He Gets Us is Not the Answer
Discover What Brings New Believers to Christian Faith and to a Connection with a Christian Congregation
He Gets Us is Not the Answer
In my previous post, “Shatter the Limitations of a Focus on Religious ‘Nones’” I suggested a focus on discovering what brings new believers to Christian faith and to a connection with a Christian congregation.
We need to continue engaging in research on the growth of “nones” and “nothing in particular” people. Recognizing this research primarily points out the challenges of the increase in these two groups.
It does not help us genuinely and authentically engage people who need the unconditional love of God through Jesus Christ and a connection with a Christian congregation who will help them mature as disciples.
Further research calls for qualitative as well as quantitative research. It requires more personal and small group conversations. Databases may not exist from which early trends are obvious.
With the huge theological and methodological diversity within North American Christianity—much less global Christianity—agreement on a singular approach and even terminology is difficult. Much less whether we are Great Commandment or Great Commission Christians. Or a healthy balance of the two.
For myself—as a centrist Baptist maverick—I have my own believes and thoughts. My ministry as a researcher, consultant, and writer with Christian congregations and denominations provide me with strong convictions.
As a strategic thinker I go below the surface of assessment to discover what is working and not working.
I invite you to read this post, and ones that will follow, and put them through your filters of theology and methodology. I write in my retirement not for you to agree with me, but for your thinking to be stimulated so you come to your own conclusions and take actions.
A Beginning Point—He Gets Us
“He Gets Us” is a good place to start. We just had the Super Bowl game, the presentation of “He Gets Us” commercials plus considerable dialogue on social media.
The Question: Is “He Gets Us” an effective strategy for reaching new believers to Christian faith and to a connection with a Christian congregation?
Answer Number One: That depends on which frame you use to answer this question.
I am not addressing the frames of sponsorship of commercials and other causes in which the sponsors are engaged. I am not devaluing the positive emotional and spiritual impact of the commercials.
I am not limiting the work of God’s Holy Spirit who draws people toward an eternal relationship with God through Jesus Christ.
I am not underestimating the number of Christians who are inspired to think, pray, and act with greater passion to share the Good News and to engage in actions of compassion.
I am looking at “He Gets Us” only through the frame of effective Kingdom strategy.
Answer Number Two: No. It is not an effective Kingdom strategy.
While some frames mentioned above show Kingdom progress, I believe it is a poor use of money, a waste of human capital, and lacking in effective results compared to the financial investment.
Many strategic thinking Christians have known this for at least five decades. But people with a lot of money and the assumption that mass marketing works to bring large numbers of people to faith have not accepted this reality.
The first time I got a hint about the ineffectiveness of a mass marketing approach was in a conversation with James Engel. He was co-author of a book entitled, What’s Gone Wrong with the Harvest: A Communication Strategy for the Church and World Evangelism.
The key conclusion of this book was that mass marketing approaches are ineffective for evangelism and church growth. They primarily rally faithful Christians. Some people then increase their personal actions of compassion and evangelism.
Generating new Christians and new congregational participants is minimal.
I talked with Engel several times. He was then on a two-day per month retainer with Pat Robertson’s 700 Club television show.
Pat Robertson’s staff followed the recommendations Engel made to them. They sought to be laser focused on reaching preChristians and unchurched people.
The results? Evaluation revealed they primarily reached women, age 55 or more, who were Christians and church members. They rallied the faithful.
These faithful contributed millions of dollars per year to the 700 Club. The contributors apparently felt the 700 Club was doing a great job of sharing the Good News. Robertson told enough stories of success that he people kept giving their money.
Engels’ research showed only personal strategies and methodologies are effective. Mass marketing approaches seldom rise above rallying the faithful. At least not enough to justify the money poured into these efforts.
My conversations with Engel took place when I was leading a research team charged with discovering if mass market approaches were an effective means of evangelism. I was on the national missions staff for the Southern Baptist Convention.
The president of the missions agency was asked to contribute several million dollars annually to a television network launched by Southern Baptists. He would only ask his board to contribute the funds if it was an effective means of evangelism.
He asked my team to go out and find the answer. We did. “No” was the answer.
It was not well received by the evangelism leadership who loved nationwide billboard campaigns, national radio and television advertising, and large-scale Bible distributions.
Recap: Sharing the Good News is personal. It happens through personally inviting people to a spiritual encounter with God through Jesus Christ. Deeply touching the lives of people with long-term compassion efforts is personal.
Our obedience to the Great Commission and Great Commandment is essential.
But no mass marketing approach will ever take the place of one-on-one encounters plus the work of God’s Holy Spirit.
There are situations where limited mass marketing might support localized personal efforts. They should never be the primary “go-to” strategy, or the first thing considered.
Comment from a Reader: "Thanks for the review. In my opinion it is not an either or decision. We are to use all means to share the gospel. The one on one conversation is by far the best. However, The 'He Gets Us' commercial can certainly introduce the possibility of a God who cares about a person. We cannot let our biases limit how God can work even in the strangest of circumstances."
George Bullard's Response: Yes, in a way you are correct. It is not always an either/or situation. At times it can be anand/both situation. However, this media dump does not qualify as an and/both situation in spite of efforts the organization behind this makes to provide local connections. It is too much a rallying of the faithful to justify the financial investment.
Comment from a Reader: Your assessment of the value of 'mass marketing' evangelism is spot on. I didn't realize that you had a significant role in keeping HMB (Home Mission Board, SBC) from helping to fund Jimmy Allen's pet project!"
George Bullard's Response: Yes, this did impact the ACTS television network. I always appreciated Jimmy Allen for his Christian passion, high energy, and resolve to get things done. Too often, however, his ideas were not as credible as we would all have hoped, and he definitely ran too far ahead of his supply lines of financial and people support. He was too often not open to negotiation.