[lpkmckenna]

http://www.thinkchristian.net/?p=960

So now that the mocking of the Christian's choice of clothes, music, and bumper-stickers is over - is there anything substantial about "Christ-Followers" that I need to know?

[RAILhead]

I'd still like to know why you're so fascinated with them. Maybe you should get a hobby, or a Wii or something?

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by RAILhead 

I'd still like to know why you're so fascinated with them. Maybe you should get a hobby, or a Wii or something?

I'm not fascinated by "them." I do like to keep current on new trends. I'm just wondering what this is about. I'd never heard of Christ-Followers until some here at MacNN mentioned it.

I wandered through their website. I couldn't find much that was distinctive. The mission statement stuff was pretty ordinary.

What is prompting the creation of this video series? What's the point?

[osiris]

I didn't know Christians had trends. What's the new thing - colored pools of water for baptism? Oh wait, the jPod!

[marden]

Originally Posted by osiris 

I didn't know Christians had trends. What's the new thing - colored pools of water for baptism? Oh wait, the jPod!

[RAILhead]

I've referred to myself as a Christ-Follower for ages. It's nothing "new." As for a delineation between Christ Follower and Christian, I can explain it thus:

A lot of people consider themselves to be "Christian," simply because they know they aren't Muslim, Hindu, Wiccan, or whatever. A lot of people think of "Christian" almost as a race. For example, ask a large, random body of people to raise their hand if they consider themselves Christian, and lot of people will.

Now, ask that same group if they have a personal relationship with God through Jesus, and the majority won't raise their hand.

So, a Christ-Follower is someone who ascribes to His teachings, just like a "normal" Christian would/should -- but the focus is more on the personal relationship with God, rather than being lumped into an ambiguous group like "Christian."

[Chuckit]

Good Lord, those are terrible on entirely non-religious grounds.

Couldn't they have just put up an MP3 of Steve Taylor's "Be A Clone" and gotten across the same message without being horribly unfunny?

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by RAILhead 

So, a Christ-Follower is someone who ascribes to His teachings, just like a "normal" Christian would/should -- but the focus is more on the personal relationship with God, rather than being lumped into an ambiguous group like "Christian."

So they are Christians that don't want to belong to a certain Church (as in organization), does this sum it up?

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

So they are Christians that don't want to belong to a certain Church (as in organization), does this sum it up?

No, they don't want to fall into the image of the stale Christian who lives for bumper stickers, stuffy suits, old hymns, potlucks, and everything else that people just associate with a religious 'going through the motions.' I have no problem associating myself with a church that discourages that type of life.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

So they are Christians that don't want to belong to a certain Church (as in organization), does this sum it up?

No.

"Christian" includes those born into Christianity but who actually aren't Christian (or religious) at all. For example, a lot of people from Saudi would view anyone from the west as being "Christian", even if they were atheist.

"Christ Follower" specifically refers to those who actually are properly Christian and doesn't include those who were simply born into a "Christian" family or "Christian" country.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Gossamer 

No, they don't want to fall into the image of the stale Christian who lives for bumper stickers, stuffy suits, old hymns, potlucks, and everything else that people just associate with a religious 'going through the motions.' I have no problem associating myself with a church that discourages that type of life.

So one of the reasons why they don't want to belong to a particular church (again, as in organization) is because they don't agree with the image and the `rigidity' (for the lack of a better word) of their worship? Is their motivation mainly based on some sort of dissent with the way the Bible is interpreted (or some other established rituals and rules, e. g. celibacy for male priests)?

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by Gossamer 

No, they don't want to fall into the image of the stale Christian who lives for bumper stickers, stuffy suits, old hymns, potlucks, and everything else that people just associate with a religious 'going through the motions.' I have no problem associating myself with a church that discourages that type of life.

But aren't there many Christians who sing old hymns and go to potlucks and wear their Sunday best who aren't "going thru the motions?"

If you want my admittedly jaded opinion, this all looks like a transparent attempt to make fundamentalism look cool.

BTW, Catholics have been wearing jeans and singing "folk rock" at church for decades.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

No.

"Christian" includes those born into Christianity but who actually aren't Christian (or religious) at all. For example, a lot of people from Saudi would view anyone from the west as being "Christian", even if they were atheist.

"Christ Follower" specifically refers to those who actually are properly Christian and doesn't include those who were simply born into a "Christian" family or "Christian" country.

