Dr Mike Johnston
Deceivers are a coagulation of corruption gathering everywhere. Most recognizable and insidious is the lying liberal media hiding behind the First Amendment directed by a cabal of deviants committed to propagating a godless political agenda based on Leviticus 18 values using intimidation and prevarication as their stock in trade to get there. Its deserved title is fake news and more and more American’s like fiddle man Charlie Daniel’s are recognizing it and speaking out against it: “The news is not about news anymore. It’s about protecting some people, destroying others and shoving a socialist agenda down the collective throats of America.”
In all honesty, when the term fake news began appearing in the 2016 presidential election, I wasn’t that surprised. Several years ago, I heard Rush Limbaugh explain the phenomenon to a dismayed caller concerned about the puzzling effectiveness of despicable defamations marshaled against innocent people while casting truth to the wind,
“The evidence is irrelevant; it’s the seriousness of the charge that matters.”
Since the seriousness of an accusation now takes precedence over its truthfulness, by default it enforces it. This not only empowers deceivers with a ready tool for destruction, it renders a defense impossible for honest men. To wit, Mark Twain was correct in lamenting, “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled.”
Mr. Twain’s axiom is the essence of this chapter highlighting its predictable expectation. For all who think it could never happen to us, it not only can, it already has. A shocking fake news story infiltrated the church some 40 years ago, lacking reliable evidence to support it and yet was believed and ballyhooed simply because of the seriousness of the charge …
“The PreTrib Rapture is a Giant Hoax
that didn’t exist until 1830”
Considering the incalculable number of Christians holding forth the PreTrib rapture as the “blessed hope” (Titus 2:13), this is a very serious allegation. I know because I witnessed its damage first hand. However, while I was for a period deceived by this, over time I began spotting inconsistencies in the argument warranting a closer investigation, which ultimately produced the following summary observation:
This 1830 rapture origin allegation is itself a recently concocted giant hoax.
I discovered it originated with a disgruntled and delusional rapture-loathing reporter named Dave MacPherson (DM). I use the word delusional cautiously but purposely. While DM has every right to his opinion. He does not however have the right to invent his own facts when stating it. That isn’t scholarship. It’s scandalous. How his conscience allows him to get away with this is I’m afraid a testimony to Paul’s warning: “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron” (1 Timothy 4:1-2).
THE GLOBAL WARMING SCHEME
New Evidence Debunks Manmade Global Warming
And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness (2 Thessalonians 2:10-12)
Global warming is an elaborately contrived scheme perpetrated by Al Gore and the leaders of the New World Order (NWO) who have banded together to control society through crisis management while enriching themselves along the way. Please take note from the following Wikipedia comments that the bottom line (as in the 2008 election) is change [Dr. Mike’s comments are in brackets]:
Crisis management is the process by which an organization deals with a major event that threatens to harm the organization [in this instance the world], its stakeholders, or the general public. Three elements are common to most definitions of crisis: (a) a threat to the organization [or the world], (b) the element of surprise [we haven’t planned for this], and (c) a short decision time [FEMA control]. Certain politicians and scientists now argue that “crisis is a process of transformation where the old system can no longer be maintained.” Therefore the fourth defining quality is the need for change [conformity to NWO ideals].
In the first chapter of Romans, Paul warns that any society rejecting the Creator will become a society that worships the creation: Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things (Romans 1:22-23). Nowhere is this more evident than with the prevaricators of global warming who claim scientific consensus that the earth is becoming increasingly hotter and man is to blame for it. But is this really the view held by science? No it is not as Philip Stott, Professor of Biogeography, University of London warns:“The attempts of environmentalists to bolster the myth of human-induced global warming is downright immoral.”
World Net Daily reported the following: A scientist whose reservations about “global warming” have been officially endorsed by tens of thousands of other scientists is accusing the U.N. of using “mob rule” to generate fear-mongering climate change reports intended to scare national leaders into submitting to its worldwide taxation schemes.
“Science has always progressed on the basis of observations, experiments, and thoughts published by individual scientists and sometimes pairs or small groups of scientific coworkers; except at the U.N.” said Art Robinson, a research professor of chemistry and co-founder of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, said in a recent column in Human Events.
Robinson’s concern over the political manipulation of science earlier led him to launch the Petition Project, a compilation of more than 31,000 scientists – with more names arriving daily – who have voluntarily signed their names to the following statement:
“There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.”
Here are additional facts globalists were hoping you never read.
New research from one of the world’s most prestigious scientific organizations indicates that cosmic rays and the sun — not manmade carbon emissions — are the major factors influencing global climate.
“The science is now all-but-settled on global warming, convincing new evidence demonstrates, but Al Gore, the IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change) and other global warming doomsayers won’t be celebrating,” writes Lawrence Solomon, executive director of Energy Probe, in Canada’s Financial Post.
