# From one who has worked through the Truth Project...



## Constantlyreforming (Feb 2, 2012)

I would like to hear what others think of the curriculum and study? I was very impressed that Focus on the Family put their name on it, considering how theological and sound I believe it was. Dr. Del Tackett does and excellent job in the classroom and although it does have some from non-reformed churches bringing in their insight, there was nothing glaring to me that was anti-scriptural through the entire thing.

Who here has worked through it? I'd like to hear your thoughts? We have gone through it twice as a church body and plan on doing it again because it is an excellent way to bring truths to newer Christians. In addition, with how much scripture is used and how much the WCF and other reformed information is presented, it would be good for a stepping stone to the Reformed faith as well.

Thoughts? I know we've had threads on this before, but it's been quite a while. It's an amazing curriculum and I'm just glad that FOTF finally put their money on something beneficial the body of Christ that is stuffed with scripture.


----------



## reaganmarsh (Feb 2, 2012)

Ethan,

When I was still teaching school, we took our academic faculty through it over the course of a semester. I was leery of anything produced by FOTF because of their usual "broad evangelicalism" & moralistic approach in books & radio. But it was a very pleasant surprise for me. 

I borrowed the DVD after the sessions & went back over different parts so I could draw the charts out for further study. (I've now braced myself for the accusations of what a nerd I am!)

I am considering taking my church through it this year, either during our discipleship training hour or by suspending the Sunday School's regular curriculum for a season & going through it together in that manner. 

Solid stuff. Glad to see that you've benefitted from it as well!

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## SRoper (Feb 2, 2012)

It's been a while since I have gone through those materials (and I missed one or two segments). They are on the whole pretty good, especially coming from Focus on the Family, and I had mostly minor quibbles. Probably the biggest issue is the idea that there is a singular Christian worldview. Apparently, justification by faith alone is not essential to this Christian worldview but it is important to assert conservative political policy preferences. Carl Trueman deals with this well, I think (follow up here).


----------



## he beholds (Feb 2, 2012)

I haven't studied that program, but we use the high school/college spin-off program called TrueU and can't recommend it enough.


----------



## Jack K (Feb 2, 2012)

I thought it largely ignored the heart of the gospel and salvation... atonement, justification, sanctification, etc. That's okay if that's not what the series is about. But some people I know have approached it as a basic introduction to Christianity and Christian thinking—as if it held the key concepts at the heart of faith—and if that's the approach then the series is lacking several essentials.

As an explanation of how biblical views of man, the universe, etc. differ from today's secular views, it was fine. I don't have any big complaints about the series itself. But it's been pitched to me too often as "watch this and you'll know what it means to think like a Christian," and the series really doesn't measure up to such a broad claim. Is the best thing we can say about why Jesus came really that he came to tell us the truth? Or would the _best_ answer to that question center more on the atonement?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## J. Dean (Feb 2, 2012)

Jack K said:


> I thought it largely ignored the heart of the gospel and salvation... atonement, justification, sanctification, etc. That's okay if that's not what the series is about. But some people I know have approached it as a basic introduction to Christianity and Christian thinking—as if it held the key concepts at the heart of faith—and if that's the approach then the series is lacking several essentials.
> 
> As an explanation of how biblical views of man, the universe, etc. differ from today's secular views, it was fine. I don't have any big complaints about the series itself. But it's been pitched to me too often as "watch this and you'll know what it means to think like a Christian," and the series really doesn't measure up to such a broad claim. Is the best thing we can say about why Jesus came really that he came to tell us the truth? Or would the _best_ answer to that question center more on the atonement?



Jack, while I don't have a whole lot of familiarity with it, I do believe the assumed audience is to be those who already are Christians.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Feb 2, 2012)

I think it is very good overall. There is one lesson - the Unio Mystica - where I think Dale over-reaches and tries to draw too much of an analogy between interpersonal relationships between husband and wife and extend that into discussions on the essence of the Trinity.


----------



## SRoper (Feb 3, 2012)

J. Dean said:


> Jack K said:
> 
> 
> > I thought it largely ignored the heart of the gospel and salvation... atonement, justification, sanctification, etc. That's okay if that's not what the series is about. But some people I know have approached it as a basic introduction to Christianity and Christian thinking—as if it held the key concepts at the heart of faith—and if that's the approach then the series is lacking several essentials.
> ...



That may be the intent, but like Jack, I have seen it used as an outreach tool. Of course, that's not really a fault of the series.


----------



## J. Dean (Feb 3, 2012)

SRoper said:


> That may be the intent, but like Jack, I have seen it used as an outreach tool. Of course, that's not really a fault of the series.


Ah, I gotcha. Yes, that would be misapplied then.


----------



## reaganmarsh (Feb 3, 2012)

Rich -- I agree that the Unio Mystica was a bit of a stretch. 

Jack -- I agree that it should focus more on justification/atonement/the gospel.

And there is no way that anyone should be using TP as an "outreach" tool. It's not evangelism, it's worldview. It's not comprehensive, it's introduction. What it does cover, it covers well (overall). There are definitely holes to fill (as per above), & content should be discussed (if for no other reason than that Dr. Tackett moves pretty quickly). 

But it does serve the purpose of driving one's thinking toward the Reformed side of the house. Given these caveats, I commend it.


----------



## Jack K (Feb 3, 2012)

J. Dean said:


> Jack K said:
> 
> 
> > I thought it largely ignored the heart of the gospel and salvation... atonement, justification, sanctification, etc. That's okay if that's not what the series is about. But some people I know have approached it as a basic introduction to Christianity and Christian thinking—as if it held the key concepts at the heart of faith—and if that's the approach then the series is lacking several essentials.
> ...



Actually, I didn't mean that it's used as an outreach tool, though I agree that would be a bad idea. I just meant that, as believers, the central biblical concepts that inform our lives must still prominently include those at the heart of the gospel. Living as people who've experienced salvation and serve God out of that experience is fundamental. This series was missing that. Yet it's sometimes pitched to believers as being everything we need to have our heads on straight.

Reactions: Like 1


----------

