I see what you are saying. I don’t want to advocate that Garrison does not believe in the authority or importance of Scripture(!); what I am trying to say is what I discover in Scripture regarding the movement of the gospel and churches in the early church is that it is the Word that worked; and to the degree that the Word was rightly preached and properly received, the church went forward; therefore, the Word is central in the proclamation and central in the foundation (and central in transmission -1 Cor. 15:1-4 . . . I delivered to you what I received – the gospel).

I appreciate your responses and look forward to learning and discussing these matters with the goal of edification and encouragement. Grace and peace.

If I have misunderstood Garrison on the Bible’s authority, I stand corrected. I do not know Garrison, and I am only responding to what he has written in his book. It is really difficult to conclude, however, that his controlling belief is rapidity because it is the sole requirement for validating his definition of a CPM (conversion rate has to outstrip the birth rate). When the Scripture is not primary in your paradigm, then the role it plays, even in secondary status is minimal at best. I would be interested in hearing the case that speed is not the dominating factor in Garrison’s model.

While the 10 factors may be considered descriptive in the book, they are being treated as prescriptive by the IMB. Moreover, throughout the book Garrison is prescribing his understanding of CPM’s to be the best way of reaching the world (Garrison states that “without exaggeration we can say that Church Planting Movements are the most effective means in the world today for drawing lost millions into saving, disciple-building relationships with Jesus Christ”); therefore, to argue that they are descriptive seems a bit disingenuous.

Thanks for the comment, and I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts here.

Thanks for sharing your take on this phenomena. Your reports on the emphasis of speed and ten essential elements are consistent with what I have heard elsewhere from other missionaries. It seems that wisdom would call for greater discernment in this area, especially in prescribing a paradigm not fitted to Scripture and (ironically enough) not reproducible in other parts of the world. I hope that other faithful missionaries would not be replaced or discouraged by their uninvolvement or inability to fit the paradigm. I hope to write about this more later. Thanks again for your input.

The reference above to Finney’s burned-over districts is telling. When we try to replicate the work of the Spirit by our own energies, we’ll reap weeds. The flesh will never give birth to spirit.

By grace,
Chris