It is no secret that Rick Warren has many critics (see my articles page, under Rick Warren). One organization that has been particularly zealous in their attacks on Warren has been the Lighthouse Trails Research Project, headed up by Deborah and Dave Dombrowski, whose "discernment" ministry is focused primarily on exposing the errors of the contemplative prayer movement and any New Age-associated persons, groups, and teachings.

Their so-called "research" into various issues, most especially Rick Warren, leaves much to be desired. Most of their material is rife with logic leaps, baseless assumption, pre-conceived ideas, religious prejudice, faulty reasoning, misinformation, disinformation, guilt by association, half-truths, and distorted pictures of Warren that they have created out of an agenda to tar and feather him as a New Age deceiver, or at the very least, a false teacher who has been deceived by the New Age and is spreading spiritual poison throughout the church.

Warren, according to their perspective, is just another part of an insidious New Age conspiracy to take over everything in these end-times (for more information on the mindset of those obsessed with the end-times, see my book End-Time Visions: The Road to Armageddon?). We are witnessing, so they say, the spread of those false teachings that will eventually usher in the Antichrist. And the Dombrowskis, through their Lighthouse Trails "ministry," are prepared to use any and all methods necessary to reveal their take on truth to the world, especially with regard to Rick Warren's role in the deception of the church.

In theory, their cause is an admirable one, esepcially if Rick Warren were indeed a false teacher. But in their zeal to expose the dangers of New Age and its real threats to the Gospel, the Dombrowskis themselves have themselves fallen into grave error.



I submit to the public some personal information at this point in order to demonstrate the kind of individuals who are running Lighthouse Trails. This information not only relates to the credibility of the Dombrowskis, but also raises questions concerning their overall motivation and intentions regarding their ministerial work.

My personal dealings with Lighthouse Trails came about after I posted an alert to an Internet email message network (AR-Talk). It contained criticisms of their  Press Release regarding business leader Ken Blanchard (for information on the Blanchard controversy see this article and this article). In response, Deborah Dombrowski quickly sent a rather threatening email to Harvest House publishers, which was scheduled to release my book on Warren titled Rick Warren and the Purpose that Drives Him (July, 2005). Dombrowski apparently did not like the fact that in my post to AR-Talk, I noted the numerous errors in George Mair's terrifically flawed biography of Warren (unauthorized) titled A Life with Purpose, which was a primary resource Dombrowski used in creating her Press Release.

In her email to Harvest House, Dombrowski first warned the publisher that I was publicly speaking negatively about Mair's book, and then implied that Harvest House might find themselves in trouble along with me should the publisher of Mair's book (Penguin) seek to bring any kind of legal action against me (exactly what Harvest House had to do with my personal posts on AR-Talk was never explained by Dombrowski). She also wanted Harvest House to know that she happened to know that Penguin had somehow been notified of my comments on AR-Talk, but that she had not yet heard whether or not the New York secular publishing house was going to take any legal actions. The questions are obvious:


I believe the answers to all of the above questions are obvious. Nevertheless, despite what I believe was an attempt on the part of Dombrowski to silence me, I submit the following material that represents my corrections to only a small sampling of their "research" errors and baseless anti-Warren innuendos at their Lighthouse Trails Research Project [LTRP] website.

Bear in mind that one of the oddest hallmarks of the Dombrowskis is there absolute unwillingness to to face facts that are presented to them in black and white. By way of illustration, if Rick Warren says he believes A-B-C, they will say he actually believes X-Y-Z. Or if Rick Warren says he waved with his left hand, they will say that he waved with his right hand—contrary to a photo showing him waving with his left hand.

What is also very interesting is how numerous criticisms raised by them are the very same ones that are now being repeated by dozens and dozens of Rick Warren critics—almost verbatim. It seems, therefore, that the Dombrowskis and Lighthouse trails is very likely the source/origin of a number of the ongoing accusations being made against Warren, especially on the Internet.

Of course, it would be utterly impossible to answer point-by-point the truly endless stream of false statements that have so far poured forth out of Lighthouse Trails. Consequently, this article and those linked at the end of this article will deal only with those accusations that seem to be most egregious and widespread. To bring correction to all of the errors and false statements made by the Dombrowskis through Lighthouse Trails would require a full-length book.



