I am probably what is described as an observant, liberal Protestant, and I thought the ads were terrific.
I don’t share the views of the owners of Hobby Lobby as disclosed in their litigation, but the message seemed bigger and broader than they — and a pretty good present day analogy/portrayal of Jesus’ life and teachings.
One can be dismissive of Super Bowl ads as an inappropriate means of expression, but one cannot deny that the ads reached a large and diverse audience — and sparked conversation.
This was very thought-provoking, John. Thx! Re: the $ spent, part of me thinks you can’t put a price on one’s life (especially if someone has that kind of cash to throw around). Of course, more is preferable to one. But who really knows what’s going on in ppl’s hearts and what the HS will use? I mostly appreciate the lack of cheese.
I also agree that the partisan reactions are unsurprising. Extreme stances inevitably carry assumptions that skew interpretations. A nuanced conversation seems more personal and efficacious… but also requires so much more from us.
Good article John. I didn't think the ads were controversial, however, I would think supporting thousands of workers around the world who are truly speaking directly into lives of people with the message of the Gospel of Jesus might be a better use of $20 million, but... I'm a bit prejudiced towards missions! Press on!
Thanks, John. I’ve similarly been baffled by the responses, particularly the anti-Green funding ones, as if unless it comes from pure money, the product is bad. The suspicion of good works as such abounds, even if we can have disagreements over the utility of the effort.
I am probably what is described as an observant, liberal Protestant, and I thought the ads were terrific.
I don’t share the views of the owners of Hobby Lobby as disclosed in their litigation, but the message seemed bigger and broader than they — and a pretty good present day analogy/portrayal of Jesus’ life and teachings.
One can be dismissive of Super Bowl ads as an inappropriate means of expression, but one cannot deny that the ads reached a large and diverse audience — and sparked conversation.
This was very thought-provoking, John. Thx! Re: the $ spent, part of me thinks you can’t put a price on one’s life (especially if someone has that kind of cash to throw around). Of course, more is preferable to one. But who really knows what’s going on in ppl’s hearts and what the HS will use? I mostly appreciate the lack of cheese.
I also agree that the partisan reactions are unsurprising. Extreme stances inevitably carry assumptions that skew interpretations. A nuanced conversation seems more personal and efficacious… but also requires so much more from us.
Good article John. I didn't think the ads were controversial, however, I would think supporting thousands of workers around the world who are truly speaking directly into lives of people with the message of the Gospel of Jesus might be a better use of $20 million, but... I'm a bit prejudiced towards missions! Press on!
Thanks, John. I’ve similarly been baffled by the responses, particularly the anti-Green funding ones, as if unless it comes from pure money, the product is bad. The suspicion of good works as such abounds, even if we can have disagreements over the utility of the effort.
My take: https://myleswerntz.substack.com/p/can-any-good-come-out-of-wilmore