Jesus Creed

Jesus Creed


Jesus is Groovy

posted by Scot McKnight

Screen shot 2010-07-10 at 2.39.59 PM.jpgIn high school a friend of mine, well known for smoking pot and into other mind-altering substances, invited me to a place where a new Bible study had formed. I was a crew-cut wearing athlete who had never toked up nor even tasted a drop of alcohol of any sort. The rumor was out that this new Bible study was on so I went. When I got there it was patently obvious to me that something was weird: the first thing said was that “Jesus was groovy” and from there it all fell apart. This group had combined being high on pot with being into Jesus, and Jesus had become groovy. Jesus was one of them.

An extreme example, perhaps, but there’s a tendency for everyone to capture Jesus into what matters most to each of us. Thus, Republicans and Democrats and Baptists and Presbyterians and religious pluralists and lone-ranger religious nomads want Jesus to be like them. It’s pretty easy: you just find a verse or two, conjure up a few justifications, and presto! Jesus is what we want him to be.
This happens today only the word might better be “hip” or “cool.” Brett McCracken, in his new and informative book, Hipster Christianity: When Church and Cool Collide
, studies just this issue: how do we make Jesus hip and we make Christianity hip. It’s all about being relevant. No one wants the gospel to be irrelevant, and everyone wants Jesus to speak to our generation, so the tendency and the temptation is to sacrifice the real Jesus on the altar of relevance.
Where do you see Christians trying to be “cool” today? Do you think this is good for the gospel or not? Where has our “cool” gone wrong? What do you think of McCracken’s ideas? Do you think “rebellion” is at the heart of hipster Christianity? And, do you think it is about being “contrarian”?
McCracken opens up with a definition of “cool”: An attractive attribute that embodies the existential strains to be independent, enviable, one-of-a-kind, and trailblazing.  And a “hipster”: fashionable, young, independent-minded contrarian.


Baez.jpgHe explores five metaphors: being ahead of the pack, the road less traveled, survival of the hippest, the pursuit of individuality, and affirmation through attention.

He sees being hip as a form of rebellion that permits a person to frame themselves over against others in such a way that they are superior to others. It’s about image and being in control.
He finds twelve kinds of hipsters in modern culture: the natural, the newbie (who tries all things new), the artist, the academic, the dilettante, the mountain man, the shaman mystic, the detached ironic, the yuppie, the flower child, the expat, and the activist.
Yep, he explores Christian hipsterdom: begins in the 60s with youth culture, the Jesus People, Christian rock and satire, Relevant Mag, new-found ironic detachment. Here are his key figures: Sufjan Stevens, Shane Claiborne, Jay Bakker, Donald Miller, Mark Driscoll, Rob Bell. In fact, he thinks Calvinism fits: it’s certain, an appealing picture of grace, emphasizes sin, fears God, and is a bit edgy, dark and punk rock.
And he finds hipster churches — Mars Hill, Mosaic, Life on the Vine, Jacob’s Well, Resurrection Presbyterian.
I skip now his stuff on emerging etc and get to the problems:
1. Too individualistic
2. It tends to alienate.
3. Competition driven.
4. Pride and vanity.
5. Focuses on the now.
6. Rebellion.
7. Reduction of identity to the visual.


Advertisement
Comments read comments(44)
post a comment
Joshua Wooden

posted July 12, 2010 at 12:32 am


Professor- is there a question in here somewhere? Maybe a small snippet of your own thoughts on the book? What’s the author’s point?



report abuse
 

Carol Noren Johnson

posted July 12, 2010 at 6:08 am


Professor,
Why would you be skipping “now his stuff on the emerging”? Also, please explain more what is meant by “a bit edgy, dark and punk rock” Calvinism, and the seven problems of this book. This isn’t Ophah’s book club where I had a chance to get the book first. Others may have read it.
Thanks.
Cordially,
Carol



report abuse
 

Scot McKnight

posted July 12, 2010 at 7:45 am


Josh, I put up a few questions. I blurbed the book and think it’s a good description of so much of what is going on. My generation was in some ways the first “cool” generation when it came to Christianity. So this is an interesting topic for me.
Carol, I skipped the emerging stuff because I’m tired of describing it. Those are his terms for one reason why Calvinism is “hip” with so many.



