HOME | CONTRIBUTE A STORY! | ABOUT MMI | CATEGORIES OF INTEREST | CONTACT ME


image

“Christian” vs. “Follower of Jesus”

Orginally published on Tuesday, March 10, 2009 at 7:56 AM
by Todd Rhoades


An interesting article was just posted over at Newsweek magazine on the changing meanings and connotations of the word "Christian". I found this particularly interesting given my recent interview with Dave Gibbons. Here's what Dave said:

"When I relate globally I usually say I’m a Christ follower rather than a Christian. There are elements within our cultural Christianity that is not at the heart of who Jesus is. As you travel, you begin to understand that the problem isn’t Jesus as much as it is the things we’ve added to Jesus and the gospel...

Now for part of the Newsweek article:

Ward Brehm doesn't call himself a Christian. "I just call myself a follower of Jesus," says Brehm, a Minneapolis businessman and former chairman of the U.S.-Africa Development Foundation. "It's a huge difference."

The Newsweek piece continues:

Christian definitions used not to matter so much. People used to be Methodists or Lutherans, Episcopalians or Baptists. Each denomination had its own culture, its ownjokes. A Congregationalist friend once defined himself to me this way: “We’re the ones who fold up the chairs after church to make room for the basketball court.” Outsiders could—and did—make assumptions about their neighbors’ personal habits and politics based on denomination. The United Church of Christ was left-wing. The Southern Baptists leaned to the right. Methodists, Episcopalians and Lutherans fell somewhere in between.

Then, in the 1980s, as nondenominational churches became the fastest-growing segment of American Christianity, a number of Christians cast off their labels. But with this freedom came a challenge: what should this new generation call itself? Initially, some chose “born again,” but after Jimmy Carter and Jerry Falwell, the media always used the term with derision. “Evangelical” eventually came into fashion, but that had disadvantages, too. What kind of evangelical? A conservative evangelical, allied with the powerful religious right? Did that mean fundamentalist? A progressive evangelical? Over the past several years, as evangelicals strained to define themselves and the media strained to comply, Christians fell into narrower and narrower niches—until at last the niches were as narrow as the denominations once were.

Younger evangelicals, meanwhile, preferred to call themselves simply “Christian,” as in “My parents are Lutheran, but I’m a Christian.”

Now, as the Christian world continues to refine its identity, another label is gaining currency: “follower of Jesus.”

You can read more here at Newsweek; or read more of my interview with Dave Gibbons here

What do you think?  Do you still use the word “Christian” or do you agree with Dave that it really does mean totally different things to different people?


This post has been viewed 1456 times so far.


  There are 16 Comments:

  • Posted by Peter Hamm

    I’m avoiding the word “Christian” pretty often these days. It’s a GREAT word, but the culture has changed its meaning (not it’s definition) and I need to engage my culture.

    In addition, the word was originally applied by others to us to indicate (derisively) that we thought we were “little Jesuses” the way we served the poor and loved each other and stuff like that. Now, in many instances, we self-apply the label based on a creed or list of beliefs, and not based on our behavior. Creeds and doctrine are vitally important, but they are not the way we show the world that we are followers of Jesus. We show the world that based on our great love for one another.

    I’m thankful to be in a church that is known for our deeds in the community, and people are attracted by that and end up engaging Christ in all His fullness because of the way we love them!

  • Posted by

    Personally, I think the tendency to simply identify as ‘Christian’ is a mark of evangelicals’ lack of groundedness in a tradition. They of course ARE the product of a tradition (namely, the evangelical tradition), but their rhetoric masks that fact. No wonder ‘Christian’ doesn’t mean what it used to.

    I’ve been happy to call myself ‘Mennonite’ for the past two years, both because it qualifies ‘Christian’ in important ways, and because many people don’t know about the Mennonites, so then I get to share a little piece of history with them.

  • Posted by

    I say I am a man who has been rescued from the superfluity of naughtiness. 

    I usually say, when identifying myself to another, “I am a christian, meaning I have responded to the love of God by following Christ.” People seem not to be confused by that. 

    When I am preaching I often say “as Christ followers” or “as those who follow after Christ” as well as say “christian”

    I rarely say evangelical.

    I do not identify myself in any of the above ways without clearly stating what I am for or what Christ has done for me.  I have little interest in stating what I am against… which seems to be the norm for a large portion of the faith world. 

    When I use the term “christian” I will often say, “as a christian, I am deeply committed to caring for those in poverty...”

