Strategic Framework

Prologue for Strategic Framework

May 2006 edition

Presented to the Board of Trustees
by the Strategic Framework Taskforce

Throughout the two thousand year history of the Christian Church, the Church and its leaders have faced numerous challenges and threats to its existence. Many of these challenges and threats emerged from major global changes that eventually required the church to either appropriately adapt or risk becoming ineffective in communicating the gospel of Christ. Refusing to withdraw or be limited, church leaders envisioned how God might use these challenges to advance His kingdom. They struggled with how to help the church thrive in the midst of massive change while maintaining Scriptural integrity and adapting their approaches to effectively reach people for Christ. Historical review demonstrates that some of these church initiatives succeeded while others failed. In America alone, critics or proponents of the church could point to numerous ways church leaders failed or succeeded when dealing with societal challenges like the abolition of slavery, women’s suffrage, care for the poor, or the civil rights movement.

Now, at the beginning of the 21st century, church leaders still face the struggle of mobilizing their congregations to maintain Scriptural integrity while adapting their practices and programs to effectively communicate the gospel within changing global dynamics. Futurists suggest that the scope and pace of change is more comprehensive and accelerated than ever and only will continue to expand and quicken due to the impact of technology on our lives. For discerning leaders, these changes bring abundant opportunities for effective, faithful service in God’s kingdom. The current public debates over immigration, war, and movies that question biblical truth are some examples of many opportunities the Church can strategically use to witness for Christ in the public dialogue over historic Christian faith and truth. So, 21st century church leaders will need to become even more astute in recognizing God’s work, identifying multicultural and global dynamics, building strategies for using these opportunities to share Christ, and leading their churches to thrive in the midst of increasingly massive and swift changes.

Especially complex is the ability to distinguish the latest popular trend from real significant change or from timeless principles that should guide the church regardless of external pressures and challenges. Church leaders have too frequently invested massive amounts of resources to adapt their churches to the latest idea being sold in the marketplace of church conferences and publications, only to discover that the same people who called for the change are now declaring it obsolete and directing everyone instead to yet another idea. Pastors potentially harm their churches when they set themselves on a course of always trying to be the “cutting edge” church that runs after the latest ideas without carefully and prayerfully analyzing what God desires. Equally damaging is the refusal of some to respond to change at all, declaring that God’s church should not adapt to any cultural pressures and changes. Aside from the timeless principles that remain true, distinguishing the significant changes that require the church to adapt—and then adjusting the programs and practices of the church accordingly—are a central important facet of ministry leadership.

Throughout their history, evangelical seminaries have sought to provide a well-designed process for training, educating and validating clergy to serve the church. Some critics of seminary training suggest that the seminary movement has lost touch with society and the church, rendering seminaries ineffective. Others argue that seminaries utilize proven, timeless, invaluable processes for training clergy, even though significant revisions of these processes could enhance the effectiveness of seminary graduates. Denver Seminary seeks to glorify God by equipping leaders to think biblically, live faithfully and lead wisely for a lifetime (see Exhibit A). As we continue to accomplish our mission and determine our institutional strategic framework for the next five years, we too must identify those timeless concepts, discern the times, and align ourselves with what we believe God desires and what are the most effective ways for Denver Seminary to prepare leaders to serve in the 21st century global and multicultural church.

Therefore, in developing a strategic framework to guide our institution over the next five years, we commit ourselves to our core values (see Exhibit A) and the following timeless concepts that must remain central to forming our educational process:

  • the authority of Scripture and the freedom to think within the limits of that authority
  • adherence to historic orthodox Christianity
  • an integrated educational experience
  • intentionality in Christian character formation
  • leadership preparation
  • highest quality graduate level theological education with a commitment to scholarship
  • student and teaching focus
  • the importance of mentoring
  • the power of the learning community
  • a focus on serving the church
  • the value of diversity and understanding culture
  • accessible and affordable theological education

The following provide a brief analysis of three key aspects of understanding our times: our world and culture; the 21st century church; personal, spiritual and learning characteristics of seminary students. These will be followed by the implications to the educational process of Denver Seminary.