“The new findings point to cosmic rays and the sun — not human activities — as the dominant controller of climate on Earth.”
The findings, published in the journal Nature, come from CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, one of the world’s largest centers for scientific research involving 60 countries and 8,000 scientists at more than 600 universities and national laboratories, according to Solomon.
CERN — the organization that invented the World Wide Web — built a stainless steel chamber that precisely re-created the Earth’s atmosphere.
“In this chamber, 63 CERN scientists from 17 European and American institutes have done what global warming doomsayers said could never be done — demonstrate that cosmic rays promote the formation of molecules that in Earth’s atmosphere can grow and seed clouds.” And the cloudier it is, the cooler it will be, Solomon notes.
“Because the sun’s magnetic field controls how many cosmic rays reach Earth’s atmosphere (the stronger the sun’s magnetic field, the more it shields Earth from incoming cosmic rays from space), the sun determines the temperature on Earth.”
So when the sun’s magnetic field is strongest, fewer cosmic rays impact the Earth, which in turn leads to decreased cloud formation and warmer temperatures.
The link between cosmic rays and global warming was first proposed by two Danish scientists in 1996, and was immediately denounced by the IPCC.
But CERN scientist Jasper Kirkby, a British experimental physicist, accepted the Danes’ theory. He told the scientific press in 1998 that it “will probably be able to account for somewhere between half and the whole of the increase in the Earth’s temperature that we have seen in the last century.”
It took Kirkby nearly 10 years to convince the CERN bureaucracy to proceed with his plan to create the chamber that replicates the Earth’s atmosphere and has produced the recent results.
But CERN “remains too afraid of offending its government masters to admit its success,” observes Solomon, author of “The Deniers: The World-Renowned Scientists Who Stood Up Against Global Warming Hysteria, Political Persecution, and Fraud.”
CERN told Kirkby and his team to downplay the results by stating “that cosmic radiation is only one of many parameters.”
Solomon concludes: “CERN, and the Danes, have in all likelihood found the path to the Holy Grail of climate science. But the religion of climate science won’t yet permit a celebration of the find.”
 Here’s the ponzi portion: First, Gore sets up a company that will invest in other companies that will benefit from global warming alarmism; Second, Gore gets some Hollywood types to fund and produce a movie designed to scare the c-c-carbon out of the population; Third, Gore travels the world promoting this movie, while pushing the view that a cataclysm is imminent if the world doesn’t immediately act; Fourth, an adoring media falls for the con hook, line, and sinker. Rather than debunking the flaws in the theories, the media promote every word of it while advancing the concept that Gore’s views represent those of an overwhelming majority of scientists; Fifth, scared governments and citizens across the globe invest in alternative energy programs driving up the shares of companies Gore’s group has already invested in; Sixth, Gore and his cronies make billions as they laugh all the way to the bank at the stupidity of their fellow citizens
The Da Vinci Code has been on the New York Times Bestseller List since its release in April 2003. In less than 2 years it has become a bestseller in 150 countries and one of the most widely read books of our time.
Author Dan Brown has done what many authors only dream of doing. He has written a book “everyone” is talking about. All over the world people are discussing his upscale murder mystery that teases readers with provocative theories about history, religion, and the arts.
This novel, however, is more than a page-turning murder mystery. The Da Vinci Code is a conspiracy theory that leaves many readers wondering whether everything they have believed about Christ and the Bible is wrong.
A reviewer from Booksense says, “This is one of those rare books that comes along and makes you question everything you thought you knew about religion, art, and what you were taught in school. It’s fast-paced, enthralling, and simply impossible to put down.”
The Da Vinci Code begins with a lengthy list of acknowledgments and then a “fact page” designed to leave the impression that the novel is based on careful research of little-known facts.
One of the book’s main characters is Robert Langdon, a fictional Harvard professor of religious symbology. Claiming years of research, the professor maintains that for 1,700 years, the church has been covering up the real truth about Jesus. His views are later echoed by a fictional British royal historian referred to as Sir Leigh Teabing who says things like, “almost everything our fathers taught us about Christ is false” (The Da Vinci Code, p.235).
The title of the book comes from the claim that Leonardo Da Vinci—along with other notables like Sir Isaac Newton and Victor Hugo—was a member of a secret society entrusted with the truth about Jesus. The secret of this group (The Priory of Sion) is that Jesus had a daughter by Mary Magdalene. Mary, according to the Priory, was the true Holy Grail who bore the royal bloodline of Jesus on earth. This, according to the professor, is a fact the church will kill to suppress.
What many readers fail to keep in mind is that The Da Vinci Code is fiction. Worse yet, the story rests not on careful research, but on a documented fraud passed off as truth. The idea that Leonardo was a member of The Priory of Sion is based on a document proven by a French court of law to be a forgery and a hoax (The Truth Behind the Da Vinci Code by Richard Abanes, Harvest House Publishers, pp.48-57).
The Da Vinci Code’s “alternative view of history” also falsely states that Jesus was not regarded as a God until the fourth century when the Roman emperor Constantine decided it was in his own political interests to unite the empire by giving Jesus “an impenetrable cloak of divinity” (The Da Vinci Code, p.233).
To make the claim plausible, fictional historian Teabing says, “The most profound moment in Christian history” occurred when “Constantine commissioned and financed a new Bible, which omitted those gospels that spoke of Christ’s human traits and embellished those gospels that made Him godlike. The earlier gospels were outlawed, gathered up, and burned” (The Da Vinci Code, p.234).
The Da Vinci Code claims that some of the documents Constantine tried to destroy managed to survive in scrolls in 1945 at Nag Hammadi, Egypt. These scrolls allegedly “highlight glaring historical discrepancies and fabrications, clearly confirming that the modern Bible was compiled and edited by men who possessed a political agenda—to promote the divinity of the man Jesus Christ and use His influence to solidify their own power base” (The Da Vinci Code, p.234).
The ancient texts found at Nag Hammadi, however, were not “lost books of the Bible,” as Teabing claims. They were the writings of a mystery religion known as Gnosticism. Gnostics viewed spirit as good and matter as evil. They denied the physical body and crucifixion of Jesus and emphasized a secret knowledge received only by those initiated into the religion. The early church rejected their teachings long before Constantine.
But even if The Da Vinci Code doesn’t stand up under scrutiny, is it possible that the Bible has been altered through thousands of years of countless copies and versions? This is the kind of question that is best answered by those who have applied the principles of science to manuscript evidence. Scholars spend lifetimes examining all available manuscripts and fragments of manuscripts. They note and map any variations of spelling or wording that show up in families of manuscripts that have been copied from a common source. In addition they analyze the writings of second and third century church fathers who left extensive quotes of the Scriptures they were reading and studying.
On the basis of such research, scholars assure us that our Bible is a highly reliable representation of the original manuscripts. In The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable, F. F. Bruce writes, “To sum up, we may quote the verdict of the late Sir Frederic Kenyon, a scholar whose authority to make pronouncements on ancient MSS was second to none: ‘The interval then between the data of original composition and the earliest extant evidence become so small to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scripture have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established’ ” http://www.worldinvisible.com/library/ffbruce/ntdocrli/ntdocont.htm; The Bible and Archaeology, New York and London: Harper, 1940).
Backed by such evidence, the Bible also remains the all-time bestselling and most widely read book in the world. Challengers come and go. What remain are the words of those who were willing to die for their claim that they personally witnessed the miraculous life, death, and resurrection of the Son of God. One of those witnesses wrote, “For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty” (2 Peter 1:16).
Note: For additional answers to questions like, Could the Gnostic gospels be lost books of the Bible? and Did Constantine burn ancient books that portray a different view of Christ? please visit our Web site at http://www.rbcdavincicode.org or write for the Discovery Series booklet The Da Vinci Code: Separating Fact From Fiction. — Mart De Haan
Dr. Mike Johnston, Editor
The Emerging Church is a very dangerous and deceptive movement in that it claims to be Christian. The term ‘Emerging Church’ is used to describe a broad, controversial cadre seeking to use culturally sensitive approaches to reach the postmodern, un-churched population with a spurious Christian message. Some Emerging Churches might use props such as candles, statues, and incense along with poems, open mics, and videos, etc. EC services are sometimes extremely informal, while others are more formal.
Beginning with the premise that absolute truth is unknowable, Emerging Churches seek to reach the lost by focusing on relationships and developing a “story,” a “journey of life” that is expressed through the “narrative” of learning. These words and others are often used by emerging teachers in describing their religious experience. Other terms sometimes used are “re-imagine,” “tribe,” “story of Jesus,” “deconstruction,” etc. There is sometimes an ambiguous, feelings-oriented desire to experience God and also share in the lives of people as they seek to find God in their way. Some Emerging Churches are inclusivistic (those outside of Christianity will be saved), while others are not. Some Emerging Churches are environmentally focused, while others concentrate on local issues. Some downplay doctrine, reinterpret creeds, and de-emphasize tradition, while others hold to them. Obviously, it is difficult to define precisely what is emerging and what is not.
Seeker-sensitive churches are similar to Emerging Churches except that Emerging Churches are sometimes lax doctrinally, where seeker-sensitive churches, which sometimes are lax in presenting the gospel, hold nonetheless to orthodox theology. Willow Creek founder Bill Hybels recently confessed the inadequacies his movement created in preparing doctrinally sound disciples. Seeker-sensitive churches try to meet people’s needs through programs, where Emerging Churches do this by investing time in people’s lives. Seeker churches tend to focus on people in their thirties and up where Emerging Churches tend to reach people in their teens to thirties. But, some areas of the Emerging Church are so similar to seeker-sensitive churches that it is hard to tell the difference. So how do you distinguish between the two? Generally, a church is emerging if it seeks to reach those lost in the post-modern culture, rejects doctrinal absolutes, and, of course, proclaims itself to be emerging.
Emerging Church Characteristics
Following are some of the common traits I have discovered by reading through Emerging Church material. But please understand that not all Emerging Churches adhere to all the points listed.
An awareness of and attempt to reach those in the changing postmodern culture.
An attempt to use technology, i.e., video, slide shows, internet.
A broader approach to worship using candles, icons, images, sounds, smells, etc.
An inclusive approach to various, sometimes contradictory belief systems.1
An emphasis on experiences including mysticism
Concentration on relationship-building over proclamation of the gospel.
Shunning stale traditionalism in worship, church seating, music, etc.
A de-emphasis on absolutes and doctrinal creeds such as inerrancy of Scripture, the existence of Hell, a future judgment; and that the cross (and blood) of Christ is offensive.
Hopefully you can see some problems in the list. But, I have to say it again, not all Emerging Church adherents agree with all the points. Emerging Church pastors Mark Driscoll and Dan Kimball both acknowledge the necessity of preaching doctrinal truths which properly define Christianity while others like Brian McLaren are extremely lax when it comes to proclaiming the true biblical faith, so much so that he’s been called a false teacher.2
No official Emerging Church or doctrine
There is no official single Emerging Church or Emerging Church doctrine so there is no unified structure to examine. But, there are a lot of Emerging Church writings. The more I read them, the more concerned I become. It is apparent that the movement as a whole is off-center and is sacrificing time-honored biblical truths for a let’s-get-along kind of attitude.
- “…the Emerging Church movement is largely based upon and characterized by a fair bit of protest against traditional evangelicalism and, more broadly, against all that it understands by modernism.”3 (those who lived during the hippie movement can easily see the correlation)
- “They [the emerging generations] are disillusioned with institutionalism and see the church itself as an obstacle to faith.”4
- “the Emerging Church is a place where people have felt the freedom to explore questions and experiment with new forms of lifestyle and corporate practice.”5
- This rejection of traditionalism (regimented service, hymns, organs, a dress code, “we’ve always done it this way”, etc.) has made it easier for those who don’t like absolute truth statements, who reject exclusivism (that Jesus is the only way). They are thus drawn to very casual settings where they can also more easily reject traditional doctrines such as the Trinity, the deity of Christ, and his physical resurrection.
“Sit down here next to me in this little restaurant and ask me if Christianity (my version of it, yours, the Pope’s, whoever’s) is orthodox, meaning true, and here’s my honest answer: a little, but not yet. Assuming by Christianity you mean the Christian understanding of the world and God, Christian opinions on soul, text, and culture… I’d have to say that we probably have a couple of things right, but a lot of things wrong, and even more sprints before is unseen and unimagined.”6
Remember, the Emerging Church is, in part, reacting against the modernistic, absolute structure of stale traditional churches that want people to convert to their style of worship and time-frozen culture. Instead, Emerging Church members believe it is necessary to establish relationships with people, going where they are, meeting them on their level, and then later presenting doctrinal truths after they have become part of their lives. I must admit, this is what Jesus did. He was involved with the lives of the disciples, interacted with them, grew very close to them and taught them by example, not just propositionally.
Even though there are some pastors in the Emerging Church Movement that are true to scripture, the movement as a whole needs to stick to the essentials of the Christian faith, otherwise, in spite of its proclamation to renew Christianity afresh, it will become stale and heretical. No one, no movement of people should ever be so arrogant as to say that they can’t fall into error — even though they seek truth. As I’ve always said, if you want to mess something up, all you need is two things: people and time. The Emerging Church movement has much good in it, but it also has a good bit of bad already within its doors.
- Inclusivism is the error that people can be saved without specific knowledge of Jesus Christ and that their general faith in the concept of God and sincerity of heart is sufficient to warrant forgiveness.
- Kimball, Dan, The Emerging Church, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003, p. 14.
- Carson, D. A., Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005, p. 36.
- Gibbs, Eddie and Ryan K. Bolger, Emerging Churches, Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005, p. 21.
- Pagitt, Doug and Tony Jones, eds., An Emergent Manifesto of Hope, Grand Rapids: Baker Books, p. 23.
- McLaren, Brian, A Generous Orthodoxy, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004, p. 296. Italics in the original.
PUBLISHER’S NOTE: You may be somewhat confused by this material because many leaders and denominations are at some level embracing this movement. Those who are wise in the Word understand Satan, who has always lusted to be like the most High God (Isa. 14:12-14) will one day have his wish by incarnating Antichrist and mandating worship of him (Rev. 13-14). The plan is well underway. It includes a vast deception (Matt. 24:4-4, 11, 24; 2 Thess. 2; Rev. 19:20) via seducing spirits who deaden the consciences of all who should have known better but refused to listen (1 Tim. 4:1-2). These will all be swept away in their arrogance and ignorance: My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children (Hosea 4:6).
I pray this will not include you, my friend. For further study, you may order Dr. Mike’s Latter Rain and Manifest Sons of God Heresy.
 Copied/adapted/edited from http://www.carm.org/religious-movements/emerging-church/what-emerging-church
EDITOR’S NOTE: Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world (1 John 4:1). Scripture commands us to be discerning in respect to what we believe and who we follow. By necessity, this includes the doctrinal beliefs of popular author and speaker Dr. Rick Warren. Warren’s springboard book, Purpose Driven Life (PDL) has sold well over 20 million copies spawning several other “purpose-driven” enterprises while giving him a voice of influence for people around the world. Today he peddles his influence as the facilitator of an unholy alliance between Christianity and Islam known as Chrislam. His influence is growing. CNN heralded him as America’s Pastor which many believe provides him with unlimited numbers of squandered evangelistic opportunities. And while Warren often speaks to Muslims, Jews, and most recently New Agers [in his unholy alliance with Dr. Mehmet Oz] about cooperative humanitarian projects, his purpose driven desire to be non offensive invariably overshadows his sense of divine destiny causing him to remove the Name above every name- Jesus Christ our Lord- from his well crafted speeches and prayers [think back to the invocation at Obama’s inauguration]. Therefore, after observing the fruit (Matt. 7:20) and trying the spirits (1 John 4:1) of the PDL movement, PMI cannot endorse Rick Warren or his Purpose Driven anything!
“Pastor Rick” Warren is merely one of a cabal of modern-day false prophets whose message can be boiled down to, “I’m okay, you’re okay” when the clear message of scripture is, “I’m not okay, and neither are you. But guess what? God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life!”
While he is but one man, the global reach of his ecumenical church of deceit and of his Devil Driven machination gives “Pastor Rick” an unprecedented opportunity to rend the flock.
“Pastor Rick” is joined in his man-centered false gospel boy’s club by the likes of Joel Osteen who preaches a sticky sweet “Gawd luuuvs you” bubble-gum theology that’s utterly devoid of the offense of the cross and Brian McLaren whose version of the “McGospel” is being endlessly “reimagined” by the post-modern neo-liberal emergent/emerging church movement.
Notoriously missing from the message of these “Evangelicals” – a term I use advisedly – is the evangelium, i.e. the Gospel itself! Think about for a moment and ask yourself when is the last time any of these very prominent – supposedly Christian – pastors publicly called for repentance or spoke of sin, judgment or hell? I’m guessing those subjects would be quite unpalatable to their worldly followers and would serve to vaporize their fawning media coverage and alienate many of their most generous “prayer partners”. Tsk, tsk . . .
The not-so-curious thing all of these “men of God” (so-called) have in common is the acceptance, adoration and love of the world. I seem to recall something in the scriptures about the love of the world; can anyone help me out with those pesky chapters and verses?
And though it’s unfortunate and saddening to watch these ravening wolves rend the flock it is simultaneously heartening to see in the midst of this present darkness that there are still those willing to speak out against the spiritual adultery committed by these men and their kind. There remains a remnant of true believers within the Body who are empowered by the Holy Spirit with discernment and love of the true Gospel message of Christ crucified; the one and only Truth. These few stand as sentries in the darkness shining forth their candles of truth and light; the teachings of infallible scripture. While others question the validity and relevance of the Bible these few hold fast to their first love, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh.
This discerning remnant is constantly pilloried and ridiculed by the co-opted church for their failure to collectively bow their knees to the church growth Baal of Rick Warren and his ilk. They often are accused of being hateful, spiteful, legalistic and highly Pharisaical. The paradox is that these few bastions of Christian truth are relatively powerless when contrasted against the Devil Driven . . . er, um . . . I mean Purpose Driven organizations surrounding the likes of Warren, Osteen, McLaren, [Rob Bell] et al. These “watchmen on the gate” don’t have gigantic media relations teams, near limitless funds, book deals, powerful friends in high places or legions of hirelings at their beck and call. What they have instead is the inspiration of scripture and a simple boldness and love of the truth which they derive from the Holy Spirit. With those odds there’s no reason for dismay on their part for as it’s been rightly said, God is a majority.
At the end of the day Rick Warren is another fence-riding charlatan who wants to have his cake and eat it too. He enjoys rubbing elbows with the world’s elite and relishes in the prerequisites of his worldly fame [this includes Muslims]. In the private sector Rick Warren would be a great asset to any company, smart, savvy, and possessing natural leadership skills and enthusiasm. In the Church he’s an abomination who has sold his spiritual birthright for a bowl of worldly porridge.
Sadly for “Pastor Rick” he and his ilk surround themselves with gutless yes-men, sycophants and hangers-on who will never tell him the truth he so desperately needs to hear; that he has strayed from the path of righteousness and become self seeking, self serving and man-centered and is in need of a contrite and repentant heart that the Lord might be merciful and restore him. But why would they? Why would these blind followers of the blind point out to Pastor Rick the error of his ways? He’s their meal ticket, their golden goose if you will, and it’s been proven time and again that men will go to great – even drastic – lengths to preserve their positions and material wealth.
But even more disheartening than Pastor Rick’s self-sustaining delusions of grandeur is the fact that he has proven himself unwilling to use his visibility and fame to perform the very task to which he ostensibly was called: to preach the Gospel. This means that, not unlike Pastor Rick himself, his audiences are also not hearing the truth they so desperately need to hear; the truth of the cross.
The church doesn’t need more P.E.A.C.E. plans, programs, AIDS summits or rallies, instead we need more men of God who will stand up and tell the world that it’s going to hell except for repentance and salvation via the shed blood Jesus Christ alone made available through the everlasting mercies of the One True Living God. 
The following 7 problems with Warren’s Purpose Driven Philosophy are excerpted from Dennis W. Costella, Editor of the FOUNDATION, a magazine published by the Fundamental Evangelistic Association. 
Problem #1: Sloppy Hermeneutics (Interpretation of Scripture). Warren cites over 1,200 Scripture verses in his book. Yet The Purpose-Driven® Life is seriously flawed, hermeneutically speaking, in three ways: First, Warren completely misinterprets and misapplies certain texts; second, Warren presupposes his own ideas and beliefs and then “proof-texts” his points rather than exegeting the Scriptural text in order to discover its true meaning; and third, several paraphrases and translations used by Warren may prove his points, but they fail to relate even remotely the true meaning of the underlying Greek or Hebrew text. Example: “Wonderful changes are going to happen in your life as you begin to live it on purpose. God says, ‘I know what I am planning for you … I have good plans for you, not plans to hurt you. I will give you hope and a good future.’ “ (p. 31). Warren cites this text (Jeremiah 29:11 from the New Century Version) several times in his book, but this verse is not informing the believer that wonderful changes will happen in his life once he lives out his purpose, as Warren would have one to believe. This text contains God’s personal message to the Israelites who were enduring the Babylonian captivity.
Problem #2: Integration of Psychological Speculation and Application. The Purpose-Driven® Life cannot claim to be a Scripture-only approach to living the Christian life. Throughout the book, Warren supplements Scripture with psychological principles and speculation in order to allow the reader to better analyze and understand human behavior. Example: “Many people are driven by guilt … guilt-driven people are manipulated by memories. They allow their past to control their future. They often unconsciously punish themselves by sabotaging their own success” (pp. 27-28).
Problem #3: References to Untrustworthy Sources for Spiritual Guidance. When embarking upon a spiritual journey, one should obviously exercise discernment and discrimination when determining who should be consulted and trusted for advice and inspiration and who should be shunned. Of course, Bible-believing Christians should seek instruction and advice from those who, first of all, possess a relationship with God and who have subsequently demonstrated through their lives, ministries or writings a dedication to God and a love for Him—a dedication and love demonstrated by faithful obedience to Him and belief in the inerrancy and sufficiency of Scripture. Yet, in The Purpose-Driven®, Warren frequently quotes men and women of the past and present who cannot be trusted in any spiritual sense by believers today. In fact, several of Warren’s quotes come from the lips of those who are not only unregenerate but who are (or have been) active opponents of Biblical orthodoxy. Consider several individuals to whom Warren refers and quotes in a positive manner in order to support his own principles: ie, Brother Lawrence and Madame Guyon, both Roman Catholic mystics; Aldous Huxley—a proponent of humanistic atheism who published an influential study advocating the use of mescaline to expand perception and consciousness; Anais Nin—a 20th century feminist writer of erotic literature; William James—a 19th century philosopher and psychologist of religion and an advocate of pragmatism and religious pluralism. James wielded a pervasive influence in American religious liberalism as he denied the reality of absolute truth; and Henri Nouwen—cited several times in The Purpose-Driven® Life, Nouwen was a Roman Catholic priest, ecumenist, educator and psychologist; one of the leading figures in introducing psychology into the Roman Catholic Church.
Problem #4: Absence of Important Spiritual Truths for Anyone’s Spiritual Journey—Holiness and Separation. According to The Purpose-Driven® Life, the second purpose of a believer’s life is to learn to love others (p. 125). Warren says believers have been formed for God’s family, and as part of that family, they must experience life together, cultivate community, restore broken fellowships and protect their church. Certainly these aspects of the Christian life are important, but God is just as concerned about personal holiness and the purity of His church. Sometimes this demands separation or a word of reproof and rebuke, which then leads to broken fellowship and disharmony at times. Noticeably absent from Warren’s book is any emphasis on the need for personal holiness and purity of doctrine. Certainly, in any believer’s spiritual journey, pure doctrine is vitally important, for the only truths anyone knows about God and the process of living the Christian life stem from the teaching (doctrine) of God’s Word. In fact, any acceptance of false doctrine or those who propagate it actually hinders one’s relationship with God and usefulness for Him (Psa. 66:18; 2 Cor. 6:14-17; 2 Tim. 2:16-21)—certainly something to consider when embarking on a spiritual journey. Warren, however, never warns the believer to watch out for false doctrine or harmful fellowships—in fact, he minimizes the need for doctrinal purity by stressing the importance of “love” and “unity” above anything that would cause strife or division. He emphasizes that believers should refuse to let anything divide them and castigates any judgmental believers or those critical of the beliefs, actions or teachings of others. In other words, he believes “love” and “unity” should take precedence over “doctrine” and “purity” in the church—despite the fact that God’s Word frequently links true, Biblical, agape “love” with “obedience” to the commandments of Jesus Christ (Jn. 14:15; 1 Jn. 2:3-5). This is a serious flaw. Example: “God warns us over and over not to criticize, compare, or judge each other (Rom. 14:13; James 4:11; Eph. 4:29; Matt. 5:9; James 5:9). When you criticize what another believer is doing in faith and from sincere conviction, you are interfering with God’s business. ‘What right do you have to criticize someone else’s servants? Only their Lord can decide if they are doing right’ (Rom. 14: 4 CE V)” (p. 164).
“Paul adds that we must not stand in judgment or look down on other believers whose convictions differ from our own: ‘Why, then, criticize your brother’s actions, why try to make him look small? We shall all be judged one day, not by each other’s standards or even our own, but the standards of Christ’ (Rom. 14:10, New Testament in Modern English)” (p. 164). God does love His church and paid the highest price for it, and He does want us to protect it. However, believers do not protect it by clamoring for peace at any price and minimizing important doctrinal differences for the sake of a false unity. According to Warren, God wants His church protected “especially” from damage caused by division, conflict and disharmony. According to the Bible, however, God wants His church protected “especially” from contaminating agents such as false teachings, false teachers and wicked behavior (Acts 20:27-31; Rom. 16:17; 1 Thess. 4:1-3; 2 Thess. 3:6, 14; 1 Tim. 1: 18-20; 2 Tim. 2:16-22; 1 Jn. 4:1-6). The church is protected when believers in the church exercise discernment and judge all teachings, philosophies and programs by the Word of God and subsequently separate from any that conflict with the doctrine of the apostles as given by God Himself.
Problem #5: Doctrinal Error Regarding Important Biblical Truths. The Purpose-Driven® Life contains other doctrinal problems that could adversely impact the life of a believer who truly purposes to glorify God in his daily Christian walk. Several problems arise, including his interpretation of the Judgment Seat of Christ. He claims God will ask us questions, one of them concerning what we did with Jesus. That is unscriptural. The fact is, the Judgment Seat is for believers so God knows what we did with His Son (please see 2 Cor. 5:10; 1 Cor. 3:13; 4:5). This will be a time when our works will be tested in the fires of judgment and rewards will be meted out by Him.
Problem #6: Premise/Thesis of Book Inconsistent With Scripture. The purpose of Warren’s book is to answer the age-old question: “What on earth am I here for?” According to Warren, believers have been placed on the earth to fulfill five purposes. He writes, ” [God] has clearly revealed his five purposes for our lives through the Bible” (p. 20). These purposes, according to Warren, are to bring enjoyment to God (p. 63), to learn to love others (P. 125), to become like Jesus Christ (p. 17 1), to serve God (p. 23 1) and to fulfill one’s mission (p. 28 1). Yet it can be argued that Warren’s thesis itself—that these are the believer’s five purposes for existence as “clearly revealed” in the Bible—is not entirely consistent with the teaching of Scripture. The Bible only declares one purpose for mankind’s existence: to glorify God. This is man’s purpose. From the beginning of a believer’s spiritual life in Christ until he is with Jesus Christ forevermore, he is to live “to the praise of [Christ’s] glory” (Eph. 1:6, 12, 14). Throughout all eternity God’s children will glorify Him (Rev. 4:11). Because the believer is “bought with a price,” he is commanded to “glorify God in [his] body, and in [his] spirit” (1Cor. 6:19-20). This is man’s sole purpose and reason for existence.
