"[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: The Rick Warren-Antichrist Conspiracy, which is 35-point refutation
of Smith's updates to his book Reinventing Jesus Christ).

(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).

---

WARREN SMITH #1: "Why do we talk about spiritual deception? . . . The apostle Paul also said in 2 Corinthians 2:11. '. . . lest Satan should get an advantage of us for we're not ignorant of his devices.' And I'm afraid that the church has become somewhat ignorant of a lot of the devices that are going on right now. . . . [The New Age movement] is a very serious movement and it's trying to usher in a false Christ. And that false Christ is literally at the door."
RESPONSE: Here we have the entire backdrop for what Warren Smith says regarding Rick Warren. According to Warren Smith, Rick Warren is part of a vast New Age push to usher in a false Christ! (also see Warren Smith: The Rick Warren-Antichrist Conspiracy and Warren Smith: Deception in Sacramento). And by implication, he is alleging (not-so-subtly) that Rick Warren, Saddleback, Purpose Driven, and Rick Warren's book The Purpose Driven Life are all "devices" being used by Satan (either by choice or in ignorance).

Putting Rick Warren into such a category (even loosely) is absurd. Rick Warren is fourth generation, dyed-in-the-wool Southern Baptist who preaches/teaches all of the essential doctrines of the Christian faith (see my article The Doctrinal Essentials of Christianity—and Rick Warren). He regularly teaches/preaches on the cross of Christ, salvation by grace alone through faith alone, sin, sinners, hell, the sin nature, and the place of repentance in salvation in Jesus Christ who is the ONLY way, the ONLY truth, and the ONLY life (see my mp3 sound clip listing titled Rick Warren Preaches Salvation and my article Saddleback Church: The Cross, Sin, and Hell). Moreover, the FOUNDATIONS course of doctrinal teachings that is offered at Saddleback not only advances these core doctrines of the faith, but also provides in-depth studies on the nature of God (historic, orthodox Trinitarianism), the nature of Man, the full divinity/humanity of Jesus, and the end-times (pretribulation).



WARREN SMITH #2: "I know in Rick Warren's book, The Purpose Driven Life, he starts off by saying, 'It's no accident that you're holding this book. It was like, 'God wants you to have this book.' And that's a common thing in the New Age. They go, 'It was meant to be. There's a reason for everything.' Well, you know, that just doesn't hold true. And when I read that in Rick's book, I just went, 'You know, I don't want you to tell me that God put this book in my hand because it's something that's gonna really to help me. Because I was reading it critically. And as I read his book, I became very concerned."
RESPONSE: Here we see a clear picture of how Warren Smith interprets all reality, all people, all events, all experiences. He sees, reads, and hears everything through the filter of his past involvement with the New Age movement. If someone happens to say/write something even remotely similar to something he heard/read while in the New Age, he interprets it as having New Age implications (or somehow being indirectly connected to the New Age). Although he left the New Age many years ago, it is still effectively controlling his life, which is a tragedy.

A perfect illustration of how he sees/hears everything through the emotional filter of his New Age background is this off-base interpretation of a passing remark in The Purpose Driven Life by Rick Warren, who said: "Before you were born, God planned this moment in your life. It is no accident that you are holding this book" (book dedication page).

Smith hears in these words the haunting echo of what he heard while in the New Age, where such a phrase was used to spiritually manipulate him. But unlike New Agers, Rick Warren is talking about God's sovereignty, foreknowledge, and predestination. He is saying that God is in control of all things, that nothing surprises God, and that it is no "accident" that readers have a book in their hands about Him. For those who accept Christ, their reading of the book was the Spirit leading and guiding them to salvation. In fact, right after his "no accident" comment, Rick Warren cites Ephesians 1:11, which is about the inheritance that Christians are predestined to receive from God: "It's in Christ that we find out who we are and what we are living for: Long before we first heard of Christ, . . . he had his eye on us, had designs on us for glorious living, part of the overall purpose he is working out in everything and everyone."

Rick Warren is making his statement from a Christian perspective (see my articles The Doctrinal Essentials of Christianity—and Rick Warren, Saddleback Church: The Cross, Sin, and Hell and Rick Warren Preaches Salvation). Knowing that Rick Warren is a Christian helps us accurately interpret his statement. If a New Ager had said the same thing, of course, they would have meant something else. In apologetics, looking at the person who is speaking is key to understanding what that person means when they say something. This is a standard practice in discernment. One must first see what someone believes theologically/doctrinally to rightly understand any other statements they make.

