It sounds like the eBay atheist may be most attracted to eBay Christianity - the one where you are drawn to the most attractive adverts, with the best user feedback on how customer friendly the seller is, you only pay the lowest price you can get away with and seek only what you want in order to improve your personal wellbeing and lifestyle. Perhaps eBay Christianity also is best enjoyed in the comfort of your own home, watching messages on a monitor and avoiding the reality of real human interaction and shared experience as much as possible.

Very interesting! Makes me want to spend some time on Mehta's blog and gain more insight into what makes him tick.

The most sobering aspect of this post is to note that "they" are watching. Those who spend their lives outside the circle of the Christian community are watching us--everything we do! They are especially interested in the things that confirm their suspicions that we are just a bit goofy or lacking in intelligence. More than this, though, they look for our inconsistencies.

Like Mehta's reaction to Joel Osteen's message, I go away from this post thinking: I really do need to make better use of my time. Just as Ephesians 5:15-17 says...

?Be very careful, then, how you live—not as unwise but as wise, making the most of every opportunity, because the days are evil. Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the Lord’s will is. (NIV)

I have been sharing the gospel and having good conversations with my Spanish Language professor (I'm 44 and back in college trying to finish) She asked me who are the best preachers on television. I told her to steer clear of TV because so much of what is there is false teaching. One must sift through the junk to get to the good stuff.

Instead, I directed her to websites from which she may listen to streaming audio at her convenience. And all or most of the good preachers found on television have good websites.

Christian preaching should point people to Jesus, not merely how to use time better, or the importance of money management, or why we need friends.

First of all, I think if any of us are honest we would admit that there are some, if not many, "hilarities" connected to the way Christian ministries/church/organizations market themselves and their events.

One example that comes to mind is the peculiar way that Pentecostal and Charismatic churches tend toward a rather liberal of use exclamation marks: "Feel the POWER NOW!", "Be Free in the Spirit!", “The VICTORY is OURS!”

I also think Mehta is on to something when he points out that sometimes our "back to the Bible" sloganing is really nothing much more than smoke and mirrors for the espousing of our own opinions. I think it's more than a little illuminating that an atheist is able to recognize that we often go to the Bible to support our pre-existing beliefs- rather than the other way around.

Most important of all I think this relationship between "Off the Map" and Mehta is a good one because it communicates to others that we are open to dialogue and receptive to feedback. At the end of the day we can laugh at Mehta’s insights because we too are human- and make human mistakes.

At the end of the day, the mission/vision behind "Off the Map" is an evangelistic one. They are willing to learn from others, while our "blemishes" come to the light, in the hope that the Jesus who is the real deal (despite all our mixed-motive advertising) will come to be known by a world of people who don’t yet know him as much more than the figure-head behind the Religious Right.

I wonder if he knows any Christians in real time, rather than merely through media. That said, I wonder what impressions on him such Christians have made. Note: It's Christian media he keeps checking into, rather than any other religions. C.S. Lewis once observed that a devout athiest cannot guard his faith too carefully - his "Adversary" can be quite unscrupulous.

E-bay Christians...
Sometimes I wonder if that doesn't sum up today's American Christianity altogether. Lord, I hope not, but a nagging doubt lingers in my hopes.

Guy Kawasaki has an interesting take on this in his 10 principles of product "evangelism" (as he is a product marketing evangelist and venture capitalist of some note). The principle: "look for agnostics, ignore athiests." Maybe $504 would be better spent bidding on an agnostic, in other words.

Fascinating insights in this post, however. I especially resonate with the comment by BW.

Hugh's surprise that 'they are watching us' is a little, well, surprising. Isn't the whole point of Evangelism to get noticed? Like it, or not, Christians live within full view of the world (perhap's this was Hugh's point), and in presuming to speak to it, we give it the right to speak back to us. If we claim to stand up for Jesus, then the right reaction we should get is 'OK, so show me what you've got', and this appears to be what Mehta is saying.

Regarding Mehta's blog, its very useful to hear how the message sounds to someone from the 'other side of the table'. I spent a couple of hours on the phone last night with someone grappling with the same issues as Mehta, and it is interesting to note the similarities between the two as they examined their perceptions of 'churchianity'. Christians would be wise to learn from these conversations.

Getting a peek into the mind of this atheist certainly has some value as we seek to evangelize the lost in our everyday lives. For that I'm grateful.
But I hope this won't continue to encourage the Hybels-esque/seeker-sensitive models of restructuring the biblical ecclesiastical methodology based on the "needs" of the unchurched (atheist, agnostic, or anyone else).

I can appreciate Mehta's "Seinfeld-esque" observations. We've been joking about such things since Jr. High though. Christians are weird because they are people and people are weird. This whole experiment can be flipped at the atheist's expense as well.

I've been following this story on and off, and among a couple things, I am mainly concerned by the hero-complex of some. I too desire to see him and all become believers, but let's be careful how far we go. We can't "save him"-- we can only be faithful to the message we have been given and act accordingly (Speak/Live the truth of Christ and Love all). Still it's worth having this important discussion.

Jack at www.blackcoffeereflections.blogspot.com

The diversity of Christian faith is such that people can see a slice of it and feel as though they have seen it all. While watching a report on Jesus the other day on Discovery Channel, the statement was made that “Most Christians believe Mary stayed a virgin her whole life.” A certain sect of Catholicism and a few other sects believe this, but not the whole of Christianity. Sort of like the 6 blind men describing an elephant.

Mehta sees in part but not the whole. It should be respectfully noted too that he is spiritually blind. This does not mean his observations are inaccurate or lack insight, but is does mean they are not “spiritually apprised.” Two thoughts and I’m out.

My friend says he does not like marriage. This is because he sees his parents' marriage as a passionless co-existence between two adults who, without the contract of marriage, wouldn’t even be friends. He tends to lump all marriage experiences into that one. The problem is that he starts with a presupposition to marriage that cannot end favorably because he does not see marriage rightly. Mehta started with a presupposition about Christianity and God that comes from the basis that there is no God. The Bible says this is foolish and the person who states there is no God is a fool. Not my words but God’s. I am less inclined to take insight from someone who, with well intentioned motives, still starts with the answer that there is no God. It turns his examination of faith into movie screening, where he can rate the actors, the audience and the merit of a story. He does not have the relationship and by his own statement of position denies the existence of God whom we worship, adore, obey, honor, and declare our redeemer. How can he understand and offer us wisdom, and why does it seem so many of us are taking his appraisal as wisdom?

Second, the history of atheism is not rosy. Look at the systems built on atheism and check their human rights credentials. Look at communist Russia, China, North Korea and other smaller countries. The extreme abuses, poverty and corruption do not fair well for this thinking. Mehta’s ability to exercise his freedom comes from the influence of a faith that he denies the existence of its God. Strange but true.

Mehta, I applaud your creativity, your seemingly honest assessment of the things you see in Christianity, and the way in which you communicate these things. But your assessments lack an honest question. It is one thing for me to critique my faith family and in doing so seek to make it better. You critique faith but do not do so to make it better.

I wonder if Mehta is as far from the kingdom as he thinks he is. C.S. Lewis, in his atheist days, likely would perhaps have made some of the same observations as Mr. Mehta.

As others have pointed out, Metha is indeed spiritually blind. He appreciates and considers faith solely as a beneficiary practice. He falls into the humanistic trap (which sadly is very rampant even among us, Christians): that religion/faith is about MY benefit.

Still, I agree with his pragmatism. Pastors should contextualize their teachings, so that they may be relevant for the flock. But at least in the same measure, they must stress God's supremacy and His perfect (yet acceptable) will for our lives. Once you realize that God is almighty and that He works for the benefit of His children, you really don't need to worry whether a particular verse "makes sense" according to the humanistic standards. Whenever I seek God's will, I don't analyze it through my limited intelligence to see whether it makes sense or not. On the contrary, I want to make sure that my rationalizing is on the same wavelength with His.

