Talk:Cambridge Declaration

The Alliance

• It appears that the level to which the foundations of the Alliance were based on precepts in Dr. Wells' book may be a bit over-stated. The book was, no doubt, largely influential and may have been an impetus for some of the founding members, but the philosophies of the Alliance were drawn from a desire to restore Protestant orthodoxy within the church and to reclaim the confessions of the faith regardless of Wells' thesis. 22:19, 10 May 2005 User:SimpleMan

under `no place for truth' in 3rd paragraph we have this sentence:

Like Wells, Horton and Boice were both strong critics of the shallow nature of contemporary Evangelicalism, and had published a book to that effect [see: "Power Religion: The Selling Out of the Evangelical Church" (1993) edited by Horton, and featuring Boice as a contributing author]. -problem is writer is interjecting a supposedly universal opinion that the contemporary evangelical movement is "shallow". placement of word `shallow' is misleading because it confirms what horton and boice insinuate. it is my opinion that the text would be more neutral if these discriptive terms of contemporary evangelicalism are omitted, for it serves no purpose. for ex. could read:

Like Wells, Horton and Boice were both strong critics of contemporary Evangelicalism, and had published a book to that effect [see: "Power Religion: The Selling Out of the Evangelical Church" (1993) edited by Horton, and featuring Boice as a contributing author].

or if you wish to include them under horton and boice's opinion instead of your own (which is likely what you ment to do) it could read:

Like Wells, Horton and Boice were both strong critics of what they perceived to be the shallow nature of contemporary Evangelicalism, and had published a book to that effect [see: "Power Religion: The Selling Out of the Evangelical Church" (1993) edited by Horton, and featuring Boice as a contributing author].Newtonsghost (talk) 05:52, 27 October 2011 (UTC)