Does anyone find all of the new and urgent postings about Rick Warren and his recent chat with a few ODMs humorous? It seems like they are scrambling to put a nice back-spin on the story, keep their audience clear of possible confusion. I mean, we wouldn’t want people to look at Warren with a fair and balanced view, now would we.

And that’s just the front page of one ODM site.

  • Share/Bookmark


This entry was posted on Wednesday, June 4th, 2008 at 9:33 am and is filed under Linked Articles, ODM Writers, PD/SS. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+/- Collapse/Expand All

63 Comments(+Add)

1   Richard Abanes
June 4th, 2008 at 9:41 am

My update on Bob Dewaay and what is happening over at Cris Rosebrough’s blog – includes a response to the latest open letter from Bob DeWaay.

2   Phil Miller
June 4th, 2008 at 9:44 am

I think it would just be a lot simpler if they adopted a Rick Warren Threat Level Indicator that was color coded, similar to the Homeland Security one.

I propose the following color-code chart for all ODM use:

Green – Low. The pastor mentioned The Truth War from the pulpit this week.

Blue – Guarded. The pastor walked past a Rick Warren display in a bookstore the other day.

Yellow – Signifigant Risk. The pastor announced a church trip to a local soup kitchen. This is not good.

Orange – High Risk. The pastor actually had lunch with a Catholic priest the other day! I heard they were talking about ways to better serve the community.

Red – Severe. Man the battle stations!! The pastor has several copies of The Purpose Driven Life in his office, and I heard he’s given a few away. Abandon ship!!!

3   Chad
June 4th, 2008 at 9:50 am

lol, Phil.

4   Ken Silva
June 4th, 2008 at 9:52 am

Re. Phil

*thinking* Hey…cool.

5   Chris L
June 4th, 2008 at 10:10 am

I notice “A Little Leaven” is no longer in Ingrid’s sidebar… coincidence?

6   Chris P.    
June 4th, 2008 at 10:27 am

I notice a little leaven in this blogsite.

7   iggy
June 4th, 2008 at 10:35 am


I think it would just be a lot simpler if they adopted a Rick Warren Threat Level Indicator that was color coded, similar to the Homeland Security one.

8   Phil Miller
June 4th, 2008 at 10:37 am


9   iggy
June 4th, 2008 at 10:42 am

Phil I just added one more thing!

10   John Hughes    
June 4th, 2008 at 11:15 am

Rick Warren is AWESOME.

All hail the Warren!

11   andy    
June 4th, 2008 at 11:52 am

Seems a lot of back peddling by Bob,but he said what he said and stand by that, its now getting murky..

(((( Hey Richard OT any chance of a signed book your One Nation Under God, i can paypal you to include post to UK..I just finished Under the banner of Heaven and would like to read yours!!))))

12   andy    
June 4th, 2008 at 12:01 pm

(Signed haha i’m such a fan boy :-p )

13   Ken Silva
June 4th, 2008 at 12:48 pm


“Seems a lot of back peddling by Bob,…”

Bob and Chris are *gasp* both friends of mine. Having just spoekn with them both I can assure you no one is doing any back peddling. :-)

14   Richard Abanes
June 4th, 2008 at 2:18 pm


Sure, however it can be worked out. Except, er, I don’t have any copies! LoL.


15   Richard Abanes
June 4th, 2008 at 2:19 pm


That is really funny.


16   Richard Abanes
June 4th, 2008 at 2:45 pm

SCHLUETER’S PLACE: Nathan Busenutz director of the Shepherds Fellowship, reminds us of the heart of the matter when he says: ‘… numbers are not the only measure of success—in fact, they’re not the standard at all. Rather, God teaches that His standard is faithfulness to His Word.’ The biblical standard of success is never numbers, but rather the accurate proclamation of God’s truth (2 Tim. 2:15; James 3:1). With this in mind, Warren’s seeker-sensitive model reveals several weaknesses.”

RA: This is just more proof that MacArthur and his people are not interpeted in the truth when it comes to Rick Warren. They have their course set, man the torpedoes, full speed ahead – don’t confuse me with the facts.

This issues of numbers/growth has been repeatedly addressed by Warren (and by me). And yet people like Busenutz and John MacArthurcontinue to rail against Warren for something he doesn’t even teach.

