"Combating Christian Stereotypes; or, How to Turn the Titanic Around." www.staypcusa.com
http://staypcusa.com/2012/07/27/combating-christian-stereotypes-or-how-to-turn-the-titanic-around/
My source is credible due to the fact that the individual has entered the home stretch in obtaining their Master's of comparative religion degree and therefore has sufficient knowledge for the topic on which they are addressing.
My source addressed her specifically non-Christian friends, in an effort to see the ways in which non-Christians view Christians, and asked them to give some characteristics of Christians that they thought could use improving. This lead to some very interesting, yet saddening, results which I argue will be very beneficial for my blog.
My source, Jodi Craiglow, sought to identify with her non-Christian friends just what the reasons were for their dislike towards Christians. Upon gathering the results from her non-Christian friends Craiglow seeks to find a solution to these views of Christians. She does so first by Drawing upon history and mentioning the beginning of a still present stereotype of Christians today, which views Christians as power hungry. While not all Christian stereotypes involve the facet of power, the Christian of today has lost the meaning of being a Christ follower, according to Craiglow, which leads to the modern Christian stereotypes. To rid our community of Christians of stereotypes, Craiglow offers that we must go back to truly seeing, and caring for, the person behind the non-Christian title; not merely as an individual to win over to "our side".
Jenny, this is an interesting blog post for your research topic. It's important, however, to acknowledge that this is a blog, which means it doesn't have the same level of credibility as an edited and published academic journal. Her blog post provides some interesting anecdotal evidence and conclusions but you'll also need to consider more academic sources in your search as well.
ReplyDeleteAs I mentioned in your phase three post, you'll want to make sure you're conducting thorough CRAAP analyses. For this post, you overlooked questions like what type of evidence does the post use and who is the intended audience? The answers to these questions affect the overall credibility of any source.
You did a nice job with the summary; it covers key highlights and keeps a neutral tone. How do you think you could write this summary even more concisely?