I remember when “Purpose Driven” written by Saddleback leader Rick Warren was a modern model for the church. It was a HUGE push in the churches. Many structured their church from their ingredients offered as a healthy model for modern day evangelicalism.
I recognized it in my own church and when I saw hints of it looked deeper. What I found was the model offered a watered down version of the gospel compatible across the board of not only other Christian denominations, but also across other faiths like Islam and Catholicism. No longer was a distinction acceptable and one must accept the commons of inclusion. This became an “ecumenical” gospel.
Next I saw a move from personal evangelism to a “social gospel.” The church was the hub of inclusion for those being saved AND those who potentially would be included in the fold to be saved. The message was an all-inclusive watered-down gospel that emphasized less on sin and personal sanctification and more on social humanitarian expectation and assimilation. One would grasp the gospe4l through osmosis of being among the congregation and be included by assumption rather than actuality.
Then I discovered a shocking fact. Rick Warren had associations with Freemasons and other societies that were not favorable to Christ. Matter of fact, after years of speculation and an article from WND accusing Rick Warren of being a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, when the CFR website appeared and publicized the roster, Rick Warren was named every year as an active member SINCE THE 1970s at least. The CFR are an extension of Illuminati doctrine that leads sectors of society towards the New World Order. Their doctrine is Luciferian and “World Government” oriented. So you can imagine how Warren’s influence of how to model a church became popular and acceptable as a healthy modern day model.
Some who teach from it don’t always reflect EVERY aspect taught or implied, but the general foundation for it has been yielded. Matter of fact they also led to alliances with government agencies such as the FEMA Emergency Response Team. In that situation a clergy would be given a special place in the rounding up of responders, BUT in agreement required to give up preaching the gospel or any form of Proselyzing.
Deeper examination
Upon looking into the intent and tactics of Purpose Driven, I found documents of clergy instruction only given out to those sworn to the agenda. However, some unwitting Pastors actually posted the document for others to use not realizing it would find its way onto people like me. I gathered from it some conclusions based on the material:
What I found is that the experience of the church needed to be inviting and nonthreatening to the public.
It would contain forms of entertainment in order to ease the prospect into a comfortable environment. The music team could be staffed or employed professionally by seasoned musicians and great influencers who can engage an audience.
The message was to be limited to the attention span of 22 minutes 9as a general example) and not include accusations of sin. The presenter would mix a form of happy instruction with humorous anecdotes with examples personal to his own situation.
As a healthy modern model, the church would have 1/3 of those sold out, 1/3 of those on the fence, and 1/3 of those not yet sold but interested.
The attendees would be monitored as to who is attending, their attendance rate, and their potential for continuation. There was a tactic to engage them by after a few weeks of steady attendance to “obligate” them to a menial role that would secure their attendance. The person need not be vetted as to their fruit or believing to be enrolled into these positions.
For the church leaning towards Purpose Driven mentality a few suggestions apply. If you are getting your congregation ready to accept Purpose Driven, spoon feed it. Slowly introduce the concept in a subtle way. Implement “assimilation” into it and see if they accept. Then move on to the next obligation step by step until the 8 steps complete (I think that’s what I remember how many there were). If by step 4 (I think it was) if the congregation shows no resistance, pursue the indoctrination. If they show a little resistance, slow down. If certain members were skeptical, single them out and try to sooth their reluctance. If they were continued to show resistance, try to discourage their continued membership (that’s where I was).
For those who don’t know, the norm has been this for decades and now so indistinguishable and accepted, there is no need to emphasize the actual model of Purpose Driven any longer.