12 Reasons Why I Prefer The Term "Jesus-follower"

This post follows on from my 11 Reasons Why I Don't Like The Term "Christian". I'd encourage you to read that first if you haven't already.

Feel free to continue commenting there. The discussion is still alive and kicking (me for suggesting such a thing--not really).

But I digress. Here are some of the reasons why I normally refer to myself as a 'Jesus-follower'.

1. It centers on Jesus.
2. It implies action.
3. It raises questions rather than answers.
4. It encourages further understanding and exploration.
5. It points others to Someone beyond myself to look to.
6. It suggests a journey rather than a destination.
7. It requires a dynamic, rather than static, context.
8. It agrees that there is room, if not a need, for A New Kind of Christian Follower.
9. It doesn’t have historical baggage, and unlike a more popular term, is less likely to cause angst and heart burn.
10. It fulfills what Jesus himself asked of people time and time and time and time and—well you get the point—again.
11. It is a conversation starter rather than stopper.
12. It exhorts relationship, interaction, and partnership.

Passing the mic to you. What do you think?

Comments

[rob horton]

I like it. I have been trying: "follower and lover of Jesus".

[John Smulo]

Rob,

I like it. I'm looking forward to reading more of your blog, good stuff there.

[blind beggar]

John: Well you certainly know where I stand on this -- a Jesus follower is what I are :-).

To pick up on thread from the previous post, Christian is a biblical term only in the sense that it is in the bible. There is no way one can make a case that it is a God ordained term. Where does it say, "And the Lord said, you shall be called Christians?"

[John Smulo]

BB/Rick,

Yes, I had to let your comment about this term slide yesterday :-)

I agree that there isn't a case to be made that 'Christian' is God's exclusive term for Jesus-followers.

[David]

And to quote what I heard somewhere (yeah I know that's not very acurate, but I'm sure you'll agree anyway, hehe)...

"Christian" is out, but "Jesus" is in.

Works for me. It should alwasy be about Jesus. I've been using "Jesus Follower" for a couple months now and it's fun to watch how a "Christian" looks at me. A bit of quirkiness, but approval at least.
:-)

[sally]

Me too, I'm a Jesus follower!

[John Smulo]

David,

I'm honored now to not only have had the queen of blogging comment, but now the king too :-)

I'm very interested to know you've been using this as well. Thanks for sharing the reactions you've had.

[John Smulo]

Sally,

I knew there was something different about you :-)

[Paul]

Works for me... :)

can I ask what happens when you say: "I'm a Jesus follower"

to wit the other person says...

"a christian?"

thus providing an opportunity to hand out your card with this url on it... ;)

or does that not just happen?

Seriously I think this post and the last have been great at asking why we call ourselves what we call ourselves and in 10 yrs time I'll be able to blog why I am a christian and just reverse all your excellent thoughts around :)

thanks John for stimulating those missional thoughts!!!!

[molly]

Great thoughts, Smulo Spaceman!

I don't mind using the word Christian around anyone who finds that word a positive thing...such as, other Christians, for example--lol. :) But I too, without even really consiously thinking about it, have nixed the word from my vocabulary in most other settings, preferring to align myself with Jesus as opposed to an institution.

This is not to say I inwardly feel seperate from my brothers and sisters, though I don't agree with much of the institutionalized varieties---but I also know that we can be in the same flock and love eachother WHILE disagreeing.

I just don't think that it's a good idea to put the focus on the mess of the instutution (ie, the word, "Christian"), when an institution never saves anybody anyway.

The point of Christianity, though oft forgetten, is supposed to be Jesus. So it seems like MAKING the point Jesus (in conversation wtih others about such things, as opposed to makign it center around Christianity) ought to be...normal...and anyone making a fuss against focusing on Jesus (in favor of using pet terminology) seems like they need to re-evaluate their concept of "Christianity" in the first place.

[John Smulo]

To the Jesus Follower formerly known as Paul:

It depends on the person for me. But normally my response would be something like "Yes Christian, but not according to what the stereotype of that word means to most people". Then it would be up to them to take it from there.

[John Smulo]

Molly,

I'm glad my favorite ex-blogger has stopped by. I'm still trying to get over that :-(

I agree that the focus really needs to be on Jesus, and you know you won't get any arguments from me about a term that puts Jesus at the center of things.

[philjohnson]

John

I have found in some contexts that this self-descriptive expression has immediately closed down a conversation or meant that the topic goes no further and the conversation heads off elsewhere.

Indeed I well remember a visitor to our stall in the MBS festival upon hearing "Jesus" physically jumped back into the aisleway and made a swift exit.

I recall Warwick Saxby saying that in Nimbin using the word "Christian" closed down communications while "following Jesus" was less problematic.

Perhaps this points to the same problem noted in yesterday's blog post: some words are stigmatized and one can never predict how people will react upon hearing the word "Jesus", "Christ", "Christian" etc. And as Dorothy Sayers said, "any stigma will beat a dogma any day."

