"[Ex-cultists] are naturally sensitive to the danger of deception and sometimes begin to see evidence of cult belief in places where it simply does not exist. They read their own experiences into other people's lives and attribute cult meanings to words and phrases when the authors in fact are using them in the ordinary ways used by people who have no cult connection. . . .
When Mr. [Warren] Smith finds 'evidence' of New Age beliefs in The Purpose-Driven Life, he is reading his own past cult beliefs into it—without regard for what Pastor Rick actually is saying" (Jon Walker, vice-president of Purpose-Driven Ministries, letter to persons asking Saddleback Church about Deceived On Purpose, April 12, 2005).

---

(also see Warren Smith: Self-Deceived On Purpose, which is refutation
of many points made in Smith's book Deceived On Purpose).

(also  see Warren Smith: Still Self-Deceived On Purpose, which is a 25-point refutation
of a lecture Smith gave in Jan. 2008 at Calvary Chapel, Costa Mesa).

(also see Warren Smith: Deception in Sacramento, which is a 12-point refutation
of a lecture he gave in Feb. 2008 at Calvary Chapel, Sacramento).

"The reason church leaders like Rick Warren weren't saying much about the New Age/New Gospel/New Spirituality was because they were now moving the church into the New Age/New Gospel/New Spirituality"  (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).

"Rick Warren and his Purpose-Driven movement were walking the church into the very trap I had just warned about in my book [Reinventing Jesus Christ]. . . . I didn't concern myself about whether or not Rick Warren was consciously leading the church into the New Age/New Gospel/New Spirituality. I was just concerned about the fact that he was doing it" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).

The reason the church has been so silent about the New Age/New Spirituality is because the emerging 21st Century church is moving into the New Age/New Spirituality—and Rick Warren seems to be definitely leading the way" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).

"There were many other telltale signs that Rick Warren—whether he knew it or not—was in the process of transitioning the church into the teachings of the New Age/New Spirituality" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).

"The following account is a summary of some of those concerns—how Rick Warren's Purpose-Driven movement seems to be in the process of providing a spiritual foundation for the coming of Antichrist" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).

"The New Age/New Gospel/New Spirituality has already—for their purposes—reinvented Jesus Christ and biblical Christianity. Rick Warren and his Purpose-Driven Church seem to be well on their way to doing the same thing"  (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Epilogue).

"Will the emerging twenty-first century New Age "Christ" become the head of the emerging twenty-first century "Christian" church? The growing number of parallels between the New Age/New Spirituality and the Purpose-Driven Church are truly amazing" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Epilogue).

[T]he emerging New Age/New Spirituality and the emerging Purpose-Driven Church are becoming more and more like each other in word, thought and deed. They are now both using many of the same terms and teachings, and many of the same ideas. It seems that step-by-step-by-step the New Age/New Gospel/New Spirituality and the emerging "Christian" Church are in the process of becoming one (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Epilogue).

---

 

THE MESSAGE, THE MESSAGE, THE MESSAGE, THE MESSAGE, THE MESSAGE—ENOUGH ALREADY! SMITH #1: "Many recent translations and paraphrases of the Bible—like Eugene Peterson's The Message—play right into Maitreya's 'Master Jesus' scenario. Unfortunately, many popular church leaders (like Rick Warren) choose to use these newer translations and paraphrases" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter  4 Update).
RESPONSE: Here we have one of Smith's many obsessions. He does not like The Message. In fact, Smith views it as nothing less than a tool of Satan that is now being used to spread false notions about God, Christ, and salvation via language that he considers New Age. He believes it is causing "confusion."

But far more confused than The Message is Warren Smith, who cannot see, read or hear anything without filtering it through his New Age-fixated psyche. In this particular instance, Smith is referring to the use of the word "Master" by The Message in various passages about Jesus. of course, "Master" as a descriptive title is also used by New Agers in reference to their own unbiblical "Jesus." To Smith's troubled mind, this is a clear indication that The Message is a polluted version of scripture that is helping to usher in a "soft" view of God, which in turn will make everyone ripe for the Antichrist's appearance (or Maitreya, the New Age false Christ).

Smith's proof, however, amounts to little more than a word game he plays wherein he links words in The Message (in this case, "Master") to similar words/phrases in the New Age. But using such a method of "discernment" is highly flawed and bound to cause irrational fears and misplaced concern. Similarity of words/terms does NOT necessarily mean similarity of thought or meaning. Most religions, for example, use the word "God." Does it mean the same thing? No. And many religions refer to Jesus Christ. Do they mean the same thing? Hardly. The same can be said for similarity of symbols used throughout the world. Like words, symbols are highly fluid. They can mean different things, to different people, in different places, at different times. When it comes to words, they are merely symbols for meanings.

Consequently, just because someone (or a Bible paraphrase) uses the word "Master" for Jesus, it does not instantly mean that a New Age meaning is infiltrating the text, especially when the context is a Christian Bible, and the word being used does indeed accurately apply—i.e., Jesus is indeed our Master. Context is everything. The context of the scriptures make it clear that "Master" being used in The Message is indicative of Jesus as Lord (see next response).


SMITH #2: "Rick Warren used The Message more than any other Bible translation or paraphrase in his book The Purpose-Driven Life. Many other church leaders are now referring to The Message in their books and writings—which of course opens the door to the "Master Jesus" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter  4 Update).
RESPONSE: Again, we see here one of the most interesting ways that Smith seeks to prove the so-called "New Age Implications of the Purpose Driven Church"—word games. It begins when Smith finds some word, term, or catch-phrase used by Warren (or a Bible translation), then finds that same thing said by a New Ager! He invariably concludes that the two sources are referring to the same thing. In this particular case, Smith is making note of the various places in The Message where Jesus is referred to as "Master." To Smith, The Message uses "Master" and New Agers use "Master," so that must mean that The Message is New Age!