Our World and Culture

The world in the 21st century is highly multicultural and interconnected. Technological advances have reduced the barriers of accessibility, time, space and distance, bringing together cultures at a more rapid pace than humans can adapt. While the internet brings people and cultures from all over the world into new conversations, relationships, and partnerships, immigration patterns have actually located these diverse cultures next to each other with little preparation and training on how people from varying cultures can best live together. Massive immigration from rural to urban settings is creating large metro areas where the infrastructures are incapable of handling the influx of people and diverse cultures. The largest urban immigration in the history of the world is currently underway in China and India.1 Meanwhile, some experts suggest that if the current European immigration patterns continue, Europe will be fifty percent followers of Islam by the year 2050.

The overall U.S. population is becoming more and more ethnically diverse. Hispanics, in particular, accounted for about one-half of U.S. population growth between July 2003 and July 2004. According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s most recent estimate, approximately 14.3 million Hispanics live in the United States.2 In the 2000 U.S. census data, Hispanics made up 32 percent of the population of the city of Denver. Some experts estimate that the city of Denver is now close to 40 percent Hispanic and could be 50 percent as early as 2010.

Today’s world is filled with challenges that threaten its wellbeing. The threats and violent actions of terrorists continue to cause the death of innocent people and threaten human societies. The terror of ethnic cleansing, violence and war, racism, poverty, famine, poor health care, pandemics, elimination of entire male populations within certain warring countries, contaminated water, illegal immigration and massive depletion of our environmental resources are just a few of the additional challenges facing us today.

When contemplating these challenges, many Christian leaders see new opportunities for sharing the gospel and proclaim that the church was uniquely designed by God to boldly serve in times like these:

A devout Christian who is knowledgeable of the world she or he inhabits and who humbly and respectfully implements the core message of the gospel is a major tool in righting the course of the world adrift. This is not the time to ‘hide the light under a bushel.’ Indeed the world has been forced to confront the reality of religion and faith as major components in making sense of the world in which we live. Geopolitics is not complete without a thorough analysis of the role of religion. A call to action from a world desperate for answers is not being issued through secular lips. We have an amazing opportunity for the world to see a faith in action.3

 

The 21st Century Church

The technological advances and multicultural changes that have so dramatically affected our world have naturally affected the church as well. The exponential growth of information, technology and science has created a perception that traditional religious beliefs are obsolete and no longer the source of hope for the future. Barna finds one of the most frightening trend lines to be that of Mosaics, the youngest adults in the nation: “two out of three adults 60 or older claim to be absolutely committed [to their personal Christian faith], compared to about six out of ten Boomers (58%), a minority among Busters (42%) and even less (27%) among Mosaics.”4 College students today highly identify with and value spirituality, but the contents of that spirituality are more eclectic and amorphous than ever. This diversity leads to plenty of non-denominational church life, spirituality not attached to a particular religion, agreement that there are multiple ways to God; in short, ecumenism, pluralism and relativism abound. Indeed, relativism makes more sense to the current generation when new technology, innovation and discoveries continually prove old assumptions and theories false. The church’s challenge is to reach those in a postmodern age who reject truth and embrace relativism. Theological education must prepare leaders to convey and display timeless truth. The church must evidence that it has the foundation – Jesus Christ – upon which individuals can stand in the midst of torrents of change.

The job of bringing hope to a lost world remains, but the world has changed and the church stands to lose much of its effectiveness. Fewer unchurched Westerners than ever find their way into churches on their own or even at the invitation of their friends; instead, churches that would be relevant and effective in sharing the gospel must identify the felt needs of the communities in which they are located and go about meeting them. According to futurist Robert Lewis, words alone are no longer effective in reaching the postmodern generations; they need proof of a loving God by the actions of a changed life:

What the world waits to see is whether what we have is better than what they have. Just think what bridges we could build if we truly followed the example of the New Testament church. We would go beyond being seeker-sensitive to a new frontier of being community-admired…and people would be drawn to God, not because of the weekly show in our churches, but by the irrefutable lifestyles we incarnate.5


The cure for the church’s irrelevance is for Christian leaders to educate, inspire, and train the church to serve the communities in which they are located. It is only when the world can see the church at work that it will listen to its message of redemption.

Today’s world is lonelier and desires authentic relationships more than ever before. Despite the ability via technology to build and maintain friendships throughout the world, ever-growing numbers of broken families leave many with unprecedented inability to know how to gain and/or maintain the relationships they so desire. Spiritual hungers are rising in response to “the promise of a land flowing with the milk and honey of deep relational connection and the kind of spiritual community that develops from these relationships.”6 We often think people need more or better information in order to believe, but what they really long for is authenticity. “Fewer are asking ‘What must I do to be saved?’ Instead their question is ‘What can I do to make my life work?’ When the people who talk about a loving God demonstrate love, the gap between doubt and faith is narrowed, and the people around them often find themselves wanting to believe.”7 The 21st century church leaders must be able to both model and mentor this kind of living, loving faith in action.