If I understand Gossamer correctly, that's not the point. The issue seems to be how these people see themselves and not whether others think of them as Christian. As a Catholic you know that the Catholic Church doesn't think of most Protestants as proper Christians … hence I think it's more how these people perceive themselves.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

If I understand Gossamer correctly, that's not the point.

If I understand RAILhead correctly, that's precisely the point.

(we'll have to wait for RAIL to answer this one, since I'm just guessing here)

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

As a Catholic you know that the Catholic Church doesn't think of most Protestants as proper Christians

Me, Catholic? Where'd ya get that idea? I'm a non-denominational proddy.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

But aren't there many Christians who sing old hymns and go to potlucks and wear their Sunday best who aren't "going thru the motions?"

Having attended a few CoE services, I can say that there's an awful lot of people (but not all) who actually are just going through the motions. Some go for the social aspect, some go because it's what's expected, some go because it's the "done thing".

Then there's those who are into the religious side of things but are essentially offloading their religious obligations onto the church/service - i.e. there's not much that's personal about it. It's like they need that structure that a church service brings or else they can't worship.

Whatever floats their boat.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Me, Catholic? Where'd ya get that idea? I'm a non-denominational proddy.

You will not be labeled

V

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

If you want my admittedly jaded opinion, this all looks like a transparent attempt to make fundamentalism look cool.

Yeah I think that's right, but the thing is, fundamentalism really is cooler, in the sense they mean it in those parody ads. Go to some mainline protestant churches, and you see a bunch of old people who sing traditional hymns in traditional liturgies and sit in traditional pews in traditional-looking churches. Very nice old people, mind you, but old. And traditional.

Go to a fundamentalist/evangelical church, and there are lots of young people, they play rock music with guitars and drums, they sit in amphitheaters, they dress casually. There's just a lot more youth and energy there. The problem, IMO, is their immoral theology, but we've had plenty of threads on that. There's no doubt, though, that they're "cooler," and I can see why people are attracted to it.

It's also a fairly regular talking point of people who go to those churches that all those traditional mainline Methodists and Presbyterians etc. are a bunch of stuffy boring losers. It's pretty pathetic that they would make it as explicit as they do in these ads.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

If I understand RAILhead correctly, that's precisely the point.
(we'll have to wait for RAIL to answer this one, since I'm just guessing here)

We're talking about two different people here. It might very well be that they associate different meanings to the word `Christ-follower'.

Since RAILhead hasn't replied yet, I guess we'll have to wait a bit …

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Me, Catholic? Where'd ya get that idea? I'm a non-denominational proddy.

Anyway, I don't think that changes what I was saying: Gossamer was focussing how people see themselves rather than how they are perceived. And I think this doesn't contradict RAILhead's characterization, he wrote that people `see themselves as Christians, because they are not …' Also the term Christ-followers is something invented by them to distinguish themselves from `Christians'.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Anyway, I don't think that changes what I was saying: Gossamer was focussing how people see themselves rather than how they are perceived. And I think this doesn't contradict RAILhead's characterization, he wrote that people `see themselves as Christians, because they are not …' Also the term Christ-followers is something invented by them to distinguish themselves from `Christians'.

We're arguing two sides of the same coin, IMO.

[RAILhead]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

So one of the reasons why they don't want to belong to a particular church (again, as in organization) is because they don't agree with the image and the `rigidity' (for the lack of a better word) of their worship? Is their motivation mainly based on some sort of dissent with the way the Bible is interpreted (or some other established rituals and rules, e. g. celibacy for male priests)?

No. Like I said, it's personal. To be a "Christian" doesn't mean you truly try and follow Christ in your daily life. Anyone can consider themselves "Christian." It's become a name-tag of sorts, an catch-all "religion" for anything other than other mainline religions. Like Doofy, said.

I call myself a Christ Follower because it helps me maintain focus. I don't want to just go through the "Christian" motions -- I want to follow Christ. I don't do that through a denomination or a brick-and-mortar organization -- I do it personally. Of course, I attend a church and I learn and help and all that stuff, don't get me wrong. I'm surrounded by Christians -- true Christians that have accepted Jesus as Savior.

However, even those who are "saved" may not always follow Christ in their life. Thus the reminder via "Christ Follower."

[RAILhead]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

If I understand Gossamer correctly, that's not the point. The issue seems to be how these people see themselves and not whether others think of them as Christian. As a Catholic you know that the Catholic Church doesn't think of most Protestants as proper Christians … hence I think it's more how these people perceive themselves.