So no Mehta, you will never be able to experience the intellectual freedom in Christ unless you step from your boat and walk in faith.

So it is safe to say that preaching on Acts 14:22 would be as unpopular with Atheists as it is with Christians.

“We must through many tribulations enter the kingdom of God.”

Mehta may be a spiritual consumer, but his insights are good in that they help us understand where to begin with people. Yes, we must point to Jesus. Yes, we must point them back to the Bible. But we they must first be willing to listen to us. Paul started with the spiritual sensitivities of those on Mars Hill he did not start with the Hebrew Scriptures.

Mehta is an atheist, and I don't think we should transform our approach to church because of everthing he writes. But I do think we can gain something. Over time, Mehta may eventually hear something or "feel" something that leads him closer to God. But he won't experience that moment if he (or any other seeker) is completely turned off by the speaker. Our preaching should not turn people away.

The Sunday worship service is only one aspect in the ministry of a local church, but it is an important one. The preacher must work to be the best communicator that he or she can be, not because he or she does it all on their own, but because God expects the best. The results, though, are Gods. He must move in people's hearts. But, again, our preaching should help not hinder their movement toward God. For some unknown reason, God has decided to work through human voices and in unison with human beings.

All of need to understand that the lost are watching us. Don't think for one second that the lost aren't judging Jesus by how we act. Believing in God requires faith but so does not believing, whether non believers know it or not. Faith is not easy because it's believing in something you can't see or touch so we work on our faith to stay strong. But since we're human we all struggle from time to time. The lost are no different. They struggle too because, whether they know it or not, built inside them is the desire to seek God. So they look to us to justify their nonbelief. Christians are supposed to be the light of the world and the lost need to be able to look at us and wonder what it is that we have.
The blogging world is awesome and I have made some great friends across the country but at times I wonder if it's really a good thing. The blogging world seems to have become a place for us to air our dirty laundry with each other. I don't want to speak for Mehta but I suspect, since he is a blogger, that he has seen his fair share of this. I wonder how it affects him? I can't speak for him but I have seen firsthand how it affects other nonbelievers.
As Christians we must never forget that we're in this together and the only way someone like Mehta will ever begin a search for the truth is if we love him into it. And we can't if were spending all our time attacking one another.
As a Pastor some might think I have gained this understanding from the people in my church but to be honest most of this I have gained because I am the brother of a lost person. I love my brother with all my heart and pray daily for him but I feel like sometimes I'm beating my head against a wall because he has so many places to go to find Christians who are brutally attacking each other and frankly I hear about when he does. He's lost and he's watching us because he needs something to help him continue to not believe.
Mehta my friend, I'm glad you're here with us. I hope you will continue to look at all of this with an open mind because my prayers are that you will find something in us that you just can't explain away. If your mind wasn't at least a little open you wouldn't be here. Besides maybe I can learn something from you that will help me reach my brother. Stick with us my friend and who knows, you may find yourself searching before it's over. And if you do, email me because whether you know it or even believe it, God loves you.
And to all of my brothers and sisters in Christ, let's never forget how closely the lost are watching us. I believe they're watching us closer than we're watching each other.

What I find most interesting here are the assumptions being made about Mehta (Hemant). The short blurb at the start of this post explains a little about what the project was about but obviously does not give the whole picture. I think it is necessary to read more of Hemant's post, especially his reviews of the churches he visited to gain a fuller picture.

It is real that we as Christians are being watched. Perhaps our goal is not to cater to what we think people want, but it is also dangerous to ignore what outsiders see when they look at our churches. It scares me how many people refuse to listen to criticism or who deal with it by attacking the person who is doing the criticizing as if that would invalidate his words. We are weird - and we can't blame all of that on Jesus. Sometimes we need wake up calls and the eBay atheist project has been a good wake up call for many churches.