report abuse
 

Jonathan

posted July 12, 2010 at 9:29 am


I wonder if his publisher would give me contract on a book called “Fogey Christianity: How Christians Get Cranky.”
I was at a Nine Inch Nails concert in CA last summer and had a guy protesting the concert on supposedly Christian terms, when I told him I was a Christian and planned on enjoying the concert myself, respond, “Look at you! You look just like the WORLD!”
This from a middle aged white guy in loafers, jeans and a plaid short sleeve botton-up shirt.
I had on a t-shirt, jeans and sneakers. I guess my tattoos were showing.
The point being, chronological snobbery goes both ways.
*yawn*
oops, wait… was that ‘yawn’ ironic?
was that question?



report abuse
 

Richard

posted July 12, 2010 at 9:37 am


Ah relevancy; like the Dutch church that prayed for the national team and decked out the sanctuary in orange http://g.sports.yahoo.com/soccer/world-cup/blog/dirty-tackle/post/Dutch-church-service-goes-orange-dismisses-Paul?urn=sow,255172 or the American church that had “bring your pistol to church” day to celebrate the right to pack heat.
I think we overrate relevancy. Our church is growing with people that like singing traditional hymns and attending in a traditional building (stone, brick, and stain glass) and have voiced that.
Interesting that he lists Shane Claiborne on there. Isn’t that kind of like saying Ghandi or Mother Theresa were hip? Does counter cultural make you hip automatically?



report abuse
 

RJS

posted July 12, 2010 at 9:38 am


Jonathan,
First of all … an author who graduated college in 2005 is not exactly an “old fogey”. (Still under 30 I expect.)
Try his blogs here: http://stillsearching.wordpress.com/
or here: http://www.brettmccracken.com/ (this isn’t as active).
Then engage with the issues rather than take offense and throw potshots.



report abuse
 

Rick

posted July 12, 2010 at 9:42 am


This topic reminds me of the “cool” guy (he has a “past”) that does announcements in that humorous Northpoint video.
http://vimeo.com/11501569



report abuse
 

Scot McKnight

posted July 12, 2010 at 9:51 am


Jonathan, besides the mischievous use of “irony” — a most important word with deep rhetorical value — the author of this book is himself young. This isn’t a fogey complainer.



report abuse
 

AJ

posted July 12, 2010 at 10:02 am


“Where do you see Christians trying to be “cool” today?”
Worship. Social activism. Telling stories. Making buildings look and feel like coffee shops and art galleries. (not saying that’s bad or that I don’t like it) Etc.
“Do you think “rebellion” is at the heart of hipster Christianity?”
At the heart? I’m not sure. But it’s certainly a huge part of it. New or fresh or resurrected interpretations of scripture are very popular. I visited Solomon’s Porch a few weeks ago and they took communion informally, handing out bread in large chunks to munch on and had large cups for juice. There were different stations throughout the room and we just gathered around while one of us passed and poured as though we were gathering around food at a party. My friend who attends there said that they re-think how to do everything.
“Do you think this is good for the gospel or not?”
1. The gospel is absolutely relevant, though may not be comfortable. The question is what gospel do we preach?
2. I think we should always evaluate the message or gospel we preach so we don’t mistake (past relevant) nuances that have become imbedded in the message for the actual pure gospel. But as soon as we say we have something closer to the message Christ preached we set ourselves apart and pride can become a huge issue. If the different way of talking about gospel meets with adversity, the tendency is to defend it, which usually means sinking our feet in deeper, rather than being continually open to evaluation.
3. This is why we must preach the gospel to our own hearts on a regular basis and stay in touch with our personal humanness/brokenness/sinfulness so the Spirit’s movement isn’t impeded by our pride.
I constantly have to re-evaluate how my pride in how I communicate the gospel in a relevant way might be getting in the way of the actual message.
I’ll cut myself off here.



report abuse
 

Larry

posted July 12, 2010 at 10:18 am


No one wants the gospel to be irrelevant, and everyone wants Jesus to speak to our generation, so the tendency and the temptation is to sacrifice the real Jesus on the altar of relevance.
Who gets to say who the “real Jesus” is?



report abuse
 

Scot McKnight

posted July 12, 2010 at 10:28 am


Seriously, Larry, that is so hip.



