Ultimately, video venues strike me as a poor compromise. They may be necessary at times, but are certainly not a strategy to be pursued, even alongside traditional church plants. They focus entirely too much on the preaching gifts of one person, a trend even we small "emerging" types need to counter.
Thinking about preaching, I think Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones would have said one word about a video preaching: abomination.
Of course, there's no way of knowing that for sure, and I may not go as far as saying that "a"-word. But I strongly agree with Bob Hyatt on the point that video venues are a poor compromise. I may not defend my position analytically and critically as I should, but let me just state a question for those who think it is ok to have video preaching. If you need to be present physically at a Sunday worship together with other brothers and sisters, why is it ok for the preacher to be physically absent?
(HT: Between Two Worlds
2 comments:
Hi Tim
Enjoy your site
I'm not enamoured with multi-site video preaching either, but I can see why Mark Driscoll and John Piper's churches do it.
Hello, Mr. McKay,
I heard that John Piper does it, and now I know Mark Driscoll does it too. Although I am not fully aware of their rationale for it, I still think it is a compromise.
I suppose it can be used as a stepping stone for the next stage of a church plant, or maybe the pastors are waiting for the congregation to mature further in this regard, or both.
I can understand that a change in churches requires time even if it is a biblical one, and I do not wish to criticise any pastor's patience, rather, I think we much need it more often than not. I heard John Piper took several years until he even started teaching his congregation about having Elders in the church.
I am humbled by such pastoral patience, and thankful for those times when I was treated with that kind of loving patience by my pastors.
Post a Comment