  • Posted by

    Looks like I hit the nail on the head about that original post from Gibbons in noticing the differences in the naming.  But please don’t call me a prophet like Pastor Wilkerson.  =)

    The name change thing is dumb.  The belief is that by somehow changing the name from, “Christian,” to, “Christ-Follower,” or, “Jesus-Follower,” will avoid stigma will only last as long as until someone within that camp does something to bring contempt towards that name.  Pretty soon people will hear, “Christ-Follower,” and have the same sort of, “Oh, you’re one of those kind of people,” reaction.

    If you’re a Christian, yes, you have a background of people who have not always done the best things.  After all, it does not require any license or test to identify oneself as a Christian.  Kind of like picking up the phone, dialing a number at random, and asking, “Are you a doctor?” You have no way of truly knowing until you see what that person is doing.  And, yes, that, “doctor,” can taint views of what real, “doctors,” are really like.  But, the title of, “Christian,” has been going on for about 2000 years, and works pretty well overall.

    The only benefit in this name change is that there seems to be a doctrinal, theological, or ideological shift in people who self-identify as, “Christ-Followers,” as opposed to, “Christians.” I can’t put my finger on it just yet, but I’m trying to get some quantifiable proof that there is a difference between the two camps.  And when I hear disdain towards the moniker, “Christian,” I get a warning sign that there is something more behind the scenes where I have to be alert.

    --
    CS

  • Posted by Brian L.

    CS,

    I am one who prefers “Christ follower” over Christian, and I can assure you I am a fundamentalist (in the true sense of the word - Scripture, deity of Christ, atonement, bodily resurrection, etc. - the real fundamentals of the faith) in those areas that are essential.

    But the word “Christian” today is about the same as “church.” To those around us it means nothing more than “religious building” rather than “those who believe in and live for Christ.”

    How many cults use the words “church” and “christian?”

    We can say, “Well, we’re not THAT kind of Christian.” And all that does is display an attitude of schism and superiority.

    I never ask if someone is a Christian, because they may say yes since they were baptized as an infant and/or go to a service once or twice a year and/or because they’re not Jewish or Muslim.

    I think I understand where you’re coming from, but I would caution you against automatically wondering of something more sinister is behind the name preference.

    I don’t have disdain for the moniker.  I have disdain for the image it portrays in the minds of those I’m trying to reach.

  • Posted by Peter Hamm

    CS writes…

    [The belief is that by somehow changing the name from, “Christian,” to, “Christ-Follower,” or, “Jesus-Follower,” will avoid stigma will only last as long as until someone within that camp does something to bring contempt towards that name.  Pretty soon people will hear, “Christ-Follower,” and have the same sort of, “Oh, you’re one of those kind of people,” reaction.]

    egads, I’ve thought of that, too, and you’re right… But for me, it’s based on the scriptural evidence that “Christian” was a derisive term based on behavior that the world thought (and still thinks) is foolish, not a self-applied moniker based on creed.

    But I wonder what will happen when some wack jobs use the term and poison it!

  • Posted by Ben

    I have to agree with CS about the stigma only coming with a matter of time. I think it’s a shame that “followers of Christ” run away from the name Christian. 1 Peter 4 says that as Christians, we bear the name of Christ, and it is such an honor and we should praise God for that! And yet we run away from it merely because of a cultural stigma?? I think it is up to us as Christians to bring honor to that name of Christ by how we live, showing the world Christ, as representatives bearing His name. And that way we also identify with the entirety of the global Church, which is such a beautiful thing that has prevailed over so many struggles greater than cultural stigmas throughout the past 2000 years around the globe.

    Sorry for preaching smile
    This is my first time commenting on your blog Todd, but this topic gets me worked up. Thanks for the post!

  • Posted by

    I was thinking the same thing.  When would “Christ follower” become a bad thing?

    I tend to not use the same terminology in conversations.  I really just tell my story and let God lead as I go.

    I’ve found myself in many conversations backstage in a cast where I am the only Christian.  I’m usually one of the few paid performers with community members who volunteer, which puts me in a position of respect right away, and people are watching me and they know that I am also a pastor’s wife and involved in ministry.

    It’s a pretty intense environment and inevitably I am questioned about my faith by several people.

    I usually tell them that I am “following the teaching of Jesus Christ.”

    Most people where we live have absolutely no knowledge of Jesus apart from what they’ve heard in the media.  And they see him as a sort of guru that might have something interesting to say.

    One woman gave me her long saga of spiritual discovery and came up with a mix of Catholicism, Buddhism, and Hinduism, along with self esteem building thought.  It was pretty weird. 

