wife, teacher etc. but not all are professional offices. Billy Graham would be an example of a professional evangelist. Modern Christian apologists....are another example of professional evangelists....and you don't have to have a "call" to peruse that.

We have no statements that all 500 were to become like Phillip, but probably some did. After Jesus appearance, many went back home and continued with their previous vocations...at minimum being evangelists to their children, extended family etc. We all are called wherever and whenever in our station and vocation in life "to give an answer for the hope that is within us."

The office of evangelist seemed to die out in the Second and Third century and what emerged was the office of Pastor-teacher. John Bunyan (Pilgrim's Progress) is representative of the re-emergence of the professional evangelist. He was thrown in jail because he didn't have a license to preach. After his death, evangelism as a vocation became common place.

 

[The Liturgist]

Are all evangelists. . .or just some? (Eph 4:11).

That Christians are to share the gospel has come to mean that all are evangelists.

That is correct, which is why we find the country of Georgia evangelized by St. Nino, an Armenian princess.

However, being an evangelist is not equivalent to being a presbyter or deacon or bishop.

Now, whereas in the portions of the mainline churches that have female presbyters where the parishioners desire female clergy, I cannot oppose them, and furthermore I think all churches ought to have deaconesses, because the canons of the Ecumenical Councils and the Apostolic Canons refer to them. However, in those churches without female clergy, where the risk exists that a schism could be caused by their introduction, and especially where ordination is counted as a sacrament (in the Orthodox, Old Catholic, Roman Catholic, Assyrian and some continuing Anglo Catholic churches, I am opposed to it, because in these cases the risk of schism over the Pauline qualifications is too great, and there already exist denominations which do ordain women as a matter of course.

I am concerned that Rick Warren is trying to stir up some kind of ill advised reformation of the SBC, which is still recovering from a series of scandals such as the sex abuse scandal, and his actions are needlessly reckless, although I doubt he will cause any substantial trouble. Clearly what he should have done, however, was to join the mainline American Baptist Convention and not make a fuss.

 

[tall73]

That is correct, which is why we find the country of Georgia evangelized by St. Nino, an Armenian princess.

However, being an evangelist is not equivalent to being a presbyter or deacon or bishop.

He does seem to be mixing two different issues. All believers are to strive together for the faith of the gospel.

Philippians 1:27 Only let your conduct be worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear of your affairs, that you stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel, 28 and not in any way terrified by your adversaries, which is to them a proof of perdition, but [f]to you of salvation, and that from God.

There are diversities of Gifts, and all are called as part of the body to minister as the Spirit enables.

I Corinthians 12:11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills.

However, whichever ones position on women's ordination, the discussion over qualifications for overseers, etc. is a more focused one.

 

[The Liturgist]

Within the wider context of the NT, I take Eph 4:11 vocationally as professional offices within the NT church. Some evangelists would be professional evangelists like Phillip. Barnabas would be another example. All Christians have vocations, some multiple vocations such as mother, wife, teacher etc. but not all are professional offices. Billy Graham would be an example of a professional evangelist. Modern Christian apologists....are another example of professional evangelists....and you don't have to have a "call" to peruse that.

We have no statements that all 500 were to become like Phillip, but probably some did. After Jesus appearance, many went back home and continued with their previous vocations...at minimum being evangelists to their children, extended family etc. We all are called wherever and whenever in our station and vocation in life "to give an answer for the hope that is within us."

The office of evangelist seemed to die out in the Second and Third century and what emerged was the office of Pastor-teacher. John Bunyan (Pilgrim's Progress) is representative of the re-emergence of the professional evangelist. He was thrown in jail because he didn't have a license to preach. After his death, evangelism as a vocation became common place.

