Read with Discernment…

John Ball - Wow Joe, good detective work! Kudos and a promotion for you.

aaron arledge - They have gotten a lot better at who they will carry but I did see a Jetezen Franklin book that makes me worry. He hangs out with the TBN crowd way 2 much. do not know what to think about the label thing though.

Leanne - Had to delete what I was going to say because then YOU’D have to publish a disclaimer for this site.

sigh.

William P. Young is Paul Young, author of The Shack. http://www.windrumors.com/

A better man not easily found, Joe, although his work may not be your cup of tea

byron - Joe, if you have some friends at LifeWay send it on…

Dear LifeWay,

I appreciate the desire and effort to protect the spiritual babes who cannot discern between healthy and dangerous literature. (Why does LifeWay even bother to stock trash/dangerous literature?) Surely one of your “Read With Discernment” employees recognizes the irony in utilizing Wikipedia as a primary source for the Bell and Miller Author Briefings. If anything needs to be read with discernment it’s an online open-source encyclopedia! At the risk that the following information may not be completely accurate (because it is copied directly from Wikipedia), here is a block quote found at “About Wikipedia” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About):
“Visitors do not need specialized qualifications to contribute, since their primary role is to write articles that cover existing knowledge; this means that people of all ages and cultural and social backgrounds can write Wikipedia articles. Most of the articles can be edited by anyone with access to the Internet, simply by clicking the edit this page link.”

I admit I may be oversimplifying here, but…if LifeWay is concerned that an author may not be qualified to make a meaningful contribution to Christendom (thus the need to be discerning), why then does LifeWay use a resource that does not require its authors to have “specialized qualifications to contribute” – even to the point that their cultural and social background may or may not be Biblical? If I understand correctly that “anyone with access to the Internet” is qualified to comment on Wikipedia (and thus comment on the literary acumen of Bell, Miller, Grudem, Piper, et al) then I suppose the truly discerning reader does not consider Wikipedia to be a legitimate source of information. The education sector does not allow students to cite Wikipedia as a primary source of research. Why should the “Read With Discernment” publishing arm of the SBC be an exception?

Curious,
byron.

Joe Kennedy - Well guys, I didn’t expect this post to get nearly the attention it has. You’ve all hit the nail on the head. I just think if they’re going to put out that kind of disclaimer, they should be equal opportunity. Perhaps they should add a disclaimer at the Christian fiction section (especially Left Behind Series). And Barclay’s commentary series (which promotes universalism). While I consider Left Behind to be garbage, I think Barclay offers insight in many ways, even if I disagree with some of his beliefs. Both would fall under the same category as Miller or Bell, if indeed their views go against that of “historical evangelicalism.” Anyway, it just seems strange that they’d only single out the “popular” books of the last few years.

Personally, I thought Velvet Elvis by Rob Bell and Miller’s first two books were great. I didn’t agree with everything they said, but I loved the points they made. Discernment used without prompting, thank you very much.