Yes, it's about how I view myself, not how other categorize my faith.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by RAILhead 

I call myself a Christ Follower because it helps me maintain focus. I don't want to just go through the "Christian" motions -- I want to follow Christ. I don't do that through a denomination or a brick-and-mortar organization -- I do it personally. Of course, I attend a church and I learn and help and all that stuff, don't get me wrong. I'm surrounded by Christians -- true Christians that have accepted Jesus as Savior.

But still, does `Christ-follower' contain a certain dislike for organized religions? Because these organization `tell you' how to interact with God?
Otherwise you could call yourself `devout Catholic' or so as well?

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

We're arguing two sides of the same coin, IMO.

I think so

[RAILhead]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

But still, does `Christ-follower' contain a certain dislike for organized religions? Because these organization `tell you' how to interact with God?
Otherwise you could call yourself `devout Catholic' or so as well?

Not to me or anyone I know. I am part of an organized religion, but the religion doesn't define me -- my faith and personal walk with God does.

And yeah, the "devout" thing is a decent description of the idea.

Another way to define it would be to say that Christ Follower is all-encompassing, reaching through all denomination to all who truly try to follow God. For example, there's are true Christians in Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian, Catholic, and most other denominations. Each has their own ways and methods of worship and understanding, and not all are truly "saved" or "real" Christians -- though many are.

So rather than lumping us as Baptist Christians or Methodist Christians, we like to simply call ourselves Christ Followers. Point being, we're all saved by grace and try and develop a deep, personal relationship with God through Jesus, regardless of our denomination of choice.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

But still, does `Christ-follower' contain a certain dislike for organized religions? Because these organization `tell you' how to interact with God?

My impression is that it conveys a dislike not for organized religion, but for stuffy old-school organized religions, primarily the "liberal" mainliners. I should clarify: I wasn't aware that this term "Christ-follower" was being used, but I've seen the attitude portrayed in the parody ad, and it seems to be associated with fundamentalist or evangelical or non-denominational Protestants who express disdain for the mainliners.

I was talking with an episcopal minister recently and he pointed out that although many of these modern Christians claim to be non-denominational, they are "denominational" whether they believe it or not. There are multiple ways of interpreting the Bible and Christianity and Jesus etc., and anyone who goes to a church with others and has specific beliefs about their religion is choosing an interpretation. The reason I point this out is that there is an air of "I follow Christ's true message and those others are just going through the motions" to the kinds of people who would make those ads.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

I was talking with an episcopal minister recently and he pointed out that although many of these modern Christians claim to be non-denominational, they are "denominational" whether they believe it or not. There are multiple ways of interpreting the Bible and Christianity and Jesus etc., and anyone who goes to a church with others and has specific beliefs about their religion is choosing an interpretation.

What about those folks who go to all kinds of churches? What about those who only get their belief structure direct from source? Heck, stick me in an Evangelical church, an Anglican church, a Catholic church or a cow field, I'm just as happy.

[RAILhead]

Yes, there's no such thing as non-denominational per se. A lot of people are confused about this, though, because they don't always know what the implications are.

Our church is "Non-Denominational," but our belief system ascribes to that of the Baptist denomination. HOWEVER, we aren't part of the Baptist General Convention, we aren't part of any other Baptist organization, we don't have a larger body in oversight, we pay no dues and make no monetary contributions to an oversight organization, etc. Thus, we exclude ourselves from receiving any benefits from any of those organizations or bodies.

Since we get no assistance -- by choice and design -- we don't have a "denominational name" to tack to our church.

99.9% of the time, a "non-denominational" church is such for the reasons I gave above, regardless what most of the church members/attendees think.

There is a strain of churches, however, that call themselves non-denominational for the sole purpose of thumbing their nose to "organized" denominations. This is unfortunate, IMHO.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

What about those folks who go to all kinds of churches? What about those who only get their belief structure direct from source? Heck, stick me in an Evangelical church, an Anglican church, a Catholic church or a cow field, I'm just as happy.

Yeah, that's true.

Originally Posted by RAILhead

Our church is "Non-Denominational," but our belief system ascribes to that of the Baptist denomination. HOWEVER, we aren't part of the Baptist General Convention, we aren't part of any other Baptist organization, we don't have a larger body in oversight, we pay no dues and make no monetary contributions to an oversight organization, etc. Thus, we exclude ourselves from receiving any benefits from any of those organizations or bodies.

That's true too.

[Gossamer]

I'll agree with Railhead. It's about having a real, active, true, personal relationship and having it for the right motivations, not because of tradition, image, etc.