An important place for the church to begin modeling loving faith in action is in the much needed skill and gift of reconciliation. “We live in a world desperately in need of redemption. Individuals, people groups, nations, entire regions of the world need to be reconciled. And the exercise of reconciliation is where our Christian witness is formed. This is where our theology moves us to action.”8

The church needs a radical alteration that must be spearheaded by strong leaders who understand the times, think strategically, and respond effectively to the rate of the culture’s change. As Barna aptly states,

As always, leadership is critical toward making serious spiritual progress in America. The issue is not one of leaders using their capacity to gain a bigger platform, to highlight more products or to attract bigger crowds, but one of engaging people in the process of pursuing God with all their heart, mind, strength and soul. This mandates ministry on a very personal level, regardless of the nature of the facilitating faith community (congregational church, house church, parachurch, cyberchurch, etc.). If leaders are responsible for motivating, mobilizing, resourcing and directing people to pursue a shared vision from God that advances His kingdom by facilitating transformation…then there must be an intelligent strategy for promoting such effort.9

Perhaps one of the greatest challenges the church faces now and in the next decade is that of handing the reins over to a new generation of leaders. As the Boomer generation begins to retire from active leadership, the generations who follow have new definitions and concepts of what church should look like and how it should be led. Mead writes of the temptation to preserve the structures rather than the insights of the previous generation: “When that temptation wins out, the critical task is to break through the structures and help the insights—if they are still viable—find structures more adequate for a new time.”10The church, however, has become used to changing slowly and, having never dealt with the need for rapid structural change, does not have very good adaptive mechanisms. Miller gives this counsel to the 21st century church:

“Boiled down to its essence, this church will need to be both flexible and permeable, able to bend and stretch with the fast-changing times and able to take in what is good from the new culture and filter out what is harmful. This is more than reorganization; it is the positive outgrowth of convergence and a new metaphor for Christ’s body – a living church for the new millennium.”11

 

Personal, spiritual and learning characteristics of seminary students

While current and future seminary students share many common characteristics of past seminary students, numerous characteristics have changed. Basic statistics demonstrate some general shifts: where historically the average Denver Seminary student was in his or her mid- to late-twenties, the typical master’s level student at Denver Seminary in 2005-06 is thirty-three years old. While our students were once primarily male, now approximately 40 percent are female. Only 54 percent of our students are married. Historically our Master of Divinity program was the largest; we now have 341 enrolled in our Master of Arts degree programs, 260 in the Master of Divinity program and 87 in our Doctor of Ministry program. The average student’s class load was 8.39 hours per semester excluding co-op programs and audit hours. A surprising 133 students are enrolled in certificate programs or fall into the non-degree classification. Our students now come from forty-four states and nine foreign countries, representing close to fifty different denominations with ‘non-denominational’ as the single highest self-declared designation.12

While a small number of students are exploring theological education in order to ‘find themselves,’ the majority have a general sense of their future ministry vocational direction and want to develop or enhance their character, bible knowledge and ministry skills. Due to their average age and marital status, they tend to be more mature and stable than college students or recent college graduates. Denver Seminary certainly has some radical members of this 25- to 45-year-old age group among its student body; however, the majority of our students are from the mainstream of society. So, research that primarily explores the extreme edges of their demographics and then projects that upon all the population has limited value for us.

Similar to the findings discovered in recent national surveys of college freshmen, our current and future students will continue to be deeply committed to their faith, expecting the seminary to intentionally and positively impact their Christian formation and provide opportunities for meaningful relational connections. Our current and future students score highly on the scales of religious commitment, religious engagement, religious/social conservatism, spirituality, and equanimity (according to the research descriptions).

Future Denver Seminary students will most likely continue to come from diverse denominational backgrounds and to distrust formal denominational categorizations. They will continue to be suspicious of historic systematic theology approaches, preferring a more contemporary language for expressing biblical and theological content. Yet many are returning to historic denominations, resulting in significant changes in the manner in which those denominations define and practice their faith. Due to their strong desire to transform their expressions of faith, some researchers posit that the next generation of seminary students will defy denominational labels and express their spiritual life in syncretistic or contradictory beliefs, behavior and methods, creating an even greater need for theological training.

