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?
In Genesis 15 verse 2, Abram lamented the fact that he had no natural son to inherit his estate, and it would fall to his chief servant Eliezar. This passage shows how all the rights and rank of a house can be transferred to a non-blood relative. Also, we read in Genesis chapter 48 that Israel adopted Joseph’s two sons, Ephriam and Manassah. They were now to be considered equal with Joseph’s brothers in inheriting the promises given to Israel and each of them were entitled to an equal portion of the land.
So your question is irrevelant
Of course you do ange you are not a christian..
If that is what James is really saying, then James is wrong. Whatever other sins I have committed, I have never even considered committing adultery, and I am perfectly capable of keeping the law against it.
Of course I disagree with the whole underlying premise that we are incapable of keeping the Law.
For this commandment which I command you this day is not too hard for you, neither is it far off.
It is not in heaven, that you should say, `Who will go up for us to heaven, and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?'
Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, `Who will go over the sea for us, and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?'
But the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it. (Deuteronomy 30:11-14)
Speak for yourself. Not all Christians are as incapable of seeing grey as you Calvinists are.
SD
Right. And we are commanded to not do the act (of adultery, for example). If we violate the commandment, we are punished for that act. It is that act for which we are directly responsible.
If you really want to get technical about it, there is no way that the repercussions of any finite act could become infinite. I think you would agree that the upper end of time is bounded by the end of the world. Suppose the consequences of a particular act propogated exponentially rather than dampening out over time. Even in this extreme scenario, the consequences do not reach infinity. As in mathematics, you can add or multiply as much as you want. You may get a very large finite number, but even such a number is infinitely far from infinity.
It is that act and its repercussions for which we are responsible. If I steal a stop sign and someone "runs" the intersection and kills someone, I am responsible not only for the original theft, but also for the death that resulted from it.
Putting the stop sign back does not make the person come back to life. I lack the power to make reparations completely for the effects of my sin.
If you really want to get technical about it, there is no way that the repercussions of any finite act could become infinite. I think you would agree that the upper end of time is bounded by the end of the world. Suppose the consequences of a particular act propogated exponentially rather than dampening out over time. Even in this extreme scenario, the consequences do not reach infinity. As in mathematics, you can add or multiply as much as you want. You may get a very large finite number, but even such a number is infinitely far from infinity.
I agree here. But the effect is, from our point of view, infinitely more than we can repair. Eventually the coffe and milk will cease motion and asume absolute zero. But I still can't make the milk come out of the coffee.
SD
Sorry, Mom, but it doesn't work that way. You can be adopted into a family, but you do not inherit a genetic lineage. Kingship in Israel is patrilineal, and it is not passed to an adopted son.
Jewish law recognized adopted childern as eligible to inherit
The kingship line of David is not the same as inheriting your father's goats.
On His mothers side his human inheritance is from the line of David through Nathan
That may be, but this doesn't help Jesus's claims to the throne of David.
Highly relevent, and you are wrong. I understand your need to look for such loopholes, but the fact is that biblically, the right of lineal privilege (kingship and priesthood) is exclusively passed on through the male line. If you can provide a counterexample, please let me know.
I neglected to point out in my last post that Luke gives Joseph's genealogy, not, as some have tried to claim, Mary's genealogy.
Being from David through Nathan would also disqualify Jesus, since the line must go from David through Solomon. Matthew's genealogy does go through Solomon. But Matthew also shows the lineage passing through the cursed King Jeconiah.
All of this is completely apart from the obvious fact that Jesus never did sit on the throne of David.
Doesn't mean I can't read and form an opinion. ponyespresso is a Christian and interprets the passage completely opposite of the way you do. I find his/her reading more persuasive.
It may be a finite amount more, but is not infinitely more. That is my point. As part of repenting and atoning, Judaism teaches that we must try to make right what we did. In some cases, this is not possible. It doesn't mean that we shouldn't try. And it doesn't mean that we cannot receive forgiveness. Remember too that Judaism teaches that those lacking in righteousness will spend some time in Gehinnom.
You are confusing the human perspective with the divine perspective. Paul clearly says that one violation is a violation of all....it makes one a lawbreaker before God.
On the human side, there are a host of sacrifices, penances, etc., to remedy the SITUATION. But the bible is clear that these things don't fix the CONDITION.
You are correct. That prophecy was given to King Ahaz, pertaining to a specific situation happening within the time of his reign. The word frequently translated as "virgin" is almah, which means "young woman" (who may or may not be a virgin). Had Isaiah intended to refer specifically to a virgin, he would have used the word betulah. This passage has absolutely nothing to do with Jesus.
You are confusing the human perspective with the divine perspective.
I believe that the Torah is the "divine perspective".
Paul clearly says that one violation is a violation of all....it makes one a lawbreaker before God.
It shouldn't surprise you to learn that Paul's opinion on the matter is irrelevent to me.
But the bible is clear that these things don't fix the CONDITION.
So when God says someone is forgiven, they aren't really forgiven?
It does surprise me. What's wrong with Paul's opinion? Why is it irrelevant to you?
Paul is a Jewish Christian, and a turncoat to the Jews. If alive today, he would not be invited over to dinner at angelos house. :)
BigMack
If what I posted comes under your definition of bobbing and weaving, then I prefer to bob and weave.
I'm not going to have any kind of formal debate on the subject. I believe Joseph Smith was a prophet, and when God wants to further clarify the contents of scripture, he'll do it through a prophet. Greek manuscripts are nice if that's all you've got to go on, but Christians are supposed to have something better: revelation from God.
The point is not whether or not Joseph disagrees with ancient manuscripts. We already know this to be the case. The point is whether or not what God wanted the original authors to convey to us is what Joseph gave us. The only way to know this one way or another is by personal revelation. Greek manuscripts, no matter how many you've got, aren't ever going to be able to give you that answer.
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.