While I hate to disagree with you, the fact is that there are two extremely prominent fourth century evangelists, St. Gregory the Illuminator, who was also a pastor-teacher, to be sure, but also St. Nino, an Armenian princess whose country was evangelized by St. Gregory the Illuminator and who then herself proceeded to convert the Kingdom of Kart’velli, the largest of the Georgian nations, which resulted in Georgia being either the third or fourth country to convert to Christianity, for if we omit the city state of the Kingdom of Edessa, the first to convert was Armenia, then the Roman Empire (which was in a sense evangelized by St. Helena, the Christian mother of Emperor St. Constantine, whose influence no doubt helped him to know the meaning of, and accept, his God-given vision of the cross and the Chi-Ro symbol with the voice “In this sign you shall conquer”, which proved true, and then Georgia and Ethiopia, which converted around the time, with St. Frumentius being influential in the evangelization of Ethiopia, also known as Abyssinia.

Centuries later, we find more obvious evangelists, in particular, Saints Cyril and Methodius, who developed a standardized Slavic dialect which would be broadly mutially intelligible, Old Church Slavonic, a derivative of which, Church Slavonic, remains the primary liturgical language of the Serbian, Montenegrin and Macedonian churches directly evangelized by the aforementioned saints, written in the derivative of the Greek alphabet developed by St. Cyril with optimizations for Slavonic use, and also the Russians, Ukrainians, Belarussians and Bulgarians, and I believe some Polish Orthodox parishes also use it, as well as many Carpatho-Rusyn or Ruthenian churches, whether Byzantine Catholic or Orthodox.

 

[bbbbbbb]

...just as he authorized every man.”

Actually I would challenge him on that statement. Jesus did not authorize every man to "go and make disciples". He authorized his apostles to "go and make disciples".

Therefore, at the death of the twelve apostles, it was no longer permitted for anyone to "go and make disciples". Thus, the gates of hell prevailed against the church, as well-intentioned Christians willfully rejected Christ's crystal-clear commandment to His apostles.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Within the wider context of the NT, I take Eph 4:11 vocationally as professional offices within the NT church. Some evangelists would be professional evangelists like Phillip. Barnabas would be another example. All Christians have vocations, some multiple vocations such as mother, wife, teacher etc. but not all are professional offices. Billy Graham would be an example of a professional evangelist. Modern Christian apologists....are another example of professional evangelists....and you don't have to have a "call" to peruse that.

We have no statements that all 500 were to become like Phillip, but probably some did. After Jesus appearance, many went back home and continued with their previous vocations...at minimum being evangelists to their children, extended family etc. We all are called wherever and whenever in our station and vocation in life "to give an answer for the hope that is within us."

The office of evangelist seemed to die out in the Second and Third century and what emerged was the office of Pastor-teacher. John Bunyan (Pilgrim's Progress) is representative of the re-emergence of the professional evangelist. He was thrown in jail because he didn't have a license to preach. After his death, evangelism as a vocation became common place.

Does your church employ professional prophets?

 

[HTacianas]

Therefore, at the death of the twelve apostles, it was no longer permitted for anyone to "go and make disciples". Thus, the gates of hell prevailed against the church, as well-intentioned Christians willfully rejected Christ's crystal-clear commandment to His apostles.

Actually, no. The apostles chose their successors and their successors chose men to carry on the great commission.

1Co 12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

1Co 12:29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?

 

[bbbbbbb]

Actually, no. The apostles chose their successors and their successors chose men to carry on the great commission.

1Co 12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

1Co 12:29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?

A wooden reading of the actual text actually can be (and has been) understood to have been the direct commandment of Jesus Christ to the eleven apostles (neither Matthias nor Paul were apostles at that point) and nobody else. If one believes that "all that I command you" includes participation in the great commission, then there is no condition, other than believing the gospel and being baptized, which would prevent anyone's engagement in the great commission.

 

[The Liturgist]

Therefore, at the death of the twelve apostles, it was no longer permitted for anyone to "go and make disciples". Thus, the gates of hell prevailed against the church, as well-intentioned Christians willfully rejected Christ's crystal-clear commandment to His apostles.

