Fuller Theological Seminary announced today that a course in tap dancing will be added to the curriculum of their Master of Divinity program this spring. Don Ohlson, a spokesperson for Fuller, explained the reason behind the new addition: “We believe that in this postmodern climate of tolerance and political civility it is important to train our future pastors to be able to dance around biblical issues when necessary.”

According to Ohlson, Fuller officials saw a need for the tap dance course after one of their most prominent alumni, Pastor Rick Warren of Saddleback Community Church, lost some of his rhythm over the gay marriage issue in California. “Over the years, Rick has displayed some instinctive dance moves that have made his Christian message light and breezy,” said Ohlson, “but when he openly opposed gay marriage his footwork got a little too heavy and he had to do some serious back-shuffles [. . .]"

Ohlson was quick to point out that Warren, despite his recent stumbles, still managed to make some impressive ballroom moves that swept Barack Obama off his feet and led to his invitation to offer the opening prayer at the Presidential Inauguration. “Even without formal dance training, Rick’s Fuller education undoubtedly provided him with the basic tools to become the theological hoofer that he is today,” said Ohlson. “By offering this new class on tap dance, we believe the next ‘Rick Warren’ that Fuller produces will be even more prepared to make the Gospel as entertaining and non-threatening as possible.”

Curiously, some people in the more left-leaning side of our dysfunctional Christian family are backing away from the doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement. Those in the more established liberal churches, along with their emergent offspring, are routinely decrying the concept that Jesus paid the penalty (death) for our sin in our place on the cross. They say it is too gory, too scary, too bloody, too masculine, and too violent. Furthermore, they say that in our tender little world of kindness, such teachings won’t help further the kingdom of meek and mild Jesus.

Meanwhile, non-Christians in the culture seem to have an insatiable appetite for the doctrine. The storyline of masculine sacrifice of one’s life to save others remains one of the most powerfully moving themes in pop culture. It was amazing, for example, to sit in a theater watching The Chronicles of Narnia [LWW] and observe the reaction of a largely non-Christian audience to Aslan. If you remember, Aslan is the Christ figure in the story, or the lion that represents Jesus as “the Lion of the tribe of Judah.” In the story, Aslan willingly and nobly lays down his life as a substitute for those he loves to save them from the rule of evil. The theater became quiet and still at the sacrifice of Aslan—even non-Christians were moved to deep sorrow and tears. Later in the story, when Aslan returns back to life as a victorious king, a heartfelt joy returned to the crowd, and some people even broke out in applause and cheers.

Why? Because deep down, even though we are sinners, we remain God’s image bearers. Like Solomon said, God has set eternity in our hearts and we cannot shake our yearning to be delivered from evil and death by a conquering hero who loves us enough to give us new life through his death.

Recommended Your Best Life Now: 7 Steps to Living at Your Full Potential by Joel Osteen

In three of the Gospels, Jesus warns that each of his disciples may have to “deny himself” and even “take up his Cross.” In support of this alarming prediction, he forcefully contrasts the fleeting pleasures of today with the promise of eternity: “For what profit is it to a man,” he asks, “if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?” It is one of the New Testament's hardest teachings, yet generations of churchgoers have understood that being Christian, on some level, means being ready to sacrifice--money, autonomy or even their lives.

But for a growing number of Christians [. . .] the question is better restated, “Why not gain the whole world plus my soul?”

[. . . In Joel Osteen's Your Best Life Now,] Jesus is front and center but not his Crucifixion, Resurrection or Atonement.

[. . .]

[Christian c]ritics see it as treating God as a celestial ATM. “God becomes a means to an end, not the end in himself,” says Southwestern Baptist's [theology Professor Ben] Phillips. Others are more upset about what it de-emphasizes. “[Prosperity] wants the positive but not the negative,” says another Southern Baptist, Alan Branch of Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Kansas City, Mo. “Problem is, we live on this side of Eden. We're fallen.” That is, Prosperity soft-pedals the consequences of Adam's fall--sin, pain and death--and their New Testament antidote: Jesus' atoning sacrifice and the importance of repentance.