But Warren Smith practices his discernment backwards! Instead of looking at what a person believes/teaches, then interpreting their statements in light of that, he takes a statement, sees if it sounds New Age at all to him (based on his own past personal experiences). If so, he then goes back and re-interprets everything that person has said based on the New Age-sounding remark Smith happened to hear/see/read.



WARREN SMITH #3: "Some of the teachings in The Purpose Driven Life dovetailed with some of the New Age stuff."
RESPONSE: Actually, there is nothing in The Purpose Driven Life that is New Age. And I say this as a widely recognized Christian apologist who has spent many years discussing, exposing, and refuting false religious belief systems—including the New Age Movement (see some of my works). So how could Warren Smith see things so differently? It all comes down to how Warren Smith practices his brand of apologetics/discernment. In Deceived On Purpose (his critique of The Purpose Driven Life) Warren Smith relies on five highly problematic methods of "discernment," all of which fall under five tactics he uses to filter everything through his traumatic New Age experiences (see my article Warren Smith: Self-Deceived On Purpose):


By using such methods, however, anyone can be made to look like a New Ager—even Warren Smith. Take, for example, how Warren Smith uses word games to identify Eugene Peterson's The Message paraphrase of the Bible as a New Age tool of deception. Smith objects to the use of the word "Master" in The Message in reference to Jesus because "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).

But 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) might 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.

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.

Clearly, 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 and the contents of The Purpose Driven Life.



WARREN SMITH #4: "One of the things that happened in the New Age is that, each experience would kind of dovetail in to the next. You're on this literal journey. And that's why I get a little bit concerned with these, you know, like "40 Days of Purpose,"and these journeys. And you're kind of moving along.  And it kind of reminds me, in the Bible where it says, 'Ever learning and never coming to the knowledge of truth.' Now, I'm not saying that's true of The Purpose Driven Life. I know there's some solid Scripture that's in there. But, for instance what I was learning in my New Age journey was that I was divine [Smith then recommends his book Reinventing Jesus Christ: The New Gospel]. . . .
RESPONSE: At this point we have Warren Smith talking out of both sides of his mouth in order to appear non-judgmental, while at the same time still being able to implant into the minds of his listeners that Rick Warren's 40 Days of Purpose campaign and his book The Purpose Driven Life are indeed comparable to the New Age journey of spirituality. If Warren Smith is not making such a comparison between the New Age "journey" and Warren's 40 Days of Purpose or The Purpose Driven Life, then why bother mentioning the materials at all?

Smith's underlying message is revealed via the resource he recommends immediately after talking about Rick Warren's materials. Warren Smith tells the audience to refer to his book Re-Inventing Jesus Christ: The New Gospel, which focuses heavily on exposing the false New Age Christ being preached throughout the world. And when anyone goes to Smith's website where the book is available in PDF form, the introductory note from Warren Smith directly ties Rick Warren to what is exposed in Reinventing Jesus Christ: The New Gospel. His "Note to the Reader" explains:

Here we see exactly what Warren Smith believes concerning Rick Warren—i.e., the Saddleback Church senior pastor is just another facet of an oncoming New Age "PEACE Plan" that will usher in an era of global persecution wherein Christians and the biblical Christianity are going to be eliminated! It is a widespread conspiratorial trap that is being laid, and Rick Warren's work (his writings, his teachings, his interviews, his P.E.A.C.E. Plan) are leading the church into the Antichrist's trap, as these further statements by Warren Smith show:

This is the message that Warren Smith wanted to get out to Calvary Chapel, Costa Mesa, but for whatever reasons, he felt that he could not say it so boldly from the pulpit. So, instead of elaborating on the great trap that is being laid for everyone by the Antichrist, he simply mentioned Rick Warren (and his materials) in conjunction with the New Age spirituality "journey," then told people to go read Reinventing Jesus Christ at his website for free, which would take them not only to the book, but also to the above remarks about Rick Warren (see above). 

This is a highly deceptive and manipulative maneuver by Warren Smith, especially because, as we shall see, his objections/accusations regarding Warren have no merit.



