Rick Warren recently posted on X (formerly Twitter) the following statement:
“John 19:18 – They crucified Jesus with two others-one on each side & Jesus in the middle.” The guys on both sides were thieves. If you’re looking for the #realJesus, not a caricature disfigured by partisan motivations, you’ll find Him in the middle, not on either side.”
Even for Warren, a figure known for his theological elasticity, this interpretation is exceptionally problematic. This post is a careless misreading and a distortion of the gospel narrative that demands scrutiny.
A History of Theological Inconsistencies
Rick Warren has long exhibited a chameleon-like approach to theology. His doctrinal stance often shifts depending on his audience. In 2006, he was a keynote speaker at the Azusa Street Centennial Celebration, an event marking the rise of the Pentecostal movement. Sharing the stage with Word of Faith figures like Kenneth Copeland and Benny Hinn, Warren seemed at home in the Charismatic crowd. Yet, when interviewed by John Piper, he presented himself as someone who reveres Puritan theology and affirms God’s sovereignty in salvation. His theological inconsistency extends to Catholicism. In an interview on EWTN, a Roman Catholic television station, Warren stated that Pope Francis was “doing everything right” and even called him “our new pope.” He praised the Pope’s humility and acts of service, aligning himself with Catholic teaching despite its fundamental doctrinal differences from biblical Christianity. Warren’s approach to evangelism is equally troubling. When appearing on the Hannity & Colmes show, he suggested to Alan Colmes, a self-proclaimed Jewish liberal, that he should “try Jesus for 60 days.” This reduced the gospel to a trial period rather than a life-altering surrender to Christ. Moreover, in 2009, Warren was a keynote speaker at the Islamic Society of North America’s annual convention. Instead of presenting the gospel, he emphasized interfaith collaboration, sidestepping the exclusivity of Christ’s redemptive work.
The Theological Error in Warren’s Post
Warren’s recent X post exemplifies his tendency toward eisegesis—reading his own philosophy into the text rather than drawing meaning out of it. His statement implies that Christ’s crucifixion location—between two thieves—symbolizes a nonpartisan, centrist political stance. This is an egregious misinterpretation of John 19:18. The reality is that Jesus was crucified between two thieves to fulfill Messianic prophecy, not as a symbol of political moderation. Isaiah 53:12 explicitly states:
“He was numbered with the transgressors.”
This was not about Jesus taking a neutral stance on political matters. It was about His identification with sinners, underscoring His role as the suffering servant who intercedes for transgressors.
The Meaning of the Two Thieves
The gospel accounts provide a richer understanding of the two criminals crucified alongside Jesus. Initially, both reviled Him (Matthew 27:38-44). However, as Luke 23:39-43 records, one of the thieves had a change of heart, rebuking the other and placing his faith in Christ. Jesus responded:
“Truly I say to you, today you will be with Me in paradise.”
This narrative is a testament to God’s sovereign grace, demonstrating how one sinner was drawn to repentance while the other remained in rebellion. It has nothing to do with Jesus positioning Himself as a centrist.
Jesus Is Not “In the Middle”
Warren’s assertion that “you’ll find Him in the middle” suggests a political neutrality that ignores the moral absolutes of Scripture. Jesus is not in the middle when it comes to issues like abortion, sexual ethics, or the authority of God’s Word. He stands firmly for righteousness and against sin. To illustrate, the Democratic Party’s platform openly supports abortion and other moral stances that contradict biblical teaching. Jesus is not neutral on these matters—He is unequivocally for life, purity, and God’s design for humanity. Moreover, the increasing normalization of perverse ideologies, such as drag queen story hours for children and gender mutilation surgeries for minors, stands in direct opposition to biblical truth. Jesus is not “in the middle” on such issues; He is absolutely opposed to sin and calls for repentance.
The Danger of Warren’s Approach
Warren’s pattern of theological compromise demonstrates why he is not qualified to teach Scripture. His attempt to redefine the meaning of the crucifixion to fit a politically palatable narrative is a disservice to the gospel. True biblical interpretation seeks to understand the author’s original intent, not manipulate Scripture to serve contemporary ideologies. Every passage of Scripture has only one correct interpretation, though it may have multiple applications. In recording Jesus’ crucifixion between two thieves, John was not making a statement about political centrism. He was documenting the fulfillment of prophecy and the unfolding of redemption.
The True Gospel Message
Rick Warren’s mishandling of Scripture is part of a broader pattern of theological compromise. While he may be a charismatic figure, his teaching is fundamentally flawed. The true gospel is this: all people are sinners who stand condemned before a holy God. No amount of good works can earn salvation. But God, in His mercy, sent Jesus Christ to live a sinless life, die on the cross, and rise again on the third day. Salvation comes only through repentance and faith in Christ, not through a “trial period” or an appeal to unity over truth. Scripture warns against those who distort the gospel (Galatians 1:8-9). As believers, we must diligently discern, hold fast to sound doctrine, and reject teachings that dilute or misrepresent God’s Word. If you have never trusted in Christ, do not “try Jesus for 60 days.” Repent and believe in Him alone for salvation. The one who comes to Him will never be cast out (John 6:37). May we stand firm in the truth, unwavering in our commitment to biblical fidelity.