I am now tasked with SEO for our site.  SEO is Search Engine Optimization and is the process of making your page rank well in search engines like Google.  The idea is the rank well for a phrase you expect someone to search on such as “discount tour tickets“.  I just looked at the site and they are trying to rank for everything under the sun instead of aiming for Key West Discount Tickets or New York Tour Discount or Cheap Tours in Washington DC.

When you focus on the specific then you get better results.  If we focus on one specific thing with God we can get better results than a generic “I’ll try to be a better person.”

I thought I’d like to take a crack at that question.

Firstly, do churches NEED a logo?  Not really, they can indeed do all that churches do without a logo.  It is not like they can’t train up the saints or show people who Christ is without one.

Should they have one?  I think so and there are a couple of reasons for that.

1. A church logo is an identification point.  The early church used the fish symbol to communicate to each other who is a Christian without announcing it and bringing the wrath of Rome down upon them.

Our church occasionally orders T-shirts and on the back is our logo.  It brings a feeling of brotherhood to see others wearing a common symbol.  It may be the same with just the name of the church, but a symbol is instantly recognizable - even from afar.

2. A logo instantly binds all things together into the same category that bear it.  Offering envelopes, mailed letters, the website, business cards, etc. all tie together as being ‘Covenant Word Church’ if only on a subconscious level.

I often get letters in the mail that want this or that and unless there is a recognizable symbol of something I am interested in I will usually trash it.  Sometimes I trash it because of the logo if it is someone I know I don’t want to deal with (Geico insurance - they are overpriced when I compare to my insurance but they keep pestering me so straight to the trash.)

3. A logo can convey a ministry’s vision.  My pastor chose the logo we use very carefully because it combines the elements of our vision together.  The earth background represents our concern for all nations which is shown in our outreach ministry.  The eagle represents keen sight to see clearly and to soar to the height that God has created us to fly, not being satisfied with hovering at ground level.  Granted, these things are not obvious to the casual observer - one could not choose a church based on our logo, but when people understand the reason for the parts and see it again it stands as a subtle reminder of our goal.

4. A church logo is not a marketing tool.  Another conversation went toward marketing the church and Jesus and I totally disagree that we are marketing Jesus.  As mentioned on the Geeks & God Podcast God is not a service to be sold to a consumer.  Relationship with God is what the church offers and it is not a buyer’s market - so to speak.

5. Why not?  Why should the church pass on any tool that may help them get the word out?  What is this mistaken idea of humility that makes so many people think the church should be poor, plain, and miserable?  Jesus wasn’t poor!  He had a coat so valuable that the Roman Centurians, who were very well paid, didn’t want to tear it because of it’s worth so they cast lots for all-or-nothing.  Judas was Jesus’ treasurer!  How many poor people have a treasurer?  When Jesus told the rich young ruler that it’s easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter the kingdom, the apostles said “Then who can be saved?”  Not a question a poor person would ask.  We have many false ideas about Christ that we need to rid ourselves of.  Why shouldn’t a church have a logo?  I can’t think of a good reason.

Peace

First off, why bother?  If you don’t believe in the story of creation, for example, why try to explain a big bang that created everything?  Why fight against those you consider nut jobs that want to believe in a higher power?  Why, above all, say things like “This may be the explanation of the story in Genesis” if you don’t even believe the story in Genesis at all?  It’s like me trying to prove that cats won’t eat green ham and eggs or something!

Case in point, last night was a rare astronomical thing - the moon, Jupiter and Venus were so close in the sky they caught the attention of people that don’t even study the sky - like me.  The news article this morning on one of the news sites liked to by Google News says:

Some historians think that a similar approach between Jupiter and Venus in 2 BC may have been the source of the star of Bethlehem story found in the Bible. The stellar pair would have appeared so close together that they might have seemed to blend into one brilliant beacon of light.

1. Why is science trying to give a “natural” explanation for something they consider myth?
2. How did the wise men follow an event that lasted only moments?  By a couple of hours later my planetarium program shows that they were totally out of the sky over the horizon.  Not much following going on there.
3. Does the Star of Bethlehem need explanation?  There was a bright thing, they followed it, they got there.  Period.  Why do people feel the need to explain miracles?  “Well maybe the mud had a healing component that cured the guy’s blindness.”  Have you ever seen that happen?  Where is this mud - I’m sure lots of blind people would love to use it!

Silly rabbit, miracles are for believers and those who may believe, not scientists trying to take the credit away from God - otherwise they wouldn’t be called miracles.