Just a few examples of the two authors' solid understanding of real Biblical theology — much more deep than their media counterparts, and far deeper than that of the your-best-life-now types they discuss.

And say what you will about Rick Warren's supposed shallownesses — this subject is not among them:

Fellow megapastor Rick Warren, whose book The Purpose Driven Life has outsold Osteen's by a ratio of 7 to 1, finds the very basis of Prosperity laughable. “This idea that God wants everybody to be wealthy?”, he snorts. “There is a word for that: baloney. It's creating a false idol. You don't measure your self-worth by your net worth. I can show you millions of faithful followers of Christ who live in poverty. Why isn't everyone in the church a millionaire?”

[. . .]

A recent Sunday at Lakewood gives some idea of the emphasis on worldly gain that disturbs Warren. Several hundred stage lights flash on, and Osteen, his gigawatt smile matching them, strides onto the stage of what used to be the Compaq Center sports arena but is now his church. “Let's just celebrate the goodness of the Lord!” Osteen yells. His wife Victoria says, “Our Daddy God is the strongest! He's the mightiest!”

And so it goes, before 14,000 attendees, a nonstop declaration of God's love and his intent to show it in the here and now, sometimes verging on the language of an annual report. During prayer, Osteen thanks God for “your unprecedented favor. We believe that 2006 will be our best year so far. We declare it by faith.” Today's sermon is about how gratitude can “save a marriage, save your job [and] get you a promotion.”

Anyone who's ever watched this man on TV can identify: Osteen is quite the showman. Just the sort to proclaim loudly unsound teachings for “itching ears” (2 Timothy 3:4) and rehashed versions of old you-can-do-it “irreverent, silly myths” (1 Timothy 4:7).

Little Joel himself — they did interview him — “osteens” his way past the writers' question. (“To osteen,” a la “to bork“: New Verb Alert!)

“Does God want us to be rich?” he asks. “When I hear that word rich, I think people say, 'Well, he's preaching that everybody's going to be a millionaire.' I don't think that's it.” Rather, he explains, “I preach that anybody can improve their lives. I think God wants us to be prosperous. I think he wants us to be happy. To me, you need to have money to pay your bills. I think God wants us to send our kids to college. I think he wants us to be a blessing to other people. But I don't think I'd say God wants us to be rich. It's all relative, isn't it?”

Oh, yes — and then immediately Time's writers get him good:

The room's warm lamplight reflects softly off his crocodile shoes.

Ooooh! Look out for that razor-sharp wit, folks — it bites.

Albert Mohler on Wednesday gave his own excerpts and additional thoughts.

The problem with prosperity theology is not that it promises too much, but that it promises so little — and promises that so falsely.

And indeed, the very title of Joel Osteen's book offers one of the most pathetic “promises” imaginable. Your Best Life Now?! How about Your Best Life Later, in the World to Come — when all turns to silver glass, and the Creator remakes His universe, merging the New Heavens with the New Earth? How much more incredible a promise is this!

Recommended Your Best Life Now: 7 Steps to Living at Your Full Potential by Joel Osteen

5. Joel Osteen examines the role of suffering in the Christian life.

Christians are attempting to model an entirely seperate culture, (entertainment, media, school material, the works) for themselves, this is of course fine and acceptable but for two tiny little problems.

A: Christians actually do, more or less, reside on planet earth with several billion other people besides them who live in their neighborhoods, visit the same commercial establishments, sit on the same buses, own stock in the same companies, stare luridly at their daughters and even *gasp* use the same drinking fountains. Christians are of course trying to put a stop to all this as soon as possible, but my prediction is that this non-segregated and altogether ungodly environment will continue to exist for some years into the future.

B: Christians are attempting to model their brave new seperatist society after mainstream pop-culture...(only christian)...which is, how shall I say it?...a Collossally stupid idea.

Lets just look at “Christian”(TM) music and movies for an example.

Instead of submitting Christian Music for a decision on the quality of the work at the Grammy Awards, Christian artists came up with the “Dove” awards just for Christian Music, so that the “Christian Quality” of music could be determined, instead of having a bunch of unspeakable little secular people tear down something they obviously wouldn't be able to understand (like music). That would be unthinkable!

Millions of CD's are sold each year exclusively through Christian stores and the Christian sections of regular stores, no matter what Genre the music might be in, it is still sold in the Christian category. Why? Well, because it's christian music, and christian music belongs on the christian market since it obviously wouldn't do well with mainstream audiences, right?

We left [a well-known mega-church*]. Here is what transpired and pushed me over the edge (and out of that church).

I attended since 1982, but after a progressive creationist spoke at the church in 2005, I spent the next eight months confronting the elders and staff at the church. Sadness filled my heart to see them reject biblical truth.

There is so much to say about what happened. The bottom line was that I gave up believing there was any hope of the leadership holding a biblical view of the authority of the Word of God.

We withdrew our membership. They had the resident theologian call me to talk about it. The first 30 minutes went well but the last 15 made me angry.

(brackets in original)

[I]f all prophesy, and an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, 25 the secrets of his heart are disclosed, and so, falling on his face, he will worship God and declare that God is really among you.

2 Corinthians 14:24 (ESV)

Recommended Hell's Best Kept Secret by Ray Comfort

Within the last 100 years, a new gospel has crept into our churches. It has been designed to not offend you. It has been carefully crafted not to be too “in your face.” It gently suggests that you open your heart to Jesus if your current lifestyle isn't working for you, and try God “when the time is right for you.”

This “seeker centered” and “no offense” approach is no gospel at all; it is “another gospel.” If we continue to define sin as “honest mistakes,” we will continue to fill our churches with “backsliders” and false converts who fail to repent because they don't see the seriousness of their sin. We will give them a cruel false hope, and make them comfortable aboard the “Jesus loves you” pleasure cruiser, singing songs to the Captain, while they blindly speed toward the iceberg of Eternal Justice.

A nationwide survey by The Barna Group on Dan Brown’s novel The Da Vinci Code shows that the book has impacted millions of lives – but changes few beliefs. One out of every five adults has read the book but only 5% - which represents about two million adults – said that they changed any of the pre-existing beliefs or religious perspectives because of the book’s content. The survey finds that the people most likely to have altered their religious views in response to the book’s content were Hispanics (who comprise 17% of the book’s readers), women (three times more likely than male readers to do so), and liberals (twice as likely as conservatives).

Recommended Ashamed of the Gospel: When the Church Becomes Like the World by John F. MacArthur

[A]n overpowering surge of ardent pragmatism is sweeping through evangelicalism. Traditional methodology—most notably preaching—is being discarded or downplayed in favor of newer means, such as drama, dance, comedy, variety, side-show histrionics, pop-psychology, and other entertainment forms. The new methods supposedly are more “effective”—that is, they draw a bigger crowd. And since for many the chief criterion for gauging the success of a church has become attendance figures, whatever pulls in the most people is accepted without critical analysis as good. That is pragmatism.

Perhaps the most visible signs of pragmatism are seen in the convulsive changes that have revolutionized the church worship service in the past decade. Some of evangelicalism’s largest and most influential churches now boast Sunday services that are designed purposely to be more rollicking than reverent.

Even worse, theology now takes a back seat to methodology. One author has written, “Formerly, a doctrinal statement represented the reason for a denomination’s existence. Today, methodology is the glue that holds churches together. A statement of ministry defines them and their denominational existence.” Incredibly, many believe this is a positive trend, a major advance for the contemporary church.

[. . .]

Subtly the overriding goal is becoming church attendance and worldly acceptability rather than a transformed life. Preaching the Word and boldly confronting sin are seen as archaic, ineffectual means of winning the world. After all, those things actually drive most people away. Why not entice people into the fold by offering what they want, creating a friendly, comfortable environment, and catering to the very desires that constitute their strongest urges? As if we might get them to accept Jesus by somehow making Him more likable or making His message less offensive.