Using Warren Smith's method of discerning truth from error, we can make anything/anyone problematic (or New Age). Consider Warren Smith's favorite version of the Bible, the King James Version. It uses "Master" in reference to Jesus, too. In Ephesians 6:9 and Colossians 4:1, for example, kurios (normally translated as Lord) is rendered Master. The word "Master," of course, is widely used within the New Age Movement, just as Smith says. So, using Smith's reasoning, the King James Version is just as New Age as is The Message. And since Smith has already admitted that the KJV is his favorite Bible, then Smith is apparently as much a New Ager as Rick Warren (or anyone else who favors The Message).

Let us also consider the use of "unicorn" in the King James Bible. It is found in Deuteronomy 33:17, Job 39:9, Psalms 92:10, Isaiah 34:7, and Numbers 23:22. But this word is not even in the Hebrew text, which reads re'em (or "wild ox"). And unicorns, as everyone knows, are not real. They are mystical creatures that must be conjured up in the imagination through New Age visualization—just like a demon is conjured up through a spell! Moreover, unicorns are often found as New Age decorations. And they are usually used as symbols for New Age groups! So, shouldn't we assume that the KJV is really a New Age inspired Bible version—and that any one who uses it is a New Ager? Again, Smith is condemned by his own words.

This shows the absurdity of Smith's arguments regarding The Message. By using such a method of analysis, no one is safe from charges of heresy! Yet this is exactly how Smith is able to make so many New Age accusations against Rick Warren.



SMITH #3: "Rick Warren often confused his readers by using fifteen different Bible versions. Yet in regards to the King James Bible, Rick Warren told his readers that 'there is no legitimate reason for complicating the Good News with four-hundred-year-old English'" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter  10 Update).
RESPONSE: This is an interesting comment. Smith sees Rick Warren's use of multiple Bible versions in The Purpose Driven Lifeas some kind of deliberate attempt by Warren to "confuse" his readers. Smith often makes these kinds of assertions, projecting on to everyone else what he himself feels. The truth is that it is Warren Smith who is confused by so many translations. It bothers him to read various translations because he likes the King James Bible. He sticks to the King James because it was the version that helped rescue him out of the New Age (as he has explained in his own testimony, see the "Subjective Opinions" section in my article Warren Smith: Self-Deceived On Purpose, under EXAMPLE #4). And anyone who doesn't feel as he feels simply cannot be walking the straight and narrow spiritual line. At the very least, they are not getting the true Word of God, and this will undoubtedly confuse them in time.

But many people find different Bible versions to be extremely helpful in catching various nuances of the biblical texts—whether the versions are direct word translations, thought to thought renderings, or paraphrases. This, in fact, is exactly why Warren used so many versions. In Appendix three of the book, he explained that he was using the different versions because in any versions "nuances and shades of meaning can be missed, so it is always helpful to compare translations." He also stated that "we often miss the full impact of familiar Bible verses, not because of poor translating, but simply because they have become so familiar." He added that his multiple translations were supposed to help readers "see God's truth in new, fresh ways."

If Warren Smith disagrees with Rick Warren's perspective, then that is fine. No problem. I happen to disagree myself with some of the versions Rick Warren used! And would I have used that many translations in my own book? Probably not. Would I have used The Message at all? Again, probably not. Personally, I don't care for The Message very much. Of course, disagreeing with someone's choice about which Bible versions they use in a book, or how many versions they use, is one thing. But going so far as to then brand that person as New Ager or "confusing" just because they have made a certain choice regarding how they wrote a book is extreme.



SMITH #4: "Although he characterized The Message as a Bible 'paraphrase' and not as a Bible translation, he often declared 'the Bible says' when he referred to The Message in his book" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter  10 Update).
RESPONSE: Here we see just shows how rigid and obsessive some of Smith's arguments can be. Smith admits that Rick Warren alerted his readers to the paraphrase nature of The Message, but still condemns him for simply referencing it using the understandable shorthand term "the Bible." This kind of nit-picky dissecting of every word Rick Warren utters could be used to tar and feather virtually anyone as a heretic or somehow a deceiver. It's ridiculous.



SMITH #5: "[T]he author of The Message, Eugene Peterson, had inserted the highly occult New Age phrase 'as above, so below' into the middle of his 'paraphrase' of the Lord's Prayer (Matthew 6:10). Instead of saying 'in earth, as it is in heaven,' Peterson had paraphrased it 'as above, so below.' The occult meaning of the New Age phrase 'as above, so below' is fully described by the editors of the New Age Journal in their book, As Above, So Below. . . . 'As above, so below,' is a deeply occult New Age phrase that is reputed to hold the key to all magic and all mysteries. Again, it means that 'all is one' and 'God is in everything'" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter  10 Update).
RESPONSE: Once more, we have an example of Smith's bizarre word games. Now, in addition to not being able to use the word "Master," we must avoid the phrase, 'as above, so below.' Smith, it seems, is letting New Agers dictate which words in English we can and cannot uses as Christians. I, for one, am not willing to let anyone tell me what words are out of bounds for me—simply because they have chosen to use them, too. What if I want to write a poem that uses the phrase "as above, so below"? Now what? According to Warren Smith, I can't—or else I risk sounding like a New Ager and being accused by Warren Smith of spreading "confusion."

It does not logically follow that anyone will be drawn into the New Age because Peterson used "as above, so below" throughout The Message (see Colossians 1:16 and Matthew 6:9-13). After all, heaven is indeed "above" and earth is indeed "below." This is not such a drastic perversion of the biblical text as Smith makes it out to be. In fact, and quite ironically, Peterson just might have derived this phrase from none other than Smith's favorite King James Bible, where Jesus himself states: "Ye are from beneath; I am from above" (John 8:23)!