Warren’s PDC is not and never has been about numbers/growth. This is one of the false accusations being made. Warren has repeatedly stressed that his teachings are not about church growth, but rather, about church health.

Warren has explained on many occasions: “[T]he key issue for our congregations in the 21st century is church health not church growth. Focusing on church growth is the wrong focus” (, “Rick Warren Interview,” August 2005). He has gone so far as to write an entire article titled Emphasize Church Health, Not Church Growth. And again, another article, Forget Church Growth, Aim for Church Health (11/10/2004).

Moreover, Warren believes that a healthy church can be large or small—sometimes very small! When/if growth happens, then that will be the Holy Spirit working in and through the biblically-sound/spiritually-balanced church: a healthy church. But growth should never be the final goal. In fact, most of the churches within the Purpose Driven network have between 100-200 members.

As for Warren’s role in the so-called Church Growth Movement (CGM), he has explained: “In the early 1980s, I used the term ‘church growth’ because that was what everybody was familiar with. But I stopped using the phrase around 1986 because of the things I didn’t like about the church growth movement” (see Rick Warren, Making Ministry Healthy, Christianity Today).

In other words, Warren deliberately left the CGM more than twenty years ago because it was indeed focusing on growth. And that was not something Warren was interested in.

SCHLUETER’S PLACE: Quoting Bob DeWaay – “One of the disconcerting things about dealing with Rick Warren is that in spite of many problematic, public teachings, he claims to agree with orthodox Christian doctrine…”

RA: Interesting. Now, DeWaay has suddenly changed his tune, saying that Warren “claims” to agree with orthodox Christian doctrine.” Originally, he stated, with no reservations or qualifications: “Privately, we agree on most doctrines” and ““There were no differences of theology that I know of.”

So, I wonder which it is. Are their truly no difference of theology, as DeWaay first claimed? Or now, after pressure has been exerted on DeWaay, is he saying there might actually difference, but these cannot be discovered because Warren “claims” to hold to all the right beliefs?

SCHLUETER’S PLACE: Quoting Bob DeWaay – “We were able to urge Rick Warren to start preaching [the Gospel].”

RA: Another interesting tweak. In DeWaay’s original statement, he noted; “If Pastor Rick starts preaching Christ more than he does now, even that, I could rejoice in.”

So, again, which is it? As I stated in my most recent response to DeWaay, “Does he need to preach Christ? Or does he need to preach Christ “more than he does now”? Because these two statements say two different things. If he needs to START preaching Christ, that is one thing, which calls into question all kinds of serious issues. If he needs to start preaching Christ “more than he does now,” then that is a personal opinion of yours — and nothing more.

SCHLUETER’S PLACE: Quoting Bob DeWaay – “Anyone will be able to see if he does start preaching Christ; they merely need to listen to his public speeches before mixed audiences.”

RA: See above comment.

SCHLUETER’S PLACE: Quoting Watcher’s Lamp – “Anyone would applaud the fine humanitarian efforts at Saddleback. These efforts resemble similar noble efforts of Roman Catholism and other belief systems. . . . The plan may appear successful in both arenas. Pews may be filled, the hungry may be fed. But the true need that the true church is called to meet first and foremost is untouched by Warren’s “cosmo-Christianity”…to expose the real spiritual condition of humanity: spiritual depravity, separation from God and His judgement for that condition…

RA: Watcher’s Lamp, like so many other websites critical of Warren, utterly misrepresents the PEACE Plan as some kind of Social Gospel (which is something Warren has repeatedly condemned). The true nature of the PEACE Plan is deliberately being ignored by Warren’s critics who refuse to quote and recognize statements in the PEACE Plan that show it to be, in essence, a full-orbed evangelism strategy.

The reason WHY Warren is going after his GLOBAL GIANTS is not only to relieve human suffering, but more importantly to REMOVE those things that he sees hindering the spread of the CHRISTIAN GOSPEL throughout the world. I have said this over and over and over — so forgive me if I am a bit exasperated and more than a little frustrated.

