Turnaround Churches

Position Paper

Presented to Dr. Todd Miles Western Seminary Portland, Oregon

In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Course THS 503: Living As the Community of the Spirit Summer 2006

By Eric Messelt Box #253

I. 2 Table of Contents

ISSUE...... 3 POSITIONS...... 4

PURELY SPIRITUAL...... 4 MODERATELY SPIRITUAL...... 5 MODERATELY ORGANIZATIONAL...... 6 PURELY ORGANIZATIONAL...... 7 SUPPORT...... 9

WEAKNESSES...... 9 Purely Organizational...... 9 Purely Spiritual...... 10 Moderately Organizational...... 11 Moderately Spiritual...... 11 STRENGTHS...... 11 OBJECTIONS...... 13 “You’re A Heretic!”...... 13 “You’re a Wimp!”...... 14 CONCLUSION...... 14

3 Issue Issue Statement - In the realm of church restoration, what is the proper tension between a purely spiritual model and a purely organizational model?

The church, especially in the “first” and “second worlds”1 is being challenged. Much has been made of the church’s decline: in attendance,2 in influence, and in spiritual power.3 It is the majority opinion that this ought not to be.4 The church ought to be vital, dynamic, and prevailing.5 There is now a seeming growth industry in the ‘rebuilding,’ ‘revitalization,’

‘turnaround,’ or other terms to describe the capture of a local church’s vitality, influence, and prestige. There are relatively fewer resources for the “restoration” of churches.

What is this distinction between ‘restoration’ and ‘revitalization?’ Revitalization seems to concentrate on the stagnant church – flattened numeric growth, loss of energizing vision, both an inward and maintenance focus: a church “stuck in the mud.” Restoration concentrates on the church that is in crises due to trauma, spiritual disease, or creeping stagnation that now threatens its existence.6 Frequently it is the current leadership team which can be held responsible. Sadly, but almost always, the leadership team must change if the church is to heal.

It is unfortunate that the church seems to ignore these wounded bodies.7 It is almost as if the larger body can not abide the thought that those who got the local church into trouble can not get the body out of trouble. Is that because the church is tempted into walking by sight,8 or do we

1 By that phrase, I mean non-Third-World: Europe and the United States. 2 Especially in “mainline” denominations: Roman Catholic, Methodists, Presbyterian, Lutherans, Episcopalian-Anglican, et al. Leith Anderson, Dying For Change, 46 (1990 Bethany House). 3 David Miles, Restoring Churches – A Primer, 4 (2004 CRM). 4 This author has not come across a serious statement that the church is under judgment and that is the cause of the church’s lack of influence. 5 Matthew 16:18; 28:18-20. 6 Miles, supra at 3-7. 7 “Why do so many pastors lack the skills to reform their churches? It requires a whole different set of skills than we learned in seminary. Denominations spend so much time and energy preparing church planters, but we need to spend equal time preparing church reformers.” Interview with Steve Goodwin, pastor of Redeemer Lutheran Church in Rowland Heights, California, LEADERSHIP, Fall 2005, at 55, 55. 8 This author means that the human response is: “I got myself into this problem; I can get myself out of it!”

4 just shoot our wounded?9

Positions How is the church in crisis to heal? Despite the dearth of material on church restoration, it seems fair to extrapolate from discussions of church revitalization, what positions either exist, or may develop as this matter is further explored. Based on this author’s survey of influential sources, there seem to be four positions that can be discerned: a “purely Spiritual,” a “moderately

Spiritual,” a “moderately Organizational,” and a “purely Organizational” position.

Purely spiritual Definition – the restoration of a church can only be accomplished by the member’s work of prayer, repentance, and reliance on God.

It is difficult to find adherents to this position. As a scholar, that would be devastating for this point: if you can not find something published, then the idea does not exist.10 However, this author has frequently encountered the ethos that only “pure” spirituality can address any problem within the individual believer or the local church. This author notes that this ethos frequently accompanies a “Keswick”11-like understanding of spirituality,12 or an extreme fundamentalism13 occasionally displayed on the Internet.14