As admirable as Smith's concerns may be, he is failing to see that the entire evangelical world does not revolve around New Agers or exposing the New Age Movement. And not everyone who walks into a church is a former New Ager. For Smith this may be his all-consuming concern. And that is fine. But every Christian pastor or writer is not obliged to watch every little word/phrase they use in order to avoid some term/word/phrase that is being used by somebody else somewhere in New Age movement. Moreover, exposing the New Age as a ministry also is not something that everyone is called to do. That task belongs to niche ministries that specialize in the area of cults, the occult, and the New Age. 

Rick Warren's The Purpose Driven Life (or The Message, for that matter) is not a refutation of the New Age. Nor is The Purpose Driven Church an expose on the New Age Movement. Consequently, neither book is written with an overarching concern to stay away from terms that might hint at something New Age—even if it's just a word or term that nobody, generally speaking, would consider New Age. Even if Peterson was indeed trying to slip some New Age catch-phrase into the Bible and Warren fell into the "trap" so to speak. It is highly doubtful that readers would see any pantheistic parallels in just four words.

More realistically, however, with specific regard to Peterson and Warren, a phrase like "as above, so below" would not be known to either of them as being New Age. Neither of them specialize in the area of cults (or the New Age). Such detailed information about the phrase, in fact, would be unknown to just about everyone except a New Ager, an ex-New Ager, or a researcher of the New Age. It could very well be a coincidence. Or, Peterson might have indeed heard it somewhere, and it subsequently stuck in his mind as poetic sounding, then he used it. But rather than opting for this possibility, Smith's fears and anxiety have gotten the best of him and he has launched into exposing his conspiracy theory—not caring that in order to do that, he is slandering others. 

Interestingly, with regard to Peterson's understanding of the term, "as above, so below," Warren Smith admitted the following during a 2008 lecture at Calvary Chapel, Costa Mesa (he made a similar remark during a lecture delivered at Calvary Chapel, Sacramento):

"I actually know somebody that contacted Eugene Peterson and told him, 'Hey, that's a New Age saying,' . . . and he said that Eugene Peterson corresponded back and said, 'If I had known that, I wouldn't have used it.' Go take a look at The Message today. It's still in there. These guys are not pulling back these things that are clearly confusing."

What Smith seems to be missing here is that it is not confusing to anyone else except him! He is the one obsessing over this word here, and that phrase there. The magnitude of the problem is a creation of Warren Smith's own mind. No one else is even thinking along those lines. Smith is being consumed by subjectivism and bias. As he himself revealed in his book: 

"I tried to imagine what it would be like for a confused New Ager today coming into a Purpose-Driven Church that uses The Message, and finding this popular New Age phrase right in the middle of the Lord's Prayer. Or . . . be handed a copy of [Warren's book] . . . only to find an abbreviated form of the same New Age phrase. . . . This hardly seemed to be the way to introduce the Gospel of Jesus Christ to an unbelieving New Ager" (Smith, Deceived On Purpose, p. 35).

For Smith to expect Warren's books, indeed any book, to conform to his own personal standards of the right/proper words to use (based in his subjective experiences in the New Age), is unrealistic and biblically unsupportable. And it shows a fairly substantial measure of hyper-sensitivity on Smith's part.


PANTHEISM, PANTHEISM, PANTHEISM, PANTHEISM, PANTHEISM—UGGHHHHH!

SMITH #6: "The New Age/New Gospel/New Spirituality movement teaches that the foundational teaching of the New World Religion is that God is in everything. Rick Warren, in his book The Purpose-Driven Life, presents this same teaching that God is in everything" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Epilogue).
RESPONSE: This is untrue. Warren does not teach God is IN everything. All Rick Warren did was quote the New Century Version of scripture, which reads: "There is one God and Father of everything. He rules everything and is everywhere and is in everything." This rendering is consistent with numerous Bible translations that seek to show the Christian doctrine of God's immanence:


Are all of these Bibles secretly advancing New Age pantheism/panentheism because they say God is "in all"? Not likely.



SMITH #7: "Rick Warren's apologist, Richard Abanes, argues: 'Warren's use of Ephesians 4:6 in The Purpose-Driven Life is an attempt to teach God's immanence.' While Abanes takes critics to task for being concerned about the concept of immanence he, of all people, should surely understand the overlapping New Age implications of the word immanence" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter  10 Update).
RESPONSE: First of all, I am not now, nor have I ever been Rick Warren's apologist. Warren Smith is either: a) woefully ignorant of the facts; or b) blatantly lying. Rick Warren NEVER once asked me, or even suggested to me, that I write a book either about him, or in defense of him. NEVER. I have written nearly 20 books ranging in topics that affect the church—from Mormonism, to Harry Potter, to video games, to The Da Vinci Code, to racism, and on and on. One such book was on Rick Warren. I wrote it, and continue to write about Rick Warren online, because I am seeking to stop the horrific perversions of "discernment" that are going on within the so-called apologetic community. For the record, with regard to my involvement, contrary to Warren Smith's remarks, I state the following:


Second, as for the so-called "confusion" being caused by Rick Warren due to the issue of "immanence" as taught via the New Century Version, Smith is ignoring the obvious—i.e., the words "immanence" and imminent" have for centuries been legitimately used by Christians to describe an attribute of God! Millard Erickson's Christian Theology tells us: "We begin with the immanence of God. By this we mean God's presence and activity within nature, human nature, and history. . . . God's spirit originates and/or sustains all things; everything is dependent upon him" (p. 302).

Warren Smith is completely ignoring context. He is ignoring everyone else's paradigm and belief system (in this case, Rick Warren's as a Christian). Of course, if a New Ager were to use the term "immanence" (or "immanent"), they surely would be meaning something completely unbiblical. But Smith is not leaving any room for different meanings/intentions of different people who are speaking. To Smith, anyone who says immanence or immanent is spreading New Age teachings. But in taking that position, he condemns far more Christians than just Rick Warren.

