|
|
Post by Kirby on Jul 22, 2011 9:57:24 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Jul 22, 2011 11:56:09 GMT -8
Removing the word crusade was a great idea.
I don't think it was necessary to remove Christ. Honestly, most people aren't offended by Jesus.
But the worst move of all was to call themselves "Cru". That just sounds stupid.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kirby on Jul 23, 2011 11:52:32 GMT -8
Not that I disagree with that statement, but do you have any stats to back that up?
I would think that to be true too, curious to know if anyone has studied it.
I think it less about people taking offense, than people being less attracted to events the groups sponsors. "Oh, it's a Jesus thing? meh." I wonder if we are too quick to think that Christianity offends them, when they are just not interested.
A couple of FB friends think the the name change is cowardly. Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Jul 25, 2011 16:25:22 GMT -8
It's a way of excusing ourselves from Paul's admonition in Titus 2:10 that we "in every way make the teaching about God our Savior attractive."
It's been my personal experience that people of the last several generations have favorable impressions of Jesus but antipathy toward the church, Christianity, or Christian doctrine.
|
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Jul 25, 2011 18:58:39 GMT -8
I doubt it has anything to do with cowardice or caving to political correctness or denying Christ. It's not like Christ is even Jesus' name and I don't think it's necessary to keep in the name just to make a point. I think in the long run, it will prove to be a good move for them as an organization. I've known people who were involved with CCC and it seemed to them a great organization to be involved with. But I think the present generation puts a little more value on what's "hip" and fresh. Younger christian students I think will be more attracted to a modernized version of the brand.*
* but yeah, I'm not sure "cru" is it. That sounds pretty lame to me too.
|
|
