Church marketing

by Richard on March 19, 2007

From the ever-splendid Dave Walker

{ 16 comments… read them below or add one }


dh 03.19.07 at 7:52 pm

I surprised, I thought Dave, Kim and Richard were all people who didn’t believe in a Gospel “to be marketed”. I personally believe sharing the Gospel is a form of “marketing” but for people to say that it is wrong seems strange in light of the Great Commission and in light of this apparent contradiction as shown in this post. Just some observations on my part. :)


gavin 03.19.07 at 8:09 pm



Wood 03.19.07 at 8:39 pm

I surprised, I thought Dave, Kim and Richard were all people who didn’t believe in a Gospel “to be marketed”.

Someone’s missing the point again.


Kim 03.19.07 at 11:08 pm

As it happens, my church is getting a new notice board, hopefully before Easter. I thought of putting something catchy on it - something like:


Any good?


Richard 03.20.07 at 12:32 am

I’m sure that would go down really well, Kim. :)


Eugene McKinnon 03.20.07 at 2:49 am

Don’t you mean Funeral on Friday at 10:30 am.

An Anglican Church in Hamilton posted an ad that went like this.

God is Dead. Niestzche

Niestzche is Dead. God

Jesus is Dead. James Cameron

Easter is in 40 Days. God.




Kim 03.20.07 at 7:12 am

Yeah, maybe it wouldn’t work. After all, Jesus was always wrecking funerals. The undertakers cooperative in Bethany is still in litigation with him over the Lazarus fiasco.


Eugene 03.20.07 at 3:17 pm

Hey Kim,

The Professional Mourners Union Local 303 of Capernaum are also tying up the courts over his resurrection of Jairus’ daughter.



dh 03.20.07 at 4:45 pm

Wood, explain what point I missed? I would be interested in your thoughts.


dh 03.20.07 at 4:47 pm

I always have problems using untruths to share the Gospel. So putting up Kim’s message on the board seems rather odd and would lead people who know nothing about Christ astray.


Jan 03.21.07 at 9:30 am


The sign under the sign is the point you missed that you refer to. It is not about “marketing the gospel” although that is a horrible phrase too, but is about marketing the church behind the sign. How many curches have really bad websites?

If you like truth, what about this one which was one of a syndicated set of signs around here. I saw it on a delightful old stone church in Sydney. “Fight truth decay. Jesus is the truth fairy.” Cringe, cringe.


Jan 03.21.07 at 9:33 am

If my comment above is a duplicate ( or worse) , could you please fix? When I pressed SUBMIT I was told the connection to connexions had been lost, so I submitted to find there were already two comments. Thanks.


dh 03.21.07 at 2:04 pm

Jan, I too kind of cringe at “marketing the Gospel” but isn’t the Great Commission a form of “marketing”? We share under the Holy Spirit hoping that the love of Jesus shines through. Isn’t that (obviously at a lower level on something clearly not as important as the soul) like marketing in the secular?

If it is about marketing the church about the sign (with the Dave art implying that marketing the church should be done correctly) then it appears (knowing that Dave, Kim, Richard, etc. don’t like marketing church, Gospel or whatever) that there is a double standard. I personally see, deep down and not on the surface because on the surface “Gospel marketing” makes me cringe, that sharing the Gospel is a form of “marketing under the Holy Spirit”. Does that help and am I still “missing the point”?


Dave 03.21.07 at 3:37 pm

Hello all. Thanks for enjoying the cartoon. The one above isn’t very clear (I blame the phone lines between Essex and Swansea) so there is a larger one here:

DH, I am sure I am guilty of some double standards and probably some triple and quadruple ones as well.


dh 03.21.07 at 3:49 pm

Maybe I don’t have a problem with “church Marketing” and/or “Marketing the Gospel”. It may sound weird but when one reads what Jesus said “How can they hear in whom they haven’t heard and how can the hear without a preacher?” My understanding of marketing is simply giving a message for a goal of a positive action. If we assume this definition of “marketing” then what is all so bad about “sharing” and/or “marketing” the Gospel as long as it doesn’t go against God’s Word or the Holy Spirit?

Dave, maybe you agree (as you imply change is needed in “church marketing”) that church and/or the Gospel can be marketing (with the previous God’s Word and under the Holy Spirit conditions)?


dh 03.21.07 at 3:56 pm

To Wood who said I “missed the point”. If the point is “church websites” and how they should be marketed and the point of the “church website marketing” is to draw people to church then logically how can that not be included in the bigger picture of the church/body/souls in the “sharing of the Gospel”? I agree on the surface the term “marketing the Gospel” seems strange and ridiculous but when one really looks into what Jesus said in the Great Commission, the statement “How can they hear in whom they haven’t hear and how can they hear without a preacher?”, etc. in conjunction with the definition of marketing then a rejection outright should not be the case for people. Just like the Gospel people can choose to accept or reject the Gospel just like in business people can choose to buy the good from the marketing or choose not to buy the good from the marketing. I see nowhere in Scripture that marketing is bad in any form unless the main goal is not for the Kingdom and Christ but other things are placed as number one over those.

Leave a Comment

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>