report abuse
 

Pat

posted July 12, 2010 at 10:28 am


Interesting. But what about all the obstacles put in the way of those doing things new and cutting edge? Some that may not be classified as hipster can be just as guilty for kneeling at the altar of sameness to the point that all dialogue and openness to the new is shunned. There has to be a place of balance. I think those who are more traditional can be very guilty of making Jesus over into their image as well and of course He only sings certain songs, dresses a certain way, conducts worship and all of church in the same way that they do.



report abuse
 

Jonathan

posted July 12, 2010 at 10:32 am


Being young myself (24), let’s recognize that fogey-ism doesn’t respect age, advanced or otherwise. Plenty of folks under 30 qualify.
Including myself, depending on the day. Perhaps this morning, if my previous comment is any indication.
But that being said, I didn’t mean to imply the AUTHOR was a fogey, but rather that this sort of criticism is a little silly and could be applied to any insular/culturally peculiar group of Christians with a strong presence in culture.
The list for my fictional book could include Dobson, Falwell, Robertson, etc.
And RJS, I only meant to be playful. On the other hand, (admittedly, only based on Scot’s description) this book sounds like an extended potshot at Christians trying to figure out the role of their faith in a chasm yawning between dismissive secularists and dismissive evangelicals.
After all, irony in the culture of ‘cool’ is very often no more than a mask for enthusiasm called into question.
Give the/us kids a break. Being cool is a lot of work.



report abuse
 

Kenny Johnson

posted July 12, 2010 at 10:34 am


Sometimes I think I’m a mental-hipster (all in my mind), because I’m certainly not on the outside. :) I’m a big fan of music, so grew up on Metal, Punk, Indie, Classic Rock, Alt-country, etc. I love Sufjan Stevens. I also went to Mosaic for a couple years. I used to read Relevant (I think it’s less Relevant to me now). I like Claiborne and Miller. Oh no… am I closet hipster?
I guess I have no problem with trying to make Christianity seem cool. It can certainly cross the line — though I don’t know where that line is. And there is a danger in trying to be cool yourself — especially when pride enters the picture. And I don’t think there is a problem with trying to put the church into it’s cultural context. I feel much more comfortable at my casual-dress church with contemporary worship than I would elsewhere.



report abuse
 

Kenny Johnson

posted July 12, 2010 at 10:37 am


@Jonathan
I could be wrong, but I think the author considers himself a hipster.



report abuse
 

Jason Lee

posted July 12, 2010 at 11:15 am


Where does James Hunter’s thoughts about the cult of celebrity come in? (In his book TO CHANGE THE WORLD, he talks about some Evangelicals obsession with celebrity almost as a form of American syncretism.) Is some of this basically about Christian groupie-ism and popularity contests WITHIN the Evangelical community rather than necessarily being relevant to the outside world?



report abuse
 

Joshua Wooden

posted July 12, 2010 at 11:29 am


Professor @ 11: good one- that was awesome.
I don’t know if I would say all of the figures are “trying” to be hip or cool. That’s kind of like saying that, because many feel more traditional churches are boring, those churches must be “trying to be boring.” Just because some churches are hip or cool, doesn’t mean they are “trying.”
I only say that to escape the trap of classifying any movements that are appealing to younger people as “trying.” Guys like Rob Bell and Driscoll and Claiborne are young guys. Are we going to criticize them for acting like it, or should they put on robes and have the congregations sing hymns, too? By the by, I seem to remember a time when hymns like “A Mighty Fortress” were just as “hip” in there own time as Hillsong United songs are in ours. Martin Luther took a tavern tune and put Christians words to it. In fact, many could say that the reformers were trying in many ways to be hip or cool or relevant- do we think poorly of them?
I think we should be innovative in how we communicate the message- so long as the message itself remains the same. The call of discipleship will always challenge and convict- it will always be uncomfortable, and it will always be a hard decision. But does that mean we should be out of touch with how younger generations think, speak, dress, etc.?
Capatcha: of errors



report abuse
 

JonathanBlake

posted July 12, 2010 at 11:53 am


I’m with #5 Richard on the Shane Claiborne thing. I was scratching my head a little bit when his name was mentioned. I’m not sure that homespun robes are that ‘hip.’



