I disagree with the idea that the issue of video venues and multi-site is not important. To me, it goes to the very definition of the church, the bride of Christ. If that's not important, nothing is.

I also dislike setting the discussion of video venues and multi-site against concern for evangelism and immigration. Many of the churches that are expanding via multi-site are deeply committed to evangelism and serving the "least of these". Strawmen like that don't further a conversation.

amen.

note: my original "amen" is in regard to David's article - not any following comments.

Here! Here! David! Well done! Finally!

There is nothing inherently Biblical, or unBiblical, about having multi-site churches. Drop the discussion, drop the idea of having multi-site churches, and get on with the work of Christ.

I appreciate the idea that we should make sure this discussion is not dominating all our interests, and yet I also think that the discussion of video venues and virtual church are very important discussions to be had.

What's at stake is how we define the identifying marks of a church. It needs to be hashed out that we make sure we aren't capitulating to the worser parts of our consumer minded, celebrity worshiping culture.

Can we highlight other issues and yet continue this discussion? I would much rather we prioritize than just take a laissez faire approach and brush the issues behind this discussion under the rug.

Probably the best way to move on to another topic is to...

Move on to another topic...

I'm afraid this post will only further the very discussion the author wants to avoid. Lets all move on...

fascinating how this blog consistently stirs the pot and then has a post about how it's such "a waste of time"...

More important issues like how to give credence to the bogus figures about millions of uninsured and how uninsured somehow means you can't get medical help? Is God's call on us to end evil capitalist oppression? Is God's call on us to help law breakers feel more like they really aren't breaking the law?

ugh. capitalism is just another human system that will be swept away, under judgement, when the Kingdom comes...

sheeesh.

Tim,

Does everything have to be political? Really?
Can't someone bring up the subject of uninsured people without it being a threat to your political belief system? Shouldn't the church be concerned about that? They don't have to espouse Obamacare to worry about the least of these.

Why are we increasingly bringing the shrill voice of secular politics to our supposedly Christian dialogue? Our Kingdom should not go through the prism of Fox News and MSNBC.

I know this really has nothing to do with David's post, but I am stunned by how often I read the comments section of Christianity Today/Out Of Ur blogs and see it denigrate into something as vitriolic as you'd find on any political site that isn't populated with people that supposedly have the love of Christ in them.

Sorry about the rant against rants.

Funny. I was just thinking (sarcasm hat on) "Wow. Another blog on Out of Ur about media usage in churches and the inevitable silly and useless debate to follow. It's amazing how out of touch this site has become."

i wouldn't say "out of touch", probably just unable to see beyond a particular set of interests that are probably more representative of the contributors, whose hobby is this blog.

i took a break from Out of Ur for a bit, came back, and must say that it's not really all that interesting anymore.

i'll probably be encouraging our other church leaders to keep CT and Out of Ur on our "don't bother list".

it's too bad.

increasingly not representative of anything we relate to and the only other option is 'the christian century'.

*sigh*

who knows...maybe i'll give it another month. "hope all things, bear all things..."

We can't move on, because Satan doesn't want us to move on. The topics of multi-site and video venue churches are perfectly sufficient to keep our focus off Jesus (whose name appears exactly four times as of this comment).

Before these topics get old, Satan will have another debate brewing that will again distract us from our Lord and his desire for us and his body.

If we "Seek Peace and Correctly" within the existing residing doors already given to The churches, there will not be so much need for additional sites half full anyways from the interpersonal/relational dividings not attended too by lazinesses held, or selfish endeavors never worked out. Sister Church sites are one thing; but when added onto only to suffice & promote support of a unhealthy division/split--God usually sees to it these all don't last--if not held too accountable to what they originally were offered from God-first. We do unto others as.....

As for the advancements in technologies through video senses, this is impairative due to the fact that many learn and retain information much better while engaging in this type of fashion--undisturbed than, and implented therefore differently.

PF

I also dislike setting the discussion of video venues and multi-site against concern for evangelism and immigration. More than just the outside appearance , or what we personally claim too others as who we are representing behavorially-community , as well our inner core being...each.

i am also not a fan of multi-site because i see it as turning potential leaders and church planters into serving someone else's idea. and i also think each individual church should be a unique reflection of that locality, not a mirror image of a distant church with a bigger budget.
thanks for the article.

ugh.

This blog and the subsequent comments (including mine) degenerating into yet another silly argument and flame-fest is just more proof that most blogs and comments sections on the web need to be a thing of the past.

Thanks for the comments, though admittedly I'm not tracking with all of them. My point was simply to ask whether the current interest in multi-site and video-venue models of church is actually representative of the types of issues facing our churches. I realize the importance of this conversation, I'm simply not convinced it matters as much as we think it does.

My hunch? Our fascination with multi-sites and video-venues is another in a long line of examples of the many being concerned with the realities of a few. And, as is often the case, the few tend to be larger and more visible churches whose influence ends up affecting those with very different contexts, challenges, and callings.

Our little, insignificant, 80-member church - complete with a sound system that buzzes and requires a person to always be at the volume control, adjusting as necessary - couldn't care less about your endless quibbles over "multi-site campuses" and video screens. This weekend, we had members serving on a Kairos mission to a juvenile prison, members serving at a food pantry, members making food and gifts for a holiday charity fund-raising bazaar, and members holding a church service at a local nursing home.

We have our problems and limitations, and certainly don't have everything right, but that's what we were up to. So... please continue to quibble about video screens, campuses and liberal politics.

We're too busy to listen to much of that.

I think one problem we get into is that we talk in too much of a meta-church conversation. I have yet to find that conversation helpful in any way. Sometimes we fight the larger "establishment" of church too much and, thus, wasting so much time.

Efforts of conversation toward health care solutions and concerns of social justice tend to be mostly political and bureaucratic. If a Christian has a stance on this issue then, by all means, pursue it through all possible avenues to make it better, i.e., be politically involved. However, a complete dependency on the government to resolve, restore, or rectify such issues is purely...well...sad. There are many more interests the government is concerned with that directly effect change in these areas. If a Christian (or church) has a conviction about health care then I say get out the checkbook and pay for someone's care or volunteer medical care. Maybe sell a car or be less self-indulgent in the consumption of luxury items, i.e., non-essentials. Get out there an take care of people! Be the love of Christ.

In regard to video and technology, I believe it is all an illusion within the church. Simply put, this is cultural consumption. To think of it solely as a learning mechanism is naive. It is included in "church" because it has entertainment value or it shows "relevance." It is all PR. It turns church into a show to meet the temporary needs of a consumer-minded, media saturated culture. An economic stratum, a social class that is more concerned with lifestyle than lifechange through the redeeming power of Christ.

Not a fan of the post. Honestly just not. The multi-site conversation is one that needs to happen. Our orthopraxy goes to the heart of our orthodoxy. Ecclesiology is the outward expression of our faith.

I do like some points, particularly the one about how this whole phenomen has set a tone for what is "successful" ministry and what is not.

Ironically I was traveling around the city where I live the other day and came across a massive, modern structure that houses a video campus of a huge mega-church located about twenty five miles away. As I sat at my light I looked to my left and saw a simple brick building housing a pentecostal church and to my left and saw a medium sized methodist church building. I wonder of the three who we think is being successful?

Finally, the grave danger that is looming is not just ecclesiolgical but is also pastoral. Multi-sites naturally centralize over one leader, one teacher. When we do this we negate the movement of God in young men's lives about the reality of their calling to lead.

You are the Church!
Robert Angison

By showing the video on site that's good for increasing traffic on site.We have to make site like it looks multi sites for that we have to making links in right or left side of our site from that we can redirect our url to particular sites.