The Video Venue Strikes Again
Apparently Mark Driscol is coming to Portland according to Christianity Today. Well, he’s not really coming to Portland, only a digital version of his sermons are. I am not a fan of video venues for churches. A “pastor” is literally supposed to be a shepherd. He is supposed to guide people into the likeness of Christ. I am not convinced that watching a video can really supply the same love and care that comes from leading a community of believers that are your friends and neighbors.
Also, how can one question the teachings of someone who isn’t interactive, and can’t possibly reply to all the people they preach to? It’s at times like these that I’m not surprised people think the whore on the beast is the apostate church. So easy to go astray when our faith is more about indoctrination and less about discovery.
Okay, now that I’ve gotten my gripes out of the way, let’s face it, as much as I don’t like it, there will probably be people who will be reached by this venue. It is one more way to scatter seed, and who knows where it will grow. Without actually being involved in a video venue church, I also can’t speak to the level of involvement that goes on at the local level. Perhaps the local community will end up disagreeing with everything Driscol says, and will use his videos to spark discussion on why they disagree.
If God is in this, and uses this venue to reach even one person for Himself, I must say that it is worth while. I can complain, disagree, and fight all I want, but it’s all meaningless if even one holy person is to be found.
So while I disagree with the method, and I think it can be potentially harmful, I must conclude with a prayer that God use this venue to bring glory to Himself and to prove me wrong.
I’d argue that that isn’t a good approach to ethics Jeff. It’s the same thought that says “I know short terms missions cause a lot of problems for those they’re serving, but if even one person is effected, it’s worth it.” I’d argue that it’s not.
In fact I’ll take it a step further at the risk of sounding overly aggressive, I will say if people are being saved through the video venue as their primary experience of church, it’s more in spite of the model than because of the model.
It may not be a good approach to ethics, but I was specifically thinking of Gen. 18. Shall we condemn the righteous with the wicked? What if 50 righteous people come out of the venue, what than? What if 20? What if only 1?
Your second statement could use some clarification, as worded it makes it sound like it is the church that is doing the saving, when it is God that is doing the saving, and who am I to say what God should use to save people? He may even use a sorry sod like you or I.