report abuse
 

RJS

posted July 12, 2010 at 11:58 am


Joshua,
I don’t think that we should be out of touch with how the younger generations think, speak, dress etc.
But I do think we should be intentionally multi-generational.
The push to “keep with it” often means dumping our elders in the trash bin for the sake of the young (the “hip” or “cool” or whatever).
Of course Pat is also right – the push to keep things like they always were is powerful and deadly. Sometimes “stick in the mud” is an apt expression.
Power struggles, what “we” (I) prefer, … and the whole church suffers.
I have never seen a church do multi-generational or (multi-class) well. Does any think it can be done? (Within the evangelical consumer paradigm)



report abuse
 

J.L. Schafer

posted July 12, 2010 at 12:23 pm


Some of the hippest young Christians I know have said that they actually long for meaningful dialogue and interaction with their elders. But it just doesn’t happen. Usually because the elders can’t seem to put aside their elder status as wise teachers to get real and honestly say what they think.



report abuse
 

Billy Kangas

posted July 12, 2010 at 12:38 pm


I think the first “cool” generation of christians was probably in the time of the Apostles. Look at what happened with Anais and Saphira…
From the stylites to the Friars Minor. From the community at herrnhut to Azusa Street, Christianity has always struggled with a tendency for it’s Counter Cultural message to turn into hip way of living that is fashionable in it’s own bizarre ways.
Scot, Is he criticizing these movements for having hip elements? Or just pointing it out? I’m a little confused as to what the point of the book is..



report abuse
 

Ron

posted July 12, 2010 at 12:40 pm


I have been around hipster churches, and hipster christians. I find the trend distasteful, because those who don’t fit(I happen to be on that end) are marginalized and dismissed. It is no different than how fundamentalists behave. And the only reason trends like this come about is because there is some level of dissatisfaction, or something missing from a “current” trend.
Sad thing is you can change the image, the jargon, and even the ideas, but when you behave in a similar fashion as what you rejected then that points to a heart issue. The problem isn’t the image, ideas, or jargon. The problem is people creating God and faith into their image; and that as never worked out well. Just like the pharisees in Jesus’ day. When they started a few hundred years before there was a drive to be more holy, and more devout. Their hearts were in the right place, but eventually missed the point, and created a God and faith that is suffocating and not liberating.
There needs to be a change of heart so that the external changes can have substance.
there’s my two bits



report abuse
 

Mark Hutto, Sr

posted July 12, 2010 at 12:54 pm


I can cee where you are comming from about the bible study becoming a crack party. My Step-son has mentioned that God made all herbs for the good of mankind. Well, when that herb is used as a mind altering substance and leads to trouble with the law. It is men who has perverted God’s word, take it out of context and try to convince everyone that they are right:”it is in the bible” they say. He is not the only one I have herd say that. We, as Christians can’t reason with someone who has already made excuses for why they do things! Good day and God bless…



report abuse
 

Stephen

posted July 12, 2010 at 12:55 pm


Where do you see Christians trying to be “cool” today? Do you think this is good for the gospel or not?
Everywhere. Christians are people and express what’s important to them the same way that every human being does. And Christians are magnets toward environments of acceptance just like every other human being is. So it’s not surprising that you have churches being classified as “cool” based on the values of those in the community. I don’t think it’s a stated organizational value as much as an unstated one. I don’t know that any of those churches would say they want to be cool (maybe they would), but they certainly communicate it corporately through the choices of individuals in the community.
The question of whether this is good for the gospel or not ultimately depends on whether that “cool” community is a welcoming and accepting place for the “not cool.” I used to work at a church that had a very high cool factor, primarily because of a high percentage of young adults that attended the church. Was it good for the gospel? In some ways, sure. Lots of people (including me) were drawn initially to the church because of that reputation. Once there we heard the gospel rightly proclaimed and responded with our lives. On the flip side, there was always a current of unhealth that existed. Sometimes going to church felt more like going to a singles bar, and the pressures created for people to shape their identity by how they looked (to be cool) was real and tangible. Some found acceptance and love; others felt rejection and condemnation. If a church is teaching and modeling Christ’s radically inclusive love and rightly proclaiming the good news of the kingdom of God for everyone, cool and uncool, then it’s good for the gospel.



report abuse
 

Andy D

posted July 12, 2010 at 1:11 pm


These conversations have always intrigued me because they tend to fail to note what aspects of culture are arbitrary and which ones are not. Also, they miss discussing aesthetics altogether. I think an important question is how much value are we placing on, and space are we offering, creatives to worship God with their talent. It only makes sense to me that whatever elements are trendy or cutting edge in culture make their way into the church as well. If this doesn’t happen it simply means there are no representatives of certain industries in that community. Gothic cathedrals with flying buttresses were once a trend too, ya know. When I see certain architects or designers etc. working on projects they either are innovative or replicating their own preferred era. Everyone’s got a perspective.
I know this focused on art but I think it applies to the other areas too. If I like coffee, why not put a mini coffee bar in the building’s lobby? Or how about thick-framed glasses (via Mohler, Zacharias, Sproul comment on the ‘emerging church’); some things are just culturally assumed and not thought through with an intention to be ‘relevant’ or whatever. I feel people make too much of this topic. Artists tend to not think through this the way others do. There may be a hint of intimidation in the church because it struggles to produce things that compete with secular culture. That’s why we talk about these things.



report abuse
 

Duncan R

posted July 12, 2010 at 1:24 pm


I think the most devastating comment is that being hip “is about image and being in control.” I think this is the heart of the critique. If an or when this is true there is a problem. However, I would be uncomfortable saying that Shane Claiborn and Donald Miller etc are like this. However, at the same time it is not negative to take note of trends and seriously evaluate the heart issues which may drive them and consider are they the right ones?
It seems however that his list of hipsters: naturals, newbies to expats and activists seems to cover just about everyone. And if we’re talking about everyone, why is the book framed toward young emergent Christianity. If we have 12 kinds of hipsters and everyone fits into the category have we destroyed the definition of hipster? Is that his point? If it is, it is surprisingly subtle and subversive.
I attend a very inter-generational church. This is something I appreciate immensely. There are and have been good opportunities for inter-generational dialogue but they are not frequent or well attended. Across the western world there has been a segregation of ages. It is interesting my wife and I are in between. We are college age and I’m finishing my last 9 credits this year but we have not really been accepted by the college group at our church instead we are more or less part of the young marrieds and families group which is wonderful and yet being the youngest and myself still in school we sometimes feel distinctly out of place. I think this feeling of discomfort is most prominent for people the more homogeneous a group is. I think the point that our church communities should be diverse is a good one that very few churches succeed in. We tend to divide, categorize and specialize based on age, language, gender, education, income etc.



report abuse
 

Taylor

posted July 12, 2010 at 1:26 pm


Can’t say I’ve heard Calvinism described as punk rock ;) Dark maybe, but punk rock? Yet now that I think on it…
Driscoll is definitely shooting for cool with his hemp looking cross necklace, casual clothing, and edgy sexual content. If it’s for the right reasons then good, only God knows the heart.



report abuse
 

MatthewS

posted July 12, 2010 at 1:36 pm


Acts 4 – Peter healed a guy and the Sanhedrin (the same basic group that sent Jesus to the cross) call him and John up and threaten them. The Church’s response? Pray for more healings (which will stir up more trouble) and for boldness! This from the same Peter who shortly before had cursed and sworn he did not know Jesus. This “ignorant and unlearned” fisherman was deeply changed by his time with Jesus.
For some, hipster Christianity is a careful effort not just to proclaim Christ wildly to the wind but to proclaim him to an actual audience in their language. But for others it is self-deception; an effort not to be rejected while naming Christ. The first group should have no problem standing with Peter and praying for boldness to withstand more resistance but the second group is specifically avoiding that.



report abuse
 

Joshua Wooden

posted July 12, 2010 at 1:44 pm


RJS: thanks for the push-back, and of course I agree with you. However, the reverse is also true, as your comment indicates. How many churches have I been to where there are many elderly but no kids? I guess the question then becomes, how do we make church relevant to younger generations (who are lacking in churches) without pushing out the elderly?
I have never seen it done very well either.