WARREN SMITH #5: "When I was reading The Purpose Driven Life. . . . I was really surprised when he started off quoting from The Message. . . . But then when he introduced 'purpose,' he introduced Bernie Siegel, who's a New Age leader with a spirit guide named George. And I just couldn't figure out, 'Why in the world is this man introducing purpose, the heart of his book, by referencing a New Age leader, Bernie Siegel."
RESPONSE: This is a common objection against Rick Warren—i.e., he quotes non-Christians (e.g., New Agers, atheists, people of other religions, Roman Catholics, etc.). But this doesn't mean that he is supporting or agreeing with their entire worldview. Quoting Bernie Siegel doesn't link Rick Warren to the New Age any more than his quoting of the atheist Bertrand Russell ("Unless you assume God, the question of life's purpose is meaningless") links him to atheism.

Rick Warren feels, as do I, that a person does not have to be a Christian in order to make an astute observation, or say something that is true. All "truth" (wherever it may be found) is God's truth. For example, a true observation about the way people think or feel is a true observation—no matter who says it. So if I quote something that is true in order to make a point, then it really doesn't matter who said it, whether they were a Buddhist, an atheist, or a space alien! On my own website, for instance, I have quoted Oscar Wilde, who said: "Music is the art which is most nigh to tears and memory." Does this link me in any way to homosexuality? Hardly.

Christians as far back as the first century were quoting pagans in hopes of communicating the truths of the Gospel. They saw that unbelievers, including the Greek philosophers, had made astute observations about God and possessed some truths consistent with Christianity. In the Gospel of John, for instance, we find the Greek word logos ("Word") being used to describe Jesus. Logos was a Greek philosophical term that represented "reason" as a sort of bridge between the unreachable God and earthly matter. Hence, Jesus, as the eternal logos, is the bridge between God and man.

Like John, Paul the apostle also quoted various pagans in his attempts to share the good news of Jesus Christ with the unbelieving world. The following is excerpted from my book Rick Warren and the Purpose that Drives Him. 

Are we now going to say that John and Paul can (or should be) tied to Greek paganism? I don't think so. It must also be noted here that Warren Smith's condemnation of Rick Warren for quoting an unbeliever like Bernie Siegel is the height of hypocrisy given Smith's own use of a quote by Bob Dylan to prove a point of truth during his lecture at Calvary Chapel, Sacramento (see my article Warren Smith: Deception in Sacramento). Smith unflinchingly stated: "In a song that Bob Dylan did back in the '60s, he said, 'don't follow leaders, watch your parking meters.' And that's pretty much, you cannot just follow leaders. The Holy Spirit has got to lead you."

When I first heard Warren Smith make this remark, I couldn't believe my ears. It has added to his sins—i.e., the sin of hypocrisy. One of the very things Warren Smith condemns Rick Warren and others for is quoting nonbelievers, particularly nonbelievers who hold a non-biblical religious view (see above response to Smith #3). And here Warren Smith is, quoting and appealing to none other than Bob Dylan—i.e., the lyrics from his 1965 song "Subterranean Homesick Blues," from his Bringing It All Back Home album.

In 1965, "Dylan confessed to not having a specific belief in Jesus and even struggled with the relevance of it all. "Everybody talks about names that strike familiar chords. Jesus Christ. They say, 'Look at all the good he did.' But I ask, 'Where? How? When? For who?' And look at what they did to him. Everybody's talking about how he really felt, but it's such a long time ago, you can't really know. You really just have to believe. And that's a dangerous business, just believing. You have to sacrifice a lot" (Scott Marshall, "Bob Dylan's unshakable monotheism—Part I: The 1960s," Jewsweek). The above news story also revealed the following about Dylan's religious views in 1965:

Currently, Bob Dylan's religions views are still hardly compatible with Christianity. As a 2003 New York Times article revealed, "I believe in a God of time and space, but if people ask me about that, my impulse is to point them back toward those songs. I believe in Hank Williams singing 'I Saw the Light.' I've seen the light, too.'' Dylan says he now subscribes to no organized religion (John Pareles, "A Wiser Voice Blowin' In the Autumn Wind," New York Times, September 28, 1997). And more recently, in 2003, we learn the following about Dylan's current religious views:


Larry Charles made these observations based on Dylan's actions in recent years past that removed him far form Christianity, although he claimed at one time to have been a born-again Christian:


So, what we have here is a situation where Warren Smith apparently thinks it is just fine for him to quote not only a unbeliever, but an unbeliever who has claimed to be a born-again Christian, while still denying Christianity! But it is not okay for Rick Warren to quote an unbeliever. That is hypocrisy. And it also shows the validity of my response in Smith #3—i.e., "Rick Warren feels, as do I, that a person does not have to be a Christian in order to make an astute observation, or say something that is true. All "truth" (wherever it may be found) is God's truth.