Technology plays an important role in the lives of 21st century seminary students. Its use has become so natural to them that they may not be able to fully describe their dependence on it. While they use technology mostly for relational connections and dialogues, they also expect it to streamline organizational processes such as enrollment, registration, taking notes in class, etc. Now that we have more extensive experience with online education, we know that students tend to use online classes to augment their seminary experience rather than as the mainstream of their seminary education. They may use a limited amount of online classes combined with short, intensive residential classes as a strategy for managing seminary education in the midst of their full lifestyles.

Current and future students tend to bring more experience in and heightened desires for a multicultural learning community. Through their undergraduate programs and prior work experiences, they seem to gain an appreciation for working in diverse teams and want their seminary to express these same values through the make-up of the faculty, student body, administration and staff, not to mention the educational experience itself.

Future students will likely bring increasing amounts of debt from their undergraduate work. Coupled with the debt incurred in earning a seminary degree and the lower potential for financial compensation in their careers as vocational Christian workers, this debt may prove a hindrance to successful Christian service over a lifetime.

Many researchers—as well as current evidence—suggest that incoming seminary students will be increasingly lacking in biblical literacy, substantial discipleship experiences, significant church backgrounds, healthy families of origin, and graduate-level writing and verbal skills. Combined with a decreasing number of students with liberal arts undergraduate training, these predictions suggest that while their GPAs will continue to climb, students will actually be poorly prepared spiritually, relationally and academically for the rigors of a graduate level theological program. Researchers also speculate that future seminary students will continue to take reduced class hours—opting for mostly part-time class loads—in order to balance their academic responsibilities, work requirements, and commitments to their families, churches and friends.

Adult learners desire a rigorous, well-designed and practical classroom experience designed to match how adults with demanding lifestyles learn. With the higher average age of thirty-three, future seminary students will not tolerate perceived ‘busy work,’ testing, or assignments that are not directly applicable to their lives. Students may demand more depth and less breadth of coverage in their classes, expecting their professors to spend less time lecturing and more time in relational dialogue on how the topic relates to their walk in Christ. Though this differing approach might be viewed as less academic, if properly implemented, adult educational principles may actually better equip leaders.

Properly addressing these issues and making necessary changes will contribute to the future health of our educational experience. As stewards of God’s resources and leaders of the educational process, we must set ourselves on a course that will most effectively equip leaders to live faithfully, think biblically and lead wisely for a lifetime.

 

Implications to the Educational Experience

In light of the context in which we find ourselves, what are the specific implications to our seminary learning community over the next five years?

 

1.   The torrent of change affecting our world and culture compels us to remain deeply committed to the timeless basic concepts that our students must understand and internalize if they are to think biblically.

Like a dog chasing its tail, mindless chasing after change is a needless waste of energy and, even when successful, proves mostly unrewarding. The seminary leadership must identify its timeless basic commitments and then adapt to effectively equip its students to serve and communicate the gospel in the world in which they find themselves. Our educational outcomes and the list on page three of this document must further define these commitments. Having these timeless concepts well identified in our personal and institutional commitments will enable us to more effectively discern how to best adapt our educational experience.

We cannot totally individualize our educational experience to match every possible ministry setting that our graduates may face in their lifetimes. However, through our mentoring program, learning contracts, class assignments and spiritual formation groups we can expand the scope of our students’ learning to intentionally allow them to focus on how what they are learning applies to their areas of ministry interest. E.g., one of our students who serves in the Salvation Army was interested in designing his organization’s strategies for responding to major catastrophes. Approximately six months after completing his assignment, he found himself in charge of the Salvations Army’s response to Hurricane Katrina. For another student who wanted to serve in a country in Africa, we were able to build a team of mentors who had served for years in that African region. Their real life experiences in Africa greatly enhanced this student’s preparation and readiness to serve. Similar stories are too plentiful to share in this brief prologue, but serve as strong proof that Denver Seminary must continue to provide the core educational experiences necessary for all students while individualizing the learning to the future ministry context of the student.

 

2.   Students must be given exposure to and opportunities for biblical reflection upon the issues of contemporary world affairs that will continually confront them as leaders.

People need well-informed, biblical responses to the key questions of life. Having a well-developed Christian worldview is critical in forming these responses. The Bible has much to say that can inform our thinking in both the private and public arena on these crucial questions. Intentionality must be given in our educational experience to ensure that students in all majors graduate with the skill of understanding how to lead in the culture and world in which they live.

