#
Questions & Answers
First, what is it that you believe is really at stake with using this material? I heard you mention several ways that it resembles secular practices of our culture. It borrows their language, ie "tools". But surely the material has many drastic differences, such as its bible base, its prayer-centeredness, its gospel motivations, and its inner realism/humility. And certainly resembling secular practices isn't inherently sinful. For example, we use guitars in worship and we utilize social media in marketing. So, if it's not wrong to resemble secular practices so long as we don't adopt unbiblical aims and goals then what is the great fear?
The men that put these materials together, where they came from are running a scam.
- Randy Pope
- Robert Schuller
- Bill Hybels
- Rick Warren
- Dale Carnegie
- Norman Vincent Peale
- C Peter Wagner
Second, do you fundamentally disagree with being persuasive in sharing the Gospel? It seems to me you equate all attempts at persuasion as manipulation. Paul almost behaves as a chameleon to win the lost, as described in 1 Corinthians 9:21-23, "To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings." Luke reports Paul's approach in the synagogues was only persuasion, "And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and tried to persuade Jews and Greeks" (Acts 18.4). So, if persuasion to the gospel is acceptable for Paul, how can it be a problem for us to learn how to be the most persuasive we can be?
So that it is said, yes I stand with Saint Luke and Saint Paul. I oppose the men listed above who have pervert Christianity to their own ends.
Finally, do you fundamentally reject any presentation of the gospel that is rehearsed? It seems to me you put the highest value on being natural. You may yourself be turned off by people giving prepared and scripted gospel presentations. I can agree I don't like overly-rehearsed presentations or those that don't come off as natural to that person. But discipleship is more than imparting truth claims. Jesus discipled in a way that he invested his life, the word, and the gospel in the lives of a few so that they could become both mature AND equipped. So, in a discipleship context in our culture, is it really so objectionable for guys to learn how to share their story in a natural way and how to lead people through the book of John in a systematic fashion?
I've shared with you these mens own words. For me they are ugly men who have gone off the rails.
If you desire to be a leader trained after Robert Schuller and his disciples that is for you to decide. I know far to much about these men, more than I ever wanted and could never join their downline, grow their kingdom, nor be their disciple. For me that would be a denial of Christ Jesus my Lord and Savoir.
My hope is to get anyone and everyone away from these charlatans including you. One can be a Christian apart from these men and will avoid much folly.
#
Michael Wood
I am a Protestant Presbyterian that leans towards Lutheran, Anglican and Catholic views considering them my brothers and sisters in Christ whom I share much in common.
My desire is to be an ordinary Christian who shares his life, his family and all that God has given him in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit that by so doing making known my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, what he has done and how he has had mercy on me.