Moreover, he is utterly missing how the English language can be used, and is not pausing to recognize the difficulties associated with this particular passage.  But to be fair, Smith is not alone in his worries. With the rise of the New Age in the western world, confusion and concern has been expressed over a number of Bible translations that seem to be saying God is indeed "in everything" and/or "in all" (see above). But when it comes to Ephesians 4:6, special care must be taken by those analyzing it and deciding exactly what is going on with the translations. The passage in total is referring to: 1) God’s sovereignty, 2) God's immanence, and 3) God's presence—with special attention being given to the Lord’s indwelling of all believers.

Paul first notes that there is "one God and Father of all" (i.e., there exists only one true God who is sovereign over all that is).

The apostle then uses the phrase "and through all," which speaks of God's immanence or presence throughout all creation. The Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary observes: "'through all'—by means of Christ 'who filleth all things' (Eph 4:10; 2:20, 21), and 'a propitiation' for all men" (see the entry on Eph. 4:6 at www.bible.cc). The Wycliffe Bible Commentary reads: "He is through all, 'expressing the pervading, animating, controlling presence of that one God and Father" (p. 1310).

Now, we come to the final section of the clause that reads, "and in all." The difficulty arises here because the Greek literally reads: kai en pas (". . . and in all"). This is where most translations leave it, assuming that readers will see that in context it is referring to God’s presence in believers, as explained in The Eerdmans Bible Commentary (p. 1115) and The Wycliffe Bible Commentary (p. 1310),  which gives a more preferrable and accurate rendering of “in all you” (or rather, "in all of you").

All of the translations that leave the verse "in all" in deference to the literal Greek (see above translations noted) are not flawed per se, but are unclear/incomplete in thought. Only by paying special attention to the context, or by reading a commentary, does the meaning become clear. Otherwise it seems to simply be saying God is "in all" (not necessarily in a pantheistic sense, but more in the sense of God being "through all" as mentioned earlier in the passage).

The New Century Version, however, by taking the word "all" and replacing it with the synonym "everything" is flawed. Nevertheless, it must be recognized that there is no credible evidence to suggest that the translators of the New Century Version were deliberately seeking to imply pantheism. It seems more likely to have been a case of carelessness and a coupling of the "and through all" idea with the "and in all" phrase. If this is the case, then the verse is to be understood as meaning that God is "in everything" as a Creator intimately associated with his creations. This would be like referring to the head architect of a planned community, and saying that he is in everything—i.e., his creativity, design, and authority is in all aspects of the community's construction. He is in everything, metaphorically speaking, but not literally.



SMITH #8: "In trying to defend Rick Warren, Saddleback apologist Richard Abanes pulled a quote out of a 1997 sermon where Rick Warren repeatedly said that God was not in everything because that was 'pantheism.' What Abanes did not explain was why Rick Warren would flatly contradict himself five years later by teaching that God is in everything. Rick Warren's statement was incredibly confusing and undiscerning. Why would he go out of his way to pick a new Bible translation to say the very thing that he had labeled pantheism five years previous? Was the reader supposed to somehow intuit what Rick Warren really meant by these obviously contradictory statements?" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter  10 Update).
RESPONSE: Here we have Warren Smith misquoting my book Rick Warren and the Purpose that Drives Him. And he must misquote it in order to make it seem as if Rick Warren at some point changed his mind between 1997 to the year he published The Purpose Driven Life. But the truth is that I did NOT simply quote a single 1997 statement. In my book I took the time to show a consistent denial/condemnation of Rick Warren by using various quotes from different years:


But instead of accurately representing what was in my book, Warren Smith chose to only cite the middle quote from Warren, and excuse it away by saying he could have changed his theology/beliefs in five years. But all one needs to do is read Warren's ongoing condemnations of pantheism and the New Age to see that his theology//faith has remained consistent over the years.

With regard to pantheism, in a 1988 sermon, Warren 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:

Clearly, Rick Warren is not a pantheist. Even in The Purpose Driven Life (all editions), he denounces today's "[m]any religions and New Age philosophies" that teach what he 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" (Rick Warren, p. 172).

As for the New Age movement itself, he has stated as far back as 1989: "One of the most amazing things to me is the popularity of the New Age Movement. It takes more faith to believe in that than it does to believe in Christianity. It is the most illogical, irrational thing" (Rick Warren, October 8, 1989, "God's Purpose for Your Life"). And in a 2002 joint article with his wife, Kay, Rick Warren made yet another proclamation against the New Age movement

"[F]or other people peace means trying new age gimmicks, like gazing at crystals, or using aromatherapy, or sitting in a lotus position and contemplating lint in their navel and going, 'Ommmmm.' But that's not peace of mind either. Let me tell you what real peace of mind is. Real peace of mind is having a relationship with Jesus Christ, God's Son, and becoming friends with God" (Ministry ToolBox, issue #80, 12/11/2002)

Obviously, Rick Warren is not a New Ager. Far from it. In fact, there are a number of articles by various authors currently at pastors.com and at purposedriven.com that condemn the New Age movement, its beliefs, its agenda, and its proponents. Consider the following examples:

"Has Purpose Driven been influenced by New Age 'theology'? Not at all. Purpose Driven is founded on the same beliefs that disciples of Jesus Christ have held for the last 2,000 years. . . . In contrast, "New Age" is a catch-all label for a hodgepodge of primitive religious beliefs accepted by some people who are looking for salvation in something other than Christ. Many New Agers believe in pantheism—the idea that everything is God and God is everything. Notions of karma and reincarnation are fashionable in those circles. Some New Age groups teach that each person is a potential god, others that all religions are equally valid paths to one universal Ultimate Reality. 'But we know that there is only one God, the Father, who created everything, and we exist for him. And there is only one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom God made everything and through whom we have been given life'" ("Who We Are; FAQ").

