I am reading The Purpose-Driven Life along with other members of my church in a 40-day study of Rick Warrenâ€™s blockbuster book. The book contains both positives and negatives. On the positive side, no serious Christian could argue with the main points of the book, which are but a summary of what every Christian should be about: worship, fellowship, discipleship, ministry, and evangelism. Rick Warren is right on target with these as they are clear imperatives that appear in different ways throughout scripture.
There are, however, certain drawbacks to this best-seller that one would do well to pay attention to. Warrenâ€™s frequent proof-texting sometimes runs roughshod over the context of the verse in question with the result that one is sometimes left with a less-than-accurate understanding of the biblical writerâ€™s real intention. The use of paraphrased versions of the Bible (New Living Translation, The Message) also leaves much to be desired.
In this essay, I would like to focus on one particular area of concern. Warren appears to embrace a kind of dualism that is frequently heard in popular evangelical preaching today. In chapter 4, Warren explains that people are â€œmade to last forever,â€ and he embarks upon an explanation of the nature of the eternal state. He writes: â€œOne day your heart will stop beating. That will be the end of your body and your time on earth, but it will not be the end of you. Your earthly body is just a temporary residence for your spiritâ€ (p. 37). This passage seems to suggest that our non-physical self (the soul) is eternal while our physical self (the body) is only temporary. A mind/body dualism emerges here that is foreign to the Bible. Warren quotes 2 Corinthians 5:6 to explain the different mode of existence which believers have in â€œheavenâ€: â€œNow we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands.â€ From Warrenâ€™s explanation of this text, one is left with the impression that our future mode of existence in heaven is non-physical, being characterized by not having a physical body.
Yet this is not at all what Paul teaches in 2 Corinthians 5:1-10. In fact, Paul is teaching quite the opposite. Paul is arguing that our ultimate hope is that God will resurrect the bodies of believers after they die. The eternal state is very much a physical state. In the eternal state, Christians will not be â€œunclothedâ€ (2 Cor 5:4), but will have put on the clothing of a new resurrected, glorified body.
This hope of resurrection is actually the center of New Testament hope. Christians are supposed to look forward not only to heaven, but to resurrection. That is why Paul urged the Thessalonians who were burying their loved ones who had died: â€œ13 Brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who fall asleep, or to grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope. 14 We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. 15 According to the Lord’s own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise firstâ€ (1 Thess 4:13-16 NIV). Paul encouraged the Thessalonians who were grieving the death of their loved ones by telling them that God would resurrect their bodies just like He resurrected Jesusâ€™ body.
One of Godâ€™s purposes for Jesusâ€™ resurrection is that believers should look to Christâ€™s resurrection as an example of what He will do for them in the future. Consider Paulâ€™s teaching in 1 Corinthians 15:16-22: â€œ16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men. 20 But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.â€ Paulâ€™s argument is that if Christ has not been resurrected then believers wonâ€™t be resurrected either. He simply assumes that resurrection is what all Christians should be looking forward to after death.
In 1 Corinthians 6:12-20 Paul uses the doctrine of resurrection to refute those who say that the physical body is morally irrelevant to God. Paul argues that the believerâ€™s body is not for immorality but for the Lord because the Lord will one day raise up the believerâ€™s body just as Jesusâ€™ body was raised. Indeed, the physical body is called â€œthe temple of the Holy Spirit.â€ No dualism here. In fact, Paul is arguing against the very kind of mind/body dualism that has become so prevalent in the modern day.
We would all do well to keep in mind a purpose-driven resurrection. Godâ€™s ultimate purpose for the believer is that they should glorify Him forever in resurrected physical bodies. He wants us to believe His promise that we will be raised just as Jesus was. We wonâ€™t be like Casper the friendly ghost, disembodied â€œspiritsâ€ roaming to and fro upon the clouds. We will be ourselves again, as God always intended for us to be: whole, physical, sinless, perfected, glorifying him. Until we fix our eyes on that hope, we are hoping in something less than what God purposes for us.
