Does Jesus Need an Ad Campaign?

Guest: Jason Vanderground

By
14

If you watch any sports on television you may have seen one of the edgy, black & white ads from the “He Gets Us” campaign. Designed to introduce Jesus to a culture that is actually quite intrigued by him, this campaign has created both curiosity and questions. We are excited to be joined this week by one of the chief architects of the campaign, Jason Vanderground. Join us for this excellent conversation about the campaign itself, the broader theological questions at play, and even the role of advertising as a tool of evangelism. 

Show Notes:

-He Gets Us campaign

Video Ads:

This content is available exclusively to Dispatch members
Try a membership for full access to every newsletter and all of The Dispatch. Support quality, fact-based journalism.
Start Your Free Trial
Already a paid member? Sign In
By
Comments (14)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Arwenaya

    The main thing I felt like Jason failed to grapple with adequately in this interview is that for Christians, Jesus is not a product. Vanderground's observation along the lines that marketing is really just storytelling nowadays, is deeply flawed in that, while it certainly uses storytelling as a main vehicle, its primary objective is to sell you something. Over and over in the gospels, Jesus rejected being the guy with great marketing. I'm re-reading the Gospel of John all in one go for the first time in a while, and man, Jesus was TERRIBLE at marketing. He says all kinds of off-putting, confusing stuff that doesn't have an easy explanation. (And I say this as a life-long committed Christian, Scripture-memorizer, theology-reader, etc. etc.) Which is not to say that there isn't a place for what the He Gets Us campaign is doing, but it should come with a fair amount of scrutiny. Once you're trying to sell something to people, your metrics for success change. Jason referred to people clicking over to a Bible app as an example of success, which is great, but not sufficient on its own. Real discipleship can only happen in the context of relationships with real, actual other human beings, and since that's really hard to measure, it's hard to incentivize in an ad campaign where high value donors are going to be asking for confirmation of their ROI.

    In the very first Good Faith episode with Mike Cosper, Curtis and David asked Mike how he was protecting his own soul in the face of increased fame from his podcast. In contrast, this came across as way more fangirling, and less willing to ask Jason to really grapple with what effect the medium of advertising itself has on those creating it to share the Gospel and what exactly the advertising medium incentivizes long-term as a metric of success.

    Collapse
  2. Nordic_man

    As a non believer, these ads remind me of the misappropriated Ghandi quote “Jesus is ideal and wonderful, but you Christians, you are not like him.”. I get that Jesus is the perfect ideal, but there is failing to live up to perfection, and then there is just being an ass. A lot of the loud Christians both in and out of the commentariat are really Republicans first and Christians second, and you know what people think of when they think of Christians? They think of those people.

    Honestly, as a non believer, I think the world would probably be a better place if Christians lived more like Jesus, but good luck with that.

    Collapse
  3. Cinici

    Two Chrism-soaked THUMBS DOWN on this episode.

    This "He gets us campaign" reeks of the Pharisee's "LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME! I'M SUPER HOLY." stance. Would the widow with the two coins want to spend $1B to publicize her faith? I don't think so.

    This money will all go to huge media corporations. What greater good might be accomplished by investing in soup for the starving rather than Super Bowl ads? The poor can't eat 30-second spots. "LOOK AT ME!!! I'M HOLIER THAN THOU!!!" "Sure, I could feed starving children. But it's more important how much web traffic we get on our site."

    I give Curtis credit for asking who's behind this. But Vanderground gave a weak and vague response. (More like Jason Underground.) According to IRS filings, The Signatry, the group funding this ad campaign, has given money to anti-LGBTQ hate group, "Alliance Defending Freedom" (what were they thinking when they came up with that name?) and The Creation Museum. Seriously? What the heck is in there? 4,000 year old dinosaur bones? See https://religiondispatches.org/behind-the-inclusive-sounding-ads-of-the-100-million-pr-blitz-for-jesus-its-the-same-old-white-conservative-fantasy/

    Look. No rich person wants to be a good Christian. I understand that. "Sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven." Matthew 19:20. Have you known anyone to do that? Then you may not know many Christians.