9 By that, the author means the human response: “You made your bed, now you gotta sleep in it!” – the church is declining and so it deserves to die. 10 However, that begs the question: is this not just an argument from silence? Just because some idea is not published by a reputable scholar does not mean that the idea is not held by many relatively untrained individuals. 11 Very roughly described as, “Let go and let God.” The individual believer must not strive, or work, or otherwise engage their own understanding (because all things of the self are “desperately wicked” [cf. Jeremiah 17:9]) but must rather utterly and blindly trust God to act. 12 Stereotypically displayed by those of a “contemplative” spiritual temperament (Gary L. Thomas, Sacred Pathways, 175-92 (2000 Zondervan)). 13 By this, the author means a culturally static “neo-fundamentalism;” not the classic Fundamentalism that grew out of the Princeton debates of the 1930’s. 14 An example is Mr. Rick Miesel of the Bible Discernment Ministries (http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/). Mr. Miesel possesses little theological training (apparently self-taught: http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/about_th.htm) and no pastoral experience; though possessing significant technological savvy as Internet search engines frequently put his opinion pieces at the top of their search results.

5 Much more positively, Gordon MacDonald presents a “theology of turnaround” for churches15 noting that the letters in the first three chapters of Revelation present instances of churches being invited to turn around and presenting the diagnosis and course of treatment for those bodies.

“When your church receives something like the letters written in Revelation, however they comes [sic] and whatever form, you know that you’d better turn around. And fast.”

Moderately spiritual Definition – the restoration work is primarily spiritual, but must recognize organizational matters as catalysts of authentic spiritual work

For this position, the adherents are Church Resource Ministries16 and Neil T. Anderson.17 CRM is noted as “[o]ne of the most effective” organizations dedicated to church revitalization.18

Additionally, CRM has a specific arm of their ministry dedicated to actual church restoration.19

CRM’s restoration ministry is headed by Dr. David Miles who did his dissertation on church restoration while coaching an actual restoration project.20 Dr. Miles develops his model for local church restoration first from a theology of renewal and restoration21 based on the process of repent, return, and surrender.22 The goal is two-fold: the restoration pastor is to leave the church healthy enough so that people want to come, meet God, grow, serve each other, and reach their community; and to create a church environment safe enough for a new pastor to come, or an existing pastor to stay, meet God, grow, and equip the church to serve and reach its community.23

Dr. Miles’ model includes four steps for the restoration pastor: diagnosis (what are the real

15 Gordon MacDonald, Clean Out The Sludge, LEADERSHIP, Fall 2005, at 37. 16 Church Resource Ministries, hereinafter “CRM:” Terry Walling: “RefFcusing;” David Miles “ReTurn.” 17 Neil T. Anderson and Charles Mylander, Setting Your Chruch Free, (1994 Regal Books). 18 Edward Stetzer, http://www.comebackchurches.com/public/revitalization_organizations.php . CRM refocusing ministries: http://www.crmleaders.org/ministries/usministries/iteams/refocusing. 19 CRM restoration ministry, “reTurn:” http://www.crmleaders.org/ministries/usministries/iteams/return . 20 Dr. Miles coached Edward Carey, “Intentional Interim” pastor of Hope International Church, Hollywood, California. 21 “Church renewal is a sovereignty initiated work of God.” Miles, supra at 11. 22 Miles, supra at 12. 23 Miles, supra at 17.

6 problems?), surgery (what are God’s solutions?), recovery of leaders (who are God’s leaders?), and recovery of plans (what are God’s plans?). While this description sounds very spiritual in its vocabulary, as the model is expanded, Dr. Miles recognizes that several organizational issues must be addressed.24 Note specifically the “recovery” phases that address leadership and vision- strategy-objectives.

Neil T. Anderson, noted for his several books on freedom in Christ, looks at local church restoration using his “Steps To Freedom In Christ” process.25 Based on N.T. Anderson’s reputation, one could be forgiven if they thought that his approach to revitalization would be

“purely spiritual.” However, N.T. Anderson’s approach – while primarily spiritual – gives significant attention to organizational issues. For example, while the first two chapters are titled,

“Protected from the Evil One” and “Prayer for Unity,” the next three chapters are titled,

“Balance of Power,” “Situational Leadership,” and “Servant Leadership.” Additional chapters are also a mix of the spiritual and organizational. One could argue that even N.T. Anderson’s process of “Steps to Freedom in Christ” (my emphasis) is rather organizational in its ethos.

