"From the Davos World Economic Forum, Rick Warren describes how private, government and faith sectors (Drucker's 3-legged stool) can tackle the global giants of poverty, AIDS, corruption illiteracy, disease, and spiritual emptiness. Rick Warren use the word THEM to describe the people of faith.
But who are the "WE" in Warren's comments? Plainly, the "WE" consists of the global movers and shakers of the World Economic Forum. Warren also tells the audience of his membership on the Council on Foreign Relations. Could the "WE" Warren refers to in this video clip refer to the global elite with whom he associates?
Here's the highlights of the clip below..
- The global faith sector plays an integral part of the "3-legged stool " of global social change
- Houses of worship have Universal Distribution: Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims and Christians represent 5/6 of the world's population. If you take "people of faith" out of the equation you rule out 5/6 of the people on the earth. "WE" are in more locations than the United Nations, "WE" speak more languages, "WE" are in a thousand more people groups than the United Nations. "WE" have to mobilize these faith groups to work together on these unsolvable issues.
- WE have the biggest manpower and WE don't have to pay THEM... THEY have local credibility...people trust the priest, pastor iman and rabbi, the religious leaders of their faith. Government and nations come and go, but the CHURCH has a 2000 year track record.
What WE need to do here at Davos (World Economic Forum), WE WE need to work on a three legged stool...WE haven't solved these problems before because WE have to have the public, private and faith sectors to solve these things.
Frankly, I don't care why you do good as long as you do good. You may have a political, profit, or personal motivation to do something now about the problems of the world."
13 comments:
3:45 seconds in and Jesus finally gets an honorable mention. Granted, it was only for a proof text, but he does mention Him.
I would be interested how Pastor Rick's would interpret 2 Corinthians 6:14.
Perhaps he could crack his Bible open once in a while when he is on those long flights to Davos, the UN or the Council on Foreign Relations.
Count me out, Pastor Rick. I don't want to be a part of your 5/6 group that works for free to usher in YOUR new (purpose driven) world order.
Yes! Rick Warren is the antichrist. Along, of course, with all emergents...and Armenians...and Willow Creek-ites...and, well, you get the picture.
Gruggy:
You proceed from a false premise, I think. The presumption being that he really is unequally yoked...
John 17:14:
"I have given them your word; and the world has hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world."
The "world" loves him. Either Jesus was lying or he (Warren) is simply working with his own kind.
Tim - Very good point. I stand corrected. Perhaps I was giving Rick Warren the benefit of the doubt.
Billy - I think that you missed the point. Rick Warren's plan may be "humanitarian", but let's not call it a Christian endeavor.
Gruggy:
Nah. Meant more as a friendly nudge than a correction.
He does send off all the wrong signals though.
Actually, I should have quoted from John 15, especially verse 19:
"18 If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you. 19 If you were of the world, the world would love its own. But because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. 20 Remember the word that I said to you, The servant is not greater than his master. If they have persecuted Me, they will also persecute you."
Tim and Gruggy,
All castigating aside, do you folks honestly believe Rick Warren is not a believer?
Billy - I didn't say nor mean to infer that Rick Warren isn't a believer. I'm just wondering if he is missing his opportunity to preach the gospel message.
Blessings,
Don
The thrust isn't what "I think" or "I believe" about Rick Warren, as philanthropic as he is (and whatever his motives may be, good or bad). It's "Do I believe what the Bible says". Jesus was pretty clear on this. Again, reference the scriptures in my previous post:
"18 If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you. 19 If you were of the world, the world would love its own. But because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. 20 Remember the word that I said to you, The servant is not greater than his master. If they have persecuted Me, they will also persecute you."
As much as I'd like to not have to deal with the hard sayings of Jesus, I chose to believe God's Word. Either Jesus was telling the truth, or He wasn't.
I believe He was.
Gruggy,
Thanks for the clarification. I understand where you are coming from.
Tim,
I know that you don't believe that the John 15 passage is the singular plumb line for whether a person is a believer or not, but your continued appeal to that causes me to think that you are so averse to anything Rick Warren, emergent, Willow Creek, or PDL that you gave such a narrow - and in my opnion, flippant reply.
If that were the only plumb line, then we could conclude Hitler and Sadaam and bin Laden were saved - clearly, they are hated by the world.
I know that's not what you believe. So again, I ask you, "Do you honestly think Rick Warren is not a believer - based on the totality of Scripture as it deals with being a follower of Christ?"
Billy:
You have my answer. You can deduce it from my previous posts in this thread. It is not a flippant one.
As I previously mentioned (did you not read it?) I did say "He does send off the wrong signals".
Furthermore, I would suggest you consider your statement as flippant...unless, of course, you are suggesting that Hitler, et. al, were persecuted for the sake of the Gospel and the name of Jesus???
You've posted here before, and our "discussions" were nothing more than fruitless. I ended up banning you for a while, hoping you might learn some thoughtfulness and tact.
My sole question for you is, are you allowed to question Rick Warren...Is it permissible to question his philosophy of ministry or methods?
I would suggest that you listen to Bob DeWaay's series on "Redefining Christianity", the segments of which are being posted here.
Actually, this is the only "discussion" we've ever had. You never responded to me before. As to your "banning" me from published comments, perhaps I did learn some tact and thoughtfulness, perhaps not. I'll leave that to you.
Of course you, I, anybody, can challenge Rick Warren, his methods, his beliefs, whatever. I do question things from him. But I am wondering, "Is it OK to question Tim Brown?"
Since you believe Warren is lost, why is it that you have such disdain for him? Don't we have the obligation from our Lord to have compassion and pray for those who are lost?
I've never responded to you before, or at least TRIED to discuss things with you before?
Actually, his memory seems to be a tad short.
During the time I disallowed your posts, your kicking and whining intensified. After you had left a while, I had (apparently misplaced hopes) that you had mellowed.
I do still have your submitted comments, if you'd like me to post them as an example of what your "discussion" is like...they are rather venomous.
Yes, I'm willing to discuss what I believe - - - with someone who can hold a mature conversation. From what I've seen elsewhere and experienced here, that seems not to be true in your case. Does a rebuke from Ken Silva ring a bell?
As far as why I have disdain for Warren, he is a false teacher. We are to separate our selves from them.
Pray for them? Sure! And I pray he wakes up before it is too late, if it isn't too late already. Otherwise the Scriptures teach us to be separate. The scripture also tell us to "mark those" who are false teachers...we don't buddy up to them.
If you check the rules of this blog, perhaps you'll notice the last rule in the list, which is "Don't expect me to mud wrestle with you on my own blog."
If you are in such violent disagreement with me, you can post something at your own blog about your problem with my point of view.You can exercise all the control you want there.
But it won't work here.
Post a Comment