Problem #7: Promotion of the Entire Purpose-Driven Philosophy. Some believers who use The Purpose-Driven® Life may disagree with Warren’s Purpose-Driven® church philosophy as spelled out in his book The Purpose-Driven® Church yet still feel as though they can follow and recommend The Purpose-Driven® Life program. But Warren’s book The Purpose-Driven® Life and his 40 Days of Purpose campaigns are integrally linked to and intentionally promote his entire Purpose-Driven® philosophy—including his Purpose-Driven® Church program (for a Biblical analysis of Warren’s Purpose-Driven® Church program, request a copy of the FEA publication “What About the Church Growth Movement?”). Throughout The Purpose-Driven® Life, Warren encourages his readers to read The Purpose-Driven® Church, to implement Purpose-Driven® ministries in their churches and to purchase several other Purpose-Driven® resources. In fact, Warren includes an appendix at the end of The Purpose-Driven® Life that lists additional resources for the reader. Every resource mentioned is associated with Warren’s Purpose-Driven® program.
Armstongism refers to the teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong, which became the teaching of the Worldwide Church of God. These teachings were often at odds with traditional Christian beliefs, and at times were explicitly in contradiction to the Bible. The most well-known of Armstrong’s teachings is that of Anglo-Israelism. This is the belief that modern day Jews are not the true physical descendants of Israel. He believed the lost tribes of Israel had migrated to Western Europe and that the present day British and Americans were actually the heirs to God’s covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Armstrong believed that this knowledge was the key factor in understanding the prophetic passages of Scripture, and that it was his mission to proclaim this message in preparation for the end times.
These beliefs of the Worldwide Church of God were not new and were rooted in an anti-Semitic misinterpretation of Scripture. The Bible is clear that God has not replaced Israel with any other nation and that His plans for Israel are right on schedule and will come to pass after “the fullness of the Gentiles” have come into the Kingdom (Romans 11:25). We can be sure that all God has said is true and will take place, because of His character and consistency (Romans 3:3-4). To attempt to revise God’s plans for both Israel and the Church is to call into question His nature, His sovereignty, His omniscience, and His faithfulness.
In addition, Armstrong taught that at death one is in a sleep-like state  until Jesus returns to earth. There would then be three resurrections. The first would be of the faithful Christians. Second would be the bulk of the population who would have a second chance to accept the gospel and be saved, despite the clear teaching of Scripture that there is no “second chance” for salvation after death (Hebrews 9:27). Third would be those that had acted in such a way as to be ineligible for the second chance. They, along with the group from the second resurrection that rejected the gospel, would then be punished. The Worldwide Church of God did not believe in eternal punishment in hell, but rather a complete destruction through fire, i.e., annihilationism. The Bible, however, is clear that there are two resurrections, one to eternal life in heaven for believers and one to eternal damnation for unbelievers (Revelation 20:4-14). Here again, the theories of Armstrongism and the Worldwide Church of God directly contradicted the Word of God.
Armstrong also taught that followers of Christ should remain true to all of the teachings in the Old Testament. Thus, he held the Sabbath to be holy, and in Jewish tradition the Sabbath was observed from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday. He further believed that the Old Testament festivals such as Passover and the Feast of Tabernacles must be celebrated. The Worldwide Church of God taught that modern Christians should follow the dietary laws and tithe (up to 30%). Armstrongism was only one of many salvation-by-works philosophies that look to the keeping of the Old Testament laws as a means of salvation. But the Bible is clear that the opposite is true. Salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone, because the Law saves no one. “A man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified” (Galatians 2:16). Clearly, the philosophies of Armstrongism and the Worldwide Church of God were just that—worldly philosophies that seek to deny the only means of salvation, the exchange at the cross of our sin for the righteousness of Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17), and replace it with the Old Testament Law, which Jesus came to fulfill because we could not.
Hebert W. Armstrong rejected many of these beliefs and came back to a more orthodox understanding of the Christian faith before his death. Thankfully, the Worldwide Church of God has, for the most part, followed Armstrong’s final example. Armstrong’s successors, Joseph Tkach Sr. and Joseph Tkach Jr. have led the Worldwide Church of God in a much more orthodox direction. The organization/denomination now refers to itself as Grace Communion International. A brief history of the transition from Armstrongism to Grace Communion can be found at:
http://www.gci.org/aboutus/history. There are some former Worldwide Church of God churches/members who still espouse the unbiblical doctrines of Armstrongism, but predominantly, Grace Communion International churches are solid, orthodox, and evangelical churches. 
WARNING! Armstrong’s dangerous doctrines are still being perpetuated by a false prophet from Edmond, Oklahoma named Gerald Flurry, leader of the “Philadelphia Church of God” and Chancellor of the Herbert W. Armstrong College. Flurry’s followers refer to him as the prophet Malachi and his writings on a par with Scripture.
 Study our tract refuting this entitled 10 Lost Tribes of Israel Myth Refuted.
 Write for our tract refuting the egregious doctrine known as Soul Sleep