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.

[John Smulo]

Fernando,

My motive here is to get into a dialog, as you mention above, without creating unnecessary brick walls. I think you can do that with 'Christian', just not in my experience as often as 'Jesus-follower'.

I have no doubt that 'Christian' will work better with some people, but I don't think I've come across many of them.

For me this really boils down to effective communication: will the way I label myself close doors or open them?

Admittedly, there's no magic term. But I personally think 'Christian' is largely broken in many contexts with many people (yes, intentionally not overdoing my case and nuancing my thoughts here).

[John Smulo]

Sam,

Thanks for your thoughts. For some reason it seems like we always allow ourselves more freedom to be contextual overseas than we do in our hometown.

No doubt "followers of Isa" was a wise choice in that context. I don't personally like "Isa" for my context, because it's a foreign word. But 'followers of Jesus' is fine for me.

I found the statistic on your blog about this post regarding Seattle interesting as well.

[scott hodge]

Great post John...

[John Smulo]

Matt,

Sounds like I'm 0-1. I'll take what I can get :-)

We did have a different label first, which says to me that labels can come and go--it's the gospel that stays; it's Jesus the same yesterday, today, forever--not necessarily labels.

[John Smulo]

Bryan,

I hadn't thought about how Christians have got away from denominational tags for similar reasons. Good thought.

Also, I agree totally, it's about Jesus. Anything we say that gets in the way of that is a hindrance.

[John Smulo]

Rick,

I also would feel comfortable calling myself a Christian after someone got to know me for who I was. I think you can get into a stereotype free zone with enough time and relationship building.

Actually this has raised something for me, we as Jesus-followers also fall into the same trap with others.

If people label them self "Pagan" "Witch", "Democrat" "Republican" (almost forgot that last label means your American and evangelical, smile) etc. many people start thinking of all of the stereotypes associated with them rather than remembering that they're people made in God's image, in need of Jesus Christ, etc.

Clearly the label problem isn't just a 'Christian' issue.

[John Smulo]

Paul,

You wrote "maybe we need to be sensitive to the Spirit/context/culture/conversation..."

I agree totally. If "Christian" works, by all means go for it. If it doesn't, by all means don't go for it.

I'd also say: God forbid that we build walls with others for the sake of tradition--the tradition of using a particular word to describe ourselves.

[John Smulo]

Steve,

Thanks for the encouragement.

[John Smulo]

Scott,

Thanks, appreciate it.

[Johnny Laird]

...hey John. Thanks for passing by on my blog, and thanks to all who are posting on this question. It's really making me think.

Peace & Blessings

J

[John Smulo]

Johnny,

No problem, thanks for doing the same.

Blessings.

[colin]

I guess if this is the direction we are heading in, we just need to make sure that we don't give as much reason to malign this terminology as we did the last. So, thinking ahead, because of our long established track record, what will we morph into from "Jesus follower"?

When that inevitably happens, I suggest putting the words "New Improved . . ." in front of "Jesus follower" (it's always worked for selling merchandise). Or, perhaps by that time we can re-invoke the name Christian: Neo-Christian has a great ring to it. That will gain respect :)!

[John Smulo]

Colin,

I think I detect a little sarcasm there :-)) "Neo-Christian"--hey, don't get me thinking like that!

As mentioned elsewhere, I'm totally fine with people using "Christian" if it works in their context. And also I'd use it after I got to know someone where appropriate, particularly at the relational stage where they'd gotten to know me as a person, not just a label.

[Connor]

I think it's interesting how many commenters are saying that they'd use "Christian" only in the context of an established relationship. To me, it seems like that's the only place you'd really need a label anyway.

You're not much more likely to win converts by walking up to *strangers* and saying "Hi, I'm a Jesus-Follower" than to say "Hi, I'm a Christian." Real, trusting relationships are really the only place where conversion is very possible anyway. If you can use the word "Christian" in that context, then (at least for evangelism) you don't really need a new term at all.

For any purpose other than evangelism/marketing, I don't like the subtext of the name change at all. It carries undertones of "I'm a Christian, but I'm better than all those *other* Christians." To me, that seems inappropriately arrogant.

[John Smulo]

Connor,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I think that not only do we need a label in an established relationship, but also upon first meeting someone. It's in this latter context that I think it's worth thinking about what term works best in different contexts.

My motivation isn't to say I'm better than other Christians, I'm clearly not. But out of concern for those who aren't Christians, I normally prefer to use a term that doesn't create unnecessary boundaries between them and myself before they get to know me.

Hope this explains a bit more where I'm coming from.

[sonja]

Wow ... I just found this conversation from Brother Maynard's blog. Very nice.

I've been having a problem with what on earth do I call myself now for a couple of years. I just generally tell people the Reader's Digest version of my story. Two or three sentences, which is enough to get the conversation started and they get the picture that I'm not comfortable with all of the rhetoric surrounding the term "Christian." Just those little nuggets takes down the walls and lets people know I'm not into judgement and "Truth" and all of that other stuff. That I'm willing to listen to them. Just saying, "I don't really know what I call myself anymore." has been a good conversation starter.

I haven't completely rejected the word "Christian" because I think there is a lot there that can be redeemed if we all work towards that. But I'm not completely living under that umbrella either, because of all the negative messages it carries (that you elegantly outlined in your previous post).