LTRP #1: "Don't think for a moment that Rick Warren is not involved with Brian McLaren's emerging church. He is.—"
RESPONSE: Actually, he's not; certainly not in the way the Dombrowski are talking about it.

First, it is not "Brian McLaren's emerging church." The Dombrowskis seem to think that the Emergent Church is a single, monolithic, centralized, institution that has an all-encompassing set of doctrinal beliefs (and church practices) applicable to every church calling itself an Emergent Church, and every leader calling themselves a leader in the movement. But this view is wrong. The Emerging Church movement is an extremely vast, non-regulated, de-centralized and disparate collection of multi-hued churches/people/teachings. Some aspects of the movement are good. Some aspects of it are resoundingly bad/unbiblical.

Second, Warren has never endorsed the Emerging Church movement as a whole, nor has he ever been "involved" with Brian McLaren in the way intimated by the Dombrowskis. Warren has spoken at various places where McLaren also spoke. And Warren was one of many contributors to a book that McLaren also contributed to. With specific regard to the Emerging Church, Warren believes that it is a very important part of what is happening across the Christian landscape, and that it is something everyone needs to watch, both the good parts of it and the bad parts of it.

But contrary to what the Dombrowskis allege, Warren is not "involved" with McLaren. In fact, truth be told, he disagrees with McLaren in many areas. This is evident in the remarks Warren made during my interview with him, which appeared in my book Rick Warren and the Purpose that Dives Him:

Clearly, Warren has reservations about various aspects of the Emerging Church, and also Brian McLaren. This is why he has never fully endorsed everything found within it. But the Dombrowskis have completely dismissed: 1) the actual nature of the Emerging Church as a widely diverse movement; and 2) the actual views of Rick Warren regarding the movement. Warren merely recognizes the Emergent Church as a significant movement that must be considered, watched, dealt with, and encouraged to go in the right direction.


LTRP #2: "[Warren] wrote the foreword (along with Brian McLaren) for Dan Kimball's The Emerging Church."
RESPONSE: Kimball's book was a collaborative volume with several different contributors—a key point that Oakland ignores. It is key because in a compilation book such as The Emerging Church, the material taken from various individuals is usually put together by the publisher, effectively keeping each author fairly ignorant about what is going on at the publishing house. It is common under such circumstances for each author to not see what the other authors involved have written. A person (for example, Rick Warren), is contracted to do a certain piece (like a chapter, commentary, side-bar, or foreword)—and that's it. Then, a year or so later, suddenly, there is the book. Most of it, if not all of it, is new to each individual author (this, of course, is not the case in a book written by a single person).

And I say this as someone who has been a contributing author to four major compilation works (The Kingdom of the Cults [1997 edition, ed. Hank Hanegraaff], Encyclopedia of Race and Racism, Baker's Encyclopedia of Cults and World Religions [not-yet-published], and Abuse Your Illusions: The Disinformation Guide to Media Mirages and Establishment Lies). In all four instances, I never saw anything that the other authors had written. In fact, with regard to Abuse Your Illusions: The Disinformation Guide to Media Mirages and Establishment Lies, four chapters before my chapter on Mormonism and Racism, there is a chapter by ex-Christian pastor Dan Barker, who debunks the resurrection of Jesus and basically says it is a lie! I had no idea that this Barker individual was going to be included in the book, let alone what he was going to say about the resurrection. Does this mean that I now deny the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ and I am an atheist? Hardly.

This seems to be what happened with Warren in connection to Kimball's book The Emerging Church. Warren, in fact, has publicly explained this—and he did it in a letter addressed to none other than Lighthouse Trails: "[T]he more well known a person becomes, the harder it is to stay current with everyone who is using your name for their purposes. For instance, Zondervan publishers asked me to write a commentary on an 'Emerging Church' book, although I am definitely not a part of that group" (Rick Warren, Open Letter to Lighthouse Trails Research Ministry, May 31, 2005).

Furthermore, it must be noted that Warren's foreword in The Emerging Church is in support of the book as being an important contribution to the study of the Emerging Church. It is not necessarily an endorsement of either: a) the Emerging Church as a whole; or b) all aspects of the Emerging Church. In other words, although Warren may think that the Emerging Church is an important thing to be discussed, dealt with, and looked at (via the very book he contributed to), he may not agree with everything being taught in the book or in certain sectors of the Emerging Church. This is obvious from his interview with me (see above excerpt from my interview with Warren).

To make matters worse, Rick Warren himself wrote to Lighthouse Trails, seeking to explain the issues surrounding the book and Brian McLaren's involvement, saying: "[W]hen the book came out—it had my name paired with Brian McLaren's on the cover! If I had known that Mr. McLaren [a more radical leader in the Emerging Church] was asked to be a commentator too, I would have declined, because I have some major disagreements with his views of the so-called 'emerging' movement'" (Warren, Open Letter to Lighthouse Trails Research Ministry, May 31, 2005).

The Dombrowskis have utterly dismissed Warren's attempts to explain exactly what he believes, preferring instead to continue painting him as a supporter of the entire Emergent Church and someone who is "involved" with Brian McLaren.


LTRP #3: "Warren teaches that God 'created the church to meet your five deepest needs' just as the Roman Catholic Church says, 'The Church is the mother of all believers.' Warren, like Rome, has switched from obedience to the Word and Person of the Living God to submission to a church to achieve one's needs. It is the oldest and cleverest temptation known to man."
RESPONSE: This rather bizarre accusation is lifted from "The Adulation of Man in the Purpose-Driven Life," by another anti-Warrenite named Richard Bennett, who is one of Warren's harshest critics. Like the material from Lighthouse Trails, Bennett's writings are littered with errors, half-truths, and outright falsehoods. This particular quote used by Dombrowski is a good example of how Warren's words are twisted.

The phrase quoted by Bennett—"created the church to meet your five deepest needs"—is from Chapter 17 of The Purpose Driven Life. In context, Warren is saying nothing—absolutely nothing—about the "church" becoming a kind of "mother" to all believers (as Roman Catholicism teaches). Warren's chapter (titled "A Place to Belong") is simply discussing how wonderful (and important) it is to find a good home church in which to grow, be active, and belong. As Warren writes on page 133: "Today's culture of independent individualism has created many spiritual orphans—'bunny believers' who hop around from one church to another without any identity, accountability, or commitment."

Warren then lists six reasons for being in a good home church: 1) it identifies you as a believer; 2) it moves you out of self-centered isolation; 3) it helps you grow spiritually; 4) it gives you an opportunity to serve; 5) it provides ways to evangelize; and 6) it helps you in times of temptation so that you can avoid backsliding. (Oddly, none of these reasons were cited by either Bennett or LTRP.) Then comes Warren's statement about how God created the church to "meet your five deepest needs." Bennett and LTRP also fail to note these needs. They are:


This is not very unbiblical, New Age, or Roman Catholic. Also not quoted by either Bennett or LTRP is Warren's conclusion to the section:


There is nothing here that even remotely suggests Warren is trying to make the church a kind of replacement for Christ. Bennett turned something uplifting and godly into something ugly, unbiblical, and sinful—and LTRP is perpetuating it.

Warren's actual position is stated not only in The Purpose Driven Life, but also in his earlier work, The Purpose Driven Church, were he states: "The gospel is about what God has done for us and what we can become in Christ. A personal relationship to Christ is the answer to all of man's deepest needs. The good new offers lost people what they are frantically searching for: forgiveness, freedom, security, purpose, love, acceptance, and strength. It settles our past, assures our future, and gives meaning to today. We have the best news in the world" (pp. 224-225).


LTRP #4: "Rick Warren's use of the paraphrase, The Message, for much of his writings. We bring this to your attention, not because we believe only one version should be used but because we believe too many people are using The Message as a literal translation, which it is not."
RESPONSE: This is an odd comment since it really has nothing to do with Warren. It is apparently a warning to people who mistakenly think The Message is a "literal translation" of the Bible. But Warren nowhere lifts up The Message as a literal translation. In fact, in his appendix of The Purpose Driven Life titled "Why Use So Many Translations?," he clearly states that he employs Bible paraphrases in his book (p. 325). I do not know of any place where Warren has referred to The Message as a translation.


LTRP #5: "Rick Warren's own words: 11 Characteristics of an emerging PD church:
RESPONSE: Here we see a very clever (one might say deceptive) attempt to link PD (purpose driven) churches with the Emerging Church Movement. LTRP convincingly quotes the title of a 2005 article by Warren titled, "11 characteristics of an emerging PD church." But the word emerging in this title is not in reference to the Emerging Church, it is in reference to "emerging" as in beginning, or starting out, or developing. The article is about the 11 characteristics of a PD church as it is beginning to develop. In fact, when one clicks on the article itself (see here), the title just reads "11 characteristics of a PD church." And then, in the article it explains exactly what the word emerging means: "Here are 11 traits you can expect to see emerging as purpose driven principles take hold in a church."


LTRP #6: "Warren, in presenting his gospel, is actually presenting an 'avatar of purpose' who he calls 'the Lord.' (Avatar: 'an embodiment as of a concept or philosophy in a person.') The message is: 'you don't have purpose, but by opening yourself up to a divine design, you can now have purpose for your life.'"
RESPONSE: I rarely, if ever, resort to the kind of language I am about to use, but here goes: This accusation, quoted from Purpose Driven and Divine Design" by yet another anti-Warrenite, is absolutely kooky! The notion that Warren has somehow been using the term "Lord" as little more than a New Age ethereal "Avatar of Purpose" that is a metaphysical embodiment of his purpose driven teachings is . . . well . . . nutty. Forgive my candor. For Rick Warren's teachings on the essentials of the Christian faith and his views regarding salvation, the cross, sin, hell, and repentance, see my two articles Saddleback Church: The Cross, Sin, and Hell and The Doctrinal Essentials of Christianity—and Rick Warren.

---

LTRP #7: "Purpose-Driven pastors are attending Robert Schuller Institute to receive their training" [this remark has been removed, but not before the damage was done].
RESPONSE: I was made aware of this false accusation via an email I received from a Michael J. Meiring, who asked me if the statement was true. I informed him that it was not true. I knew of no purpose driven pastors attending Schuller's Institute for Successful Church Leadership. I suggested that he ask LTRP for names—i.e., a list of the so-called "pastors" that they knew were attending Schuller's Institute. Meiring did just that in an email to LTRP. Lighthouse Trails responded, saying that they actually had no such list of names, but that if they ever did obtain such a list, then they would post it. The questions are obvious:


Apparently, LTRP eventually realized that such an accusation was just too inaccurate to post, and so it was subsequently removed from the LTRP website.


LTRP #8: "'Rick Warren admits that Robert Schuller . . . had a great influence upon him. A man who believes it is wrong to call people sinners, a man who will not try to convert people of different religions influenced Rick Warren!'"
RESPONSE: Warren admits no such thing. In an email to LTRP, Warren specifically noted that the "first time" he even met Schuller was during a 1985 meeting—approximately six years after Warren had already started Saddleback Church. Moreover, with regard to his appearances at Schuller's Institute, he was only there to share his testimony a few times. Warren eventually parted ways with Schuller due to major doctrinal difference. Despite what has been said in the secular and Christian media, Warren has not been "greatly influenced" by Schuller (see my article Warren and Schuller: Debunking An Urban Legend).

It is noteworthy that in the LTRP remark, there is a clear insinuation that Rick Warren, like Schuller, refuses to call people sinners and eschews trying to convert people from other religions. But nothing could be further from the truth. Warren teaches that all people are sinners who need to be saved by grace alone through faith alone. And he does indeed believe that Jesus is the only way of salvation—therefore, people of other religions must be converted in order to be saved (see my two articles Saddleback Church: The Cross, Sin, and Hell and The Doctrinal Essentials of Christianity—and Rick Warren").

Consider the following question-answer exchange that took place during my interview with Warren, which is now published in Rick Warren and the Purpose that Drives Him:


Obviously, LTRP needs to do more research.