As part of the project, Hemant visited the small church plant I am helping start ( Via Christus ), and it was great getting to have a conversation with him and "seeing" our church through his eyes. We discussed ideas, and while I don't agree with his beliefs and basic worldview, I respect him and appreciate what he is doing.

"Even the wise take counsel from fools..." ... so says the book of Proverbs.

Just because someone is an athiest doesn't mean that they can't have insightful comments for the Church. I find his characterization of 'Church-lite' to be very compelling and true... if only Seeker-sensitive churches would actually listen to this. This movement to 'palatize' Christianity has had some real good benefits.

But it also has been destructive in that it gives so-called Christians a choice to be disengaged theologically with their hearts and minds. And I think Metha senses the lack of thoughtful engagement that takes place in the church. Furthermore, this destructive view simply confirms the athiest view that Christians are simply looking for comfort, not the truth.

Thanks Mehta for calling this out.

In my thinking, it is very sad to see an unbeliever pointed toward mass media Christianity and institutionalized, crowd oriented gatherings of Christianity and asked to observe for truth and authenticity. The foundation of both these approaches to Christianity are denials of its core element: God is a personal relationship God, and thus is a two-way communication God. This core element is almost completely eliminated from these two approaches to Christianity.

Mass media Christianity and institutionalized gatherings are at least 90% one-way communication. When Jesus said "I am the way, the truth, and the life" he is saying these 3 elements are all a personal relationship with Him. Therefore there is no surprise that every passage that calls the saints to proclaim Jesus to the lost is to be done in PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP / TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION.

WE ARE His ambassadors, not impersonal mass media presentations of true facts about Him. There is a HUGE difference between the two. American believers are quite gullible to "outsource" their personal relationship responsibilities to impersonal media and crowd oriented/one-way communication events, even though it all costs multiplied billions of $. I remember Howard Hendricks saying something like "The lost are weary of merely hearing facts about the truth."

Alas, as Paul said he could rejoice even when Christ is preached with selfish ambition, so can I, even though it’s a struggle. But this does not mean we should not rebuke systems of preaching Christ with selfish ambition.

Millions have not yet heard the gospel in personal relationship fashion because American believers have suckered for funding non-relational systems that give the gospel to people who have heard it in this fashion a hundred times already and have rejected it a hundred times.

This is not good stewardship of God’s economy and God’s design for His family.

Joel Osteen is a fraud. But that is the case with most "tele-evangelism." American Christianity is a pop-psycologized version of religion which "meets needs." It does not follow the road of disciplship after the way of Christ, nor does it carry a cross, and it certainly has misunderstood salvation as "souls being saved." Sorry that was a neo-Platonic philosophic.

The Gospel of Jesus Christ cannot be packaged, reducued, or made easy. It is both offensive and beautiful simultaneously. It's offense is its great beauty. But then again that is never good for a numbers game.

Most of our churches are not ekklesia's they are collection tanks for a narcissistic society that perpetually recreates Jesus in the indvidual mind after the individuals image!

peace.

I think Out of Ur's choice to focus in on Hemant's comments on Christian Media was unfortunate. I expect you chose those comments since you, being a Christian publication, fall under the heading of 'Christian Media.'

However, I think any of Hemant's surveys of evangelical churches (Willow Creek, Park, Park Community and Moody are all evangelical, I think) had a lot more comments about evangelicals in them than Hemant's survey on Christian media. They would have been more relevant.

Jesus did not come to give us the all wise guru who gives "tips to a better life." Jesus came as the all conquoring Savior who gives forgiveness of sins to those who convert, i.e., repent of their sin, believe trust in and submit to His Lordship, so as to reconcile lost men to their loving heavenly Father. To use the pulpit to do anything else confuses the issue. Should we be as creative and relevant as possible, yes. Should we be creative and relevant to the point of misrepresenting who Jesus was/is and His message, no. This is the crucial question of these days. May we answer it with great prayer, care, devotion to Scripture and love.