report abuse
 

AJ

posted July 12, 2010 at 2:41 pm


Groups. Are we in or out? The striking beauty of the gospel is that my acceptance is not based on me – my style, my sin, my preferences, my intelligence, whatever. If we focus on creating a community that is cool (or traditional or whatever) we are focusing on partial inclusion. Someone will feel marginalized.
No matter what the church, an incredible amount of grace and effort must be applied toward inclusion. People must be able to be themselves and be valued, simply because they are a human being loved by God. I am not saying that all opinions or expressions are right, just that we must use loving discernment rather than judgment in community with one another. If we can be authentic and loving, we can connect at the heart-level with ANYONE. The trouble is that we often spend our time in church focusing on anything but heart-level, grace-filled relating.
For example (as in #25 Andy D):
If I can truly love those I’m in community with, I can also appreciate how they use their God-given gifts to artistically express their love for and experience of God, even if it’s not my style. Joy comes from seeing God glorified, not in feeling moved by the experience.
If the focus is on being cool, the focus is not gospel.
That does not mean that the gospel can’t be proclaimed in a relevant way, just that our congregation community life should reflect gospel.



report abuse
 

Cam R.

posted July 12, 2010 at 3:16 pm


Scot,
What do you think this critique of hipster christianity says about the Origins Project? One of the passions of Origins is innovation, does this mean that for the Origins Project “coolness” is a core value?
Is there a difference between being cool and innovation communicating the gospel?
Both should be fine if the results are clear communication and reaching people. Right?



report abuse
 

Kenny Johnson

posted July 12, 2010 at 4:32 pm


Hmm.. My pastor is going to the Origins Project conference. . . Maybe I am a hipster going to a hipster church…



report abuse
 

Matt

posted July 12, 2010 at 5:47 pm


I have a fundamental struggle with the nature of this critique. I don’t think people should try to MAKE Christianity “hip” or “cool,” but I also find it difficult to conceive of a constructive purpose in critiquing churches and church leaders on the grounds that they are trying too hard to be “cool.” If Mars Hill, for example, is to be judged, then do it on the basis of whether it is accomplishing the mission of God, not on the quota of well-trimmed goatees that are visible on a given Sunday morning.



report abuse
 

nathan

posted July 12, 2010 at 7:44 pm


This just seems silly to me. It also strikes me as quintessentially “evangelical” (in the cultural sense) to problematize particular cultural trends/fads/currents that ultimately will be here today and gone tomorrow. I say this because if the truism that “evangelicals are just the children of fundamentalists” is…well…true, then this is really no different in principle than Pensacola Christian University problematizing khaki cargo pants for their dress code simply because they were “in” and therefore “fashionable” and therefore “of the world” because that’s what the mainstream was doing. This kind of “discerning” really is embedded in our ambivalence about the culture.
I don’t mean to be uncharitable, but people do things with mixed motives all the time, I just don’t see why a minority group within christianity OR, as I suspect, the simple vagaries of a given era are worth a book.
Think about it…if this were the late 80’s, a book would have to be written about the “problem” with Christian young people wearing their polo collars popped up and “french cuffing” their pants to peg them tight to their ankles.
Maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t see any fire here.
Just my 2 cents.



report abuse
 

AJ

posted July 12, 2010 at 11:45 pm


It is absolutely healthy to carefully consider and constantly re-evaluate our approach and motives to how we do church and share the gospel. I wonder if the conversation got off track a bit here?
Scot – Would you please point me to some of your past writings on the subject? It’s important to me. Thanks.



report abuse
 

JoanieD

posted July 13, 2010 at 7:40 am


To Jonathan in #4 about your proposed book, “Fogey Christianity: How Christians Get Cranky:”
Funny title! I would read it. :-)



report abuse
 

Jonathan

posted July 13, 2010 at 8:56 am


@ Joanie D
Haha, thanks! You don’t happen to be an editor at Zondervan, do you? Intervarsity, maybe?
No?
Shucks.
@ Nation (34)
Thanks for respectfully and clearly articulating the point I was trying to make via satire.
Expensive coffee and American Apparel t-shirts is just not the same sort of ethno-cultural issue as circumcision. Pick a distinct sub-cultural group in America and tell me the conclusions above aren’t struggles and tensions within that group. Possibly the Amish, though their young people have their own identity crises, as you may have heard.
I chose not to take this too seriously earlier b/c I think it’s such a non-issue. Or rather, I think its framed in a cranky, fogey-istic way that does more harm than good.
And beside, no one complains more about hipsters than other hipsters. Of course this book got written.
Captcha (and possibly another overly-individualistic group): street looter



report abuse
 

Jonathan

posted July 13, 2010 at 8:56 am


oops, sorry, NATHAN, the auto correct on the cell decided your name should be spelled in a more Westphalian fashion.



