Subscribe to Christianity Today and get 3 free trial issues. No credit card required.
Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery. Offer valid in U.S. only.
If you decide you want to keep Christianity Today coming, honor your invoice for just $19.95 and receive nine more issues, a full year in all. If not, simply write "cancel" across the invoice and return it. The three trial issues are yours to keep, regardless.
The author has insight into some real issues in churches and Christian organizations, but I know first hand of several churches that might speak with this lingo and these churches really are seeing biblical transformation taking place in peoples' lives. When I read the list of indicators, they resonate with me on a very biblical level. I realize a basis for concern, but from the depths, my spirit cries "YES!" to these indicators. There are too many churches with "right theology" but no fruit to show for it. So the author is correct - these indicators (like anything else) must be grounded in the right foundation.
Kerry E. Southorn
Posted: June 20, 2007 2:38 PM
The burden of proof has shifted in our churches. At one time, the burden of proof was upon those who wanted change, "We've always done it this way", was the accepted mode of thinking. Today the burden is on those who want to conserve the things they cherish. What is new is automatically considered superior--without being weighed or considered.
The article goes straight to the quick on this malady. We shouldn't blindly preserve traditions that have outlasted their overrated usefulness, but neither should we grasp every lame sham of novelty which the "polyanna church movement" promotes.
Mike Kachura
Posted: June 14, 2007 9:00 AM
There is a convenient but dangerous mode of thinking (and preaching) in evangelical circles, that as long as you attach a verse to substantiate whatever you are saying, it is 'biblical' (and, I suppose, the more verses you include, the more 'biblical' you are). I say 'convenient' because you never have to do the hard work beyond that; 'dangerous' because it is so projective and perhaps the 'sub-cause' of much strife and confusion in the church. You only have to see what you are looking for. Such is the flavor of this article. The irony of this article is that the author's criticism of "sub-biblical" (whatever that is) is just the opposite of what I found: Ford's premise is based on a strong biblical world-life view (I read the book) and the research is interpreted accordingly. Read the book and decide for yourself. Keep in mind how infrequently Jesus quoted scripture and how often he used the social context (parables) to illustrate Truth and make it relevant.
RSS Feeds
Audio
Twitter
share this page
E-mail
Print
Post
Subscribe to Christianity Today magazine today!
