i’m almost finished with the tangible kingdom
by hugh halter and matt smay and i’ve enjoyed it thus far. i may be enjoying it more because the book was recommended to me from two different people who said they were reminded of tapestry while they were reading it (thanks john & trey). the more i read of the book the more thankful i am that people think we are doing something similar. it’s a nice compliment.
by hugh halter and matt smay and i’ve enjoyed it thus far. i may be enjoying it more because the book was recommended to me from two different people who said they were reminded of tapestry while they were reading it (thanks john & trey). the more i read of the book the more thankful i am that people think we are doing something similar. it’s a nice compliment.i’m not going to write much about the book until i finish it but i thought i would go ahead and point out the differences that halter and smay and see between attractional and incarnational evangelism.
here’s the table they have in the book:
| attractional approach | incarnational approach |
| unbeliever is invited to church | sojourner is invited to belong |
| unbeliever confesses belief | sojourner confesses interest |
| unbeliever repeats a prayer | sojourner experiences the good news |
| believer joins a church | sojourner participates in community |
| cognitive discipleship | experiential apprenticeship |
| focus: counting confessions | focus: transformation |
| believing enables belonging | belonging enables believing |
i think their lists are pretty accurate. i much prefer the incarnational model, especially the idea of apprenticeship. we need let people try on faith to determine if they really believe or not.