Well, that’s a novel interpretation, which is problematic enough, and it also makes no sense, since you are saying that every Christian missionary since that time has sinned. Note that Dr. James Kennedy, the greatest Presbyterian of recent years and an ardent admirer of John Knox, whose own Reformed Calvinist credentials are unassailable, did interpret evangelization as disciple-making, and referred to the laity as disciples in his preaching.

Basically, the idea of a Great Apostasy is unsupportable, and John Calvin himself was very into Patristics and historically Reformed theologians have greatly valued the consensus patrum (this Latin phrase being of Calvinist origins). In contrast, the idea of the Great Apostasy originated within the Restorationist movement and entered into the fundamentalist side of the Reformed movement via osmosis, perhaps involving John Nelson Darby and the Plymouth Brethren, whose doctrine included both Reformed and Restorationist elements (which is also the case in the Stone/Campbell movement and some Baptist churches).

 

[The Liturgist]

A wooden reading of the actual text actually can be (and has been) understood to have been the direct commandment of Jesus Christ to the eleven apostles (neither Matthias nor Paul were apostles at that point) and nobody else.

Such a “wooden reading” is not widely held; indeed I come across it extremely scarcely even in conversation with Restorationists who utterly reject Alexandrian hermeneutics.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Such a “wooden reading” is not widely held; indeed I come across it extremely scarcely even in conversation with Restorationists who utterly reject Alexandrian hermeneutics.

I agree. It is extraordinarily rare and IMO quite bizarre.

 

[The Liturgist]

Does your church employ professional prophets?

The argument you seem to be making with that question, that is, if a church employs professional teachers, presbyters, deacons and evangelists, therefore it must employ professional prophets, is both a non sequitur but more importantly a fallacy of composition, in that just because some charisms are vocational, does not mean that all charisms are vocational. In the case of prophecy, in this age we mainly encounter this among elderly Orthodox monks and nuns, such as some of the more renowned Hesychasts on Mount Athos, and among Coptic Orthodox monks. I have only seen clairvoyance and speaking in tongues among Coptic and Eastern Orthodox monks, but I assume it exists among other Oriental Orthodox monastics, and also in the Roman Catholic and Anglican monasteries and among the hierarchs of the Assyrian Church of the East and the Ancient Church of the East.

 

[bbbbbbb]

The argument you seem to be making with that question, that is, if a church employs professional teachers, presbyters, deacons and evangelists, therefore it must employ professional prophets, is both a non sequitur but more importantly a fallacy of composition, in that just because some charisms are vocational, does not mean that all charisms are vocational. In the case of prophecy, in this age we mainly encounter this among elderly Orthodox monks and nuns, such as some of the more renowned Hesychasts on Mount Athos, and among Coptic Orthodox monks. I have only seen clairvoyance and speaking in tongues among Coptic and Eastern Orthodox monks, but I assume it exists among other Oriental Orthodox monastics, and also in the Roman Catholic and Anglican monasteries and among the hierarchs of the Assyrian Church of the East and the Ancient Church of the East.

AintZwinglian wrote, "Within the wider context of the NT, I take Eph 4:11 vocationally as professional offices within the NT church."

He then went on to explain the professional role of evangelists. The problem with his exegesis is that the passage lists various other gifts to the church, including prophets. If one is consistent in asserting the professional role of evangelists then one must, perforce, include all of the gifts as being professional individuals.

If one is a cessationist, then this argument is moot because all spiritual gifts have ceased. This argument is based on the extremely vague statement in I Corinthians 13:10 "but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away."

If however, one is a continuationist, then one must not only provide historic evidence of a continuation of all of the spiritual gifts, but also provide proof of their active usage in the present day.

Most Christians seem to adhere to a partial view, retaining some gifts, but rejecting others. Among the others would be what are called "sign gifts" such as tongues or healing. IMO an artificial dichotomy is needed to sustain this view. Another form of this dichotomy would be to divide the spiritual gifts of Ephesian 4 into those of the Old Testament, such as prophecy (as if no prophecy was generated in the New Testament) and those of the Church such as evangelism.

This is conundrum for many Christians without an easy resolution.