In chapter 4, Warren completely misinterprets 1 Corinthians 2:9, which he quotes from the Living Bible: â€œNo mere man has ever seen, heard or even imagined what wonderful things God has ready for those who love the Lord.â€ Warren uses this verse to make the point that the human mind cannot comprehend what heaven will be like (p. 38). Yet when considered in context, 1 Corinthians 2:9 is clearly not talking about heaven, but about the cross of Jesus Christ (1 Cor 1:24). Indeed it is the wisdom that is â€œhiddenâ€ from the rulers of this age (1 Cor 2:7). Yet this wisdom has been revealed to believers â€œthrough the Spiritâ€ (1 Cor 2:10). Paulâ€™s point is not that something has been hidden from Christians but that something has been revealed to them that is not revealed to others. Christians can see and enjoy the wisdom of God in the cross. So Warren has completely misunderstood this text. Christians do in fact understand â€œwhat wonderful things God has ready for those who love the Lord.â€ As a matter of fact, this is what distinguishes believers from unbelievers. Believers â€œget it,â€ and unbelievers donâ€™t.
There are many examples throughout the book. Consider Warrenâ€™s argument in chapter 12 on â€œDeveloping Your Friendship with God.â€ In this section, Warren claims that a healthy friendship with God includes â€œaccusingâ€ God when one is not pleased with what God does. Warren uses Mosesâ€™ words in Exodus 33:12-17 from The Message to bolster his point: â€œâ€˜Look, you tell me to lead this people but you donâ€™t let me know whom youâ€™re going to send with me. . . . If Iâ€™m so special to you, let me in on your plans. . . . Donâ€™t forget, this is YOUR people, your responsibility. . . . If your presence doesnâ€™t take the lead here, call this trip off right now! How else will I know that youâ€™re with me in this, with me and your people? Are you traveling with us or not? . . .â€™ God said to Moses, â€˜All right. Just as you say; this also I will do, for I know you well and you are special to me.â€™â€ (quoted on pages 93-94). Does The Message really capture the content and tone of the conversation between God and Moses in this text? Compare that translation to the one found in the NASB, the translation widely regarded by scholars to be the most literal English translation: â€œ12 Then Moses said to the Lord, â€˜See, Thou dost say to me, â€œBring up this people!â€ But Thou Thyself hast not let me know whom Thou wilt send with me. Moreover, Thou hast said, â€œI have known you by name, and you have also found favor in My sight.â€ 13 Now therefore, I pray Thee, if I have found favor in Thy sight, let me know Thy ways, that I may know Thee, so that I may find favor in Thy sight. Consider too, that this nation is Thy people.â€™ 14 And He said, â€˜My presence shall go with you, and I will give you rest.â€™ 15 Then he said to Him, â€˜If Thy presence does not go with us, do not lead us up from here. 16 For how then can it be known that I have found favor in Thy sight, I and Thy people? Is it not by Thy going with us, so that we, I and Thy people, may be distinguished from all the other people who are upon the face of the earth?â€™ 17 And the Lord said to Moses, â€˜I will also do this thing of which you have spoken; for you have found favor in My sight, and I have known you by name.â€™â€ The Message makes it sound like Moses disrespects God, a notion that does not appear in the NASB.
nathaniel adam king
Naughty, naughty! Are you not aware that mouthing the purpose driven model will bring ‘swift destruction’. Just kidding, is it safe to say that this book is good if taken and read with full knowledge that it is by no means ‘perfect’?
I must confess that I have not ‘thoroughly’ read the book. Just sped-read it. Although I do have the Purpose Driven Church, as well as the Purpose Driven Life Journal (great shelf stuffers!)
Great essay, as always, Denny. But it is the PRETEXT of the whole “Purpose Driven” thing that is repulsive to me. I’m SICK of the business-modeling of the Church. What’s next, ministry under “Total Quality Management”? Maybe we need customer response cards next to the wine-cup holders in the pewbacks?
What does Warren say the “purpose” is? Is it to grow churches? Make disciples? Baptize people? Subdue the world for Christ? I don’t know…but evidently it isn’t done with ecclesiastic oversight. Sorry, congregationalists.
Warren’s points are within orthodoxy, it is his ecclesiology that is screwed up.
Good one! Down with dualism! Down with listening to Plato instead of Paul! Down with thinking that God is quitting on his creation! Yes, I can use exclamation points at the end of each of my sentences!