The P.E.A.C.E. PLAN is intended to remove those things that are hindering the spread of the Christian Gospel throughout the world. For example, if you seek to end illiteracy – suddenly how many millions of people can read a Bible? If you try to alleviate poverty, it enables people to look to other issues in their lives besides just worrying about how they’re going to survive through the next 24 hours.

This is all in BLACK & WHITE in the PEACE plan, but no critics are bothering to quote those parts of it. All they keep doing is talking about how “E” for evangelism is not in the plan. Why haven’t you ever seen any of these quotes listed by Warren’s critics:

1. These are the world’s biggest problems, affecting billions, not just millions, of people: spiritual emptiness, corrupt leadership, poverty, disease, and illiteracy. These five global giants ravage the lives of billions of people worldwide and all work together to constrain them and cut them off from knowing the saving grace of a loving God who sent his son, Jesus Christ, to die for their sins allowing them eternal hope and security” (P.E.A.C.E.).

PLEASE READ AGAIN – “cut them off from knowing the saving grace of a loving God who sent his son, Jesus Christ, to die for their sins”

2. “These giants [spiritual emptiness, corrupt leadership, poverty, disease, and illiteracy] work together to constrain and prevent masses of people from knowing the saving grace of a loving God who sent his son, Jesus Christ, to die for our sins allowing us eternal hope and security. . . . The only successful solution is the global Church of Jesus Christ.” (PEACE PLAN SUMMARY)

PLEASE READ AGAIN – “work together to constrain and prevent masses of people from knowing the saving grace of a loving God who sent his son, Jesus Christ, to die for our sins allowing us eternal hope and security”

Far from being a Social Gospel, the PEACE PLAN in total is an evangelism strategy. The only real question is: Are we as Christians permitted to work with unbelievers in our attempts to: a) alleviate pain and human suffering; and b) gain access to places where we can spread the Gospel. I see NOTHING in the Bible that would prohibit either.

SCHLUETER’S PLACE: With the recent swell of attention concerning a meeting held by Rick Warren with a couple of his critics CRN brings you this look at the Biblical problems underlying this work of Warren.

RA: My evaluation of GARY GILLEY’Sfalse charges and misinformation relating to Rick Warren.


I could go on, but well, you get the point……


17   Nate    
June 4th, 2008 at 2:57 pm

Are you shadow boxing? Who is “Schlueter’s Place”? Did I miss something?

18   Richard Abanes
June 4th, 2008 at 3:06 pm

I meant KEN SILVA at


I had Ingrid Sclueter from on the brain, and kept typing her name. ROFL.

But meh, you’ve read one ODM, you’ve read them all. :-)


19   Nate    
June 4th, 2008 at 3:22 pm

Her husband may not like the way you phrased that. (Why is my wife on Richard Abanes’ brain?) LOL!!!

20   Richard Abanes
June 4th, 2008 at 3:50 pm

My response to Bob DeWaay’s recent back-peddling is now up at my blog.


21   andy    
June 4th, 2008 at 4:18 pm

Man that suckssss,are get it direct from Amazon then ;-)

22   Ken Silva
June 4th, 2008 at 4:27 pm

“But meh, you’ve read one ODM, you’ve read them all.”

Ah Richard you say the kindest things. :-)

23   Tim Reed, Owosso MI
June 4th, 2008 at 5:45 pm

Doesn’t it strike you as the least bit hypocritical to complain about what Richard just wrote and then turn around and write the things you write on a regular basis?

24   Richard Abanes
June 4th, 2008 at 5:46 pm


Thank you Ken. But I would say kind and accurate.

Most of the ODM sites, yours included, cross-links like mad. And every few months, basically the same articles appear, but with different titles.

So, as for the above comment, I would say its neither kind, nor unkind, just accurate.


25   Richard Abanes
June 4th, 2008 at 5:51 pm

Tim: Doesn’t it strike you as the least bit hypocritical to complain about what Richard just wrote and then turn around and write the things you write on a regular basis?

RA: No, he doesn’t. Scary, huh? But truth be told, my favorite ODM is Tim Wirth. He easily outdoes KS (sorry, Ken). It’s Wirth whose compared me to Hitler’s propaganda minister Josef Goebbels!

But here’s my favorite quote from Wirth – I might even put it in a signature for blogs: “Saddleback has created a monster in the form of author Richard Abanes.”