    Vanderground said the effort was funded by many "high net worth" individuals. How many "high net worth" individuals backed Jesus? My bible is missing those chapters. Have these people ever seen a camel and a needle?

    Collapse
    1. Bkamena

      To provide just one example, the man who provided the tomb for Christ's temporary stay was of "high net worth."

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      CarsonJ

      I'm not sure if you just aren't familiar with David French or if you're trolling about ADF. You do know he did litigation for them for many years, right?

      Collapse
    3. Ellisrt1031

      Wow. The whole log in my own eye passage. With God all things are possible. The point of the advertising campaign is to generate interest in Jesus and that the interest becomes faith. That is what I got out of the podcast. Maybe I am just too gullible.

      Collapse
  4. Joanne Garrison

    David’s French Press and the podcast were excellent. They provided my soul with thoughtful reflection and a hope I have been missing. I will admit, I have been struggling finding a place within the Christian community. I am alienated from many who are closest to me because of the Christian/political divide. I am a conservative Christian but I am not a Trump supporter. Unfortunately, my spouse is an adamant Trump supporter and openly professes that Dinesh D'Souza is his hero. The topics of politics and religion are off limits in our home. I am weary of the struggle. I long for an outlet where my Christianity can be nurtured. I long to find a gentle Christian community. I am not looking for a woke acceptance of everything. Rather, I am weary of hiding my feelings and accepting aggressive, win at any cost, Christians. David’s writing and podcast are at present, my only tangible link to this hope.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      John

      Joanne, I'm sorry to hear this. It's hard. I know. Do you have at least one Christian friend who shares your point of view and disposition?

      I'm sure that most of the people in my church voted for Trump and are at the least sympathetic to the toxic waste bubbles in Trump World. I have, though, found a lifeline in one man. You might say that we share ministry work (him: vocational; me, not). We regularly talk. We shake our heads together. We talk about our aspirations and our failings. We sit in our struggles of faith and family together; on occasion, we find insight through our conversations.

      I pray that the Lord give you someone like that. The American church needs healing (or perhaps purging) but it may be a while before that happens on a large scale.

      Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Greg Williams

    I can see why some Christians might have theological or doctrinal issues with this ad campaign. I personally think that type of narrow criticism is unproductive to the cause of the gospel. When some of Paul's inner circle came to him during his ministry in confinement in Rome and told him of others preaching the gospel for questionable motives, this was Paul's response:

    "But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice. Yes, and I will continue to rejoice..." - Philippians 1:18

    I'll go with Paul's wisdom on this one. Whether the vector is from Jesus' humanity or His divinity, as long as the source is biblical, the gospel is in the light. That's all the Holy Spirit needs is for us to turn on the light.

    https://christiansoldier21.substack.com/

    Collapse
  6. Lawyerjackson

    Not directly related to this podcast episode, but I thought other Good Faith listeners might like this article: https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2022/november-web-only/bono-book-interview-cover-story-u2-hope-punk.html (by Mike Cosper, who has been on the Good Faith podcast and hosted the Rise and Fall of Mars Hill podcast). Here's a sample:

    “These are not partisan issues,” Michael Gerson tells me. He was a speechwriter and policy aide in the George W. Bush administration and has worked with the ONE campaign in the years since. “Bono found common ground with other people because of his own sense of human dignity, which is rooted in the Bible.”

    That’s how Bono found himself being prayed over in the office of senator Jesse Helms (who was one of the inspirations—and not in a good way—for U2’s anti-war song “Bullet the Blue Sky”). It’s hard to imagine a politician with views more diametrically opposed to Bono’s. Helms had called AIDS “the gay disease” and had been an opponent of civil rights legislation for decades. “And here he is,” Bono writes, “putting his hand on my head.”

    Helms was praying for him.

    “He has tears in his eyes and later he will publicly repent of the way he has spoken in the past about AIDS. As big a shock to the left as to the right. It was the leprosy analogy from the scriptures that moved him. He had to follow his Jesus there.”

    Throughout the Bush administration, Bono and others in the ONE campaign built bridge after bridge, resulting in more than $100 billion of taxpayer money being allocated toward efforts to prevent HIV transmission and provide treatment.

