More Active Posts
Front Page
Interview with Richard Mouw
 |
 26 Comments |
NPR interviews Richard Mouw, president of Fuller Theological Seminary and signer of an “Evangelical Manifesto” that tries to depoliticize the word “evangelical.”
 |
Topic: Audio |  |
Email a friend |
 |
Keywords: |  |
RSS 2.0 |
 |
Both comments and pings are currently closed. |  |
Share this: |
Soul searching
Now if we could only depoliticize NPR!
42-9-3-0
42 million abortion deaths worldwide each year (not counting the morning-after pill), 9 for starvation, 3 for AIDS, 0 for global warming. The evangelical church continues to leave the abortion problem behind as the church becomes weaker in order to raise more money from the unconverted.
Many churches have more unconverted people than converted, as churches decline in growth throughout the United States. Many mega churches are not preaching the truth and are full of professing Christians who are not saved. Many people are hungry for the truth but are discouraged because many churches are run by ‘political machines’ interested in the bottom line instead of Biblical truth.
We got into this position because men have quit preaching the truth and have relied on the social sciences instead (psychology, sociology, economics, geography, history, political science, etc). God can use social sciences but not when they take the place of the Bible. There is forgiveness only in Jesus Christ, not our humanitarian efforts.
Many humanitarian organizations have quit telling people that Jesus Christ is the only answer. Seventeen percent of the staff from one top humanitarian organization are from false religions. They give aid to people but are not telling victims the truth. By doing this, victims live on earth longer only to die without Jesus Christ. Then that person spends eternity in hell.
Evangelicals need to get back to the truth. We need to be involved in humanitarian efforts but never stop telling people the truth. If we cannot share the truth openly, we should then find another humanitarian effort where we can.
“Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth” (1 Corinthians 13:6). Love and truth go hand-in-hand. Sometimes the modern church wants love but not the truth that goes with it.
Steve McConkey, 4WCA News, www.4wca.org
I’m guessing Steve has less to say about the interview, since he essentially posted a statement from his website.
I’m thankful for Steve’s boldness in proclaiming the truth. But is this statement relevant to the interview with Mr. Mouw, or does it belong on another thread?
It is relevant as the whole topic is evangelism and the position that evangelism has on the political arena. This was written in advance as I knew what would be said. I was right. Some good points, but the same story.
I read the whole 20 page document. Boring to say some valid points and questionable on others. Evangelism dumbed down to have no effect on the world, all in the name of political correctness.
Mouw’s interview had interesting points, however, same old story. Dallas Willard, one of the signers, questions central doctrinal issues. Rick Warren is all over the place. Jim Wallis stands for whatever the Democrat party says. Same story. Trying to be religious without standing up for the truth. Instead, lets bash Dobson, Land, etc. The document does not come right out and say this, however, that is what it is trying to do.
All men need correction, but I would be careful not to judge these godly men. We should always preach the central issues with love. Thanks. Steve McConkey
Steve
The men you mention in post #4 are all involved if not leaders in the “Emerging Church” movement, except Dobson. You mention Willared, Warren, Wallis, they are all part of the “Emerging Church” bunch.
Very interesting. I haven’t been able to fine a copy of the Evangelical Manifesto, can you give the website?
Richard Mouw from Fuller Seminary has been a busy man. He made a statement in Salt Lake City in 2004, to apologize to the Morman Church.
Evangelical Preaches at Salt Lake Tabernacle
By Carrie A. Moore
Deseret Morning News
Published Monday, Nov. 15,2004 9:12 a.m. MST
READ the rest of the article, link below-
They list the signers who lean toward contemplative prayer:
http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/
Also, links to the Manifesto website.
God bless. Steve
Here is where info can be found on the document. See
http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/
Steve
Info on the Evangelical Manifesto can be found at http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/
God bless, Steve
Why would Richard Mouw, president of Fuller Theological Seminary want the evangelical community to take part in an anniversary which would celebrate Joseph Smiths Birthday?
Below is the link to the “Evangelical Manifesto” which was presented yesterday.
Steve - 4
YOU WRITE:….” Rick Warren is all over the place.”
What did Rick Warren say about the “Evangelical Manifesto” ?
Steve:
Well, now…finally some better, original postings dealing with the subject in context, instead of a pre-written statement! This stuff I can deal with, instead of rantings. Thank you!
Oh, and Victoria…
I would dare say that Mouw goes a bit overboard on being diplomatic, into denying the Gospel. Do evangelicals sin against Mormons? Without doubt…but not in declaring the truth to them.
Kennethos
YOU POST: … “I would dare say that Mouw goes a bit overboard on being diplomatic, into denying the Gospel. Do evangelicals sin against Mormons? Without doubt…but not in declaring the truth to them.”
How was Mouw diplomatic? Example please?
How have Evangelicals sinned against Mormons? Examples please.
Was Mouw truthful?
Rick Warren signed the document. Also, he has a history of having New Age people in his pulpit. One week, he will promote New Ager Ken Blanchard and a week later denounce him. Then, he will have him again.
See http://www.apologeticsindex.org/214-why-rick-warren-has-critics
Also, pray for our work with the Olympic track and field athletes in China. We have athletes testimonies in the underground church there. See www.4WCA.org
God bless. Steve
In the interview, Mouw cited a George Barna survey (briefly and without details) that spoke for those who think that “evangelicals” are “narrow-minded, bigoted, mean-spirited people.”
Thus, Mouw is participating in the panic over the prospect that the “evangelical” label is not being honored enough by secularists and other cultural leftists.
Richard Mouw is simply being a critical person (toward the “relious right” as stereotyped by George Barna and others) without being a critical thinker.
I believe that anyone who takes George Barna surveys seriously is intellectually incurious and profoundly shallow.
Joel,
I agree with everything you posted.
Some Evangelicals Say Faith Too Political
By Paul Strand
CBN News
May 7, 2008
CBNNews.com - Some evangelicals are saying they want to repair the damage done by evangelical activists who’ve made the faith too political.
At a news conference in Washington, D.C., Wednesday, they released a document they titled An Evangelical Manifesto. Some on the religious right suspect it may be an effort to push them out of the spotlight.
But those behind the manifesto, from scholar Os Guinness to Christianity Today editor David Neff, said what’s more important is recapturing the term evangelical to serve a higher calling: that of religious faith.
They want evangelicals to once again concentrate on Jesus Christ, His Word, and the good news of salvation. Fuller Theological Seminary president Richard Mouw summed it up this way: “The most important issue that any human being can encounter in the universe is the question of ‘what will you do with Jesus?’”
The group of Christian leaders worked for three years to produce the manifesto.
In it, they worry some evangelicals so politicize their faith, they become “useful idiots” for one political party or another.
Pastor John Huffman, the chair of Christianity Today International, says the group is concerned many in the public perceive evangelicals as “a group of strident, religious political zealots determined to take over society with the institution of their religious political philosophy in a theocratic grab for power.”
Os Guinness, co-author of the manifesto, warned, “When scholars and writers can look at the evangelical political movement and describe them as ‘theocrats’ or worse as ‘fascists,’ something is badly wrong.”
Conservative critics of the manifesto say what its backers really want to do is toss the religious right overboard. And important religious right members are conspicuously absent from the list of those backing the manifesto. For instance, neither James Dobson of Focus on the Family, Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention or CBN founder Pat Robertson signed on to the manifesto.
Janice Crouse of Concerned Women for America told CBN News the authors of the manifesto were definitely trying to distance themselves from the religious right. “Basically, they were saying ‘those of you who care about abortion, who care about homosexuality, who care about the family disintegrating don’t speak for us, because we are too intellectual, we are too sophisticated to be concerned about those kinds of things.”
Crouse warns their fear of appearing too strident may leave manifesto-backers in the mushy middle — inoffensive, but also ineffective. She complained to the manifesto-authors, “You know, you want to work with everybody, but you don’t want to work with those of us who care very deeply about some of the issues that are clearly biblical and some of the commandments that Christ clearly gives.”
NOTE: If you go to the link above there is a short 1 minute video you won’t want to miss.
Ater spending 3 years putting this together, Os Guiness, Richard Mouw and 78 other “evangelical leaders” may just be a bit disappointed to learn that most Christians can think for themselves regarding how to synthesize their theological, cultural and political perspectives, thank you.
We will not all think alike and that’s fine with me. Being free to think for ourselves is an American heritage I treasure enough to tolerate the diversity. The truth fares better amid freedom than otherwise.
The manifesto does not take away my freedom so I support their freedom to spend 3 years writing it. But from Mouw’s interview, the problem seems to be that some people prefer intellectual diversity only as long as it all stays to the left of center. He apparently fears the religious right and perhaps that’s grounds for heightened hope that its positive influence is stronger than we thought.
Joel,
You make this statement which is to the point:
The influence of the strong Believers had to have made a difference or they wouldn’t have concocted the “Evangelical Manifesto” - there is no reason for anyone to sign such a document, I don’t walk ‘lock step’ and particularly with these signers.
Below is a letter which was signed by many so called Christian leaders, among those who signed this letter are:
Robert Schuller, Founder, Crystal Cathedral and Hour of Power
Brian D. McLaren, Author, Speaker, Activist - Emergent Church
Tony Jones, National Coordinator, Emergent Village- which is part of the “Emergent Church” movement
Jim Wallis, President, Sojourners
Rick Warren, Founder and Senior Pastor, Saddleback Church
Richard Mouw, Richard Mouw, President, Fuller Theological Seminary
Duane Litfin, President, Wheaton College
Stanton L. Jones, Provost, Wheaton College
Khaleej Times Online
Christian leaders ask for Muslim forgiveness
(Wam)
26 November 2007
“ABU DHABI-Peaceful relations between Muslims and Christians stand as one of the central challenges of this century, according to leading Christian leaders.”
Part of letter below which is in the article:
There is a long list of those signing the letter, its an interesting list -
MEMRI
#1761 - Former Jordanian Minister Ali Al-Faqir Vows to Conquer Spain and Rome and Declares: America and the EU Will Soon Come to an End
Al-Aqsa TV
May 2, 2008
VIDEO
Transcript
“…an “Evangelical Manifesto” that tries to depoliticize the word ‘evangelical.’”
In other words, you Martin Luther King, Jr., types in ministry; stifle it and sit down. or change the subject.
Of course Dobson, Robertson, et al wouldn’t sign the document. They aren’t going to give up their seat of honor at the Republican Party table. They have the best of both worlds: religious and political power. It is those men (among others) that the Manifesto is written toward.
As for the recent attempts by Joel Mark to claim Martin Luther King for the conservative Christian cause, it’s pure bull. Given that conservative Christians either (a) openly supported segregation or (b) sat on their hands during the civil rights movement, it’s entirely without merit to claim Dr. King for the religious/political agenda of the right. Given that conservative Christians sit in the seats of power in this nation, no doubt he would be speaking against them if he were alive today.
There is zero bull in my references to Martin Luther King, Jr. Anlir. If Dobson and Colson are to be told to take a seat and shut up with regard to their conviction in the public and political arena, why not King? I say they all should speak up. I respect both the M.L. Kings and the James Dobsons of the world for their deeply Christian activism for justice.
Many conservatives think just like me on this too. And it was MOSTLY Democrats who openly supported segregation in King’s day.
Anlir, this may come as a shock to you, but many Evangelical leaders are not signing the “Evangelical Manifesto” -