T h e o • p h i l o g u e

Home » Uncategorized » To Brand or Not to Brand the Gospel•___•__•_• A Response to Tyler Wigg-Stevenson

To Brand or Not to Brand the Gospel•___•__•_• A Response to Tyler Wigg-Stevenson


2 Comments

  1. Naumadd says:

    But, of course, “Jesus Christ” IS a brand. People shop around for philosophies and religions as much as they do for the best price on an iPod. They invest time, energy, thought, emotion, resources and, yes, money in selecting their beliefs and in selecting the practices they will make their own. The very name of “Christianity” marks that particular religious philosophy as a package deal under the guise of a cult of personality. The individual human being labeled “Jesus Christ” – if he ever actually existed – has been used as an icon since the very beginning of that religion to forward a specific set of beliefs, values, goals and practices whose “gadget” as it were is the christian “Holy Bible”.

    The image of the cross is the trademark logo, popes, priests, ministers, preachers, etc. the marketing department, churches and cathedrals the sales floors, bibles, prayer cards, and other saleable paraphernalia, and, of course, Christianity’s “iPod”, it’s trademark product – the person, image, story, and alleged teachings of Jesus Christ itself. The religious philosophy has operated in precisely this way since its inception. It has done so because every other religion – from which is borrows the bulk of its content and practice – has done precisely the same.

    Christianity didn’t invent the sales pitch but, there is no doubt, it wouldn’t be around if it hadn’t nearly perfected it. Call it blasphemy if you like but, calling it that just makes the point of christianity’s marketing success in branding a single human being – assuming of course, that figure isn’t merely a very early “Mickey Mouse” – like every other alleged deity and like many alleged prophets.

  2. Naumadd, your comment got me thinking … what is a brand anyway. I found the following Wikopedia definition very interesting:

    **A brand is a collection of symbols, experiences and associations connected with a product, a service, a person or any other artefact or entity.**

    Jesus is a person, often represented by symbols, understood through experiences associated with him, offered himself as a servant, offered salvation to all who would believe in him (often by telling them the benefits of doing so, etc.

    So … from this definition, Jesus could be considered a brand. Very interesting.

    Of course, even by this definition, Jesus could fit the definition of a brand without actually being reduced to a brand. Maybe that’s a helpful distinction.

    Thanks for your thoughts.

    Bradley

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow T h e o • p h i l o g u e on WordPress.com
%d bloggers like this: