This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
And from the other end of it, no understanding of God and Jesus is complete unless it includes both the power and the love. I think you are correct that sometimes, the power needs to come first. The question is whether this is one of those times.
I don't think so, no. The love and tender mercies and so on are repeatedly visible throughout the OT. It's a major theme of the Prophets and the Psalms, and it shows up repeatedly through the histories as well. It undergirds the idea of why God would send his rain to the unrighteous as well as the righteous. The basic problem is that without a personal or communal relationship, his love and tenderness is not legible, not that it is absent; his blessings and mercies are interpreted as either "just the way things are", or worse, as proof of the utility of evil.
The point of the ad is not "you should do this". The point of the ad is "this is who we are." The point seems to be to peel back some of the enculturated dismissal of Christians as hateful bigots that the world (and some foolish Christians, it must be admitted) has worked so hard to cement. There is no ad you can make that is going to get non-Christians to adopt Christianity. Moving them toward openness to interaction with actual Christians as Christians would be a clear improvement on the status quo.
I'm skeptical. The problem is that our society is firmly post-Christian; to a first approximation, non-Christians think they know what the Gospel is and think they've already heard it.
In your original post, I think you objected to one or both of the ads showing low-class losers. Unfortunately, those are the people most willing to listen: people who understand that they are missing something, that they are not, in fact, self-sufficient and self-actualized Masters of their own Destiny. Progressivism is the successor ideology because it promises a better path, and there is no better argument against it than to point out that the path it offers is not in fact better. Those who have been failed most disastrously by Progressivism's principles are those most willing to investigate alternatives.
So:
Because it seems to me that those are the messages being sent.
Is submitting really sending that message, or would it have made more sense to show Christians doing good works. Because in the modern context, washing people's feet are not good works, but seem more like either weird virtue-signalling or a foot-fetish.
More options
Context Copy link
But I don't think this will work much. I think it's pretty commonly believed that Jesus was basically a progressive, and so you see people who oppose Christianity as it exists today to it as it originally existed. Doing this doesn't help that, and doesn't help people get a broader vision of what Christianity is actually about.
If I were designing an ad for the purposes of attracting people, I'd try to show Christianity in a way that connects it to real churches with real people that actually exist. I'd try also to make it alluring in the sense of a place where a healthy, well-ordered life can be found in a community. And something to grab the attention.
I'm not sure how well that would work, and so I'd undoubtedly want to put more thought into what would be most needed and most effective if I were trying to commission something super-bowl sized, but I don't think showing "Jesus is nice and this is what Christianity should be like" will do much without also showing that this is what Christianity actually can look like if you go looking for it.
More options
Context Copy link
There’s hardly a case in the Old Testament where God’s love and mercy does not hinge on recognition and submission. See how Christ came in the sign of Jonah: the mercy of God is by swallowing Jonah in a whale when God produced a storm to traumatize him for failing to heed His desire. And Jonah was only released when he “called out to the Lord”, declaring “salvation belongs to the Lord”. Jonah’s mission of mercy was to warn Ninevah of the consequences of their sin: “Yet forty days and Ninevah will be overthrown!” As a response, the Ninevans fasted, sat in ashes, called out to God, and turned from their evil ways.
You write that there is an “enculturated dismissal of Christians as hateful bigots that the world has worked so hard to cement”, and I have to say, I dont think this is what is stopping people from being Christian to any significant degree. These people have met Christians, they have passed church signs, they have already seen ads, they have already imbibed the cool-aid Christ that acts like a hippie, they’ve seen the reels or tik toks by Christians before. They actually have an image in their mind of a much weaker and accepting Jesus, I bet. And we don’t actually see the standard irreligious American choose their social identification based on what people are nicest. They don’t chase the jobs which allow them to be nicest to those in need, they chase the job that gives them money. (There’s not a waiting list for retirement community volunteers.) They buy the product that gives them status. They listen to the self-aggrandizing, self-worshipful hymns of rappers. They want the university that gives them status. They care a lot about their hairlines and jawlines. They watch shows and model their identity based off of characters who are cool and beautiful. They are, you know, animals with instincts, like you and me. Or at least just me. The girls used to like Kim Kardashian, now they adore Taylor Swift. The boys like Andrew Tate or John Wick. Humans like high status people, not nice people. I mean, maybe Taylor Swift is nice, but she doesn’t sing songs about washing feet and loving homeless people. Her
liturgiesmusic videos are filled with status signifiers and handsome men.If there are ads that can make people watch movies for three hours, there are ads that can make people pick up some Christian literature or attend a church once. Do you think anyone is watching a movie about the nicest man in existence? The top movies of 2023 are the heroic spider man and the beautiful Barbie.
Yes
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link