On a very personal level, I can say (and prove) that Rick Warren stands diametrically opposed to the New Age based on his endorsements of two of my own books, both of which include lengthy and detailed refutations of: 1) the New Age movement as a whole; and 2) various doctrines promoted by the New Age. These two books are: Defending the Faith: A Beginner's Guide to Cults and New Religions; and its companion volume Cults, New Religious Movements and Your Family (see these reviews from Answers In Action).

The first book (Defending the Faith) refutes several New Age concepts/teachings: pantheism, Jesus as just an "Ascended Master," impersonal nature of the Holy Spirit, the "illusion" of sin (there is neither true right, nor true wrong; no actual good, and no actual evil), and the non-literal resurrection of Jesus. Regarding this volume, Warren stated: "Richard Abanes has done a brilliant job of describing complex theological truths in an easy-to-understand style. I enthusiastically recommend this book."

The second book (Cults, New Religious Movements and Your Family) features an entire chapter—the very first chapter, in fact—that is dedicated to refuting the New Age movement and its many disparate teachings. It is titled "Behind the New Age Craze" and includes: 1) a testimony from a former New Ager who became a Christian; 2) a history of the New Age movement's origins/spread; 3) a comparison of N Age teachings to the Bible; 4) an explanation of why/how so many people are drawn into the New Age movement; and 5) a lengthy list of recommended reading sources for people to learn more about the dangers of the New Age movement. Concerning this volume, Warren said: "If you are interested in cult-proofing your family, this is the book to read."

It doesn't sound like Warren is very much of a New Ager! In fact, Warren preaches/teachers standard, Southern Baptist, Bible based doctrines on every essential of the Christian faith, including those related to God, the Bible, the cross, sin, hell, and repentance (see my two articles The Doctrinal Essentials of Christianity—and Rick Warren, Rick Warren Preaches Salvation, and Saddleback Church: The Cross, Sin, and Hell).

Finally, there is also the FOUNDATIONS course of doctrinal teachings that is given at Saddleback church (written by Tom Holladay and Kay Warren). It spends five pages explaining the historic, orthodox, creedal view of the Trinity. And the "Teacher's Guide" contains a full ten pages of discussion points to teach regarding classic Trinitarian theology. All of these pages, however, were ignored by Smith.



SMITH #9: "I warned [in 2002] that 'Oneness'—the teaching that God is in everyone and everything'—was at the heart of the New Age/New Gospel/New Spirituality. It is an incredible sign of the times that both Robert Schuller and Rick Warren were—in one form or another—now teaching this New Age/New Gospel doctrine. If left unchallenged this one teaching alone could end up transitioning what was the church into the heart of the New Age/New Spirituality/One World Religion" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter  10 Update).
RESPONSE: Rick Warren is not teaching pantheism in any form. What Warren Smith is seeing is a delusion born of his former experiences in the New Age (see my responses #7 and # 8).



SMITH #10: "Almost unbelievably, on page 88 of The Purpose-Driven Life, Rick Warren presented as gospel truth the immanent, 'as above, so below,' New Age teaching that 'God is in everything.' Quoting Ephesians 4:6 from a new Bible version (New Century Version), Rick Warren stated the following about God: 'The Bible says, 'He rules everything and is everywhere and is in everything'" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter  10 Update).
RESPONSE: More delusion (see my responses #7 and # 8).



SMITH #11: "[N]o wonder Rick Warren, and his team of apologists, were doing everything in their power to make it appear that Robert Schuller had not influenced Rick Warren to the obvious extent that he had. But the fact of the matter was plain and simple—both Robert Schuller and Rick Warren were now teaching the immanent concept that God was in everything" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter  10 Update).
RESPONSE: Here we see two things: 1) Warren Smith's ongoing insistence that Rick Warren is a theological/doctrinal product of Robert Schuller who is covertly pushing Schuller doctrine, while lying about his connections to Schuller; and 2) another aspect of Smith's far-reaching conspiracy theory (i.e., a"team" of Rick Warren apologists who are deceptively trying to hide the truth about Robert Schuller and Rick Warren). For information on the mindset an paranoia of people who live their lives in the shadow of conspiracies, see Selling Fear: Conspiracy Theories and End-Times Paranoia by Gregory Camp).

The factual story about Rick Warren and his connection (or lack thereof) to Robert Schuller has been fully documented, and debunks the charge that Rick Warren and Schuller share similar theologies, ideologies, and philosophies (see my article Warren and Schuller: Debunking An Urban Legend). It has been made so clear, in fact, that anti-Warren critics like Warren Smith have been forced to resort to blatantly calling Rick Warren a liar—and inventing a conspiracy of lies to explain away the facts that contradict deep doctrinal ties between Warren and Schuller. This is tragic and shows how desperately individuals like Smith want to make Rick Warren out to be a heretic, despite the truth and factual evidence.



SMITH #12: "Wilkinson described Schuller as a 'visionary' and a 'real leader,' and the "grandfather" of today's church growth movement—the man who trained pastors like Rick Warren and Bill Hybels" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 1 Update).
RESPONSE: This is another exageration being spread by Smith in order to make it appear as if Rick Warren is a virtual Robert Schuller clone. The so-called training that Schuller gave to Rick Warren amounts to nothing but a single course at Schuller's Institute for Successful Leadership that Warren attended all the way back in 1979 as part of his studies in his last year at seminary! In a personal letter from Rick Warren that has been made public, Warren explained his involvement with Schuller back in 1979:


That's hardly being "trained" by Robert Schuller. But Warren Smith has to make it a tempest in a teapot in order to frighten his listeners into thinking Rick Warren is some kind of devotee of Schuller.