Thanks for this great conversation. I've thoroughly enjoyed it and it's given me a lot to think about.

[bryonm]

I appreciate your post. And I haven't read every comment, so if I'm sharing a previously states sentiment, forgive me. My thoughts are simply this: why be labeled as anythging? Why not just BE a Christian or follower of Jesus. Don't be LABELED. BE.

[John Smulo]

Sonja,

Thanks for commenting. I thought it was wise for you to say in some conversations, "I don't really know what I call myself anymore."

I can see how that would open up conversations, honestly reflect your struggle with stereotypes associated with Christianity, and break down walls instead of create them.

I'm going to put that in my bag of helpful ways of answering (intentionally or unintentionally) loaded questions.

By the way, you have the coolest looking blog I ever remember seeing. And you can change it around to your preference! Drooling.

[John Smulo]

Bryon,

Why didn't I think of that? :-)

Actually, that is what I want to *be*. But I'm not sure how to get past simple questions like "What religion are you?"

I like your thought here, and would be appreciate hearing how you respond in situations like this.

Thanks for stopping by.

[sonja]

Thanks for the props, John, It was one of the few times that my lack of filtering ability actually turned to a positive experience for me.

As for the blog, I'd love to take credit for it, but WordPress has these really cool themes that people make that are available for anyone to use. This one is called "Vistered Little 1" by Nik Iliadis. I love it just because anyone can change it to their preference. When anyone revisits, it will look just as it did when they left. It rocks! But ... all I did was choose it.

[John Smulo]

Sonja,

Props still well-deserved for a great choice! I've noticed they're making more and more blogs for those without filtering ability :-) I think it's great to allow the website/blog user to be able to customize the look of the site somewhat.

Your church community website is amazing as well. Don't tell me that was a WordPress theme :-)

[Ross Hyland]

Anyone remember the term "Jesus Freak" from the '60's?. It probably started out well but eventually became a derisive term. I do like the term "Jesus Follower" but it too has a limited shelf life. We need to keep dodging and weaving to stay current and to avoid being misunderstood. In just the same way we need to be able to express our faith with stories and metaphores that don't necessarily involve oxen and wineskins and sheep. (Great ideas for the Middle East a couple of thousand years ago!)

It's worth rembering also that WHATEVER we call ourselves, we're going to be hated in one sense because Jesus was hated. Even if we're doing a great job working hand in glove with the Holy Spirit.

[John Smulo]

Ross,

I know Jesus told his disciples to not be surprised if people hated them, because they hated him first.

Well, particularly many of the Pharisees and Sadducees hated him--trying to think of an example of someone who wasn't from a "God's people" background in the NT that didn't like him, without success.

But I've yet to find a person that isn't a Jesus-follower representing "the world" that actually hates us for living in a way that is truly consistent with what it means to be a "Christian".

Disagree? Agree?

PS Can you please send me a cup of your great coffee I miss, as well as asking Betty to send me some of those chocolate and peanut butter balls? Surely Australia Post can help you out.

[Ross Hyland]

You may be right JJ. It's easy to use the excuse that we're being "fools for Christ", when maybe we're just being fools.

Even so, there are often times when I sense that the very name of "Jesus" makes people squirm in a conversation. There develops a feeling of conviction that is followed by an unreasonably hostile or else an unreasonably embarrassed reaction. Perhaps it's just in my imagination, but I don't think so. Blokes at my work are happy enough to talk about the supernatural, or Buddhism ..... but mention Jesus and you could cut the air with a knife.

....and sure, pop round for a coffee if you like....

[sonja]

Thanks again, John. Yes, well, the church website is another thing entirely. That's the work of my husband. He does that sort of thing for a living and lent his skills/talents to the church. But I'm stubborn enough to want to "do it myself" on my blog. I'm learning to code a little at a time.

I like Ross' points btw ... sometimes it is just the name of Jesus that sets folks teeth on edge and there's not much to be done about that. All we can do in those cases is pray, love them, and hope.

Try Green Mountain Coffee Roasters ( http://www.greenmountaincoffee.com ) for some excellent mail order coffee ;-) It's the best!

[John Smulo]

Sonja,

Your husband does a great job.

I agree with Ross as well that this happen at times as well, but in my experience it seems to happen much more often with 'Christian'.

I'll check out the coffee! Thanks.

[John Smulo]

Ross,

I hear what you're saying, "Jesus" does set people on edge at times. Have you ever had this experience when you first have told people you're a "Christian"?

Hey, you're going to make me fly 14 hours to get a cup of coffee--and don't forget the chocolate peanut butter balls! How about you come over this time? You guys haven't seen the new place :-)

[ken]

John,
I love the comments this post has generated. When referring to myself, I dropped the term 'Christian' a couple of years ago and started calling myself a "Jesus Follower" instead. "Christian" is a label that others used in the book of Acts when they talked about this strange new group of people who followed some Hebrew named Jesus "Christ". But in the West today, the label doesn't mean that anymore. "Christian" carries with it centuries of baggage and ideas that have distorted the portrayal of Christ to the world. So I think I like the purity and simplicity of being labelled a "follower of Jesus."

[bekeru furi]

the only i love jesus