Question. Hendricks cites EDP pp. 4–5, 98–9, 340 for the prophecy that Christianity will divide between dying and rising segments (per dp-prophecy-christianity-divides-into-dying-and-rising). What do these passages actually say? Is the prophecy a general division-and-renewal pattern (which would be loosely confirmable by almost any historical period) or does DP specify features of the dividing line (which would be more falsifiable and more theologically forceful)?
Why it matters. A non-specific prophecy is unfalsifiable — Christianity has always had dying and rising segments, in every century. A specific prophecy (“the dying segments will be the ones with X feature; the rising will have Y feature”) is a real claim that can be tested against the historical record. The strength of Hendricks’s use of the prophecy depends on which kind DP gives.
If specific: it directly underwrites the populist-church thesis and the Johnson evidence. If general: the empirical case stands on its own sociological merits and the DP citation is more decorative than load-bearing.
Current best guesses. EDP pp. 4–5 are likely the introductory framing of providential history; pp. 98–9 may concern the Christian era’s specific role; p. 340 likely concerns the era of the Second Coming. The passages together probably give a moderately specific prophecy framed around faith vs. apostasy rather than around organizational features per se. Resolve by close reading once EDP is ingested.
Source. Raised in br-04-populist-vs-denominational REVIEW, from dp-prophecy-christianity-divides-into-dying-and-rising.