SMITH #13: "What became evident in reading The Purpose-Driven Life was that throughout the years, Rick Warren had been—and continues to be—greatly influenced by the writings, ideas, and teachings of Robert Schuller" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).
RESPONSE: Actually, Warren is not being influenced at all by Robert Schuller beyond some catchy, pithy sayings that Rick Warren likes to use because they communicate memorable little truths relating to human behavior and feelings. I call these Schullerism. They are not very harmful or doctrinally offensive. They do not in any way deal with the essentials of the Christian faith. None of them detract in the least from the historic, orthodox, creedal teachings of Christianity involving the cross, sin, hell, or repentance. Nor do any of the references to Schuller that Warren has made in some of his sermons refer to anything unbiblical. Consider the following examples:

"You need hope to cope" (PDL, p. 31); 

"What is the driving force in your life (PDL, p. 27); 

"Shift from local thinking to global thinking" (PDL, p. 300); 

"I dare you to dive into the deep end" (PDL, p. 301); and 

"The greatest churches in history are yet to be built" (PDL, p. 398). 

I wouldn't necessarily have used them in my own book, but Rick Warren made a different choice. So what? Whenever Rick Warren says something he has heard from Schuller, it always seems to be some benign remark or some aspect of how he creatively started a church. For example, in one sermon Rick Warren mentions how Schuller initially had no church building. But he kept looking for one (rather than just giving up), and eventually Schuller settled for a drive-in theater! This impressed Warren as a mark of "creativity," a great trait for a church leader to possess (Rick Warren, "Handling a Failure in Your Ministry," Leadership Lifter, n.d.). Rick Warren also has commented on Schuller's apparent ability to look beyond common logistical problems that arise in any church situation (Rick Warren, "How to Communicate Your Vision," Leadership Lifter, n.d.).

In a 1985 sermon, Rick Warren cited Schuller's fairly harmless opinion that people should "make the best of a bad situation." There is certainly nothing heretical about that. And in a 1987 sermon, Warren referred to the oft-repeated Schullerism "Tough times never last; tough people do." Again, no big deal. Finally, as another example, we have a 1989 sermon in which Warren borrows Schuller's line "God wants to turn your scars into stars," which Warren used to illustrate the biblical truth that God can and does heal our emotional wounds when we come to Him—no matter how deeply we have been scarred by the world and sin (see Rick Warren, "Letting Go of Loneliness," part 5, Dec. 8, 1985; "How To Develop Staying Power," part 7, June7, 1987; "Healing Scars of Shattered Confidence," part 3, Apr. 9, 1989).

These things obviously have nothing to do with any serious doctrinal/theological teachings. This is all fluff sentiment and/or motivational language. In other words, Smith (and many other anti-Warrenites) are making a very large mountain out of a rather small mole hill.



SMITH #14: "And while Rick Warren and his staff have done everything possible to make it appear that he has theologically distanced himself from Schuller, that is simply not the case. Robert Schuller's influence continues to totally permeate Rick Warren's Purpose-Driven movement—including his Purpose-Driven Peace Plan" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).

RESPONSE: Again, we see here Smith's conspiratorial delusions taking hold. He is treating Warren and Saddleback Church as if it is a full-blown cult, complete with deceptive practices that include passing off lies as truth to its members in an effort to keep them obedient and loyal. This shows that Warren Smith has completely written off Rick Warren as some kind of cult leader. Such a view is also evident in Smith's comments about Rick Warren that I noted at the beginning of this article. Smith is completely discounting all of the theologically sound teachings advanced by Rick Warren as mere lies that are all part of a big New Age conspiracy (For information on Rick Warren's theology and doctrinal views, see my two articles The Doctrinal Essentials of Christianity—and Rick Warren and Saddleback Church: The Cross, Sin, and Hell).



SMITH #15: "In an interview in the Nov. 18, 2002 issue of Christianity Today, Kay Warren revealed that she and her husband attended Robert Schuller's Institute for Successful Church Leadership just prior to starting Saddleback Church. She stated that Robert Schuller 'had a profound influence on Rick" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).
RESPONSE: This Kay Warren quote has been hugely overblown by Smith (along with all of Rick Warren's critics). Kay's statement has been explained again and again, but the explanations are being ignored. Although the explanation is included in my article Warren and Schuller: Debunking An Urban Legend, I will also repeat it here as an excerpt from my book on Warren titled Rick Warren and the Purpose that Drives Him:


This is the true story and it is not very damning. Both Kay and Rick Warren have reviewed this part of their history, and it was approved by them.



SMITH #16: "Schuller described [in 2004] how Rick Warren had come to his Robert H. Schuller Institute for Successful Church Leadership 'time after time'" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).
RESPONSE: This sounds like a fairly incriminating comment. But rather than saying anything about Rick Warren, it says a lot about Robert Schuller. The comment seems to be a convenient way that Schuller has found to attach himself to one of the most influential and powerful leaders in the evangelical church—i.e., Rick Warren. In fact, Schuller's Hour of Power website is now even claiming: 

"We are the home of the world's first Church Growth Institute, launching the mega-church movement in the 20th century. Tens of thousands of pastors, including famous graduates Rick Warren, Bill Hybels, Bishop Blake, Walt Kallestad, and Sundo Kim of Korea, were mentored here" (see Hour of Power). 

But the truth is that Rick Warren's so called "time after time" return to Schuller Institute was not for any training. It was just few visits that Warren made to the Institute in order to share his testimony—that's it (see Warren and Schuller: Debunking An Urban Legend). But this is not discussed/revealed by Smith. So now the question is: Just who is deceiving who at this point? 



SMITH #17: "Schuller's Hour of Power website also described Rick Warren as one of the 'famous graduates' who had been 'mentored' at the Schuller Institute" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).
RESPONSE: See previous responses.



