Maranatha's clever "I'm Gunna Apply" video

When is the SI Admin team and Moderators going to finish there video -“I’m Loggin In To SI?”

[Pastor Joe Roof] When is the SI Admin team and Moderators going to finish there video -“I’m Loggin In To SI?”

It’s in Post-Production

We need additional funds to finish it up! S E N D M O N E Y N O W

is what some expect from the school. It communicates something about them. And apparently what they communicate is okee dokee with those in the highest levels. Meh.

as a pastor of congregation with young’uns coming up in our church, should I be at all concerned that this kind of thing/marketing blurb/commercial (whatever is meant to be) is the tool of choice meant to draw our younguns to a school which claims to be intent on teaching them to soldier on as the next generation representing a Christianity that is supernatural and earth-shaking? (Trying my hand at a run on sentence—I think I succeeded.) Without someone making reference to how great/silly other medium were from previous iterations of MBBC or other schools, if this came from a “nooevgelical” school, wouldn’t some of you have been all over it (if not now, maybe some years ago?)

I don’t have a BJU/MBBC/NBBC or the like fundy college experience, so I don’t know how “crazy” or “silly” or _________________ you all could be, but I saw this and I threw up in my mouth a little. If someone comes back and says something like “college should be fun” or the like, I get that. But, unless they were going to Westboro Baptist College of Divinity, would you truly need to tell kids that your college is fun?

But I see this, and I think of the times when children (or their parents) whine about how children’s activities “aren’t fun, they are too serious.” And I think of how much time IS fun in a child’s life, and how little of it is devoted to seriousness, especially in terms of biblical pursuit. Their experiences in our church are often the only “serious” times in life.

This doesn’t quite express what I mean, but (and I’m a big “grace not law” guy) it feels out of place. To use Bauder’s lingo is this portraying a fundamentalism worth saving? (‘member, I said no hatin’ earlier).

[SamH] as a pastor of congregation with young’uns coming up in our church, should I be at all concerned that this kind of thing/marketing blurb/commercial (whatever is meant to be) is the tool of choice meant to draw our younguns to a school which claims to be intent on teaching them to soldier on as the next generation representing a Christianity that is supernatural and earth-shaking?

You should be concerned. Definitely. When put out in this way, one can reasonably infer that the production indicates what is deemed important to the institution (and thus worth their emphasizing to inform their audience) or important to its prospects (and thus worth emphasizing to appeal to them). Thus, I conclude that the production reflects the values of the institution or of those they wish to draw. That is troubling.

Maybe there is a notion that prospective students will find this light-hearted, relevant, or otherwise appealing. But consider the persons who find that this pitch makes the school appealing. Are they the types of persons it really wants as students? Are they the ones most likely to develop into the sober-minded leaders that the church needs in these perilous days? I think not. Moreover, this will turn some sober-minded prospects away. As one who has been considering colleges for my son, I do not find this appealing in the least. It leads me to doubt that the institution understands the need of our day, that it has the sober-mindedness necessary to provide an environment most conducive for spiritual and academic growth, and that it will cultivate the right affections in those who attend. It inclines me to turn away and look elsewhere.

[SamH] But I see this, and I think of the times when children (or their parents) whine about how children’s activities “aren’t fun, they are too serious.” And I think of how much time IS fun in a child’s life, and how little of it is devoted to seriousness, especially in terms of biblical pursuit. Their experiences in our church are often the only “serious” times in life.

For similar reasons, I would say that these comments reflect the (misplaced) values of the “whiners.” I can understand this, to a degree, coming from a child. But as children grow, they need to be taught so that they know better. I am greatly troubled when this comes from adults, who should know better. The fact that this sentiment is as common as it is reflects poorly on our institutions (and I am thinking broadly here, not merely our educational institutions).

[SamH] This doesn’t quite express what I mean, but (and I’m a big “grace not law” guy) it feels out of place. To use Bauder’s lingo is this portraying a fundamentalism worth saving? (‘member, I said no hatin’ earlier).

I think that the answer to this is rather evident, now. But your reference reminds of his address on the issue. Here is an excerpt worth pondering:

[Dr. Kevin Bauder, “A Fundamentalism Worth Saving” (AACCS, Feb. 2, 2005)] We must be or become sober—and oddly enough, that is an exact description of the kind of fundamentalism that is most worth saving.

Scripture repeatedly exhorts us to exhibit the virtue of sobriety. Sobriety is a qualification for bishops, deacons, and their wives (1 Tim. 3:2-11). Old men in general are to be sober (Titus 2:2). Younger men and women are to be taught sobriety (Titus 2:4-6). In view of the end of the age, sobriety is held up as an essential virtue for the Christian life (1 Pet. 4:7).

What is sobriety? Put simply, it is serious-mindedness. Sober people are serious about their ideas, their words, and their conduct. They weigh the importance of what they think, and they envision the consequences of what they say and do. They refuse to treat life as if it were a game, and they regard no aspect of life as too insignificant to be held up for examination.

Would that we would grapple with this, take it to heart, and live it.

[Brent Marshall] Are they the ones most likely to develop into the sober-minded leaders that the church needs in these perilous days? I think not. Moreover, this will turn some sober-minded prospects away.