For example, a true observation about the way people think or feel is a true observation (like Bob Dylan)—no matter who says it. So if I quote something that is true in order to make a point, then it really doesn't matter who said it, whether they were a Buddhist, an atheist, or a space alien! On my own website, for instance, I have quoted Oscar Wilde, who said: "Music is the art which is most nigh to tears and memory." Does this link me in any way to homosexuality? Hardly. Warren Smith quoted Bob Dylan, does that make him a confused, false born-again Christian, who has invented his own personal religion using snippets of Judaism, Christianity, and whatever else? Of course not.

Warren Smith, in making his remark about Bob Dylan, completely dismantled every criticism he has ever made about Rick Warren quoting unbelievers. Not only was it a self-contradictory remark that he failed to even see, but it also made him nothing less than a hypocrite. In my opinion, Warren Smith might do far better as an apologist if he started paying more attention to his own words, than the words of others.



WARREN SMITH #6: "Maybe Rick Warren didn't know that [about Siegel]. Maybe he just, you know, Bernie Siegel's a doctor, and he uses that in his [book]. So I started tracing around. Lo and behold, I end up on Robert Schuller's website. Robert Schuller said that Bernie Siegel is one of the greatest physicians of the 20th century. And Bernie Siegel had endorsed one of Robert Schuller's books in 1995. And then I noticed on the website it said that that Rick Warren was a graduate of Robert Schuller's Institute for Successful Church Leadership."
RESPONSE: Here we have some classic Warren Smith lines of guilt by association. The line of guilt by association is as follows:

1. Bernie Siegel is a New Ager.
2. Bernie Siegel endorses Robert Schuller and Robert Schuller endorses Bernie Siegel.
3. Robert Schuller's views are comparable/equal to those of Bernie Siegel.
4. Rick Warren is a graduate of Robert Schuller's Institute for Successful Church Leadership.
5. Rick Warren's views are comparable/equal to those of Bernie Siegel.

This is no way to do apologetics. 

As for Warren being a graduate of Robert Schuller's Institute for Successful Church Leadership, this was an event that occurred nearly thirty years ago and was simply part of Warren's studies during the last year he was in seminary! In fact, as par for his course of study, he attended the conferences and church meetings of several different church growth leaders. It was study! That was the only time he went through the Institute for Successful Church Leadership. As Rick Warren explained in a now-public letter to Steve Blackwell, "In 1979, while in seminary in Texas I was given 3 scholarships to attend 3 different pastor’s conferences in California. One of the 3 conferences was held at Garden Grove Community Church. It was a good conference and challenged to “start where people are” when sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ. I still think that is a good idea. However I also noticed that the church did not seem to take them much further spiritually" (for full text, see letter to Steve Blackwell). As for how closely tied Warren is to Schuller theologically, please see my article Warren and Schuller: Debunking An Urban Legend.



WARREN SMITH #7: "Even Rick Warren's wife said, you know, that when they went to the Institute for Successful Church Leadership, way back when Rick was just starting his church, she said that Schuller had a profound influence on him."
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. I also had both Kay and Rick Warren review this part of their history, and it was approved by them.



WARREN SMITH #8: "The oneness that the New Age is purporting is in the flesh. . . . What they're saying is that all of humanity is God. Each person is a cell in the body of God and Christ. We awaken, they say, to the understanding that we are God and that we are Christ. . . . What hinders this movement of love through the cells of humanity? Those who do not believe that they're God. They do not believe that they are divine. . . . We are not playing our part in the body. We are hindering the body. And we are hindering the ability for the world to come to peace. There's a world peace movement that is getting going now. The New Age is very strong behind it. . . . But this idea that God is IN everything because love is all there is, and God is love. Therefore, God is in everything. . . . And also on the [Robert Schuller] website, the New Century Version of the Bible is being advertised. And that was the Bible version that Rick Warren picked out of the, I think, 12 or 15 that he was using, for his quote of Ephesians 4:6. . . . And I'm reading Rick Warren's book, and he says, using the New Century Version, he says: 'God rules everything, is everywhere, and is IN everything.' And I went, 'Oh, Lord, you want me to write another book? I've got to quit my job. And that's what I did. I wrote Deceived On Purpose: The New Age Implications of the Purpose Driven Church. I'm sorry. I'm not questioning Rick Warren's motives, or anything else. But he is transitioning the church into New Age teachings by bringing up Bernie Siegel; by saying God is IN everything."
RESPONSE: Here we have one of the most absurd suggestions/accusations that Warren Smith is propagating—i.e., that Rick Warren is somehow seeking to spread pantheism (God is all), or panentheism (God is in all), via his referencing of Ephesians 4:6 out of the New Century Version of the Bible. Smith is building an entire accusation (and a serious one at that) on an isolated word, in direct contradiction to a plethora of quotes and statements by Rick Warren, wherein he resoundingly condemns the New Age and pantheism.