ROFL! I don’t think anyone’s ever called me a monster before.

When I first read this, I thought of that old Bugs Bunny cartoon where he’s in a mad scientists castle and he’s fighting this big red monster and puts curlers in the monster’s hair, and says: “If an interesting monster can’t have an interesting hairdo I don’t know what this world is coming to.



26   iggy
June 4th, 2008 at 6:26 pm


I find it funny Tim Wirth and I email each other and pray for each other. He recently went through a bout with some cancer… and still needs prayer. We have a mutual friend that he really respects and that has no issue with me.

Meanwhile Ken just mocks me and calls me his nemesis… and I still pray for him though he refuses to actually converse with me.

I think Ken is just a bit silly…


27   Dave Muller
June 4th, 2008 at 6:59 pm

I hadn’t been to for a while and it’s still the same – wild accusations and something that I just can’t stomache.

“pragmatic semi-pelagian ‘Calvinist’ message”, “Warren’s ‘cosmo-Christianity’”, “The Circus Church”, “the Protestant Pope, ‘America’s Pastor’, Rick Warren”, “a sermon by C.H. Spurgeon” (and they complain that evil modernists reuse sermens!), “Christian compromisers like Purpose Driven Pope Rick Warren”, “Rick Warren’s queer quest to reverse the Reformation of our Lord’s Church”, “The apologists of Purpose Driven Pope Rick Warren have been busy playing spin doctor” all from the front page.

I think it’s the extreme hyperbole and subjectivity of the content there that makes me feel ill after reading.

28   Dave Muller
June 4th, 2008 at 7:07 pm

actually it reminds me of the front cover of womens day or cosmo.

29   Rick Frueh
June 4th, 2008 at 7:09 pm

I believe the words “urinate” and “defecate” were also used.

30   Ken Silva
June 4th, 2008 at 7:54 pm

Guys, I didn’t know you cared. I’m deeply moved…or maybe I just forgot to refrigerate the cole slaw.

Anyway, yeah I see what you mean evangelical apologetics sites never crosslink. ;-)

31   Richard Abanes
June 4th, 2008 at 9:05 pm


ROFL. I sometimes wonder what would happen if God picked us all up in his hands (no I am not affirming Mormon doctrine about a big God) and threw us all into a room, and locked the door, for a week — not TV, no Internet, no books. Just a slot in the door for pizza and Coke. Hmmm, I wonder what would happen.


32   Chad
June 4th, 2008 at 9:14 pm

I think you just described heaven. We’ll have an eternity to work it out.
I just hope they have pepperoni.

33   Rick Frueh
June 4th, 2008 at 9:16 pm

“I wonder what would happen.”

A lot of urinating and defecating!

34   Christian P
June 4th, 2008 at 11:30 pm

Dave, I’m not so sure they use hyperbole, let alone extreme hyperbole.

35   Nathanael
June 5th, 2008 at 7:20 am

Always with the practical answer.

36   iggy
June 5th, 2008 at 7:53 am

I think there is some type of “bull” they use… whether it is hyper or not depends on which one.

; )

37   iggy
June 5th, 2008 at 10:34 am


Guys, I didn’t know you cared. I’m deeply moved…or maybe I just forgot to refrigerate the cole slaw.

the latter would explain a lot about you…

; )

(that was not a mean angry malicious attack, but a friendly jab… so don’t go and post some post on CRN about how much a meanie I am)

You friendly Christ Loving Nemesis* (*your title not mine!)


38   pastorboy
June 5th, 2008 at 11:10 am

Well, I didn’t get to go to the conference. But there is something I can say about the observations.

It seems very clear that Rick Warren is a gracious host

It seems very clear that Rick Warren has Christian charity

It seems clear that Rick Warren has an agenda. That agenda has been judged ad nauseum by people on both sides of the PD fence.

Bob DeWaay and Chris R seem to agree that in private, Rick Warren agrees with basic Christology and Soteriology. I take their word for that. RA has been screaming that fact from the rooftops for a while now.