Moderately organizational Definition - the primary problems with stagnant churches are leadership and vision-strategy- objectives alignment; but there may be spiritual components that require significant attention

Adherents –Leith Anderson and Bill Hybels. Anderson and Hybels present a more organizational bent. Anderson argues as a church revitalist mostly concerned that churches become more missional and wake up from their complacency.26 Anderson, in presenting a hypothetical case

24 Dr. Miles’ “reTurn” model addresses the following areas: Contract and Job Description, Diagnosing Problems, Organizational Behavior and Family Systems, Processing Grief and Loss, Power and Authority, Conflict Resolution, Problem Solving, Church Discipline and Accountability, Dynamics of Change, Spiritual Warfare and Intercession, Preparing for the Future, Leadership & Lay Ministry Development, Communications, Boards Meetings Teams and Staff, Emotional and Spiritual Health, Assessing Restoration Skills and Potential, and Coaching. David Miles, reTurn Resource Kit (2004 CRM). 25 N.T. Anderson and Mylander, supra. 26 “Fulfilling the mission is always more important than perpetuating traditions.” Anderson, supra at 136.

7 study, concludes by saying bluntly: “Perhaps what CFC needs is not spiritual renewal, but a new name, reorganization, and more modern methods.”27 Anderson then immediately moves into a discussion of how church history affirms this; even the incident of Greek Jews not getting their fair allotment of food recorded in Acts 6 was (Anderson argues) recognized by the Apostles “as primarily a sociological problem rather than a spiritual problem…. The apostles did not ignore the spiritual dimension. They simply realized that the spiritual would suffer if the sociological was not handled.”28

Bill Hybels has not written specifically on church revitalization or restoration. However he is profoundly motivated29 to contribute to the church’s health and growth by leveraging the resources of the Willow Creek Association to feed church leaders on the best thinking of leadership available. This is primarily offered in an annual three-day seminar called “Leadership

Summit” with the mission “Envisioning and equipping Christians with leadership gifts and responsibilities.” In Hybels’ book,30 the table of contents reflects a mixture of organizational and spiritual components, with the organizational components dominant.

Purely Organizational Definition – the problems with “stuck” churches are not spiritual, they are about ‘functional structures:” leadership, organization, management, and vision-strategy-objectives alignment

Adherents – Thom Rainier31 (by extension, Jim Collins32) and Mike Simpson. Thom Rainier is a widely recognized church consultant who has written several well-received books on church

27 L. Anderson, supra at 125. 28 L. Anderson, supra at 126. 29 “Where, I wondered, had the beauty gone? Why was that power not evident in the contemporary church? Would the Christian community ever see that potential realized again?” Bill Hybels, Courageous Leadership, 18 (2002 Zondervan) (emphasis in original). 30 Hybels, supra. 31 Thom Rainier, Breakout Churches, (2005 Zondervan). I equate Rainier’s book with Jim Collins’ book based on the extensive use Rainier made of Collins’ model, results, and reasoning. This observation was noted as a weakness in Rainier’s work. Alan Nelson, How Art Thou Great?, LEADERSHIP, Spring 2005, at 87-89 (book review). 32 Jim Collins, Good To Great, (2001 Harper Business).

8 matters. However, to punctuate this issue this author places Thom Rainier in the “purely

Organizational” camp due to his integrated reliance on Jim Collins’ work. Collins, when he wrote “Good To Great,” was not a believer.33 As such, there could not be significant and legitimate spiritual content in his book, nor is there any. Because Rainier based his work completely on Collins’ work, any spiritual component to Rainier’s work was an add-on.34 For example, rather than using Collins’ “Level 5 Leadership,” Rainier retrofits his term: “Acts 6/7

Leadership.” This calls into question the theoretical integrity of Rainier’s work. 35 From these issues, this author must conclude that Rainier’s work is merely a clone of Collins’ and therefore there is little integrated spiritual content in Rainier’s theoretical framework.

