Posted on 09/30/2002 9:19:01 AM PDT by PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
VENTURA, Calif. -- Pollster George Barna, known these days as the bearer of bad tidings about the state of Christianity in America, arrived in his office a few minutes late for a 10 a.m. appointment.
His hair was ruffled; his eyes puffy. Shoulders slouched. Being the George Gallup of the conservative evangelical world is a heavy burden for Barna, who often works into the early morning, deciphering numbers generated by his surveys to find church trends.
The 48-year-old author of 30 books, who describes himself as a raging introvert, is a popular national speaker. And he produces enough in-your-face statistics and blunt talk to irritate pastors, cost him business and earn a reputation for having, as one magazine put it, "the gift of discouragement."
His data undercut some of the core beliefs that should, by definition, set evangelicals apart from their more liberal brethren. Findings of his polls show, for example, that:
• The divorce rate is no different for born-again Christians than for those who do not consider themselves religious.
• Only a minority of born-again adults (44 percent) and a tiny proportion of born-again teenagers (9 percent) are certain that absolute moral truth exists.
• Most Christians' votes are influenced more by economic self-interest than by spiritual and moral values.
• Desiring to have a close, personal relationship with God ranks sixth among the 21 life goals tested among born-agains, trailing such desires as "living a comfortable lifestyle."
'Are people's lives being transformed" by Christianity? Barna has asked. "We can't find evidence of a transformation."
Even Barna's toughest critics concede that Barna Research Group's polls carry considerable weight because of his first-rate surveying techniques and his 17-year-long record of tracking church and cultural trends.
His work has been used by major companies (Ford Motor Co. and Walt Disney, for example) and religious organizations such as the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and World Vision.
"He is the accepted authority on church trends," said Bob Cavin, director of the Texas Baptist Leadership Center. "He gives pastors insight, not only into the effectiveness of the church, but with trends in society that help the pastors with their strategic planning."
Because of his influence, many are watching with interest as Barna branches out from his usual business. He has been preoccupied with quantifying contemporary Christian beliefs, attitudes and practices; comparing them with biblical truths; and delivering the results to pastors, Christian leaders and laity. He said that he once hoped his analyses would be used as building blocks for more relevant churches.
But he decided this year to take a more active role by helping to identify and develop new and better church leaders who will boldly go where their predecessors haven't gone before: to radically revamp the church. He said he believes the process will take decades -- generations -- to complete.
"One of our challenges is to revisit the structures and means through which people experience Christ," Barna said. "People have been talking about developing the 'new church' for the past several decades, but nothing new has been forthcoming."
According to Barna, pastors are great teachers, but not necessarily adept at leadership. To back up his claim, he cited one of his own polls: It showed that only 12 percent of senior pastors say they have the spiritual gift of leadership and 8 percent say they have the gift of evangelism. In contrast, two-thirds say they have the gift of teaching or preaching.
"We, not God, have created a system that doesn't work and that we're reluctant to change."
Barna also is in the early stages of establishing a genuine and appealing Christian presence in secular entities: film, music, media and politics. He has identified these as the institutions that hold the most influence over Americans.
What's needed are "skilled professionals who love Christ and model his ways through their thoughts, words and behavior in enviable and biblically consistent ways," he said.
For Barna, the need for better leadership and better Christian role models in the secular world was underscored by a poll he released this month.
9/11 opportunity lost
The survey showed that the Sept. 11 attacks had virtually no lasting effects on America's faith, despite a 20 percent rise in church attendance during the first few weeks afterward.
"We missed a huge opportunity," he said, adding that, because of their own shallow faith, church regulars needed so much reassurance themselves that they couldn't minister to newcomers.
This kind of comment bothers evangelical Christians.
Mike Regele, author of "The Death of the Church," is one of many who believe the Barna Research Group's statistical work is excellent, but the conclusions drawn by the company's founder are too harsh.
The hypocrisy of Christians, Regele said, "has been a part of the church, probably since the day of Pentecost" and doesn't indicate its collapse.
"It sounds like he's very, very angry at the church," said Regele, a church critic himself who is ultimately an optimist. "There are reasons to be disappointed, but scripture never said we'd be perfect. We shouldn't view the whole institution as a failure."
With each new Barna poll or book, the attacks begin again: He's too negative; he has it in for pastors; he's arrogant.
The criticism "would affect any human being," said Barna, a husband and father of two. "We all want to be loved and accepted by others, but we also have a higher calling to which we each must be true."
Barna said he has learned painfully that giving advice on how to revitalize churches in America is a hugely complex proposition that doesn't fit well into sound bites. He has learned to be more guarded.
Although his statistics often show self-described Christians living lives no different from those of atheists, Barna's faith never has wavered.
"The issue isn't whether Jesus or Christianity is real," he said. "The issue is, are Americans willing to put Christ first in their lives?
Define what is good. We are also told not to be unequally yoked in spirtual matters. You may think that we are on the same side, but when our doctrines are so foreign, with your in apostacy, how can we be on the same side cheering for the Right Team? We're all praying for you to come over.
I almost never bother with addressing my posts to more than the person whose name comes up in the "To:" box when I respond to something. I assume that those who are already participants in the thread will eventually find it and read it. If my not flagging everyone and their mother to everything I write here on a public board in a public forum constitutes posting behind someone's back, then so be it.
To be consistent, you would have to maintain that he was saved (although nothing is said that he was), because if he wasn't saved, the notion that a man has to be regenerated before God can reach him falls by the wayside.
I agree with your assessment of the attributes of both the Father and the Son, and the decision they would make is to reach all men so every man has a choice to make and not have had that choice made by God for him in a Eternal Decree. (Rom.1, Ps.19, 1Tim.2:4, 2Pet.3:9)
Your second clause is not consistent with Rom 9:8-26. Custance, White, and others have shown convincingly that the use of pas in 1 Ti 2:1 and 4 is consistent with "all classes" or "all types" of men. As for 2 Pet 3:9, one must ask "all what?". The context there shows that the verse is referring to believers.
There are two many verses like Prov 19:21 and Prov 20:24 and John 6:44-45 for me to believe that the elect can resist the call of God. And those who are not sheep do not come because they are not sheep. God is just in His dealings with them.
I'm sure neither of these arguments comes as a surprise to you...
It is? I see the distinction showing up in vs 2 with Kings, not in vs.1.
Does the 'all' in verse 2 'all that in authority' mean without exception or distinction?
Clearly, it means without exception since it means whosoever is in authority
So, I would state that the 'all' in vs.1 means 'without exception', In other words, do not pray for all kinds of men, but for all men
Paul then shows a distinction in vs 2 with Kings and then states that every King and those in authority without exception ought to be prayed for (not just different kinds)
As for 2 Pet 3:9, one must ask "all what?". The context there shows that the verse is referring to believers.
Well, Calvin himself would disagree with you on that,
http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_index.htm
Not willing that any should perish. So wonderful is his love towards mankind, that he would have them all to be saved, and is of his own self prepared to bestow salvation on the lost. But the order is to be noticed, that God is ready to receive all to repentance, so that none may perish; for in these words the way and manner of obtaining salvation is pointed out. Every one of us, therefore, who is desirous of salvation, must learn to enter in by this way. But it may be asked, If God wishes none to perish, why is it that so many do perish? To this my answer is, that no mention is here made of the hidden purpose of God, according to which the reprobate are doomed to their own ruin, but only of his will as made known to us in the gospel.
There are two many verses like Prov 19:21 and Prov 20:24 and John 6:44-45 for me to believe that the elect can resist the call of God. And those who are not sheep do not come because they are not sheep. God is just in His dealings with them. I'm sure neither of these arguments comes as a surprise to you...
There are too many verses that show that God wants all men to be saved (Jn.12:32, Jn.3:16, Rom.10:17, Acts.17:30, Ezek.33:11, Heb.2:9, 1Jn.2:2)
No, we have been over them quite a few times.
The 'sheep' have to do with the nation of Israel and their rejection of their Messiah.
In Matthew 23:37 we see that Christ puts His rejection squarely at the feet of the Jews, ye would not
It seems that Calvinists believe the only time 'all' is without 'exception' is in Romans 3:23.
Every other time, it means without 'distinction'
However, in Romans 5 you have the problem of vs.18 which clearly states the all without exception (sinners) and then shows that salvation came to that same all
So are you asserting that Paul means that Timothy should take the record book of the city of Ephesus and start with the praying for the first born, the second born,... I think not.
Does the 'all' in verse 2 'all that in authority' mean without exception or distinction? Clearly, it means without exception since it means whosoever is in authority
Not necessarily. How many different classes of authorities are there? The Caesar in Rome, the govenor, the commander of the military, the masters of the slaves... In our case, we have all levels of officials. The good favor of all levels of these rulers eases the free flow of the Gospel. This is the point of v. 2.
As for 2 Pet 3:9, one must ask "all what?". The context there shows that the verse is referring to believers. Well, Calvin himself would disagree with you on that...
I don't appeal to Calvin but to the context of 2 Pet 1:1 and 3:1
The 'sheep' have to do with the nation of Israel and their rejection of their Messiah.
Sorry. Don't buy it. Nations are made up of individuals. God's choice was specifically of individuals in the case of Jacob and Esau. This is very clear in Rom 9. individuals become nations...
As you have noted so many times, this is Calvin's escape hatch, "the hidden purpose of God", a device that he is using to claim that the god he proposes says one thing, but secretly intends to do something very different, like a little boy who makes a very sincere-sounding statement with his fingers crossed behind his back.
Calvin should never attribute such a thing to God. However, he has tried to do it, and has gotten away with it with some people for 500 years now.
Calvin, by this device, claims God's approval of his private interpretation, and reads it into verses that clearly contradict his views.
If a Bible passage proves him wrong, no problem. He wants us to think that God publicly wills one thing, but hides His real purpose, leaving John Calvin to ferret it out and reveal it to the world 1500 years later. If we give Calvin license to do this, he can say the Bible means whatever he wants, and that is pretty much what he did.
Yes, and this from those who proudly boast that they are Sola Scriptura !
Ofcourse, they get this from Augustine who was a philosopher before he was a theologian and bent the scriptures whenever he felt like it.
He is after all, the father of Romanism as well as Calvinism (Col.2:8)
Well and succinctly stated.
I too am frustrated with premillenialism. Does that make me Jewish? :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.