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.



WARREN SMITH #9: "And I know that he's had his apologists write books trying to counter a lot of our objections. Frankly, the one objection on that one was, his chief apologist said, 'In 1997, Rick Warren said that God is not in everything. That's pantheism.' And I'm going, 'Yeah, so? Five years later why is he saying it? I mean, if he knows it's pantheism, why would he pick a—? Out of all his Bible versions, why would he pick something—? Our God's not a God of confusion."
RESPONSE: I am going to respond to this remark in a very personal way since it is directed personally at me and at my book titled Rick Warren and the Purpose that Drives Him.

First, I am not now, nor have I ever been, one of Rick Warren's apologist, "chief" or otherwise. 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 Warren Smith's rebuttle to my remarks about Rick Warren and pantheism, he did not provide accurate information. Rick Warren's condemnations of the New Age and pantheism are not limited to a single quote from 1997, which is what Warren Smith implied. 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 (see previous Warren Smith #8 response). Rick Warren is no pantheist or panentheist.



WARREN SMITH #10: "And the other thing is: If he legitimately saw that that could confuse people, you'd think he might pull it out at the next edition. . . . You know, you'd think he'd pull that out. Maybe get Bernie Siegel out of there, too, while he's thinking about it [audience laughter].
RESPONSE: Warren Smith is assuming Rick Warren actually sees some legitimate problem! The fact is that Warren doesn't see his use of the New Century Version as confusing at all. And it's not confusing to a lot of other people either. But it IS confusing to Warren Smith who is extraordinarily sensitive to anything that reminds him of his association with the New Age. It makes HIM uncomfortable and HE doesn't like it. And he expects others to feel the same way. If they don't, then they are blinded, or deceivers, or ignorant (see previous Warren Smith #2 response). Moreover, the version Rick Warren quoted is NOT the only Bible version that translates Ephesians 4:6 in a supposedly New Age way by saying God is in "all" or everything:
 

Are all of these Bibles secretly advancing New Age pantheism/panentheism because they say God is "in all"? Not likely. God's immanence is being communicated by the New Century Version when it says, God is in everything (or when the other translation say God is in all). The rendering choice is NOT seeking to communicate some kind of New Age doctrine of pantheism or panentheism. But that is how Warren Smith is reading it because he is so hyper-sensitive to anything that sounds in the least bit familiar to him as a New Age word, phrase, or term. He is still looking at everything as a New Ager—which is not how the average person, including Rick Warren, is going to read the New Century Version (or any of the other versions listed above).

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.



WARREN SMITH #11: "At the end of the book, talking about Acts 1, when Jesus is about to be taken up, he [Rick Warren] says that Jesus said that essentially, 'prophecy is none of our business.' I'm going, WHAT! Excuse me. . . that's how I got saved. I got saved because the real Jesus told us about signs at the end of time. And to say that prophecy is none of our business—
RESPONSE: Here is what Warren wrote: "When the disciples wanted to talk about prophecy, Jesus quickly switched the conversation to evangelism. He wanted them to concentrate on their mission in the world. He said in essence, 'The details of my return are none of your business. What is your business is the mission I've given you. Focus on that!"

This small quote near the end of The Purpose Driven Life has caused endless gnashing of teeth by countless individuals who responded in a knee-jerk fashion, denouncing Rick Warren's audacity for daring to discourage the study of prophecy. But is that what Warren was doing? Is he condemning prophecy as a legitimate and rewarding aspect of Bible study? The Rick Warren haters obsessed with prophecy say "YES," and have used this short statement to accuse Rick Warren of practically wanting to gut the whole Bible of prophecy.

But nothing could be further form the truth. In fact, prophecy is taught at Saddleback in the FOUNDATIONS maturity course of doctrinal teachings for members of the church. The course's section on "The Second Coming" features segments on:


Each of these parts are totally compatible with the eschatology of Calvary Chapel—and I say this as a current member of Saddleback, and also a former long-time attender of Calvary Chapel. Moreover, the importance of these doctrines to Saddleback is plain to see, given the fact that they are included in the book, which is sub-titled, "11 Core Truths to Build Your Life On." The simple point that Rick Warren is making in his book is: Don't become obsessed with prophecy to the point of ignoring your mission on earth to serve God and serve humanity.

Nowhere has Rick Warren ever stated that prophecy is something which should not be studied, appreciated, or enjoyed. His point is that an unhealthy obsession with prophecy is where Christians must be careful, especially since Christ himself seemed to rebuke his disciples for asking him about certain aspects of the end-times that no one will ever know because it is not our place to know such things. As Acts 1:6-8 reads: 

"[T]hey asked him, 'Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?' He said to them: "It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."

Rick Warren, as is his way, has simply taken this verse and attempted to put it into his own, 21st century, down-to-earth, laid back, California, edgy way.



WARREN SMITH #12: "And then I see that Brian McLaren, leader of the emerging church, said the same thing! He's talking about Acts 1, and he says, prophecy, and he used the same words, 'it's none of our business.'"
RESPONSE: Brian McLaren is not the leader of the emerging church. There is no "leader" of the emerging church. Smith, like so many critics of the emerging church, seem to think that it 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 emerging church. In reality, 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. Rick Warren has never endorsed the Emerging Church movement as a whole (see my article Roger Oakland: Truthteller or Storyteller). He believes that it is an important part of what is happening across the Christian landscape, and that it is something everyone needs to watch, both the good and the bad parts of it.



WARREN SMITH #13: "But the thing that was really interesting is that pioneer-matriarch New Age leader, Alice Bailey, years ago talking about the coming of the false New Age Christ, said. . . . Alice Bailey, in 1948 said, if our work (there's a lot of work being done in the church right now, looks good, but what about the theology that's behind it), if our work is rightly done, he—her Christ—will come at the set and appointed time. How, where, or when he will come is 'none of our concern.' That's pretty close to 'none of our business.'"
RESPONSE: Comparing Alice Bailey with Rick Warren is ludicrous. Bailey denied every tenet of Christianity and was an all-out, full-blown, Mind Science, cult leader. Rick Warren preaches/teaches and embraces all of the essential doctrines of the Christian faith (see my article The Doctrinal Essentials of Christianity—and Rick Warren). He regularly teaches/preaches on the cross of Christ, salvation by grace alone through faith alone, sin, sinners, hell, the sin nature, and the place of repentance in salvation in Jesus Christ who is the ONLY way, the ONLY truth, and the ONLY life (see Rick Warren Preaches Salvation and Saddleback Church: The Cross, Sin, and Hell). And yet Warren Smith is putting them both in the same category merely because Rick Warren said to be careful to not get fixated on prophecy.



WARREN SMITH #14: "[Alice Bailey said] . . . 'our work is to do our utmost on as large a scale as possible to bring about right human relations. For his coming depends on our work.' Rick Warren said, 'If you want Jesus to come back sooner, focus on fulfilling your mission, not prophecy.'"
RESPONSE: The sentence "If you want Jesus to come back sooner, focus on fulfilling your mission, not prophecy" is related to us accomplishing what we need to accomplish in obedience to God's commands, as God's children, with regard to what God wants us to do while we are here. Obviously, when all is accomplished, according to scripture, Christ will return.

This remark by Rick Warren, ironically, is quite similar to a comment I have heard many times during sermons delivered at various Calvary Chapels. It basically goes like this: "Did you know that Jesus is waiting to return until the Gospel is preached everywhere? And as soon as that last person accepts Jesus, then He will return. So, if you want Jesus to return, it's up to you to go out there and evangelize. Tell as many people as possible about Jesus because you never know who that last person is going to be. And whoever they are, as soon as they come to Christ, then it's all over, and Jesus will return."



WARREN SMITH #15: "In the Lord's prayer, Eugene Peterson [The Message paraphrase]. . . .  . he inserts into the Lord's prayer, instead of 'in earth as it is in heaven," he says, 'as above, so below.' . . . The New Age, editors of the New Age magazine, said that 'as above, so below' means that God is not only transcendent, he is immanent IN everyone and everything. And 'as above, so below' was a saying I was very familiar with in the New Age.
RESPONSE: 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). Nor does it logically follow that Peterson was seeking to spread pantheism. 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.