SMITH #18: "Schuller's influence over Rick Warren was so 'profound' and far-reaching that in 1995, fifteen years after he started Saddleback Church, Rick Warren was still describing Robert Schuller as having one of the 'many strong, Bible-believing churches' in Southern California" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).
RESPONSE: This remark about Robert Schuller by Rick Warren appears in his 1995 book The Purpose-Driven Church: Growth Without Compromising Your Message ( p. 38). And indeed, in 1995, this is the impression that Rick Warren (and many other pastors) had of Robert Schuller. Rick Warren at that time did not know of Schuller's serious drift away from orthodox, Christian teachings. But as the 1990s passed, Rick Warren began to see that he and Schuller were seeing things very differently. As Rick Warren has publicly explained: "I got a bunch of information about him, and then I also started seeing him have all kinds of nonbelievers speaking at his church" (Abanes, Rick Warren and the Purpose that Drives Him, p. 102).

Then, Schuller had Mormon author Steven Covey speak at his church. Rick Warren has publicly revealed: "I thought, This isn't right. How am I supposed to explain to all the ex-Mormons in my congregation why in the world Schuller has a Mormon up there talking?" (Abanes, Rick Warren and the Purpose that Drives Him, p. 102).

In response to Schuller's apparent pluralism, Warren sent a March 13, 1998 letter to Chet Tolson of Schuller's Churches Uniting in Global Missions (CUGM), resigning his position from the CUGM Council, telling Tolson that the Crystal Cathedral was "going in a very different direction than Saddleback Church."

Warren followed this letter up with another letter requesting that his name be remove "from the [CUGM] mailing list for updates" (Rick Warren, letter to Glen DeMaster, September 15, 1998).

Schuller then wrote Warren asking him to come back.

Warren responded with a 1999 package of information revealing the problems with Steven Covey and his Mormons views.

Afterward, Schuller continued to invite Rick Warren to speak at the Crystal Cathedral for church services and at his Institute, but he refused.

The only presence that the Crystal Cathedral has seen of any "Warren," was the recent appearance of Kay Warren at conference held by Schuller that featured a widely diverse collection of politicians, religious leaders (of all stripes), and social/cultural movers and shakers (see my article Kay Warren and Robert Schuller: And the Re-Think Conference). And Kay was there to talk about AIDS in the world. It had nothing to do with doctrine or theology.



SMITH #19: "Saddleback apologists were furiously trying to distance Rick Warren from Robert Schuller. Schuller had suddenly become a great embarrassment and an obvious spiritual liability—especially on the heels of New Age leader Gerald Jampolsky's 10/17/04 appearance on the Hour of Power. Saddleback kept insisting that Schuller's influence on Rick Warren was minimal" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).
RESPONSE: Here we have Smith's delusional conspiracy theory rearing its ugly head yet again. The facts have been given (see above remarks).



SMITH #20: "To counter the fall-out they even started describing Schuller as a 'heretic-liberal' and one of the 'true New Agers.' But it was too little too late. Prior to the sudden spotlight that had been thrown on the two of them, Saddleback had been very quiet regarding the spiritually wayward Schuller" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).
RESPONSE: This is actually a direct reference to me. I have called Schuller a heretic-liberal because that is what he is. And I did not state this as any kind of Rick Warren/Saddleback apologist, which is what Warren Smith is implying by his use of the word "they." But there is no "they" when it comes to me. I am an independent journalist who has responded online to the lies being spread about Rick Warren's critics because: a) it relates directly to one of my books; and b) scripture commands me as a Christian to stand for truth and expose falsehoods.

If Warren Smith would like to produce evidence that I have made my responses as a Saddleback apologist at the behest of Rick Warren (i.e., as part of a "they" contingency), then I would suggest he make that evidence available to the public for scrutiny, instead of simply making accusations. He also is suggesting in this comment that I have somehow been disingenuous in my labeling of Schuller as a heretic-liberal. If he has any information to support this implication, then I would ask that he make that evidence available as well.



SMITH #21: "Where did Rick Warren and his Purpose-Driven Church really stand with Schuller? What I had discovered in reading The Purpose Driven Life, was that no matter what Saddleback apologists were saying—even if Rick Warren hadn't personally crossed paths with Schuller in years — Schuller's teachings were at the very heart of Rick Warren's Purpose-Driven movement, including his 'Global P.E.A.C.E. Plan.' Rick Warren had nothing to gain and everything to lose if people truly understood how immersed he really was in Schuller's teachings. But it was all starting to leak out bit by bit" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).
RESPONSE: Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy. Conspiracy.
(For information on the mindset an paranoia of people who live under the shadow of conspiracies, see Selling Fear: Conspiracy Theories and End-Times Paranoia by Gregory Camp.)



SMITH #22: "Another of the many obvious Rick Warren links to Robert Schuller and the New Age/New Spirituality is through the Schuller concept of 'God's Dream.' On October 27, 2003 Rick Warren announced that the next weekend he would be introducing his P.E.A.C.E. Plan to 'help change the world.' He used the term 'God's Dream' to describe this P.E.A.C.E. Plan. He called it 'God's Dream For You—And The World.' While the explicit term 'God's Dream' is not to be found anywhere in the Bible, it is a term that Robert Schuller has been using for over thirty years" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).
RESPONSE: More word games. It is true that Rick Warren has talked about his dream for the P.E.A.C.E. Plan (and also in reference to the building of his own church). And Schuller has often used the word dream in his teachings regarding church leadership, church growth, and New Age concepts. But this does NOT mean the two men are using the word dream (or the phrase "God's dream") in the same way.