report abuse
 

nathan

posted July 13, 2010 at 12:19 pm


@37
Thanks Jonathan.
no worries on the name.
do you blog anywhere?
captcha: he mailed



report abuse
 

nathan

posted July 13, 2010 at 12:21 pm


I went to McCracken’s blog and read his list on hipster vs. christianity.
My comment there was that he hasn’t succeeded in describing hipsters so much as he’s successfully identified “humanity”.



report abuse
 

Duncan R

posted July 13, 2010 at 1:09 pm


Jonathan
The “Fogey Christianity: How Christians get Cranky” might be worth shooting over to Jonathan Acuff at stuffchristianslike.net He got a book of Christian satire published by Zondervan, so it is possible…
Nathan, I agree. He has broadened his critique so much that he’s basically talking everyone. Which is fair but less unique and interesting.



report abuse
 

nathan

posted July 13, 2010 at 2:01 pm


@Duncan:
and makes the whole “hipster” focus incoherent.
if his blog posts are any indicator of the book’s content then he’s not writing about hipsters, he’s writing about the insular cultural world of evangelicalism in all its forms– “christian concerts” and “celebrities” and particular material culture that has no real wider traction with the rest of the culture and many times seems bizarre to outsiders.
the index in the book seems to cite Tullian Tchividjian alot…”Unfashionable”… a book that falls into the trap of implying or outright claiming that there is a particular problem of this time that is somehow unique to this time…not a perennial challenge in many forms. As Jonathan said, good coffee, American Apparel and educated folk with urban aesthetics does not necessarily mean something is suspect.
Furthermore, having lived in LA where the author is from we could also easily say he’s describing basically all of the privileged/educated class in the L.A. basin regardless of their fashion choices.
It’s clear I’m not buying what he’s selling… :)



report abuse
 

Jonathan

posted July 13, 2010 at 5:15 pm


Nathan: the above is a blog where I write a bit about the Kingdom of God as Abundant Living, and the Kingdom of Man as Imperial Living. You’re welcome to take a peek.
Duncan: hmm.. I wonder if I could maintain a snarky tone long enough to bust out a whole book on the subject.
Come to think of it, that probably wouldn’t be a problem. :)



report abuse
 

Tim Hawkinson

posted July 14, 2010 at 3:46 pm


Christianity is, at it’s core, not about non-conformity so much as “the right conformity”. Ironically this is the epitome of being counter-cultural in the “hipster” context. That being said… the reality is that everyone in the scene is replicating someone else unknowingly and so following Chris could simply be transferring allegiances. Ha. What a mess.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

More Blogs To Enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Jesus Creed. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Red Letters with Tom Davis Recent prayer post on Prayables Most Recent Inspiration blog post Happy Reading!  

posted 11:15:58am Aug. 16, 2012 | read full post »

Our Common Prayerbook 30 - 3
Psalm 30 thanks God (vv. 1-3, 11-12) and exhorts others to thank God (vv. 4-5). Both emerge from the concrete reality of David's own experience. Here is what that experience looks like:Step one: David was set on high and was flourishing at the hand of God's bounty (v. 7a).Step two: David became too

posted 12:15:30pm Aug. 31, 2010 | read full post »

Theology After Darwin 1 (RJS)
One of the more important and more difficult pieces of the puzzle as we feel our way forward at the interface of science and faith is the theological implications of discoveries in modern science. A comment on my post Evolution in the Key of D: Deity or Deism noted: ...this reminds me of why I get a

posted 6:01:52am Aug. 31, 2010 | read full post »

Almost Christian 4
Who does well when it comes to passing on the faith to the youth? Studies show two groups do really well: conservative Protestants and Mormons; two groups that don't do well are mainline Protestants and Roman Catholics. Kenda Dean's new book is called Almost Christian: What the Faith of Ou

posted 12:01:53am Aug. 31, 2010 | read full post »

Let's Get Neanderthal!
The Cave Man Diet, or Paleo Diet, is getting attention. (Nothing is said about Culver's at all.) The big omission, I have to admit, is that those folks were hunters -- using spears or smacking some rabbit upside the conk or grabbing a fish or two with their hands ... but that's what makes this diet

posted 2:05:48pm Aug. 30, 2010 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.