perhaps not as gone as gone
Book about why young people leave church, but nothing revolutionary. Disappointed with lack of new/creative ideas to remedy the situation. It's easy to criticize, but Ham's ideas are not new/insightful, and won't revolutionize ministry/Christian education.
While having the same doctrinal beliefs as the author, it's his implications that I am at odds with. I find this book to be a bit of alarmist propaganda, as pertinent as his opinions might be.
Most of his stats are from Barna and Viola, who are anti-institution and strong proponents of the house-church movement. Barna's surveys are often skewed and Viola's research isn't always trustworthy/helpful.
The whole agenda is the author's interpretation of Genesis. While I hold the same literal understanding of creation, his ramifications are extreme. Yes, our view on creation does affect our understanding of the nature of scripture. But, to not agree with HIS interpretation of it is not to undermine its authority. Gen tells us that God created but as to the how he did it, it's not quite as explicit. How Ham jumps from his view of creation to the nature of scripture (and then on to salvation, as implied) is problematic.
What undermines the nature of scripture here is not the how, but the what. God created; that's the what, what's non-negotiable. The negotiable is the how, describing/explaining how it happened. God must be recognized as the author and sustainer of life, and capable of speaking the universe into existence.
Ham's interpretation of Genesis is not foundational to all doctrines (p.74). That's not only presumptuous, but somewhat arrogant and judgmental. To disagree with the specifics of his understanding is not necessarily to attack sound doctrine/disprove The Bible (79,81,etc.).
Those who leave the church will have stronger opinions about the church. After all, they left for a reason. They were disgruntled, have a grievance/have an axe to grind while the others weren't there enough to have as strong a feeling as those hurt by the church.
A very small percentage said that leaving had to do with the leadeship or with biblical doctrine. Hypocrisy,an enemy of the church,is a congregational problem, something that parents also bear some responsibility in.
The number one thing that young people missed about the church was the pastor's sermons (p.65), yet it was his hypocrisy that justified their leaving (p.66; 'may' & 'perhaps', without further stats as proof?)? Why would a teen miss the sermon of someone who was dishonest, hypocritical, legalistic, and irrelevant? An ok read but extreme with practical implications.Read full review
