Sorry I've been away for a couple of days, but I'd like to thank everyone for their participation and responses so far. I am sympathetic to those of you who felt it important (and perhaps difficult) to determine which heretical ideas are more "root" problems (more basic or causal), and which are more "fruit" problems (more symptomatic or derivative). Our Lord said that a bad tree produces bad fruit and cannot produce good fruit (Matthew 7:17-18; Luke 6:43-4), and I would agree that Arminianism (or Semi-Pelagianism or Pelagianism) is the bad tree or root from which most of the heresies I listed have sprouted, and as one of you asked, "how many Reformed seeker-sensitive churches do you know of?" The Reformed tradition has produced a few small but serious heresies and heretics (e.g., Harold Camping/Depart Out/Campingism, Hyper-Calvinism, Theonomy), but the Arminian tradition is the hands down winner in this department.

My hope is that this poll and the posted responses might provoke more discussion about the connections and relationships between all of these ideas, and reflection about how to address them in various contexts and circumstances (e.g., depending on which one your about to step on). I encourage everyone to say how and why they voted as they did.

I chose the seeker-sensitive movement, not because it represents or embodies in itself the most heretical or dangerous beliefs, but because of its subtlety in insinuating itself into even the most "conservative" churches and pulpits. More than the others, it masquerades most effectively as an "angel of light" (2 Cor. 11:14).

More specifically, I believe the Purpose-Driven (Saddleback) model of Rick Warren is more dangerous than the older "Market-Driven" paradigm of George Barna, or even the "Seeker-Sensitive" (Willow Creek) model of Bill Hybels (there is also growing synergy between Warren and the Emergent Church movement, though some Emergent aesthetes still regard him as a Philistine). The Five Purposes appear far more biblical than all of Barnas graphs and stats, and churches believe they have more freedom to pick and choose between various levels of commitment to the model without "buying into" the whole thing. But the most basic "man-centered" presupposition has already been embraced, and it is all downhill from there as doctrinal entropy and what Alan Gomes calls the second law of theological thermodynamics kicks in.


Soli Deo Gloria,

Brad J. Hammond