But one thing the document is not is a manifesto. A genuine manifesto is sharp, punchy and, ideally, short.

I have to agree with Jacobs (in spite of how much I respect and applaud the intent of the authors), this ‘manifesto’ would better be described as a wordy polemic against fundamentalism and liberalism.

The document also makes difficult to justify generalizations, such as labeling fundamentalists “unloving” and liberals as being “unfaithful” which are caricatures of these traditions. It would be better to stick with identifying specific belief and behavior that has deviated from the gospel of Jesus as we understand it.

Also, rather than cataloging a long list of errors ("All too often we have ..., All too often we have ..., “), I would have found the document more persuasive and uplifting if that list was simply replaced with things Evangelicals do (or should) embrace. Overall, the tone of the document seemed too defensive and reactionary.

Having said that there were some good things too. To the following statement I said a hearty amen ...

Fifth, the Evangelical message, “good news” by definition, is overwhelmingly positive, and always positive before it is negative. There is an enormous theological and cultural importance to ―the power of No,‖ especially in a day when ―Everything is permitted‖ and ―It is forbidden to forbid.‖ Just as Jesus did, Evangelicals sometimes have to make strong judgments about what is false, unjust, and evil. But first and foremost we Evangelicals are for Someone and for something rather than against anyone or anything. The Gospel of Jesus is the Good News of welcome, forgiveness, grace, and liberation from law and legalism. It is a colossal Yes to life and human aspirations, and an emphatic No only to what contradicts our true destiny as human beings made in the image of God.

Sharp, punchy, and short?

Then we should be able to hammer it out right here on this blog!

Someone has really overlooked the simple framework of the Creeds; either Apostles or Nicene.  I could also suggest the Gettysburg Address, preambal to the USS Constiturion, or President Roosevelts Declaration of War on the Japanese Empire as other examples of shortwinded statements.  Is this another case of saying more and more about less and less??

This document should read and studied very carefully.  I’ve put up some highlights over at the Cafe, warnings the document offers that I think should be taken very seriously.  We must watch our finger pointing, lest we forget the finger pointed at ourselves. 

I admit that I came to the document skeptically, but when I read it I found that this was a courageous step forward and away from the separatism and self-righteousness that can be such a seductive wooer.

It’s form, however, is quite “boomer” and it will be interesting to see how GenXers and younger take the ideas of this document forward. This document does not have a battle plan, it is wide in scope and is quite a contrast to the earlier “A Christian Manifesto” which was so highly-influenced by Frankie Schaeffer as we know now.  This document goes in a completely direction and it is about time.

bb