But, in the meantime...

While I'm busy working billion hour days, thinking about someday writing part 2 of the "Why Both Sides and I Think Pornography is a Bad Influence"...

Jan was taking a break from her knitting and made a rather nice comment about the preferred tone of our little blog. Periodically, I think it helps to repeat a point of focus, for reinforcement and to keep those who join in late up to speed. Christians, as a matter of history, have been well known for works, both good and bad. One of the confessions I will continue to make is that while we have often attracted great doers, some of our thinkers do in a rather unthinkful way. (My blog, my word... tough.)

An acquaintance of mine, Jeremy Thiessen, of the very cool band Downhere, has a similar gripe to mine. My contention is that if the claims of the Bible are true, and the worldwide conglomeration of professed Christians really are "the church", then we really do represent "the Brand" and ought to do so with excellence. After all, if God is so great and all that we do in response to His greatness is defined as worship , then shouldn't it be representative of an irresistable, perfect, and loving God?
A lot of us really need to find a nice, comfy chair and read a great book called "Following Jesus Without Embarrasing God". Now, before my brothers and sisters in Christ flip out, "Yes, God loves us even if we can't spell well or have lousy grammar." This is not an excuse for mediocrity. If we are commissioned with "drawing people near to God" and "winning souls to Christ", how appealing is a God whose people don't even tip 15%? [Yeah, I want to "join your club so I can be a cheapskate like you..."] How winsome are those who speak only in Christianese jargon, thinking that throwing "Bible darts" at people will magically show them a true and cogent understanding of mercy and grace (which I'll define later for those confused by this ironic use of jargon)?
Case in point: the aforementioned rockstar and I believe that those signs outside of churches are just flat-out suckin' the life outta' me!!!

Let me catch my breath.

Alright. Having struggled with a bad temper for nearly three decades, I understand how poor self control turns people off in any argument, discussion, or discourse. 7 years in the restaurant business taught me that "presentation and perception are everything", meaning all else being equal, if it don't look good, people aren't going to want to taste what's on their plate. Paul admonishes in his letter to the church at Colossus: "Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone. (Col. 4.6)NIV" Doesn't that mean we should respond to neoCons in neoConese, libDems in libDemese, hackers in code? Our continued resistance to engage the culture without embracing it (of but not in, in Christianese), speaking in code will rarely ever influence a "non-believer" the way our heart desires. (Jargon breakdown: "non-believers" are those who are not and have never been "professing Christians" - hopefully I didn't just define jargon with jargon).

Our goal, even if both sides disagree on theology is to at least help them get better at presenting their ideas - raise the bar on the quality of the ongoing dialogue.
• If you know a church that "just doesn't get it", find a polite and "seasoned with salt" way to bring up that (Col. 4.6) verse to them. Ask them how they feel it applies to the catchy signs and sayings that are associated with their church's marketing materials and signage. For added credibility, if you're not a professing Christian, let them know you're speaking as a representative of their "target market" and are turned off by their approach. (Again, try it with more season and less "salt"). Contact the guys over at Church Marketing Sucks and hook them up with your newly adopted friends at "First Jargon Episcopalebycomparison Church" to see if they're a match made in marketing heaven.
• If you're a "believer", check out some things at The Church Report's 50 Most Influential Churches". See what some of these churches are up to. Look at how they are "reaching" people for Christ (Jargon breakdown- reaching: explaining the gospel in a coherent manner that is relevant, convincing, and life changing). #3 on the list, Andy Stanley is well known for saying "your discipleship model is perfectly designed to give you the results you are currently getting." Thus, if you want different results, change what you're doing.
• Post a link to this blog, Jeremy's blog, or any on my blogroll, and encourage people to engage in the discussion. Listen, even those "actively apathetic toward religion (AARTs) [HT:WB" would agree that Christianity offers at least some good wisdom and valuable teaching. We may never all agree on my "narrow" Christian view of "approaching God through Christ alone", but what if we could get a massive majority of AARTs just living a life that reflects what the Bible teaches? Could we make an impact on poverty, disease, illiteracy, and war? Could we balance a budget and raise people who live on cash instead of debt? Could we create a society of people in control of their tempers and appetites? What couldn't we do?

Remember, I could be a complete idiot.
What's your opinion?
A