We spam in His name
August 10, 2004 7:18 AM Subscribe
The Baker Church of Christ is looking for a new building. They're running a sort of bond drive to finance it. So far, no problem. But I heard about it via spam.
5% sounds pretty good for this kind of bond, especially when you consider that it's a guaranteed ticket to heaven as well. Even if you've been killing nuns because you thought they were crypto-hookers.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 7:37 AM on August 10, 2004
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 7:37 AM on August 10, 2004
See? Spam gets results! (Got them on the front page of MetaFilter.)
posted by mcwetboy at 7:47 AM on August 10, 2004
posted by mcwetboy at 7:47 AM on August 10, 2004
Now if only there were some way for me to enlarge my penis...
posted by Robot Johnny at 8:09 AM on August 10, 2004
posted by Robot Johnny at 8:09 AM on August 10, 2004
Is evangelical spam somehow more offensive or annoying?
posted by ChasFile at 8:23 AM on August 10, 2004
posted by ChasFile at 8:23 AM on August 10, 2004
See? Spam gets results! (Got them on the front page of MetaFilter.)
(falls to the ground, sobbing)
...i ...bow...
...i-i-in sh-shame
....at the SAME SIN!!!!!!
[/prostrate] with god and heaven as my witness i am so sorry.
posted by Peter H at 8:32 AM on August 10, 2004
(falls to the ground, sobbing)
...i ...bow...
...i-i-in sh-shame
....at the SAME SIN!!!!!!
[/prostrate] with god and heaven as my witness i am so sorry.
posted by Peter H at 8:32 AM on August 10, 2004
The whole page reads like a 419 hook, but if it's true, it says lots about pastors who run their churches like a business.
posted by brownpau at 9:15 AM on August 10, 2004
posted by brownpau at 9:15 AM on August 10, 2004
Very much so as its not just commerce its crazy ideologies. Namely bigotry, misogyny and other fine qualities of the Christian right.
Yikes...
- Every sale requires an ideology, which in marketing lingo is called a "brand position;" indeed, commerce itself is an ideology. What do Nike ads sell? They certainly don't discuss the features and benefits of their particular shoes.
- Deeming the ideologies of others "crazy" is an inherently dangerous practice, as in so doing you betray your own ideological prejudices.
- You claim your outrage is based in your personal distaste for the values profligated in these advertisements. I find this argument specious, considering that many other common email ads reflect a similar ideology: most of the spam I recieve for pornography are highly misogynistic, to proffer the most obvious example. Yet can I assume the progress of misogynistic pornography continues unchecked by your complaints?
- Abusing spirituality for personal monetary gain is clearly deplorable. If it is a scam, then it is a particularly dastardly one. However, if these are real churches legitimately seeking funds for a new building (or whatever,) then they are hardly the first non-profit to solicit donations for their cause. Simply because you don't support the cause doesn't mean they don't have a right to solicit for it.
- Declaring the ideology of the "Christiran right" to be universally misogynistic and bigoted only demonstrates how narrow-minded your own ideology is. Don't lump millions of people in with a few money-grubbing spammers based soley upon a shared religion.
I'm not a Christian, I'm not on the right, I don't like spam, and I don't respond to unsolicited donation requests. My BS meter went off big-time at this one, however. Spam is spam; why the personal crusade? "I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will protect to the death your right to say it" or somesuch.
posted by ChasFile at 10:24 AM on August 10, 2004
Yikes...
- Every sale requires an ideology, which in marketing lingo is called a "brand position;" indeed, commerce itself is an ideology. What do Nike ads sell? They certainly don't discuss the features and benefits of their particular shoes.
- Deeming the ideologies of others "crazy" is an inherently dangerous practice, as in so doing you betray your own ideological prejudices.
- You claim your outrage is based in your personal distaste for the values profligated in these advertisements. I find this argument specious, considering that many other common email ads reflect a similar ideology: most of the spam I recieve for pornography are highly misogynistic, to proffer the most obvious example. Yet can I assume the progress of misogynistic pornography continues unchecked by your complaints?
- Abusing spirituality for personal monetary gain is clearly deplorable. If it is a scam, then it is a particularly dastardly one. However, if these are real churches legitimately seeking funds for a new building (or whatever,) then they are hardly the first non-profit to solicit donations for their cause. Simply because you don't support the cause doesn't mean they don't have a right to solicit for it.