[Lori]

John,
I have to admit that when I read your first list about the word Christian I couldn't help but think, why not try and change the perception by being what you described here. That's my eternal optimism talking.

But when I read this list and the meanings behind being a follower of Jesus, that better describes my faith and that's what I want others to know about me. Great thoughts.

It's why I chose my blog name, I want people to know that not all pastor's wives homeschool their kids, play piano, sing and run the yearly bake sale at the church.

[John Smulo]

Philip,

Wisdom is needed in different contexts for sure. But my guess is that 'Christian' provokes a more adverse reaction in more cases than any other term.

No doubt this is because it is overwhelmingly the most used descriptor. But nonetheless, this still means it has inherited the most negative thoughts/feelings.

[John Smulo]

Lori,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts about this.

I had a feeling there was a story behind your blog name :-)

[Shannon]

Jesus Follower is an accurate descriptor in every way. That is exactly what Christ asks of us, right? Follow me? A bit off topic but I get frustrated to hear preachers ask potential converts to "accept" Christ. I mean, Jesus NEVER asked anyone to accept him. He asked everyone to "follow him". The reality is much of what Jesus had said and done was "unacceptable" to many...then and now. We accept Visa, Mastercard and Discover cards....you "Follow" Jesus! We follow Jesus even when it's difficult to accept they why, where, when and how.

[John Smulo]

Shannon,

I really like what you say here. I agree fully. Where did we ever get "accept" from in this context? Very good point.

On a different note, I also really dislike church "membership" for many of the same reasons you say above. We're members of the "yacht" club; membership has privileges. But were a body part, etc. in the body of Christ. I've used the word "partnership" instead of membership in the past because I think it more closely represents the "one another" passages and the rest of what believers are called to in the local church.

[fernando]

Of course, if we wanted to, we could shoot down *both* Christian and Jesus-follower as being insufficiently Trinitatrian.

But let's not go there for now.

Just recently, I had a new aquaintance say this to me; "...you are just too honest and intellgent to be a Christian." I'm not sure his angst towards the faith, or bewilderment at my embrace of it would be assuaged by a different descriptive term.

I'm not sure it could *unless* we wanted to claim that Jesus-followers are different from Christians - but that seems fraught.

In the end, doesn't it come down to our approach to dialogue, rather than what we call ourselves? Your "Jesus-Follower" approach seems to designed to open a converstion about the core of your doctrine and praxis. But you can do that by calling yourself a Christian as well, it just comes down to how you approach it.

Maybe the real problem is the full-stop we put after "Christian" - as if the title itself was self-explanatory.

[samlee]

Recently, I was asked what religion I was with. I had such a hard time saying, "I was a Christian".

Anyways, you might find this interesting, but when I was working with a Muslim community in Western Africa, we were told to describe ourselves, "followers of Isa", and not Christians. Isa is Jesus in Islam. So I got to thinking, do we need to start calling ourselves "Followers of Isa" in the Western world as well...?

[Matt Wiebe]

Despite my disagreement with you on ditching "Christian," I find myself in full agreement with you here. From a missional base, I would definitely be far more likely to use the term "Jesus follower" to describe my beliefs than "Christian" for precisely the kinds of reasons you're saying.

Heck, we were called "followers of the way" before being called "Christians."

[Bryan Riley]

Yes, it would be nice if we could simply let our lives speak for themselves, but sometimes words and other things get in the way of communication. "Christian" for many has become just such a term. Just as many followers of Jesus (the Christ) have fled Baptist, Assemblies of God, Methodist and other denominational brands to find unbranded versions of church, it makes sense to make it clear with whom we stand--Jesus. Of course, even then, there will be new stereotypes, but we must endeavor to keep offering ourselves as living sacrifices to the only One worthy of it.

[blind beggar]

Bryan, I think you have noted something useful to the discussion by bringing up church names. Many have dropped terms like "Baptist" from the name for many of the same reasons John has noted about the term "Christian." It doesn't mean they are not still "Baptist," just that the term creates a negative image not reflect by the actual faith community. I belong to a faith community that has the term "Bible" in its name. You don't know how many times I've heard someone from outside say something like, "Oh you can't just be a regular church, you have to be a "BIBLE" church."

fernando, you are spot on when you said that it is about our approach to dialog. It is about taking those first steps of relationship building that dialog starts. At some point, once relationship has been built, I have no problem using the term "Christian" because they now know me and are not quick to put in their stereotypical "Christian" thought box. At that point, it is common to hear "...you are just too honest and intelligent to be a Christian." That is good because we are now changing their perception of what a Christian – causing them to question their stereotypical view.

samlee, great analogy. Missional people contextualize the message for the context they find themselves in.

[Paul]

Don't tell me John in your next post you are gonna propose we change our secret handshakes as well??? :)

Seriously for a mo i think the conversation here as highlighted that sometimes christian is gonna work and sometimes follower of Jesus (or variation) is gonna work and maybe we need to be se sensitive to the Spirit/context/culture/conversation...

[Steve]

I like it.