Here's the link.
http://www.jesuscreed.org/?p=3002
First and foremost, I'd like to read this book, if there are any Christmas shoppers out there. Secondly, what are your reactions to this type of thinking? It's very close to a very sensitive subject in my heart. There is such rampant hypocrisy in churches that seem to market the gospel. In my own experience, that marketing comes through an image that the church forces all of its members into. Often, I feel like such an image becomes an idol.
But on the other hand, every community emits a vague representation of itself simply through the relationships we have or those we choose distinctly not to have. Does that justify a concern for our image? Is there a place of balance? And how can we reach people who have no concern and no attraction for church? Can we forget how the world looks at us and still be culturally and socially relevant? What about our identity?
Thoughts? Comments?
Blogged with Flock
5 comments:
really? you're getting married? really? it's hard to read tone on these infernal machines!
see? the tone of that was very charlton hestonish.
Anyway, I am not sure how i feel about this whole image issue. To a large extent, it seems that caring about how poisitive our image is is counterintuitive to the gospel. You could say that Jesus' image got him killed. but that is of course an oversimplification.
Also, some of the core aspects of Christianity are not accessible to popular culture. there's not a lot of room for brash individualism and overconsumption in the gospel.
I think sometimes the hearts of the people trying to make the Church relevant to culture have good intentions. But i think it is a misguided notion.
I think we should focus more on loving people than trying to appeal to them, trying to improve the image of xians, evangelicals, whatever. --actually i sometimes think that these labels of subgroups within christianity are more divisive than denominational alignments.-- Some are going to come to Christ, some are not. Some are going to hate us, persecute us, kill us. that is to be expected from the NT.
But on the other hand i know that point of view. i remember as a kid asking my dad why it was so important to keep the lawn of the church nice. it would be harder to attract people to a church in a trailer. But i guess how i felt deep down then, and now, is that we should attract people by the testimony of how we live. They will know we are xians by our love...how we care for the poor, the orphans, the widows.
wow, that was a ramble.
congratulations, if you really are engaged. if not, you're a sarcastic dork...
also, it seems like churchgoers pigeonhole themselves and each other. working for a publication at a seminary that is very much in the middle of the spectrum (liberal and conservative), i experience this daily. People email me with sentiments to the tune of "of course, since you are a Christian, you are a republican, and do not concern yourself with social issues..." and on the other end of the spectrum "we are so much smarter than those 'fundamentalists', aren't we? man, that dobson is so off base! gay people are the coolest!" It seems like image is a personal issue, influenced largely by experience. Some will always assume that everyone means the same thing by "evangelical" or "born-again."
I think maybe all of this just points us to pray for our brothers and sisters.
I wonder, what was the impact of the Jesus Movement in the 70's? This was a time when following Jesus was en vogue. Was that a good thing? Should this be something we strive for?
Hank Hill was careful to seperate Bobby's interest in rock music from his faith. He did not want Bobby to toss aside xianity as he had beanie babies and other fads. good point hank.
I only gave the jesuscreed post a read and then a once-over, so I might be inferring a little (sue me), but it seems like he's saying, "The evidence is too far gone, let's just change our label." Now, seeing as how I'm not sure if that was his main point or not, I'll leave it at my saying that I don't agree with that conclusion.
On the larger issue of image as a whole, I tend to agree with Mr. Cassil. I think it's an individual thing and it's based on experience. And that's individuals and experiences on either side of Christianity. A person may have had a negative experience with an "evangelical," and so he now has a negative perception of Christianity as a whole. Then again, someone might choose to be un-involved with all things Jesus based on his own logical conclusions or personal convictions, these having nothing to do with any contact with "church people." He may be fond of church people and respect their conclusions and convictions but not share them.
It's a tough question, and you could really argue it either way.
And I'm sure you have -- Ian
I would both agree and disagree. I think the key to understanding McKnight's post is in his four key points at the end, the last one being that perceptions are based on real-life notions.
What concerns me with an attitude towards love being the basis of our testimony as represented by your thoughts its the limits of its scope. I agree that love is the sole basis for all that we do, but does that mean that love should look the way we define it? Is love so simple? Can we just choose to live a certain way and call it love if it doesn't actually affect someone? That's exactly where I think image matters. Also, image is important as far as it reflects a genuine being. If our image is misconstrued, than it should be our concern.
Also, I feel that an attitude that solely seems to think that "our love" is the only thing that matters, seems slightly unconcerned with evangelism. Granted, evangelism must be based entirely on love, but how will that love be received? I don't think its our job to necessarily force people how to feel about our love, but to affectively reach the world, we have to promote an image of genuine love that transcends our actions. We may make mistakes in what we do, but is our image one that reveals our true hearts of love. Regardless of what we do, is it obvious to the world that we do it out of love. That's why image is important to me. Our image is the public representation of who we are, and if we are unconcerned with how we are perceived, it limits the effectiveness of our ministry because someone somewhere will inevitably disagree with our decisions. May they never disagree with our hearts focused on the gospel of Jesus Christ and the love that he gave to us.
Post a Comment