I would also add that faith is not always a feeling.  There are many Feel-Good Churches who, for whatever reasons, water-down their message.  One reason that I suspect is to get higher numbers attending their particular church.  It is my observation that there are different types of people who might attend a church that teaches fluff.  The first type are those who are honestly seeking and have had conversion in their lives becuas of these churches.  In these cases I would view the Feel-Good Churches as a good thing.  The second type are the people who are attending the church because they want a church that makes them feel good and one that doesn't challenge them to change the way they live.  In this case, I would view the Church as doing more harm than good.  Scripture challenges us to live a Christian lifestyle.  If you don't get beyond the fluff then what is the reason we are actually attending these typse of churches?  I used to attend one of these churches for the latter reason.  The music was more like the stuff I heard on the radio,  the sermons made me feel good, and they had donuts during the service.  The only time I really felt challenged was when the sermon was on tighing (which was about twice a month).  There are so many other things in Sacred Scripture that challenges us as Christians than tithing, but back then I didn't want to hear about them, because then I would have to take a step back and honestly look at how I was living my life.  But conversion is not a one time thing.  God walks with us and brings about conversion all throughout our lives if we let Him.  Too often our own selfish pride can blind us to hearing the truth.

G.K. Chesterton writes the following:

We do not really want a religion that is right where we are right. What we want is a religion that is right where we are wrong. In these current fashions it is not really a question of the religion allowing us liberty; but (at the best) of the liberty allowing us a religion. These people merely take the modern mood, with much in it that is amiable and much that is anarchical and much that is merely dull and obvious, and then require any creed to be cut down to fit that mood. But the mood would exist even without the creed. They say they want a religion to be social, when they would be social without any religion. They say they want a religion to be practical, when they would be practical without any religion. They say they want a religion acceptable to science, when they would accept the science even if they did not accept the religion. They say they want a religion like this because they are like this already. They say they want it, when they mean that they could do without it.

Others may take the "Just Me and Jesus" approach to Christianity or they may say things like "I don't believe in organized religion".  But to take the church (Christ's body) out of the equation is not what Christ had in mind.  This type of Christianity can quickly become somewhat relativistic.