The common refrain that is heard from the transformationalists is that cult affects culture, or put in another way, “as the church goes, so goes the world.” This standard belief is often so widely assumed that it is rarely questioned.
But let’s put the theory to the test, using a smaller scale; let’s say in a typical small American neighborhood of about thirty homes. Let’s assume two of the families in that neighborhood are Christian families, not nominal Christians, but genuine Christians. How does the presence of those two families affect the unbelieving households in that neighborhood? Does the divorce rate decrease among the unbelievers in that neighborhood compared to neighborhoods with no believers in it? Does the crime rate decrease? Do those unbelieving parents in that neighborhood raise their children differently because of the presence of two Christian families?
The same test could be applied to work. Because you are a believer and you wait tables at Chili’s, does the manager cheat less on his taxes (assuming he does) because of your presence? Do the other workers because less greedy for money because you are also an employee? We could go on with examples, but all of you who live in neighborhoods and work at jobs know that the answer to these questions. The answer is almost always in the negative, and it is not because the Christians in these examples are disobedient to God, but that simply is the way life is in this fallen world, and we are never told to expect differently. So if the transformationalist assumption of cult affecting culture doesn’t really work on a local, micro level, why are they so convinced it must work on a national, macro level?