 

3.   Central importance must be given to guiding students in the development of personal wholeness and spiritual maturity.

Continuing to strengthen our mentoring process, spiritual formation groups, chapels, and informal education will prove vital to our continued success in integrating our educational experience. These elements provide effective opportunities for the Holy Spirit to transform the character of our students and help to meet the increasing relational expectation of seminary students. Additionally, all members of the Denver Seminary communities must stay committed on a personal and community level to a transformative personal relationship with Christ and building a Christ-like community here at Denver Seminary.

 

4.   Out of a visible commitment to the Great Commission, we must create reciprocal partnerships with majority world church leaders.

We must develop contextually appropriate means to partner with majority world church leaders who can assist us in how we train our students for today’s global world and in providing graduate theological education for all. Recently, majority world leaders in seminary education requested that the seminary leaders in North America partner with them to discuss how we can more effectively provide seminary education on a world-wide basis without inadvertently hindering the work of many national seminaries in the majority world. Many of these majority world seminaries may also provide opportunities for our students to study abroad as part of their Denver Seminary experience. These conversations and partnerships must also include substantive discussion on how to best train international students in ways that can help to eliminate the leadership drain occurring in so many majority world nations when international students do not return to their own countries of origin.

 

5.   We must maintain our commitment to the highest levels of scholarship wedded with the best forms of andragogy in the service of a well-integrated educational experience that is accessible and affordable to all.

While the staff and administration provide the needed infrastructure for building an effective learning community, highly skilled faculty, mentors and training center directors continue to be the key to the preparation of our students. We must continue to make the role of teaching students our central focus while adequately supporting the scholastic endeavors of our faculty. Denver Seminary must build a faculty who embrace diversity as God’s design; are themselves multicultural and diverse; embrace our mission, vision and values (see Exhibit A); focus on equipping leaders for the church; love teaching students; and will continue to develop as professionals in their various disciplines.

To effectively equip leaders, we must address the issues of the growing number of students who are biblically illiterate, have not been intentionally discipled, lack substantial church backgrounds, come from unhealthy families of origin and have diminished verbal and writing skills. Certainly, in its two- or three-year programs, the seminary cannot solve all of these issues; however, more intentionality must be given to ensuring that our graduates have received assistance where needed in each of these areas. We currently provide tutors for students requesting assistance to improve their writing skills. Our mentoring program could be explained as an intentional discipleship process. While we do address unhealthy family of origin issues in our counseling and youth and family programs, little is done curriculum-wide. The administration and faculty also must address how to properly assist those incoming students who are biblically illiterate and will struggle to catch up in such a demanding academic environment.

Increasing numbers of adults are unable to resign from work and attend seminary full time. Many students want to continue their ministry roles while completing their seminary education in more concentrated delivery formats. Also, expanding numbers of potential seminary students are lay leaders who hope to enhance their skills for serving in their churches instead of pursuing full time Christian vocational service. A key to our continued effectiveness as a seminary may be providing new delivery formats that will meet these growing demands.

Denver Seminary must develop more innovative programs for assisting students with the funding of seminary and reducing their long term debt. Scholarship programs must continue to increase without increasing our current tuition discounting levels. Expanded endowed scholarships, alternative work solutions and other means for funding seminary education must be explored and implemented.

 

6.   We must build a multicultural and global learning community in which students learn to embrace diversity as God’s desire and become skilled in understanding how to wisely communicate the gospel and lead in global, diverse communities.

We must build an inclusive learning community where people of all ethnicities, ages and cultures can be full participants in the life of the seminary. Strategies must be initiated and enforced that will ensure successful integration of the seminary community on all levels—board, administration, faculty, staff and students. Additionally, the administration and faculty must research and revise the formal and informal learning experience to ensure that it is a safe and effective environment for all.

We must develop graduates who embrace God’s heart for diversity and who are skilled in understanding different genders, races, cultures, religions and geopolitical systems to effectively communicate the gospel and lead wisely in whatever settings they find themselves. This must also include intentional training in reconciliation on an individual, family, organizational and community base.

Denver Seminary must also increase its effectiveness in equipping leaders to serve in the urban settings of the world. While the majority of our graduates will continue to serve in rural, suburban or ‘second ring’ metro level churches, a large number must be properly trained to take leadership in the rapidly expanding urban centers of our world. Our training center directors and increased partnerships with experts in urban ministry may prove most successful.

