Putting him up on a video most weeks may be a little like having a woman preacher; theologically and biblically questionable but a darn sight better than a live preacher preaching heresy.
The plan of global domination involves a local pastor who preaches 10 or so weeks of the year and pushes play the other 42 weeks. I heard one person quip:
When Driscoll talks of the need to screen planters (for their suitability), perhaps he means to plant screeners.
But all jokes aside it is an amazing development. Having heard the gospel-centred preaching from Driscoll I am certain his desire comes from a good place. My thoughts which I've presented elsewhere are that the greatest loss in beaming in our iPastor is we are unable to see their life and doctrine matching up. The benefit of proximity allows us to witness if they practice what they preach. This is seen in smaller congregations with your traditional flesh-pastor (though I have reservations about this description). Yet even if (God forbid!) our churches grow and we don't have a deep personal relationship with the Bible teacher we still see them as a husband and father, the car they drive, the type of person they are drawn to speak with after church, we meet with people they do have a personal relationship with, we see the respect of congregation members, we meet people converted through their personal ministry. In short, we see not just their doctrine, but their life as well.
Thanks for your blog Izaac. With a lot of things in life decisions comes with pros and cons- this applies both for large churches and also applies for a smaller churches. Are you simply presenting the cons of such a structure or are you suggesting your stance on this particular issue?
ReplyDeletePete Chong
Hi Pete,
ReplyDeleteThanks for ensuring I remain balanced! The post is my stance, to which I am definitely presenting the cons. In general I feel this is the wrong strategy. Particularly when the proposed set-up involves a local pastor preaching 10 weeks a year, I wonder why they then need a recorded address the other weeks. Is it saying it's too much work to prepare the sermon? Is it suggesting they aren't up to the task? Is it leaving the teaching of God's work to the professionals? From my perspective these are the implications of having pre-recorded messages from an outsider. This is creating an artificial distinction between the teacher and the pastor. Even churches that create specialised roles still should see that you pastor by teaching God's word and you teach God's word to pastor.
Now the pro's:
Situations where recorded messages would be useful:
1. Better to preach the gospel by video than not at all.
2. Closed countries often have recorded Bible messages broadcast over radio
3. Christian's in area's where they are the only Christian's.
"When Driscoll talks of the need to screen planters (for their suitability), perhaps he means to plant screeners."
ReplyDeleteWhoever said that was both erudite and brilliant.
Your security "CAPTCHA" thing just called me a clown.
ReplyDeleteIf only I could claim that particular example of brilliance as my own. Though I'm always happy to celebrate others wit.
ReplyDeleteIt was in the comments on one of my posts. For some reason, being the arrogant person I am, I thought it was mine - but it was someone else.
ReplyDeleteI did however suggest he was looking for 900 AV men for Jesus.