Rick Warren's use of the word "dream" dates all the way back to his first sermon at Saddleback in 1980. He listed several dreams he had for his church. And, in my opinion, it is more reminiscent of Martin Luther King's "I Have A Dream" speech in Washington D.C. than anything Schuller has ever said/written. Notice the cadence of Warren's sermon and how it is so very similar to the cadence we hear in King's famous speech:

WARREN'S DREAM SPEECH

KING'S DREAM SPEECH

• "It is a dream of a place where the hurting, the depressed, the frustrated, and the confused can find life, acceptance, help, hope, forgiveness, guidance, and encouragement." • "It is a dream of sharing the Good News of Jesus Christ with the hundreds of thousands of residents in south Orange County." • "It is a dream of welcoming 20,000 members into the fellowship of our church family—loving, learning, laughing, and living in harmony together." • "It is a dream of developing people to spiritual maturity through Bible studies, small groups, seminars, retreats, and a Bible School." • "It is a dream of equipping every believer for a significant ministry by helping them discover the gifts and talents God gave them." • "It is a dream of sending out hundreds of missionaries and church workers all around the world and empowering every member for a personal life mission in the world."

• "I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed..." • "I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slaveowners will be able to sit down together..." • "I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a desert state, sweltering with the heat of injustice and oppression, will be transformed..." • "I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin..." • "I have a dream that one day the state of Alabama, whose governor's lips are presently dripping with the words of interposition and nullification, will be transformed..." • "I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain..."

Smith, however, asserts that Warren presented his "God's dream" for the P.E.A.C.E. Plan based on  Schuller's heretical concepts and how he uses that language. But there is no documentation provided that would make such a definitive connection. Smith offers no evidence at all to back up his assertions that Warren was copying Schuller's language, thoughts, or intentions when announcing his P.E.A.C.E. Plan. As noted above in my response to SMITH #1, similarity of words/terms does NOT necessarily mean similarity of thought or meaning.



SMITH #23: "In his book The Purpose-Driven Church, Rick Warren states that in 1974—six years before he started Saddleback Church at the age of twenty-five—he read Robert Schuller's book, Your Church Has Real Possibilities. This Schuller book presented a young and impressionable Rick Warren with the Schuller concept of 'God's Dream' and how 'God's Dream' was inextricably linked to 'purpose.' In his 1974 book, Schuller wrote about 'God's dream' for your life,' stating: 'He has a dream for your life and your church' . . . . The phrase "'God's Dream' was also particularly prevalent in Schuller's 1982 book Self-Esteem: The New Reformation" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).
RESPONSE: At this point Smith has finally hit upon something. But what? It certainly does NOT prove that Rick Warren holds any of Schuller's theology or heretical-liberal doctrines. At most—again, I say, at most—it suggests that Rick Warren might have read Schuller's book prior to his 1980 serrmon and thought, "Wow, talking about 'God's dream' and using the word 'dream' in a sermon is pretty cool sounding, and it kind of creates an inspiring image for people wrap their minds around, too. I think I'm gonna lift that nifty little phrase and use it for my own teachings and purposes."

If this is indeed the case—and again I say IF this is the case—then it still proves nothing doctrinally/theologically about Rick Warren. It only proves that he likes to borrow other people's catchy phrases and make them his own for his own uses. That's about all.  And it certainly does not even hint at Rick Warren being some kind of deceptive, lying, unbiblical, under-handed, conniving, listening-to-another-spirit, New Ager who is leading the church down the road to Antichrist hell (which is what Warren Smith believes, see my article Warren Smith: The Rick Warren-Antichrist Conspiracy).

There is nothing wrong with hearing some word, turn of phrase, or catchy term and using that for one's own message/purposes. Pastors, teachers, and politicians do that sort of thing ALL THE TIME. I've done it myself! It doesn't mean that I am teaching, preaching, or believing everything said/taught by whomever I might have borrowed a phrase from? For example, when speaking about spiritual growth, I often say, "No pain, no gain." I don't even know who said that! (I hope it wasn't a New Ager).



SMITH #24: "Robert Schuller was calling for a 'kingdom building dream'—a 'New Reformation'—to redeem the world. He called it God's Dream to 'redeem society.' Twenty years later Rick Warren was calling for a kingdom building dream—a 'New Reformation'—to 'change the world.' As previously stated, he called it his P.E.A.C.E. Plan and described it as 'God's Dream For You—And The World.' I would later discover that Rick Warren's use of the term 'God's Dream' and his accompanying affirmation that it is 'going to happen' could be found in Robert Schuller's 1978 book Discover Your Possibilities. Schuller had written: 'Once you've got that dream and you know it's God's dream for your life, then be daring. Dare to say it. Let the redeemed of the Lord say so. Announce to the whole world that it's going to happen.' In Rick Warren's October 27, 2003 e-mail announcing his P.E.A.C.E. Plan and entitled 'God's Dream For You—And The World,' he wrote: 'THIS WEEKEND, I'll begin a series of five messages on God's dream to use you globally—to literally use YOU to change the world! I'll unveil our Global P.E.A.C.E. plan, and how God has uniquely prepared you for this moment of destiny…. The Global Peace Plan IS GOING TO HAPPEN'" (Reinventing Jesus Christ, Chapter 10 Update).

RESPONSE: Might this simply be more examples of Rick Warren borrowing terms, phraseology, and wording for his own personal use? Possibly. But again, this is saying NOTHING about Rick Warren's theology or doctrines. Nothing suggests that just because he is using these similar terms, he is meaning what Schuller means—especially since Rick Warren has consistently taught a scope of doctrine (theology, soteriology, thanatology, and eschatology) that is absolutely consistent  with scripture (see my articles The Doctrinal Essentials of Christianity—and Rick Warren, Saddleback Church: The Cross, Sin, and Hell and Rick Warren Preaches Salvation).



SMITH #25: "This use of 'God's Dream' and its direct connection to Robert Schuller is yet one more issue that has never been honestly addressed by Saddleback apologists."
RESPONSE: I don't know about "Saddleback apologists," but as for me, see above responses.



SMITH #26: "Saddleback apologist Richard Abanes even took it a step further. Carefully avoiding any mention of the term 'God's Dream,' and Rick Warren's specific use of the term 'God's Dream' in describing his 'Global P.E.A.C.E. Plan,' Abanes—like other Saddleback apologists