And then they asked me if I had heard of the LDS church, where I could be even happier.

(At that point I had to break it to them that that Southern Idaho was the functional equivalent of Northern Utah, so I was familiar with the church and would gladly wave to them if I saw them at the next stake dance.)

While it’s pretty clear they weren’t conducting research about happiness, I found it to be a rather charming icebreaker. So Tim, yes, I agree that marketing tactics are not inherently dirty. But I maintain my aversion to the “shiny” type.

Sorry I didn’t respond earlier. If all we’re concerned with is getting people’s souls into heaven; what we say and how we say it is going to be a lot different than if we are out to get heaven into people’s souls. (to butcher a phrase from Dallas Willard). It’s the converts vs. disciples thing. People are much more than their eternal souls and saying the “pass code” at a Billy Graham Crusade isn’t a ticket to heaven.

That being said, it’s been pointed out to me recently that evangelism and discipleship are different gifts. Not all evangelist are gifted disciple-makers. So I’m willing to grant room to straight proclamations, but I think Evangelicals have erred over the last 100 years by stopping short at “get saved” and not been interested in “get discipled”. Evangelicals have been way too satisfied with a bunch of people with the smell of sulfur on them in heaven. It has done great damage to our faith to have a 60% of the country “just saved” and nothing more.

At it’s best and purest, it’s just communicating clearly and consistently. In regards to a spiritual message, all the more care has to be taken to insure that it is authentic. But there’s nothing any more wrong with a church using the best practices in marketing than with a pastor taking some public speaking courses.

When Jesus made the decision to get on a boat to talk to a large crowd, that was a marketing decision. He wanted to find the best place to be seen and heard so that he could communicate clearly and effectively. That kind of decision hasn’t always been called marketing and you don’t have to study marketing to figure it out, but that is exactly the kind of decision marketers make.

However. In the DC area, the McLean Bible Church puts out a lot of radio ads with the tag line “not a sermon, just a thought.” The interesting part was that the pastor bought time during the fairly obnoxious morning show and then (publicly) tried to insist that the DJ clean up the content since the church was a paying advertiser. I’m sure you can guess what the DJ did with that.

But as for “marketing” over all, I’m all for spreading the Message, I just hate how “shiny” some churches try to make it. I find it insulting. I once attended a Christmas-season service at an evangelical church and the entire area was decked out in bright glittery signs that really just looked like a holy Old Navy commercial. Appealing to the compulsive consumer in people is certainly effective, but Katie said it well–it cheapens what we have to offer.

Back to the question:
But if the value is not immediately obvious? Perhaps what is being marketed is not actually valuable?

This is the eternal question: how do you bring someone to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ? And this question is the wrong one. “How do I love this person?” should be the only evangelistic tool needed. What we are “selling” is love, as demonstrated through us. That is really the only thing of value we have to offer. It is not doctrinal knowledge, nor a burning in the torso that truly connects us to Christ, but unearned, unconditional love. If we don’t have that to share… we shouldn’t be out there at all.

And yes, attempting to market the love of God is doing a great disservice because it leads to the question: “why would you need to?” Is it so hidden in our lives?

If the message is genuine, why would there need to be methods, tactics, scripts, training, or even a contrived effort? If the item/idea/Gospel is so valuable, why does it need you to get me to buy it?

Well one answer, although incomplete, is that for most of us here, who are Christians of one sort or another, we’ve been commanded by Jesus to take his gospel to all the world. That alone suggests that some sort of effort is required.

And BrianJ is right. One purpose of “marketing,” and that includes media use as well as sending people door to door, is to let people know what is available. And that can be done in many ways without manipulating or misleading.

“If the message is genuine, why would there need to be methods, tactics, scripts, training, or even a contrived effort? If the item/idea/Gospel is so valuable, why does it need you to get me to buy it?”

Because you don’t know that you will benefit from the product. You have to be educated on its value.

Apologies regarding your choice of career…

Are not the goals of marketing specifically to inspire or exploit desire for the thing being marketed, whether an object in the case of a cell phone, or an intangible feeling in the case of humanitarian donations or a Mac? In essence, it is manipulation, whether subtle or overt, towards a goal that might not otherwise be sought. In most cases, this is to the benefit of the owner of the thing being marketed, and sometimes to the person(s) being marketed to. In the case of evangelism, I question the motives of the evangelist, just as I question the motives of the salesman. If the message is genuine, why would there need to be methods, tactics, scripts, training, or even a contrived effort? If the item/idea/Gospel is so valuable, why does it need you to get me to buy it? Marketing thrives in a world of cheap.

I will confess, I am neither an LDS nor an Evangelical, so I may not belong here. I recently went through a conversion process of my own, and it had nothing to do with evangelism or marketing. It did have to do with relationships that I had, seeds that had been planted a decade ago, and a natural attraction to specific ideas. If someone from our church had approached me and attempted to proselytize, I may never had gone back.

Ouch. That’s my career you’re talking about there. (Marketing, of course. Not evangelism.)

No, I totally agree that you have to be super careful when it comes to “marketing” the word of God. This isn’t about capturing market share; it’s about capturing hearts. Employing traditional marketing tactics seems to cheapen the message of Christ and, like Eric said, turn it into just another consumer choice. I think it can be done, but you have to be careful. Bait and switch, deception and “over-cleverness” is probably NOT the way to go.

I think the gospel is best shared person to person, not through the mass media or with slick slogans.