That kind of thinking badly skews the mission of the church. The Great Commission is not a marketing manifesto. Evangelism does not require salesmen, but prophets. It is the Word of God, not any earthly enticement, that plants the seed for the new birth (1 Peter 1:23). We gain nothing but God’s displeasure if we seek to remove the offense of the cross (cf Gal. 5:11).


Is All Innovation Wrong?

Please do not misunderstand my concern. It is not innovation per se that I oppose. I recognize that styles of worship are always in flux. I also realize that if the typical seventeenth-century Puritan walked into Grace Community Church (where I am pastor) he might be shocked by our music, probably dismayed to see men and women seated together, and quite possibly disturbed that we use a public address system. Spurgeon himself would not appreciate our organ. But I am not in favor of a stagnant church. And I am not bound to any particular musical or liturgical style. Those things in and of themselves are not issues Scripture even addresses. Nor do I think my own personal preferences in such matters are necessarily superior to the tastes of others. I have no desire to manufacture some arbitrary rules that govern what is acceptable or not in church services. To do so would be the essence of legalism.

My complaint is with a philosophy that relegates God and His Word to a subordinate role in the church. I believe it is unbiblical to elevate entertainment over biblical preaching and worship in the church service. And I stand in opposition to those who believe salesmanship can bring people into the kingdom more effectively than a sovereign God. That philosophy has opened the door to worldliness in the church.

“I am not ashamed of the gospel,” the apostle Paul wrote (Rom. 1:16). Unfortunately, “ashamed of the gospel” seems more and more apt as a description of some of the most visible and influential churches of our age.

Recommended Presumed Guilty by James Scott Bell

Murder, betrayal, and a trial that feeds a media frenzy.

Can one woman stand against the forces that threaten to tear her family apart?

Pastor Ron Hamilton’s star is rising. His 8,000-strong church is thriving. His good looks and charisma make him an exceptional speaker on family values. And his book on pornography in the church has become an unexpected bestseller. Everything is perfect.

Until a young woman’s body is discovered in a seedy motel room. The woman is a porn star. And all the evidence in the murder points to one man: Ron.

With the noose tightening around her husband’s neck, Dallas Hamilton faces a choice: believe the seemingly irrefutable facts—or the voice of her heart. The press has already reached its verdict, and the public echoes it. But Dallas is determined to do whatever it takes to find the truth.

And then a dark secret from Dallas's past threatens to take them all down.

As the clock ticks toward Ron's conviction and imprisonment, and an underworld of evil encircles her, Dallas must gather all her trust in God to discover what really happened in that motel room . . . even if it means losing faith in her husband forever.

Well, This Doesn't Help

Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Community Church and author of the best-selling book, The Purpose-Driven Life, was the subject of an interview in The Philadelphia Inquirer on Sunday. The article, "The Purpose-Driven Pastor," is part of the paper's series on evangelicalism in America today. Interestingly, the article comes just months after another profile on Warren published in the same newspaper. [See previous article here.]

This is how the current article concludes:

Warren predicts that fundamentalism, of all varieties, will be "one of the big enemies of the 21st century."

"Muslim fundamentalism, Christian fundamentalism, Jewish fundamentalism, secular fundamentalism — they're all motivated by fear. Fear of each other.

Equating Christian fundamentalism with Muslim fundamentalism is both wrong and dishonest. This falls right into the hands of those who argue for a phenomenological definition of "religion" that includes "fundamentalism" as a general reference to any person or movement that refuses to accept the basic worldview of modernity. Adding the therapeutic category of "fear" just adds to the confusion. The motivation of fundamentalist Christianity is fear of Muslims and Jews?

And, we might ask, just what definition of Christian fundamentalism operates here? Who, exactly, is Rick Warren talking about?

This much is clear — an approach like this doesn't help."