Mike Simpson presents a non-spiritual revitalization model within a church context.36 An example: “it only takes one focused, persistent leader with vision to revitalize a congregation…”37 While Leith Anderson (supra) made a similarly blunt comment about the church’s need to get its organizational house in order, he immediately followed that up with several spiritual insights that acknowledged the spiritual nature of revitalization. Simpson, by stark contrast, advertises no spiritual context. “The one thing dying churches lack that sets them apart from vital churches is not money, young families, a youthful and exciting pastor, a dynamic evangelism program; but rather an individual who is willing to step forward and lead.”38

33 Jim Collins’ status as a ‘prophet’ within Christian leadership circles is significant. There is no doubt to this author that Collins provides complementary insights for the Christian leader. However, Collins’ spiritual status is a bit fuzzy. Bill Hybels reports that he has been in an on-going relationship with Collins as a spiritual ‘seeker.’ In 2003, CHRISTIANITY TODAY reported that Collins was not a believer (Mar. 14, 2003). Even in a recent interview for LEADERSHIP, Collins makes no indication of a conscious faith in Christ. Interview with Jim Collins, The Good To Great Pastor, LEADERSHIP, Spring 2006, at 49-50. 34 Unfortunately, this is analogous to scholarly ‘eisogesis.’ 35 Other concerns accompany Rainier’s work in Breakout Churches: 1) the reliability of conclusions based on Rainer’s data; 2) the work is descriptive with little prescriptive insight; and 3) the aforementioned eagerness to align his results with Collins’ conclusions. Alan Nelson, How Art Thou Great?, LEADERSHIP, Spring 2005, at 87-89 (book review). 36 The Lazarus Project, www.lazarusproject.org. 37 http://www.lazarusproject.org/systems.htm. 38 Id. (emphasis in original).

9 This, and other statements by Simpson, contains no spiritual content. Simpson advocates strong leadership, clear vision, alignment with that vision, and savvy to bring all that together. Yet, for

Simpson, there is no God of, or even spiritual nature of, the congregation.

Support

Weaknesses

Purely Organizational

I begin with the “purely Organizational” position. Thom Rainier’s work has already been critiqued. While there are insights from the secular management world that may be helpful to the church, the church must be ever mindful that it is not the same kind of an organization as a business. Even Jim Collins recognizes this: “The biggest distinction [between the business sector and church] is the role of money… in church, money is only a means or an enabler of true performance, which is successfully reaching people with the message, creating a sense of community, and contributing to the community.”39 The church is a spiritual organization. It can be a philosophic mistake to apply business insights to the church – it is a taxonomy issue.

In the case of Simpson, the fact that he includes no spiritual component leads one to question the motivations of such a practitioner. Is the goal to perpetuate a human institution?

Would Simpson’s thoughts be just as applicable to a Muslim mosque as a Christian church?40 Is his reliance upon the “Great Leader” an opening for abuse by a Nietzsche-ian “superman?”41

39 Interview with Collins, supra, at 49. 40 It seems untenable that one should be able to apply “Christian” revitalization to religious error. Can the Holy Spirit act to increase the effectiveness of a false religion or a cult? See, Todd Miles, “Severing the Son from the Holy Spirit: Theological Relativism in Contemporary Theologies of Salvation” (2006) (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (Louisville)). 41 “Superman … determines what is good and what is evil, not allowing religion or society to determine these things for him. The Superman … uses a reason that is independent of the modern values of society or religion. He determines his own values. This creation of his own values gives him joy, and in order for the Superman to cope with a changing world, the Superman must constantly change.…. The Superman does not believe in an afterlife or the power of the soul over the body because he does not believe in religion and has no proof of an afterlife or a God.

10 What is the backstop for the scope of action from such a purely organizational perspective?

Purely Spiritual

Although such a position is taken with the intent that they reflect the purest theological perspective, ironically such efforts produce exactly the opposite result. While a proper theology of humanity recognizes that people are both spiritual and incarnational,42 holders of this position seem want to deny the messiness of the world and therefore bifurcate the realities of the world from the realities of spiritual truth. Dis-integrating their theology, they are left with a pietistic perspective that not only is divorced from the world in which we live, but also produces a detached and ungrounded theology.43 Therefore, the fact that the purely spiritual position is not attached to real life removes it from consideration.44 Church restoration is very much about messy “real life.”