    “The thing that turned America around,” Bono tells me, “that helped inspire a conservative president of the United States to take up the fight against HIV/AIDS and lead the world in what was the greatest, largest intervention in the history of medicine, were conservative Christians.”

    I tell him I’m fascinated by these stories, especially in our current polarized times.

    “I will define myself as the radical center,” he says. “Having your faith hijacked by politics is something we all need to be really careful of.”

    If hopeful lament was an act of rebellion in 1981, when Boy was released, maybe being in the radical center is punk rock in 2022.

    “I don’t think we should allow ourselves into this binary view of the world between progressive and conservative. I think that’s very divisive,” he says. “We’ll find common ground by reaching for higher ground.”

    Collapse
  7. Ted

    Listening to today’s podcast was surreal for me. I listened to half of it on my way to work (and the other half after work). When I got to work I read Axios and learned that God had endorsed Ron DeSantis for governor. So on the one hand you have people trying to spread the beautiful message of Jesus but it’s running headlong into culture where God is weaponised. In some respects you have a war between Jesus and a large segment of American establishment Christianity. The message of Jesus is not the message of power and domination that certain establishment Christians want. For some, Christianity is three things and only three things: hating gays, hating abortion, and supporting Republicans. When Jason talked about Matthew 25, I had to laugh; does he think most people associate that message with Christianity today? If you bring that argument up in a public debate, you will get polite smiles and then eye rolls when you are gone. I am a strong believer of Jesus and his message but I recognise Christianity today is too often led by men who desire power and recognition over spreading the teachings of Jesus.

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Wrob77

    One of the more insightful interviews you have had on. Really enjoyed this interview..

    I think Hebrews verse we have a great high priest who was tempted in every way as we are yet without sin is a good grounding text for the He gets us campaign.

    Before listening to this interview I found the entire thing to be a waste of money. But having listened and watched the videos I find it to be interesting and possibly a good evangelism tool. It is not perfect. Nothing is.

    I found most of the videos to be moving and connecting to the experience of incarnation of Christ.

    Except for the birth video. I don't think the Jesus had a teen mom argument is justified by the text or attempting to adapt to modern culture. It looses the point of the virgin birth entirely and they should take it down.

    Well Jesus can't get all of us. He certainly didn't get or agree with the people who crucified him. He didn't get people who divorce their spouses and no fault divorce.

    He acknowledged that his message would divide some and unite others. So I think the campaign is reaching too far and confusing the gospel with a woke acceptance sometimes.

    David is very good at turning the other cheek rhetorically. But criticizing some random guy for thinking turning the other cheek is woke politics when he has a large arsenal in his possession seems hypocritical. As John Piper argued turning the other cheek means challenging ourselves to live an unarmed life. David can't criticize others if misunderstanding the concept when he clearly hasn't applied it himself.

    Surely he will throw many arguments at me as to why one can own an arsenal and love your enemies. The man he mentions has many arguments as to why turning the he other cheek is woke ideology. And perhaps woke and the gospel agree here and the man should be more woke in this area of his life. The arguments David gives for biblical self defense largely ignore the new testament. Leave it to the government to bear the sword. If the government doesn't do its job you shouldn't take the sword into your own hands. Even if the old testament says you have a right to defend yourself Jesus clearly challenges eye for an eye in the sermon on the mount. The implications are clear. David just doesn't like them.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      CarsonJ

      I understand your point, and I don't own guns myself, but I think it's perhaps a bit presumptuous to assume that David's take on self defense is wrong on a "turn the other cheek" standard alone. There is also a strong element of protecting the defenseless in the idea of owning weapons. Is allowing children to be taken advantage of because "turn the other cheek" morally correct? I don't think so.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Wrob77

        The new testament is pretty against owning weapons.

        There are many non lethal ways to protect your family.

        A security system for example.

        David's exegesis on self defense is poor.

        It is presumptuous to think I haven't spent three years in seminary and years thinking through the issue.

        Our defense is God who gave the sword to the state.

        If the state doesn't protect you God will avenge you presumably by punishing the wicked in hell

        Collapse