Why is "The Purpose Driven Life" so popular?

[jubilationtcornpone]

Why in the world is this book so popular? Its exegesis is slipshod and its lessons are elementary at best. The gospel presentation that it provides is sloppy and incomplete -- promising salvation without first emphasizing the penalty of our sins, for example, and giving only light treatment to the necessity of repentance.

So why is this book so popular? I can understand how laypeople might miss some of the subtle points in this book -- heck, many of them were by no means obvious to me at first glance. However, even pastors with formal theological training seem to be easily caught up in this fad. Why?

 

[charityagape]

I've never read the book, but I recently read an article on Rick Warren that makes me want to go read it, because I believe actions speak a lot louder than words.

Newsweek (july 3-10, 2006)What's described in the article is a very good (IMHO) picture of how the church could be at its best.

Some points:

-From his income as an author he's retroactivily paid back his salary to the church for the last 25 years.

-He reverse tithes, giving away 90 percent and living on 10 percent.

-Quote from the article:" If, 2.3 billion people in the world claim to be followers of Jesus, "then why not take the next step and mobilize those people to do important things, like stop poverty, improve literacy, feed the hungry, heal the sick? Conventional relief organizations are fine, but why not tap what Warren calls 'the faith sector', the armies of motivated religious volunteers who are sick and tired of polarizing rhetoric and professional crusaders?"

-".... in today's global and wired world, troops of caring volunteers can be deployed to communities in need with the push of a button. Such was the case on Christmas 2004, when Warren, awake and online at 4:30am received news of a massive underwater earthquake via e-mail from a pastor in Sri Lanka. Warren who has an e-mail list of 200,000 pastors worldwide, notified churches in Thailand and Indonesia, that immediately mobilized volunteers to tsuami disaster sites."

-He's also launched a plan called "PEACE", in which small groups of church members choose a remote village that needs help, travel there and provide aid (water sterilization, etc)

 

[Tonks]

Because it peddles a version of Christianity that makes people simply "feel good." Then again, I have a rather dim view of the WoF movement.

 

[Maccie]

Because its warm, fuzzy and bite-sized Christianity.

And he twists the Scriptures to suit his purpose. And some of his examples really only refer to affluent, southern Californian happily married couples.

 

[JJB]

It's non-threatening; requires nothing of you; keeps you busy; if you disagree with it, you're booted out of your church. Naysayers cannot remain in PDL churches -- Warren also gives a "plan" for those who disagree and how to shove them out.

Did you know Mr. Warren was invited to go to N. Korea? Is Kim Jong Il really going to let Warren preach the gospel, when Il teaches his own people that he is a god to be worshipped?

 

[calmcoolandelected]

It's non-threatening; requires nothing of you; keeps you busy; if you disagree with it, you're booted out of your church. Naysayers cannot remain in PDL churches -- Warren also gives a "plan" for those who disagree and how to shove them out.

Did you know Mr. Warren was invited to go to N. Korea? Is Kim Jong Il really going to let Warren preach the gospel, when Il teaches his own people that he is a god to be worshipped?

I haven't read PDL. I have read the Bible and Jesus said, "Let him deny himself, and take up his cross and follow me" (Mark 8:34).

CC&E

 

[jubilationtcornpone]

When Warren said that God "always" used 40 days to prepare his people, I cringed. I think that if we stop to think about it, this definitely sounds like an overly broad claim.

He said that God used 40 days of rain to prepare Noah. Now, I can understand how a layperson might gloss over that remark; however, any pastor worth his salt should recognize that this isn't true. The 40 days of rain occurred AFTER Noah had already been chosen by God due to his righteousness! What's more, it occurred after Noah had spent about 70 years building the Ark! Noah was prepared long before the 40 days in question.

These are just some examples of how Rick Warren plays fast and loose with the Scriptures. It seems like he starts off with a message in mind, and then picks passages (typically from a paraphrased version of the Bible) that seem to support his view.

Does that concur with your observations? Do any other examples come to mind?

 

[Maccie]

These are just some examples of how Rick Warren plays fast and loose with the Scriptures. It seems like he starts off with a message in mind, and then picks passages (typically from a paraphrased version of the Bible) that seem to support his view.

Those are exactly my own thoughts! Though I was nearly drummed out of the church for saying that!

 

[kingisjesus]

Why in the world is this book so popular? Its exegesis is slipshod and its lessons are elementary at best. The gospel presentation that it provides is sloppy and incomplete -- promising salvation without first emphasizing the penalty of our sins, for example, and giving only light treatment to the necessity of repentance.

So why is this book so popular? I can understand how laypeople might miss some of the subtle points in this book -- heck, many of them were by no means obvious to me at first glance. However, even pastors with formal theological training seem to be easily caught up in this fad. Why?

Because many in the churches have iching ears.

Most want to hear only what they want.
When we hear what we want, we become happy and believe it is from God.

"{2 Timothy 4}
3For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a
great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
4They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to
myths. 5But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship,
do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your
ministry."

 

[Celticflower]

Our church did the PDL thing a year or so ago, and, luckily, no one seems to have taken it too seriously. No one was kicked out for disagreeing with it and no one was forced to attend to the classes.

I agree with the others who have said it is popular because it is easy and non-threatening in its presentation of the Gospel. It is easy to read, easy to understand and easy to do. It is also easy to forget.
In a lot of ways it is a very watered down treatment of what I learned being raised in a Methodist church -but the church placed more emphasis on the Bible (one translation, not multiples) and the whole sin/repentence/grace/Christ package.

 

[kingisjesus]

When Warren said that God "always" used 40 days to prepare his people, I cringed. I think that if we stop to think about it, this definitely sounds like an overly broad claim.