The question I still have is that if he states it in private, why not in public? I agree with Chris R’s assessment that while Rick knows and believes in the basics of salvation by faith alone through grace alone by Christ alone, he preaches a very works based message. He is falling into the Galatian heresy, adding works to faith as a requirement or add-on to salvation. You can call it practical, you can call it life application, but it comes across as Jesus’ blood plus ________

And this is the rub! And this is where Rick Warren is gliding ever closer to the Roman Catholic Church, who, for two millenia, have substituted works for faith.

39   Rick Frueh
June 5th, 2008 at 11:16 am

“He is falling into the Galatian heresy, adding works to faith as a requirement or add-on to salvation.”

And the funny thing is many accuse Warren of preaching easy believism, not a works salvation.

40   Richard Abanes
June 5th, 2008 at 12:03 pm

I have posted what is very likely my last post to Chris Rosebrough’s blog, given the fact that he has chosen to continue his false assessment of Rick Warren, and PD teachings.

What seemed like a light at the end of the tunnel has now been snuffed out, IMHO. It is fairly clear now, with Rosebrough falsely claiming that Warren teaches salvation by works, that there is no hope for constructive discussions. This is especially evident in Rosebrough’s most recent statement: “This is why many, including myself, describe Purpose-Driven Preaching as Christless Christianity.”

So sad. Tragic, in fact. But God is in control and he allows what he allows for his good purposes. Pray for Rosebrough. Truth has been offered, and he is now accountable.

R. Abanes

41   Chris L
June 5th, 2008 at 12:12 pm

Maybe Warren’s call (as previously noted) is primarily as ‘pastor’ rather than ‘evangelist’, and thus giving practical advice on living vs. believing are more in line with his role (and the role of pastors, in general)…

The more I read the sniping at Warren, the more it seems that those doing the sniping want people’s ears to be tickled with abstract doctrines rather than practical applications of the same… God forbid people act out what they claim to profess…

42   Phil Miller
June 5th, 2008 at 12:19 pm

I still maintain that the majority of criticism of Warren is coming from jealousy. I’m serious.

I’ve been around pastors all my life, and trust me, the amount they compare themselves to one another isn’t unlike an 8th grade boys locker room.

43   nathan
June 5th, 2008 at 1:09 pm

Where has Warren ever said that we are saved via works? I would assume that people get this from Warren actually calling Christians to live out their faith. God forbid we tell people that without works their faith is dead. We wouldn’t want to diminish grace, now would we.

44   Richard Abanes
June 5th, 2008 at 1:27 pm

nathan: Where has Warren ever said that we are saved via works?

RA: He never has. Sad, isn’t it? Well, at least I tried.


45   Nathanael
June 5th, 2008 at 2:21 pm

I read through almost all of the comments on Chris R’s timely admonishment for all of us to heed the apostle Peter’s mandate to use gentleness and respect in defending the faith. And I almost commented several times, but stopped. I did a lot of praying for all parties who were commenting, and especially for our brother Rick Warren.
My final conclusion is to pray, “Lord have mercy on us sinners.”

46   Ken Silva
June 5th, 2008 at 2:32 pm


“You can call it practical, you can call it life application, but it comes across as Jesus’ blood plus ________”

It’s a new form of Pietism.

47   Richard Abanes
June 5th, 2008 at 2:49 pm

KS; Quoting Pastorboy,”You can call it practical, you can call it life application, but it comes across as Jesus’ blood plus ________”

RA: And this is from one of your attack articles on me: “…here is what the watchful eyes of a pastor would notice in this example of Mr. Abanes’ choices of music. No matter what the reason, by his own admission, Mr. Abanes does not listen to ‘a lot of Christian music at all.’ However, as for ’secular music…”

Ken, you make tihs too easy. May I borrow from pastorboy now in response to your statement about my choices of …..gulp… mucic? “You can call it practical, you can call it life application, but it comes across as Jesus’ blood plus ________”


48   Ken Silva
June 5th, 2008 at 3:30 pm


RA: this is from one of your attack articles on me.

KS: Correction: It is a response to one of your attack articles on me.

I’m afraid only imaturity in Christ is showing by your conduct here. I do hope you decide to lay low for a while before your reputation as an apologist is completely lost.

49   Chris P.    
June 5th, 2008 at 4:47 pm

Abanes is a drama queen.

50   Tim Wirth
June 5th, 2008 at 8:11 pm

Richard thanks for all the links and hits to my website.
Matter a fact my blog got promoted on Word Press didnt quite know what that meant until I saw this.
Hey iggy thanks for all the prayers. I got my pet scan back and 100% cancer free.
Praise God for that.
Plus the pet scan showed I havent eaten any cats or dogs as well.
Again Richard thanks for all the traffic to my site.
Keep on talking.
Tim Wirth

51   iggy
June 5th, 2008 at 9:30 pm


We are not enemies… and I am glad you see that with me. I wish Ken could see that also.

I am so glad to hear that the tests did not find any missing pets… but I do have a cat I could conveniently miss it you might desire… ; )

God is gracious and good. So we need all show the same grace to others even though we disagree. My prayer is that be so for all.

Be blessed,

52   Ken Silva
June 5th, 2008 at 9:33 pm

Hey Tim,

The Lord be praised for no cancer.

And congrats that Abanes has helped get your blog promoted.

When he chose to attack me a couple of years ago Abanes ended up bringing me to Ingrid’s attention. So she started reading my work.

That’s how I ended up working with her on the original Slice. Abanes sure can talk though, can’t he. :-)

53   Richard Abanes
June 6th, 2008 at 8:25 am

Ken & Tim,

I haven’t heard stuff like this since I was in siixth grade. You might as well have put a “Nah nah nah nah, nah” on your post. LoL.

Are you gonna corner me at my locker after PE class, too, or maybe push my book off my desk when the teacher has her back turned.

Sooo sad. And Ken, you’re a pastor?

Guys, there is NOTHING for us left to say to each other — I really feel sorry for you two.

Ahhh well, time to go on to other things.


P.S. I’m actually glad your websites have gotten more traffic, tbh, and is being seen by more people. The light always will expose the darkness so that those who want to follow the light may do so, while those who choose to remain in the darkness can also do so. God, then, has every justification to bring both blessings and judgment to those who made their respective choices. My efforts, therefore, have been successful.

54   Ken Silva
June 6th, 2008 at 9:03 am

RA: “And Ken, you’re a pastor?”

If you really wish to know you can ask the Lord what His calling is for me. He’d know better than I. :-)

RA: The light always will expose the darkness so that those who want to follow the light may do so…

Indeed it does Richard. See you on the battlefield.

55   Bud Press
June 6th, 2008 at 9:51 am

Hi Richard:

Speaking of going on to other things, now that your new book is done, and the “6-8″ week deadline you established is past, are you going to keep your word and make your findings on Ken Blanchard public? If so, when?

In Christian love,

56   Richard Abanes
June 6th, 2008 at 10:32 am


You are not my father. You are not my mother. You are not my God. You are not my publisher. And you are not my parole officer. What on earth makes you think I’m supposed to be reporting to you and justifying my time management and life activities to you?

Please stop HARASSING me — and that’s what your doing now with your incessant emails & online posts.

I told you that I’d get to Ken Blanchard and make my report when possible, given my responsibilities. I’ve already begun the research, and have even posted a caution about him to persons visiting my website.

My book on Eckhart Tolle is finished, but my work on the project is not complete, contrary to your pestering me about my work being done and asking me if I’m going to keep my word (which has more than one not-so-subtle implication).

My 6-8 week estimation did not take into account more aspects of the book’s publication that have come up – and TBH, it’s none of your business what those added responsibilities are based on requests from the publisher.

So just go ahead and whatever you want to say about me on your website. Whatever I do or say won’t make a difference anyway. So, please just feel free invent some tantalizing conspiratorial scenario — here I’ll help.

Ken Blanchard, who is really my Uncle Kenny, called and pleaded with me to not expose his true New Age agenda, which is to teach the church how to Lead Like A New Age Jesus. And to bribe me, he deposited $30 million into a Swiss Bank account with the last 3 numbers being 666. I told him that this would be acceptable, and that I’d never say anything negative about his book endorsements or associations with new Agers as long as I not only got the cash, but also was promoted to the Regional Director of the Illuminati, complete with my own special “I” embroidered blazer, a coat of arms pin, and a direct special hot phone line to the Vatican.

There you go, Bud. A whole new article for you. :-) You’re welcome. I wish you the best. And please, please, stop wasting your time emailing me — you’re most definitely top-listed now on my spam filter.