- Declaring the ideology of the "Christiran right" to be universally misogynistic and bigoted only demonstrates how narrow-minded your own ideology is. Don't lump millions of people in with a few money-grubbing spammers based soley upon a shared religion.
I'm not a Christian, I'm not on the right, I don't like spam, and I don't respond to unsolicited donation requests. My BS meter went off big-time at this one, however. Spam is spam; why the personal crusade? "I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will protect to the death your right to say it" or somesuch.
posted by ChasFile at 10:24 AM on August 10, 2004
Disregarding the abuse of spirituality, use of ideology, etc., Christian appeals are inherently fraudulent because they take real-world dollars and promise after-death results.
Now, to a true believer, promises of great returns on the NASDAQ market are similarly fraudulent - they are simply fleeting material gains with no spiritual significance. However, the last time I was in a church*, I didn't see a NASDAQ ticker. Similarly, I don't want to hear about wacky religious financial details out here in the real world**.
*Interestingly, the old cathedrals in the UK (and probably continental Europe, though I haven't visited them) are covered with banner-ads on the inside. You might not recognize them at first, because they look like family coats-of-arms. But back then, a noble family was functionally similar to a modern corporation, and their coat of arms was their banner ad.
**Not complaining about the MeFi post - this is certainly a valid discussion.
posted by Kwantsar at 10:54 AM on August 10, 2004
Now, to a true believer, promises of great returns on the NASDAQ market are similarly fraudulent - they are simply fleeting material gains with no spiritual significance. However, the last time I was in a church*, I didn't see a NASDAQ ticker. Similarly, I don't want to hear about wacky religious financial details out here in the real world**.
*Interestingly, the old cathedrals in the UK (and probably continental Europe, though I haven't visited them) are covered with banner-ads on the inside. You might not recognize them at first, because they look like family coats-of-arms. But back then, a noble family was functionally similar to a modern corporation, and their coat of arms was their banner ad.
**Not complaining about the MeFi post - this is certainly a valid discussion.
posted by Kwantsar at 10:54 AM on August 10, 2004
Now calm down, people. They're not offering tickets to heaven, and the Church of Christ is not particularly right-wing. They're just looking for people who want to make a buck off the people who come to church. So let's just relax and ask ourselves, what would Jesus do?
posted by anewc2 at 11:35 AM on August 10, 2004
posted by anewc2 at 11:35 AM on August 10, 2004
anewc2: On preview, it appears that this church isn't affiliated with UCC, as they would have to identify somewhere that they are a member of or affiliated with a particular denomination. If they belonged to UCC, they would likely have greater access to funding than via spam.
posted by moonbird at 12:34 PM on August 10, 2004
posted by moonbird at 12:34 PM on August 10, 2004
Most member churches of the United Church of Christ use one of the names of the merged denominations, which are primarily Congregationalist (e.g. First Congregationalist UCC, the name of my family's home church) or Evangelical & Reformed (e.g. Bethany St. John UCC). Very few actually use the name Church of Christ, which is typically the name of a Biblical literalist sect with independent congregations which raise funds largely through tithing.
I've never heard of a church -- any church -- acquiring a building through what is ostensibly a REIT (without all that legal mumbo-jumbo that protects the investor, like the ability to elect a different trustee), but that doesn't mean it can't happen. That said, I think something about this disturbs me. Cute as a button, that building, but purchasing or building a house of worship is an important rite of maturation for any congregation. If they're not ready to buy it, they may not be ready to finance the maintenance and other aspects of church ownership. If they're not ready for that, they're certainly not ready to pay off investors.
posted by dhartung at 12:31 AM on August 11, 2004
I've never heard of a church -- any church -- acquiring a building through what is ostensibly a REIT (without all that legal mumbo-jumbo that protects the investor, like the ability to elect a different trustee), but that doesn't mean it can't happen. That said, I think something about this disturbs me. Cute as a button, that building, but purchasing or building a house of worship is an important rite of maturation for any congregation. If they're not ready to buy it, they may not be ready to finance the maintenance and other aspects of church ownership. If they're not ready for that, they're certainly not ready to pay off investors.
posted by dhartung at 12:31 AM on August 11, 2004
« Older NASA to ground many of its sites | Monica's worth an investigation, but outing a... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Mayor Curley at 7:23 AM on August 10, 2004