“Behold, I am making all things new (except, of course, the bodies of you human beings)!” – Pseudo-Jesus
Well, Plato did know that the study of the arts would lift our souls to something greater than ourselves–that contemplating the best of what is thought and said, if I may mix my quotations and contexts, would give us clarity as to the material and nonmaterial worlds. But then Paul says that too: down with the philosophies of men! down with imaginations! up with hope!
I just want to use exclamation points like Myles.
Terrific blog, Denny. Really terrific.
How on earth can you write soo much for fun??? it has got to hurt your head soo much muchless your fingers… :o)
i didn’t read all of it but very insightful
hope you have a good night..and tell your wife I said hello
I really enjoyed this entry. So far as I am aware, this is the first time I’ve seen the issue of Warren’s dualism being brought up. I was *very* pleased to read your refutation of Warrent position, which, penetrated the modern-day church.
Let me pick my bone with Warren now. Actually, it is not so much with Warren, but with his huge polularity within the church. Why is it that there is a plethora of churches across the country that read his 40 day study book, but you don’t hear of same thing being done with the Puritan writers, Reformers, Church fathers, or even such people like Schaeffer or W.A. Tozer?! If you listen to all the praise that has been given to Warren, you’d think he had envented this whole thing on his own. That there was no one before his who had thought of this simple formula – “it’s not about you, it’s about God.”
This hype about Warren tells me several things:
First, modern-day church in large has lost touch with its historic roots. This, of course, could be a product of modernistic thinking that says, “if it’s not new, it ain’t worth looking at.” Or, this could be an indication of a much more troubling trend in the church – the fact that our people forgot how to think for themselves (in his book, Harry Blamaires writes, “There is no longer a Christian mind.”) Otherwise, we would not need to wait until Rick Warren tells us that our lives are to be lived for God – we would be able to learn this truth from the Bible itself! We would not wish for a 40-day pre-packaged recepie for successful Christian life, but go to the Mystics to learn contemplation and prayer, and to the heroes of faith to learn the servant life of obidience and love. We would not shun away from a difficult readings of Puritans (which, I must admit, sometimes can be a hard thing to read) or Church Fathers. Instead, we would learn to read with a vocabulary in our hand and to expand our horizons of understanding. I can go on forever about this – the poor state of education, and particularly of education within the church, is one of my biggest pet peeves.
However, there is even more disturbing thought that lurks in the back of my mind. What if the church likes Rick Warren so much not because he is easy to read, but because he tell us what we want to hear? Sure, he opens the book with the statement, “It’s not about you.” But then in the rest of the book he proceeds to tell us how WE can have life full of purpose, joy, peace, ec. It is all about US, and what do WE get from following the Lord. What a difference it is from, say, Jonathan Edwards and his “The Purpose for Which God Created the World.” Could it be that Edwards and others like him uncomfortably disturbs us, when Warren in the end affirms our self-esteem? Could it be that the roots of the Warren-mania are so deep as to grow from the deepest recesses of our hearts? For I recognize in myself the deep-rooted sin that shouts “Me!” every time I open my mouth, perform an action, or think a thought.
In the end, God will work all things for good according to His purpose, and He will get all the glory. Until then – how does one deal with such books as “Purpose Driven Life” (not to mention the “Purpose Driven Church”)?
I forgot to mention – my friend Jeremy Gregory, who graduated with his MA from Criswell last year, has written his MA thesis on “Purpose Driven Life”, comparing it with the “Consolations of Philosophy” by Boethius. If you are interested in looking at it, I think you can get it from Linda or somebody esle in the Academic Deparment (??).
How about the absence of the Gospel in the book? His presentation of the questions we’ll be asked in Heaven is something… but not the Gospel. While I recognize the rewards issue is hotly debated (Can you tell me the difference between the Cherubim and Seraphim?), the idea that our faithfulness is the foundation of the Christian life is silly! The Christian life is about Christ’s continuing faithfulness to fallen, sinful people. Only when Christ is at the center do we begin to respond with sacrifices of prayer, praise and thanksgiving… and how weak they are! Thanks be to God for victory in Christ Jesus… not thanks for victory through trite self-help techniques or self-actualization!