R. Abanes

57   iggy
June 6th, 2008 at 10:39 am


Indeed it does Richard. See you on the battlefield.

It is so sad that you a mere man think Truth needs your protection.

Jesus is The Truth… in that He protects us. You seem to have deified yourself to the point you think you need to protect Jesus from other men…

And that is not only sad, but blasphemous.
Know the Truth (Jesus) and he will set you free.

Again, my prayers are with you.


58   Ken Silva
June 6th, 2008 at 1:11 pm

You keep right on a-praying there Carlos.

59   Bud Press
June 6th, 2008 at 3:01 pm

Dear Richard:

I can’t believe you are saying this. I am amazed that you aren’t telling the whole story.

On March 11, 2008, I provided you with documented information on Ken Blanchard and his participation in the New Age Movement. In turn, you wrote and requested additional information, and said that if Ken Blanchard had not grown in discernment in two years, you would make your findings public–and in private to Rick Warren.

The information I provided proved, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Ken Blanchard is deeply involved in the New Age Movement. The list on your website demonstrates only a fraction of Blanchard’s participation in the New Age ( ).

As a result of the information I provided (at your request), on March 31 you posted a “NOTE & WARNING” on Ken Blanchard on your website at .

But in one particular e-mail, you wrote and said “DO NOT CONTACT ME AGAIN,” then wrote again days later and said, “I am starting to look at Blanchard today,” and requested further information.

I fully understand the responsibilities with your new book. No problem. But since March 11, those responsibilities didn’t stop you from spending an incredible amount of time posting lengthy messages in various blogs and dealing with New Agers on “YouTube.” Many of your blog posts had nothing to do with your new book.

Certainly, while you are entitled to your own opinion, please keep in mind that if you refuse to provide a statement on New Ager Ken Blanchard, your new book exposing New Ager Eckhart Tolle may not sit well with the body of Christ, your publisher, and online and walk-in Christian bookstores.

Ken Blanchard claims to be a “Christian,” but his involvement with and participation in the New Age Movement is dangerous to the spiritual welfare of the believer, as well as those searching for the real Jesus Christ.

Richard, I sent the information to you on Ken Blanchard out of love and concern for both you and your readers. I offered to talk with you over the phone, but you declined. I wasn’t “HARASSING” you, and you know that. I simply fulfilled your requests for information.

And for the record, I am not out to destroy you or your reputation. You are doing enough of that on your own. I will, however, hold you accountable, as the Lord leads.

With that in mind, your readers deserve to know the whole story on Ken Blanchard. You have my permission to link to or post any and all of my articles concerning Ken Blanchard on your website and blogs.

Furthermore and for the record, you have my permission to post ALL of our e-mail correspondence on your website and blogs–in their entirety, please.

Tell the whole story, Richard. Give your readers the opportunity to make-up their own minds. The documentation stands on its own. Truth will stand up to intensive investigation.

Finally, Richard, words mean a lot to me, and I am not afraid to hold people accountable for the things they say and do. A man’s word is his bond. I will honor your request. But at the same time, I will continue to remember you in my prayers. I will not shut the door on you. Should you have a change of heart, please feel free to contact me anytime, night or day.

In Christian love,
Bud Press, Director
Christian Research Service
Jude 3

60   Chris L
June 6th, 2008 at 3:04 pm


This really doesn’t seem to be on topic – can you take it to email, please?

61   Bud Press
June 6th, 2008 at 3:10 pm

Hi Chris L,

No problem. I will honor your request.

62   Bud Press
June 6th, 2008 at 3:13 pm

Chris L,

By the way, thank you for allowing me to express my concerns.

63   Richard Abanes
June 6th, 2008 at 3:50 pm

Write what you want, Bud. Just write whatever it is you want to write. It doesn’t matter — to anyone of any importance.

Your emails will not be answered. Conversation over. I’ve already given you a good lead off for a new article (see above).


One Trackback/Ping

  1. New Page added! Rick Warren Threat Level! « The Online Discernmentalist Mafia    Jun 06 2008 / 4pm:

    [...] is Ken Silva approved, Quote Ken, “Hey…cool.” He likes [...]