 

7.   The seminary leadership must regularly assess and revise our educational experience to ensure that our students are appropriately developing our institutional educational outcomes.

The administration and faculty must continue to systematically evaluate and revise, as needed, how we design our educational experience ensuring that character formation, academic excellence and leadership training are informing each other and all aspects of the curriculum. Attention must continue to focus on feedback from our alumni and leaders within the church and parachurch organizations where our graduates will serve. This systematic feedback must regularly inform any curriculum review and decisions. To the best of our ability, we must ensure that our graduates exemplify our educational outcomes (see Exhibit A) and that these outcomes are appropriate for the world in which our graduates will serve.
 

 

8.   We must continue to provide and use appropriate technology to support and enhance the educational experience.


While technology should not be the driving force of the seminary, it does have a vital role in enhancing the accessibility, affordability and effectiveness of our educational experience. Students will continue to expect appropriate technology in various aspects of the seminary. During the construction of the new campus, expanded technological infrastructure was built into the design of the buildings. We have the capacity to maintain a high level of technological sophistication to meet our needs for many years to come. More staff and equipment will be required, but we are properly prepared to face most of the anticipated changes over the next five years. We have the capacity (though not the funds) to add live streaming of our classes to multiple sites when the technology become readily available to more regions of the world, demand increases, and the cost is more affordable. Designing more new online courses and increasing the frequency of offering our current courses will also prove important. Due to our commitment to an on-site learning community, the 21st century seminary student’s desire for authentic relationships, and current accreditation limitations, it is reasonable to suggest that in the next five years our best course of action is to offer delivery formats that provide majors through a combination of online learning and intensive residential experiences. Due to the educational and financial success of our online classes and the desire to accommodate student requests for increased choices, we must continue to design additional online classes and expanding the frequency of our online offerings.

Because almost all metro areas in the U.S. that are large enough to support a seminary satellite location are already being served by evangelical seminaries, building satellite campuses in locations in other parts of North American seems unnecessary. Efforts might be better invested in learning how to wisely assist our international partners and developing a strategy for our involvement that advances the plans of those kindred spirit seminaries in the majority world.

 

9.   We must assist in equipping church and community leaders of the Front Range by providing ongoing educational experiences for lifelong learning and addressing issues within the public dialogue.

The pace and scope of change demand that church leaders stay committed to learning and adapting in order to wisely lead in the decades ahead. In light of this necessity, Denver Seminary must provide more intentional non-degree training for church and community leaders throughout the Front Range. This includes expanding our current strategies to provide a more comprehensive program. Included in this program is the Vernon Grounds Institute for Public Ethics, our Hispanic and Asian initiatives, and other vital learning opportunities.

 

Conclusion

Denver Seminary seeks to glorify God by equipping leaders to think biblically, live faithfully and lead wisely for a lifetime. As we prayerfully finalize the institutional strategic framework that will guide our work over the next five years, we humbly understand that only God can build a house and that we labor in vain if we have not aligned our thoughts and plans with His. To the best of our ability we have prayerfully, and with diligence, sought His guidance throughout the entire process. Our heart’s desires have been to not just ask Him to bless what we determined; rather, we desire that God will be honored, the kingdom of God and church will be served, our students will be well-equipped and that we will continue to faithfully complete our mission. To God be the glory!

 

1 Ray Bakke. Denver Seminary, March 24, 2006.

2 John A. Challenger, “Working in the Future: How Today’s Trends are Shaping Tomorrow’s Jobs,” The Futurist, (November-December 2005).

3 Robert A. Seiple, Ambassadors of Hope. (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2004), 208-209.

4 George Barna, The State of the Church: 2006. (Ventura, CA: The Barna Group, Ltd., 2006), 52.

5 Robert Lewis, The Church of Irresistible Influence. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 48.

6 M. Rex Miller, The Millennium Matrix. (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004), 127.

7 Rick Rusaw and Eric Swanson, The Externally Focused Church. (Loveland, CO: Group Publishing, 2004), 28.

8 Seiple, Ambassadors of Hope, 204.

9 Barna, State of the Church: 2006, 53.

10 Loren B. Mead, Five Challenges for the Once and Future Church. Alban Institute, 1996, 16.

11 Miller, The Millennium Matrix, 198.

12 All enrollment statistics for Denver Seminary are from fall 2005.