    But she made a point to ask me about my spiritual life and where I was at, because she “saw a difference in me.”

    I think if we are living out our faith as light in a dark place, treating people well and truly caring, some will want what we have.  And it doesn’t take a lot of preaching to communicate that.

    Put Betsy on your prayer list!

  • Posted by

    1) I know Zen Buddhists that are “Followers of Christ”. I know Muslims who are “Followers of Christ”.

    2) I am incredibly amused by people who concern themselves over a culture’s disdain of all things “Christian”. Jesus himself taught us that as the World hated him, it would also hate us.

    The more Christ like we are the more we will be scorned. Many churches today COVET their community/ cultures APPROVAL. This is a sure symptom of compromise.

  • Posted by keith

    Jud wrote:
    “Many churches today COVET their community/ cultures APPROVAL. This is a sure symptom of compromise.”

    No, Jud, it’s not. it MIGHT be a sign of compromise. It might be a sign of unhealthy fear. it might be a sign that a congregation passionately wants to get the ear of their community so they can proclaim the Gospel.

    Sorry if this is off-topic, but i couldn’t let that pass unchallenged. I think Jan’s correct: if people see the life of God demonstrated in our attitudes and actions, some will be attracted to that, regardless of what name or label we use for ourselves.

    Keith

  • Posted by Peter Hamm

    Thanks, Keith.

    Our church “covets” a reputation in the community for loving as Christ loved. When people come in our doors to visit or be part of what is happening here, they will then learn what we believe about God, Man, Sin, Jesus, the Bible, the Holy Spirit, etc. It is NOT about compromise, and we don’t.

    I would counter that many churches covet a reputation in their community of their exact and often peculiar distinctives instead of a reputation of service to the community and the love of Christ for their fellow man. I know of many churches like that that seem even proud of the discomfort a visitor will often feel, and are often disdainful of us, saying things like “Well, they’ll let just anyone in there...”

  • Posted by

    I think this is silly like others.  Changing the name from Christian to Christ follower is a waste of time in my opinion.  It will only be a matter of time before a “Christ-Follower” does something wrong and then there goes that name.  Personally if you take time to get to know people and they take time to know you then they wil see you are not a hyporcite well that is if you are not one.  Ha ha.

  • Posted by

    It reminds me of the time when certain folks were trying to change church names.  One pastor I knew convinced his congregation to drop “Baptist Church” from their title.  They used Fellowship instead of church.  When I would meet members of that group at work or in the community, they would say, “We go to church, it is called [Town] Christian Fellowship.” It was still a church to them - even to those who were being reached.  What is more sad than changing the label from Christian to Jesus follower are all those who are Christian “in name only!” The label does not matter - it is what we do and Who we follow that does.

  • Posted by Kenny

    Wow, I like this differentiation.  It also underscores the “followership” involved with discipleship and Jesus.  I recently was pondering the differences in using “being Christian” vs. “being religious” [see video: ]http://godvertiser.com/blog/do-you-say-tomato-or-to-mah-to/]

    Because we now are living in a basically post-Christian world, the actual word “Christian” is no longer “owned” but Christians anymore, but rather what secular society makes it mean.  I guess that’s why the “follower of Jesus” tends to strike a chord with me as of now.

  • Posted by

    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 講座
    FX 初心者 必勝法 成功 情報商材 初めて 始める
    FX 初心者 必勝法 成功 情報商材 比較
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 通貨ペア 比較
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 サポート 比較
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 比較
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 比較
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 スキャルピングFXプロ
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 ワンミニッツFX
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 リデュースFX
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 モグラ
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 FX-max NEO デイリー
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 FX-max NEO ウィークリー
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 リアルFX
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 レイズ Rays
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 スーパーFXシステム
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 サラ Sarah システムトレード
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 ビックバンFX
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 ビクトリーメソッド ベーシック
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 ビクトリーメソッド アドバンス
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 FX-AAA
    FX 初心者 向け 必勝法 成功 情報商材 講座

  • Posted by

    Studying the origin and spread of religion can be very interesting. It is especially applicable when the fundamental principles seem to have a deep rooted origin. Books based of the well known religions woven into literature makes an informative read. I would like to share some good books based on Religion.

    The Churches in International Affairs: Reports 1987-1990

    Living with the Animals: The Community of God’s Creatures

    My Bible Study Notes

    Bible Stories for Tiny Tots

    Stories about Jesus for Little Ones

  • Page 1 of 1 pages

Post Your Comments:

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Live Comment Preview:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below: