Replies

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/decemberweb-only/151-53.0.html

WARREN: One thing that I learned from Peter Drucker
is a concept that he got from Joseph Schumpeter. He
talked about systematic abandonment. Systematic abandonment
means you intentionally stop stuff in order to start
something new. The way Jesus would say it: You've got
to prune the branches so there's more fruit. Anybody
who has roses, and I grow roses, knows that you have
to cut the roses back or they can't grow for the next season.
You have to cut back and then they grow to the next phase.

Well, "systematic abandonment" is "politespeak" for "creative destruction", which, if you examine the source materials -- rather than the sugar-coated Hawaiian shirt "for the masses" explanations -- appears to be very reminiscent of Marx's "theory of continuous revolution."

And if you want to talk "fruit", I can supply numerous cites of churches torn asunder, lives -- lives of decent people -- in upheaval, and other evidence of "systematic abandonment"-cum-"creative destruction" fitting Schumpeter's model to a tee -- the literal tearing down of societal structures, in order to build a new order.

I'm not really sure you want to go there (with "there" being the effort to portray Warren's "fruit" as being something other than that which is promulgated by Schumpeter and company).

I'd like to say, "Go ahead, try me, I've got all night, and plenty of resource materials," but the fact is, I don't. (I don't have all night, that is. I'm dog-tired and getting over a really wicked bout of flu. I do have plenty of resource materials, though, and I'd be more than glad to "share with the class", but as I said, I don't think you really want to go there.)

I will leave you with this thought (from 1 Tim 5:22): "Lay hands on no man suddenly," (i.e., don't go endorsing someone before you really know who and what he is).

"Lay hands on no man suddenly." Not even if "he's a real sweet 'jes' fo'ks' type of harmless lovable fuzzball in a Hawaiian shirt." Not even if "everyone else is doing it, and you'd feel silly being seen as doubting such a 'Mighty Man of God.'" Not even if "he's sold millions of books, and every secular authority in the land is in love with the guy." Not even if "his program has been installed in thousands of churches."

And finally, not even if you will be ostracized if you do NOT "go with the flow." And that, I submit, may be the hardest "not even if" of them all for anyone to handle in this day and age.