Took Paul 3 1/2 years to be prepared. Guess God made a mistake. Either that or Warren is filled with false teaching and pushing his own version of Humanistic Christianity. I would guess the latter.

 

[SumTinWong]

Because it peddles a version of Christianity that makes people simply "feel good." Then again, I have a rather dim view of the WoF movement.

Although I agree with the first part of your post the second part is incorrect, as Warren is not associated with the WoF movement in any way.

 

[rosewaning]

My major problems with this book (in addition to the choppy use of scripture) are

a) he doesn't acknowledge that there is an eternal punishment for sin and a need for us to repent. He doesn't place any emphasis on the fact that Jesus died on the cross for us, and why He did it, rather sticks to the thesis that because we were created, that God will welcome us with open arms, regardless of how we live our lives. He suggests that we can build a relationship with Christ without confessing and repenting of our sins. This is false, obviously, especially when the bible states that it is our sin (not a lack of purpose) that distances us from God.

b) his use of the bible and his thesis seem to support the absense of an absolute truth in scripure.

c) He states that the worst thing possible is a life without purpose. This, he states, is the only thing worse than death. The only thing worse than death is dying without Christ. Anyone can have a life with purpose, and never know about Jesus (or even reject Him outright). Any "christian" book that encourages taking the focus off of Jesus' sacrifice for our sake and our desparate need for Him, and place it on ourselves can hardly be considered sound, at least in my opinion.

 

[calmcoolandelected]

My major problems with this book (in addition to the choppy use of scripture) are

a) he doesn't acknowledge that there is an eternal punishment for sin and a need for us to repent. He doesn't place any emphasis on the fact that Jesus died on the cross for us, and why He did it, rather sticks to the thesis that because we were created, that God will welcome us with open arms, regardless of how we live our lives. He suggests that we can build a relationship with Christ without confessing and repenting of our sins. This is false, obviously, especially when the bible states that it is our sin (not a lack of purpose) that distances us from God.

b) his use of the bible and his thesis seem to support the absense of an absolute truth in scripure.

c) He states that the worst thing possible is a life without purpose. This, he states, is the only thing worse than death. The only thing worse than death is dying without Christ. Anyone can have a life with purpose, and never know about Jesus (or even reject Him outright). Any "christian" book that encourages taking the focus off of Jesus' sacrifice for our sake and our desparate need for Him, and place it on ourselves can hardly be considered sound, at least in my opinion.

CC&E

 

[Melethiel]

Because it's watered-down and feel-good warm fuzzy pop Christianity. It's SO much easier to look for your "purpose," whatever that is, than to take up your cross daily.

 

[scandinavian19]

.It's non-threatening; requires nothingof you; keeps you busy; if you disagree withit, you're booted out of your church.Naysayers cannot remain in PDL churches --Warren also gives a "plan" for those whodisagree and how to shove them out

Being subject to not questioning their doctrine by disagreeing seems to be seting a slippery precedent and appears to be similar tactics used by others.

It is no longer the message which are allowed to be examined or the messengers who teach them for fear of reprisal, rather by not allowing disagreements, is like embracing doctrinal subversiveness.

These messages no longer adhere to what is true but rather say that doctrinal differences are not only divisive but the next level of progression suggests that by defending doctrine or questioning their motives may be considered hate speech.

A reason why its so popular is because:

II Timothy 4:3-5: 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, 4 and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths. 5 But you, be sober in all things, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry

Jude 1:4 “For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.”

 

[ksen]

Why in the world is this book so popular? Its exegesis is slipshod and its lessons are elementary at best. The gospel presentation that it provides is sloppy and incomplete -- promising salvation without first emphasizing the penalty of our sins, for example, and giving only light treatment to the necessity of repentance.

So why is this book so popular? I can understand how laypeople might miss some of the subtle points in this book -- heck, many of them were by no means obvious to me at first glance. However, even pastors with formal theological training seem to be easily caught up in this fad. Why?

Babies like milk......unfortunately this isn't even healthy milk.

 

[jubilationtcornpone]

Being subject to not questioning their doctrine by disagreeing seems set a slippery precedent and appears to be similar tactics used by others.

It is no longer the message which are allowed to be examined or the messengers who teach them for fear of reprisal, rather by not allowing disagreements, is like embracing doctrinal subversiveness.

These messages no longer adhere to what is true but rather say that doctrinal differences are not only divisive but the next level of progression suggests that by defending doctrine or questioning their motives may be considered hate speech.

Interestingly enough, in The Purpose Driven Church, Rick Warren also recommends that churches have their people sign a "membership covenant." Now, I don't have a problem with covenants per se; however, the very first point in his covenant declares, "I will protect the unity of my church: by acting in love toward other members, by refusing to gossip, by following the leaders." Protecting unity is fine, but only up to a point. When "unity" is attained by "following the leaders" (without any manner of condition or qualification), then that is not true Biblical unity.

I have similar concerns about the "refusing to gossip" line. Of course, we should avoid gossip; however, based on the overall tenor of his books (as well as my observations regarding "purpose-driven" churches), I get the feeling that he would consider any privately voiced objections to the "purpose-driven" program to be gossip. (I can't prove that, and so I say this cautiously, but that would certainly be consistent with his overall push toward "unity" and his light treatment of doctrine.)

 

[jubilationtcornpone]

Although I agree with the first part of your post the second part is incorrect, as Warren is not associated with the WoF movement in any way.

Well, he doesn't formally affiliate himself with the Word of Faith movement; however, he did participate in the 100th anniversary of the so-called "Azusa Street Revival"--an event that was headlined by such prominent Word of Faithers as Benny Hinn, T.D. Jakes, Kenneth Copeland, and Creflo Dollar. Not the sort of company that I'd care to keep, frankly.

 

[charityagape]

So called "Azuza Street Revival"??