I'm not sure I can agree with the spin in this blog, Chris.  I'm reminded of your blog from a few months ago that blacklisted dozens of prominent Christian apologists and theologians for allegedly embracing and teaching pagan spiritual practices as "new" Christianity.  I looked into a few of them and found the quotes to be tenuously connected at best.  I'm seeing a repeat here.  

Consider one homeless alcoholic.  Call him Clive.  You go up to Clive and give him the full Gospel message with bells and whistles and scripture references.  He asks antagonistic questions.  You answer them politely.  He firmly states his answer:  "no."  His firm refusal is now clearly established.  What do you do next?  Well, of course you could continue to pray for him and give the Gospel differently whenever the opportunity arises, but there is also this sticking point:

Clearly, we are also called to "partner" with Clive to minister his physical needs.

You and I are in agreement that we need to evangelize to everybody on the planet.  If a village is not receptive, we are not called to ignore them. What are we to do?  Do the best we can to help them.  This is what I see Warren talking about.

Another point:  yes, we need to speak the truth clearly.  Calling somebody a sinner is good (especially augmented with the fact that we are sinners too, so superiority is not communicated).  Calling somebody a cultist is just going to cause them to shut their ears.  Paul said the exact opposite of this when speaking to the Greeks (Acts 17). 

I think there are many ways to evangelize.  After all, an aspect of evangelism is making friends; connecting at a personal level.  People are all different.  One way that works for me (albeit I'm pretty inexperienced) is working from within their own faith system and not calling them a heathen.  Be a friend, walk like a Christian, and when opportunity presents, talk about what you believe, Who you believe.  As Ravi Zacharias often says, "I don't like to throw mud at other religions for two reasons:  you get your hands dirty and you lose a lot of ground." This is what I see Warren doing.  There is a theoretical/theological way of speaking, and there is a practical way of speaking.  Jesus primarilly spoke in the latter; in Romans Paul spoke in the former.

Let me know your thoughts.  But I think the intentions of Warren need to be analized with a larger scope than this.  I haven't read his stuff, but I hear nothing but good things from his theology by people that I respect for their spiritual maturity.

By the way, I highly admire the dedication and zeal of Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons in their evangelism efforts.  That is the truth.  I am not afraid to say that, and my saying this does not legitimize their gospel one whit.  Abstaining from saying this not only makes me insincere, it causes tension in relationships.

"Men of Athens!  I see that in every way you are very religious!"

Amen brother... I admire their zeal in evangelism... though they are required, part of their "works doctrine" to earn celestial heaven and become gods.  If they fail, they'll only go to the telestial heaven.  In their theology, the only ones who go to hell are the apostate momrons.  How's that for cult theology? 

Now for the beating, haha!  Certainly, I agree with you in meeting people... you usually can't tell people to their face they're going to hell... and most responses to salvation are made through relationships.  The "good deeds" that Warren is empahasizing aren't in and of themself bad, for we were saved for good deeds in Christ Jesus (Eph 2:10).  By all means we should be engaged in servanthood and deeds of love, but not at the expense of the gospel.  Warren does not mention the gospel, or explain it as a basis for salvation.  He is falling into the camp of teaching that "everyone is going to heaven," much as Mormons state, though I'm sure their conception differs. 

And for me, it's not that I want to demonize Warren... but I think the teaching is so heretical!  Brian Mclaren, of the emerging church actually denies the atonement!!!  I don't know why he calls his meeting a church.  Actually, I do know why, because he is deceived and a tool of his master.

Brian Mclaren?  I'll have to do a little more reading.  I haven't heard of him.  According to Wikipedia, his church is 10 minutes away from where I live! 

Honestly, I've mostly ignored the goings-ons of "seeker friendly" churches.  One of them brought me to Christ, and many of the small groups there have read Warren's PDL.  If Mclaren denies the atonement, this is indeed heretical.  Does Warren ignore the Gospel in his writings?  I'll verify with someone who's read his stuff.  

From Brian Mclaren's church's website's statement of belief:

Pardoning the Arminian slant, I think this is a very good summary of the Gospel and the Atonement of Christ.

I've done a lot of research on McLaren, reading his books and I'm very sad to say that there are some serious problems.  One of the most disturbing I have found is his endorsement of a book by Alan Jones called Reimagining Christianity.  McLaren wholeheartedly approves of the book and yet in this book, Alan Jones says that the vicarious atonement of Christ is a vial doctrine. He casts strong doubt over the Bible's reliability, denies the virgin birth, says Christianity a sadomasochistic, affirms evolution, and sees religions such as Islam and Buddhism as equally valid compared to Christianity.  In my assessment, Alan Jones is not a Christian and no true Christian should ever support the book reimagining Christianity.

But, what does Brian McLaren actually teach?  Some pretty disturbing things!  You Can go to the first and second articles that list a series of quotes from him.  In them you will see how troubling Brian McLaren's teachings really are.  Among the quotes he states such things as Christianity is a little true, that perhaps our understanding of Christianity is wrong, that masculine pronouns used to describe God should be avoided, that we probably haven't got the gospel right yet, that understanding nothing is good, that Gandhi followed the way of Christ, that being saved is not being saved from God's damnation, that we haven't got the homosexuality issue right, and that systematic theology is a practice in arrogance.

Therefore, I can only conclude that Brian McLaren is a dangerous teacher. 
http://www.carm.org/emerging/brian_mclaren.htm

Wow, you cited CARM!  I came back here because, while searching CARM for something on Zen Buddhism, I found a whole page directed to this Mclaren guy!  LOL!  Is God trying to wake me up?

http://www.carm.org/emerging/brian-mclaren_quotes2.htm

I'm not sure what to say about not being able to trust statements of beliefs....  If I can't trust what anybody says, how am I to operate?  Call me naiive and young, I dunno.  I'm an optimist by nature.