My son looked at it, and said, “Looks like their standards are going.” He’s not looking for a school right now, but if he were, it just plummeted on his list.

Sam, it hasn’t gotten a pass on SI because it’s a fundy school, it’s gotten a pass because many of the SI members who won’t be comfortable with it have given up on discussing this kind of thing here.

Brent and JG, thanks for the notes. Have a good Lord’s day.

My fear is that those who say this type of advertising is the best way to attract today’s students are right. We have adapted so thoroughly to the customs and language of our culture that most see nothing wrong with replacing the joyful noise with a Glee-ful one. We have reared successive generations who have like Lot drifted closer and closer to Sodom, but so gradually that the change goes unremarked. Where and how will young people attracted by such methods learn that those methods themselves are anathema? Worldly oxcarts make for poor results when moving sacred arks.

The words of Nehemiah come to mind (and his reaction is instructive as well): “And their children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews’ language, but according to the language of each people. And I contended with them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked off their hair, and made them swear by God, saying, Ye shall not give your daughters unto their sons, nor take their daughters unto your sons, or for yourselves.” (Nehemiah 13:24)

The fun of the Lord is not the beginning of wisdom.

[Robert Byers] The fun of the Lord is not the beginning of wisdom.

Um … have you recently checked out the typical Fundy youth group?

[Robert Byers] My fear is that those who say this type of advertising is the best way to attract today’s students are right. We have adapted so thoroughly to the customs and language of our culture that most see nothing wrong with replacing the joyful noise with a Glee-ful one. We have reared successive generations who have like Lot drifted closer and closer to Sodom, but so gradually that the change goes unremarked. Where and how will young people attracted by such methods learn that those methods themselves are anathema? Worldly oxcarts make for poor results when moving sacred arks.

I fear that, as to significant numbers of believers, you are right. I agree that there is a problem with such methods. I would go a step further and suggest that such methods reflect a problem with what the practitioners value and, fundamentally, with what and whom they love. Sin is deceitful like that.

On one hand, I think that that an institution’s use of appeals of this sort is a symptom of problems elsewhere. As I said in response to Sam, the fact that the “too serious, not fun” sentiment is so common reflects poorly on our institutions, and that includes major problems in our homes and churches. This reminds me of something that Sam wrote:

[SamH] I think of how much time IS fun in a child’s life, and how little of it is devoted to seriousness, especially in terms of biblical pursuit. Their experiences in our church are often the only “serious” times in life.

Yet unfortunately, in an increasing number of instances, church times are not so serious either. Jim points to that when he writes:

[Jim Peet] Um … have you recently checked out the typical Fundy youth group?

Sad, is it not? It tends to perpetuate the problem, for from what I have seen, as the youth become the adults of the church, they carry their values and associated preferences with them. Thus, issues in the youth group can become issues in the church as a whole.

All that said, I do not think that an institution’s use of appeals like this is a symptom only of problems elsewhere. I think that it also reflects problems at the institution itself. Many parents and pastors contributing to these problems in homes and churches are perpetuating what they learned in school. Then, as their children return, the school perpetuates the issues further. In sum, we have a vicious cycle here.

I’m sorry, but some of the reactions to this video just boggle my mind. Could someone who objects to it tell me what, specifically, in the video is objectionable?

It can’t be the music, because it is certainly tame.

Is it because it’s a “fun” video? Well, I never knew “sober-minded” meant “no fun.” I’m sure this isn’t the only way Maranatha promotes their school. I’m sure they have plenty to say about academics and spiritual formation in their materials and on their web site.

As far as the “Glee” factor, I would be the first to say that I don’t understand how any Christian could watch that show. But people have been singing (and even lip syncing) on video long before Glee came along. What about this video makes it a “Glee” video?

would this other college’s video promo also be considered cool, clever, unique, cute, catchy, novel, and fun in the same way as the Maranatha video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-dc9nHwC2w

Puh-leeze

Anyone who says they can’t see the difference between Marantha’s and Liberty’s videos is just being ridiculous! Perhaps they would also have trouble telling the difference between a BJU orchestra cd and a guns and roses cd.

I’m rather ambivalent about the Maranatha video and wasn’t trying to insinuate that it is the same as the Liberty one, so perhaps the “Puh-leeze” and “Ridiculous” response was a bit over the top. I truly wanted to know from all those who have taken the time to publicly praise the Maranatha video if they find it clever, etc. in the same way as the Liberty video. If they don’t, it would be helpful to know why not.

[Brenda T] I truly wanted to know from all those who have taken the time to publicly praise the Maranatha video if they find it clever, etc. in the same way as the Liberty video. If they don’t, it would be helpful to know why not.

Just to clarify my own view. One can view something as clever but not praise it. I think both videos are clever.

If I were 18 (oh to be 18 again!) I would choose Liberty over MBBC. Not based on the videos but rather on the educational opportunities

Liberty: http://www.liberty.edu/index.cfm?PID=6908 (I would pick Engineering: Computer)

MBBC: http://www.mbbc.edu/academics/majors (zero options in Engineering)