LTRP #9: "The Spring '97 Evangelicals Concerned RECORD newsletter [a pro-homosexual organization] said, 'More than 80 gay and lesbian pastors and lay leaders from the Metropolitan Community Churches participated in this year's Robert Schuller Institute for Successful Church Leadership at Schuller's Crystal Cathedral.' The speakers included Bill Hybels, John Maxwell and Rick Warren."
RESPONSE: This kind of attack is commonly known as "guilt by inference." The inference here is that Warren's presence at the conference was some kind of an endorsement of (or at least a tacit acknowledgment of) the gay ministers who were in attendance.

But did Warren know that such persons were present? Where is a statement by Warren even suggesting that he did, in fact, know such persons were present? Where are any quotes by Warren wherein he says that he endorses homosexuality? Is there any evidence that Warren does not condemn homosexuality or that he does not denounce gay ministers as unbiblical?

Contrary to what LTRP implies in this statement, Warren is against homosexuality. In fact, the very same year this conference was held, Warren declared from the pulpit: "Homosexuality is unacceptable to God. It always has been. It always will be" (Warren, "Maintaining Moral Purity," May 25, 1997).

Once more, we see LTRP sorely lacking in their so-called research.


LTRP #10: "'[Rick Warren] and Kay [his wife] drove west to visit Robert Schuller's Institute for Church Growth. Schuller, though, won them over.' Christianity Today"
RESPONSE: This accusation is based on "A Regular Purpose-Driven Guy" (Christianity Today, Nov. 18, 2002). The meaning of this quote has been stated publicly over, and over, and over, and over (see Warren and Schuller: Debunking An Urban Legend). But the Dombrowskis refuse to accept the truth, preferring instead, to keep accusing Warren of being in league with Robert Schuller, or at the very least, being so heavily influenced by Schuller that he teaches nearly the same thing.


LTRP #11: "'Rick Warren was getting most of the publicity, but it seemed that Robert Schuller was really the man of the hour. Christian leaders, Rick Warren and Bruce Wilkinson, both had best-selling books that depended heavily on Schuller material'" [this remark has been removed, but not before the damage was done].
RESPONSE: This is a quote lifted from the extremely flawed book Deceived On Purpose by ex-new ager Warren Smith. The volume is filled with a nearly endless list of: misinterpretations of Warren, out of context quotes, "guilt by association," unwarranted accusations, and slanderous innuendos. The bulk of the text is not even about Rick Warren, but instead, focuses on a slew of false teachers (e.g., Robert Schuller, Donald Neale Walsch, and Marianne Williamson) who are then linked to Warren using very tenuous evidence (see my article Warren Smith: Self-Deceived On Purpose).

The truth is that Warren's book The Purpose Driven Life does not, by any stretch of the imagination, rely "heavily" on Schuller. The only thing from Schuller that shows up in Warren's bestseller are a few pithy Schullerisms relating to observations about life: e.g., "You need hope to cope." Similarly, Schuller wrote in 1982: "[W]ithout hope we will lose the faith that we can cope" (Schuller, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, p. 19). Such innocuous remarks, however, have nothing to do with any major Christian doctrine or essentials of the faith.


LTRP #12: "And there's Rick Warren, a pastor who today is phenomenal. He came to our institute time after time. . . . How God has blessed him. And today Rick Warren is blessing millions of people [LTRP quoting Robert Schuller]."
RESPONSE: There is plenty of documentation indicating that Rick Warren has never been, and refuses now t be, connected with Robert Schuller (see Warren and Schuller: Debunking an Urban Legend). Consequently, it is my personal  opinion that Schuller knows a good thing when he sees it. And when it comes to power/influence, Warren is a good thing. Schuller, it seems, wants his church to ride Warren's coattails, so to speak. And in his mind, he is able to sort of push that agenda because: a) Warren did indeed visit his church while at seminary; and b) Warren did give his testimony at Schuller's Leadership Institute during the early years when Warren's church was growing. But that is the extent of their contact.

For many years now, Sculler has been nagging Warren to come back and speak at his church. Warren has kept telling Schuller no, no, no, no (I document these interesting facts in my book). And in private communications between Warren and Schuller, Warren has chide Schuller for "causing confusion" in the Body of Christ. Nevertheless, Schuller continues to lift Warren up as if he is a product of Schuller, the Crystal Cathedral, and Schuller's Institute for Successful Church Leadership. In other words, Rick Warren is a very big feather to have in one's proverbial cap. And Schuller is apparently wants to wear that cap-with-feather, despite the facts.


LTRP #13: "Purpose Driven and the Cross: In an effort to make the church attractive to the world, the Purpose-Driven Church has removed the offensiveness of the Cross . . . but it is that offensiveness that brings a lost soul to repentance.— I Corinthians 1:18"
RESPONSE: This is one of the most offensive, harmful, and divisive statements on the entire LTRP website. It is applying 1 Corinthians 1:18 to Rick Warren, which means that LTRP is blatantly labeling Rick Warren a non-believer—i.e., Warren is not a Christian. The verse reads: "For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved, it is the power of God."

This is an extremely serious charge to make against someone, especially a Christian pastor. And yet LTRP does not hesitate to apply it to Warren, which is nothing less than irresponsible and sinful (bearing false witness). Warren has continually preached the cross of Christ (in both his books and in his sermons at Saddleback), as well as its unique power to save because of Jesus Christ's sacrifice (see Saddleback Church: The Cross, Sin, and Hell). Moreover, Saddleback Church displays without shame two cross for all the world to see when they visit the church:



LTRP #14: "Discerning Christians have already established how Rick Warren's bestselling books and Church Transformation Programs were literally jam-packed with New Age teachings and other false doctrines."
RESPONSE: Untrue. What has been established is that there is a handful of paranoid, delusional heresy-hunters who see a New Age conspiracy everywhere they look. And in order to tie Rick Warren into that bizarre conspiracy, they have resorted to maliciously spreading half-truths, outright lies, misinformation, and disinformation in the face of facts presented before them. For the teachings of Rick Warren, see Saddleback Church: The Cross, Sin, and Hell and The Doctrinal Essentials of Christianiy—and Rick Warren.


LTRP #15: "Yes, Rick Warren has a Global PEACE plan. He also calls it a "new reformation". But when you take a closer look into his plan, you are reading the New Age blueprint."
RESPONSE: Again, what we see is a delusional view of the world. Warren's P.E.A.C.E. plan is a vehicle designed to spread Christianity to unreached parts of the world, while at the same time meeting people's physical needs, using five methods for touching humanity:

The P.E.A.C.E. Plan is Warren's attempt to return evangelicalism back to the nineteenth century, a time when Christians not only preached the Gospel, but also demonstrated the truth/love of that Gospel by being socially active to help those in need. I interviewed Rick Warren regarding his P.E.A.C.E. Plan, and in his explanation of it, there was not a hint of anything about him trying to simply "make planet earth a better place for everyone." As the following interview with Warren shows (excerpted from my book Rick Warren and the Purpose that Drives Him), LTRP has delivered a grossly distorted image of the P.E.A.C.E. Plan:


The P.E.A.C.E. Plan is about living as a church in obedience to the commands found in James 1:27 ("Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world") and James 2:14-17 ("What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, "Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead").

As for the New Age, Warren has made it very clear that it, and everything connected to it, is pure silliness. He has bluntly stated, "The so-called New Age has nothing new about it at all.  There is not one single new idea in this New Age thinking.  All it is a combination of very old lies that have been around for centuries, named by other things—paganism, naturalism, pantheism and all these different things. You reformulate them, throw the all in and go out on a limb and you've got New Age.  God says, Don't do that. It's just a combination of old lies" (Warren, "Developing Trust," part 3, April 20, 1997).

And in a 9/28/2005 issue of his Ministry Toolbox, Warren took another not-so-subtle swipe at the New Age, saying: "Mention the term "spirituality" today and many people will conjure up images of wearing white robes, sitting in a yoga lotus position, burning incense, and chanting 'ommmmm' with their eyes closed."

Warren has been especially critical of pantheism (God is all, all is God, we are God), a hallmark of the New Age Movement.  In a 1988 sermon, he declared: "[God] can be in many, many places all at the same time. He's everywhere. That does not mean that God is everything. That's pantheism. Don't confuse the creator with His creation. He's not everything but He is everywhere" (Warren, "Where Is God When You Need Him?," 1988). And consider these remarks from a 1997 sermon:

Even in The Purpose Driven Life, Warren denounces today's "[m]any religions and New Age philosophies" that teach what Warren calls the Satan's oldest lie: "that we are divine or can become gods." He also notes, "Let me be absolutely clear: You will never become God, or even a god," then adds, "God doesn't want you to become a god; he wants you to become godly" (Warren, p. 172).

Clearly, Warren is not a New Ager of any stripe.



LTRP #16: "With practice, you can develop the habit of praying silent 'breath prayers'" Rick Warren, from his book (p. 299) "[U]se 'breath prayers' throughout the day, as many Christians have done for centuries. You choose a brief sentence or a simple phrase that can be repeated to Jesus in one breath."—Rick Warren, Purpose-Driven Life, p. 89" (cited in LRTP article here).
RESPONSE: The Dombrowskis at LTRP consider this to be clear proof that Warren is teaching New Age contemplative breath prayers (and by implication, mantras). This has become a standard accusation among anti-Warrenites. On p. 89 of The Purpose Driven Life, Warren recommends short phrases speakable in a single breath. He calls them breath prayers: "You are with me." "I receive your grace." "You are my God" (Warren, p. 89). A person is supposed to think about what these words mean during the day. It is a way for them to be in constant prayer—little reminders that God is near, that he loves you, and that you are to live for Him. Another example of a breath prayer that Warren gives is on page 299: "Father, help me to understand what is keeping this person from knowing you."

This does not sound very New Age. These prayers, in fact, are textbook Christian prayers—short phrases to keep people's minds fixed on Jesus in the middle of their busy lives. Nothing about them resembles "vain repetitions" (or mantras), which Warren actually condemns directly on page 103, saying, "Jesus called thoughtless worship 'vain repetitions.'" Warren, of course, is referring to Matthew 6:7, where Christ denounced such false forms of worship as "much speaking" (or "babbling speech") uttered by Gentiles in a vain attempt to sway the will of their pagan gods. As The Wycliffe Bible Commentary explains, such prayers were an attempt "to overcome God's unwillingness to respond by wearying him with words."

Warren, clearly, is not advocating anything connected to Eastern thought, mystical rites, contemplative prayer, mind-altering practices, Zen, or mantra-style chants when he talks about "breath prayers." One might just as well call them "one-sentence prayers," or "arrow prayers," or "quickie prayers." That's all they are. But Warren's critics refuse to acknowledge this fact and keep repeating the accusation.

The interpretation put forth by LTRP simply highlights one of the consistent flaws in the research done by far too many of warren's critics. They will hear Warren using a certain words/phrase that happens to be used by people of other religious belief systems and instantaneously interpret that word/phrase in exactly the same way. this is not the best way to do research since similarity of terms does not always equate to similarity of meaning. New Agers, for example, also use the words "Christ" and "God." Does this mean that every Christian who uses Christ and God is a New Ager? Of course not.


LTRP #17: "Breath Prayers and Rick Warren. Rick Warren Promotes Breath Prayers, Contemplative Prayers. The Roman Catholic practice of praying the rosary is also akin to breath prayers" (cited in LRTP article here).
RESPONSE: With regard to breath prayers, see the previous response. And, no, prayers of the rosary in Roman Catholicism has nothing to do with the kind of breath prayers Warren is talking about. In contrast to the rosary, when it comes to Warren's breath prayers:

1) there is no set number of prayers that Warren claims need to be repeated;
2) the prayers are not an attempt to convince God to do something by showing devotion;
3) the prayers are personal (i.e., not a set formulaic prayer for everyone);
4) each prayer is meant to be a reminder of a specific aspect of one's walk with God;

With regard to contemplative prayer, I submit the endnotes from my book on Warren, wherein I discuss this much maligned/misunderstood form of prayer, which as far as I know, has never really been discussed all that much at Saddleback. It has always been something far, far away in the background via loose affiliations. In the fifteen years I have been attending the church, I have never heard "contemplative prayer" (in any form) discussed: during weekend services, during mid-week Bible study, during small groups, during any ministry meetings, at any conference, or in any prayer group. My personal take on contemplative prayer is as follows:

In other words, there are actually two types of "contemplative prayer." One type would be New Age and unbiblical (i.e., emptying the mind and seeking, by way of mental nothingness, a route to some kind of altered state of consciousness). The other type would be perfectly acceptable (i.e., centering one's mind on God, and waiting in silence, focusing on Christ with the earnest expectation of Him speaking to your soul).

Contemplative prayer—in all its varied forms and degrees of practice—cannot be denounced with a blanket condemnation as if every single person who says they engage in "contemplative prayer" are a) meaning the exact same thing; or b) dropping into some altered state of consciousness connected to occultism. The issue is  not that simple. and certainly, just because someone practices "contemplative prayer" that does not instantaneously mean they are not Christian, not deeply connected to God, not biblical, or not discerning. There are many areas of disagreement that can be tolerated within the Christian community (see The Doctrinal Essentials of Christianity—and Rick Warren).

At the same time, it is very true that great care should be taken with regard to concepts relating to "contemplative prayer" because some of its advocates have indeed stepped over the bounds of what is biblical, and have borrowed far too heavily from eastern meditation practices and occultism. But this does not have to always be the case when it comes to "contemplative prayer."


LTRP #18: "Is Rick Warren promoting contemplative spirituality (i.e., spiritual formation)? We believe the answer to that is a wholehearted 'yes.' New Agers believe that the world will be unified and brought to peace through a majority of people practicing meditation. What surprise they must be experiencing now to see evangelical Christendom join ranks and leave behind a solid, bible-based faith in Jesus Christ and exchange it for their own spirituality" (cited in LTRP article here).
RESPONSE: Bizarre, I must say. Totally bizarre. No one, least of all Rick Warren  is advocating leaving behind "a solid, bible-based faith in Jesus Christ" (see previous responses).


LTRP #19: "In both Rick Warren's Purpose Driven Life and on his pastors.com website, he encourages the use of breath prayers. In nearly every instance that people use this phrase, this is an Eastern style of mantra prayer" (cited in LTRP article here).
RESPONSE: There is actually more to this statement than first meets the eye. On the surface it appears to be just repeat of the same accusation again: Warren teaches "New Age" breath prayers and new Age contemplative prayer. But a third element is thrown into the mix that readers will likely digest mentally without realizing it. LTRP is equating what Warren advocates with "Eastern style of mantra prayer" (see response to LTRP #16). What is most fascinating, however, is that LTRP inserted a qualifier that will probably be missed, "In nearly every instance. . ." Nearly? If it is nearly every instance, is LTRP saying that it holds true in Warren's instance? If not, then why mention  mantra prayers at all? This is a propaganda technique known as innuendo, or suggestive implication. The implication in this case, of course, is that Warren is advocating the use of mantras (see LTRP #16).



This represents just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to LTRP. They have produced a mountain of detritus regarding Warren that is based on false accusations laced with unending innuendos. Using my limited spectrum of knowledge, I can only come up with one explanation for the glut of information coming from the Dombrowskis. The writings are, in my estimation, products of delusion and paranoia. Although, of course, this is just an opinion. I could be wrong. But I cannot comprehend any other explanation. It is unfortunate that so any trusting Christians have taken their falsehoods as truth. More information will be forthcoming.

---

• INTRO ARTICLE: Lighthouse Trails: Walking In Darkness

• Lighthouse Trails: The Blanchard Bashers
   (a look at the Ken Blanchard controversy)

• Warren & Lighthouse Trails: A Futile Attempt At Reconciliation
   (an analysis of the Lighthouse Trails Dismissal of A Warren Email)

• Lighthouse Trails: Rants and Ramblings 
   (a final look at the so-called "research" of LTRP)