Moderately Organizational

While the same critique applies to this position as with the purely organizational – that the church is not a business and it can be a temptation to apply business principle without consideration for the taxonomical issues – still, this can be a useful perspective. It is useful if the dangers of ‘creeping secularization’ are recognized and taxonomy of technique is thoughtfully

Therefore, he makes the most out of this life, not depending on a reward in Heaven or a punishment in Hell for what he has done on Earth. The Superman does not pity or tolerate the weak. He feels that human compassion is the greatest weakness of all because it allows the weak to restrict the growth of the strong. Anna Knowles, “Nietzsche’s Superman”, http://personal.ecu.edu/mccartyr/great/projects/Knowles.htm . 42 “Conditional Unity” of immaterial and material aspects of humanity. Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 554-57 (2d ed. 1998 Baker). “Adam is a unified person with body and soul living and acting together.” Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, 473 (1994 IVP). 43 Pietistic thought can lead to a linear model with God at the top of an imaginary priority list. If so, then everything else is second-best and need not be considered. Interview with James Tunstead Burtchaell on how church-related colleges became secularized, 36 Mars Hill Audio Journal (Jan./Feb. 1999). A better model is “integrationist” where God is the center (hub) of our lives and all things in our lives (spokes) are connected to Him. 44 However, in saying this, this author in no way discounts the insights provided by Gordon MacDonald. The brief for his article was a purely theological perspective – there are few people in the church who can more articulately connect the theological with the every day.

11 discerned.

While this author believes that L. Anderson and Hybels well navigate these confusing waters, others can be swept away by the powerful currents. It is far too easy for a pastor to become enamored of a process, a procedure, or program that – in his mind – should work exactly as it did for the big boys. This temptation to confusion, plus an emphasis on organizational matters inherent to the specific purposes that L. Anderson and Hybels were addressing, make this a dangerous position to take toward church restoration. The deciding factor is simply this: neither

L. Anderson nor Hybels are directly addressing the issue of church restoration in their books,

‘merely’ that of revitalization.

Moderately Spiritual

The moderately spiritual position’s weakness is that L. Anderson is right: Sometimes the church needs to act and thoughtfully remove all the barriers that keep it from being a fully functioning church. For a church to get moving past its ‘stuck point,’ it needs to refrain from

“spiritualizing management issues, and managing spiritual issues.” Not all church problems are spiritual problems.

Strengths

However, the task of church restoration is, again, not the same a church revitalization. In restoration, the problems are overwhelming to the point of despair, the issues are inconceivably complex, and the confounding of the spiritual and organizational is irreconcilable. The task is, frankly, just too large for human wisdom. Practitioners who this author has communicated with all say the same thing: if God doesn’t act, things will not happen – no matter what we try to do.

There is the need to recognize that the task is too big, the stakes are too high - the primary

12 emphasis has to be placed on God’s working.

A word about restoration practitioners: they can be a rather eccentric bunch. Occasionally confident to the point of seeming arrogance, they are all well-accomplished, very intelligent, very competent, and highly skilled people. Speaking of one practitioner mentioned in this paper, a former pastor commented, “He does have the air of someone carrying a pearl-handled revolver.” Yet, at the same time – perhaps this is what draws them – they have the sense that the task is too large for them. Even with their best efforts, everything can come unraveled if God does not do the work. Time and again they report seeing hard hearts inexplicably softened, intransigent minds oddly changed mid-stream, a seeming typical testimony break a room into tears as the Spirit of God powerfully touches hearts and minds all out of proportion to what was being said, years of resentment and betrayal evaporate from a “solemn assembly” of confession and repentance. The blessing of the ministry is not the “fixing,” but the watching of what God does with the obediences of the practitioner, leaders, staff, and members.

If sanctification can be defined as our cooperation with the Holy Spirit as he leverages our small obediences to blessing to greater obedience in a generally ascending “virtuous cycle,” then the practitioner is doubly blessed by seeing corporate sanctification, even as the individual practitioner grows in their own sanctification.

Additionally, both of the books that most clearly address church restoration, rather than revitalization, land in this camp. David Miles’ work with CRM stands to the fore in this arena.

For this reason, this author is convinced that the “moderately spiritual” position is the proper posture to take for a restoration work.

Objections

13 “ You’re A Heretic!”

Someone might say, “It is dangerous to mix Man’s human wisdom in the spiritual working of God!” “It is creeping secularism and the accommodating heresy of worldliness to make use of any of these so-called ‘truths’ of management theory!” “The only agenda that matters is the agenda that God has already published in the Bible!” All of these comments are indicative of the “purely spiritual” position. The weaknesses of this position have been examined, supra, but some more can be said.

While many of the “purely spiritual” ilk will go apoplectic at this point, this author affirms that all truth is God’s truth. The worthy doctrine of the sufficiency of scripture needs to be rightly stated. “Scripture does not present itself as the only source of truth about all matters. It does not even present itself as a source of some truth about everything. It presents itself as the only authoritative source of truth about some things, and they are the most important things.”45

Scripture is silent on many issues and this author believes that in those issues or principles where there is silence, God grants us freedom. “Delight yourself in the LORD and he will give you the desires of your heart.”46

Every ‘borrowed’ practice from the disciplines of psychology, game theory, and business management must be filtered through the lens of rightly interpreted scripture. Should a practice be found at odds with clear scriptural teaching or principles, then the discerning Christian leader must discard it – or modify it so that he may glorify God in its practice.

“ You’re a Wimp!”

Another may object that “What is needed is not more spiritual mumbo-jumbo, no more prayers for ‘deliverance,’ no more solemn assemblies of introspective self-indulgence, no more

45 Ken Meyers, “Christianity, Culture, & Common Grace”, 11 (1994 Berea). 46 Psalm 37:4.

14 Bible verses on the PowerPoint projector, no more guilt and hang-wringing and holding hands in a circle. In times of crisis it is time to act! It is time for clear leadership and charisma to declare purpose, cast vision, aligns strategies, facilitate objectives, and make hard decisions so people will act.” All of these comments are indicative of the “purely organizational” position.

What these comments fail to appreciate in both their impatience and hunger for leadership is simple lack of faith. It is the lack of belief that the church is a spiritual gathering of deep union with the Godhead and all members to each other. It is the lack of belief that God is in control: this crisis did not surprise him and he can see the end of it so the timing of the crisis story is in his hands. It is the lack of belief in God’s working through the hearts and minds of the people of God in the church. Attempting to rush the process along by short-circuiting God’s working in favor of “dynamic” human leaders is asking for trouble. Moses came down from the mountain with a clear vision from God – but it took some time: the people “had a cow.”47 We are the creatures and must wait for the Creator.

Conclusion

Gordon MacDonald said it well;48 a church in crises must be willing to let Jesus back through its doors.49 Organizational concerns can facilitate his residency, but the primary issue for churches in crisis is spiritual.

AUTHORITIES

Alan Nelson, How Art Thou Great?, LEADERSHIP, Spring 2005, at 87-89 (book review).------8 Anna Knowles, “Nietzsche’s Superman”, http://personal.ecu.edu/mccartyr/great/projects/Knowles.htm .------10 Bill Hybels, Courageous Leadership, 18 (2002 Zondervan)------7 Church Resource Ministries, hereinafter “CRM:” Terry Walling: “RefFcusing;” David Miles “ReTurn.”------5 David Miles, Restoring Churches – A Primer, 4 (2004 CRM)------3 David Miles, reTurn Resource Kit (2004 CRM).------6

47 Exodus 32. 48 MacDonald, supra at 40. 49 Revelation 3:20.

15 Edward Stetzer, http://www.comebackchurches.com/public/revitalization_organizations.php .------5 Gary L. Thomas, Sacred Pathways, 175-92 (2000 Zondervan)------4 Gordon MacDonald, Clean Out The Sludge, LEADERSHIP, Fall 2005, at 37.------5 Interview with James Tunstead Burtchaell on how church-related colleges became secularized, 36 Mars Hill Audio Journal (Jan./Feb. 1999)------10 Interview with Jim Collins, The Good To Great Pastor, LEADERSHIP, Spring 2006, at 49-50.------8 Interview with Steve Goodwin, pastor of Redeemer Lutheran Church in Rowland Heights, California, LEADERSHIP, Fall 2005, at 55, 55------3 Jim Collins, Good To Great, (2001 Harper Business).------8 Leith Anderson, Dying For Change, 46 (1990 Bethany House).------3 Matthew 16:18; 28:18-20.------3 Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 554-57 (2d ed. 1998 Baker)------10 Neil T. Anderson and Charles Mylander, Setting Your Chruch Free, (1994 Regal Books).------5 Psalm 37:4------13 Revelation 3:20------15 The Lazarus Project, www.lazarusproject.org.------8 Thom Rainier, Breakout Churches, (2005 Zondervan)------8 Todd Miles, “Severing the Son from the Holy Spirit: Theological Relativism in Contemporary Theologies of Salvation” (2006) (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (Louisville)).------10