With a title for this entry like I've chosen - I want to do it in such a way that I leave very little room for any controversy. I defeat the purpose of this entry otherwise.
I am not going to reference or give any names in this and I don't want this to be about promoting or attacking anyone in the body of Christ, but to simply be something that promotes a spirit of encouragement, love and bringing the body of Christ closer to being a body working as God desires.
This morning I read a title of a blog entry that one of my friends shared. When I read the title I instantly thought it was a marketing tactic to get people to read it, but wasn't really going to conclude with the idea it planted by the title or was written from a source against Church and or followers of Christ in general.
I did not expect the entry to actually be what the title presented.
I don't even want to use the title or anything close to it of what I read.
I'll start with this.
The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him.
- Proverbs 18:17
I can certainly see how the author could come to the thoughts they expressed and how they could come to the statements they made. However, as I wrote my friend back I began to think and read through the article more and it started to seem less and less right and more and more wrong.
The more I read the blog entry, the more I felt behind the well made points, was a unseen force. The fruit or the spirit of the blog entry, did not promote or produce a feeling of blessing, healing or restoring the body of Christ and or bringing glory to God from what I experienced in reading it. Rather it seemed to produce a feeling, a fruit, that didn't sit well and felt like a brother in the family tearing down another brother.
The feeling I felt myself with was sadness. Real sadness.
Why do we as the body of Christ attack and tear down each other. Why are we so quick to think we are to correct and rebuke on things that are not clearly outlined in scripture as wrong?
The thought of the entry I read is that when a church has more than one campus and uses remote video to beam a pastor into other campuses to preach and teach that it is Satan behind the motives of doing it. That is not the exact wording, but anyone who has read the article - I think it is safe to assume that my summary of the entry is close to the entry's point.
I want to make it clear what view and thought I am coming from in writing this as it is going to influence the lens I am writing this through in my worldview.
First, I never expected I would be writing a article or blog entry defending churches having multiple campuses that use video to beam a pastor in to preach on video. Simply because I would never go to a church that did it. I am fine with a church I go to beaming video out to another campus, but I personally want to see a real person preaching at the church I go to.
If I'm honest it is because of my own selfishness and or feeling of entitlement to having a pastor in person preach in the church I attend for me to listen to in person. If I am fortunate enough to get to also know that pastor, then also so I get to see Him that Sunday too. Even in an age with video chat and being able to talk to loved ones far away on video - it does not compare to being in the same room with them.
Then there I think is a bit of rebellion in my heart too with the idea, because well if I wanted to watch a pastor preach on a video, I would stay at home and watch him on TV - not drive to church and burn up gas. Of course church is more than the pastor, it is about family, and seeing your church family.
So it is not because I am a big fan of multi-campus churches that beam a pastor in on video to preach I am writing this, but it is because it deeply saddens me when we attack and tear down each other and point fingers calling what others are doing to serve God as being of Satan.
If I had multiple sons, I do not have any kids yet, but if I did, and they were grown men, and each preaching in churchs, in different ways, and one or more began calling the work others were doing of Satan, I think it would grive me.
I can't speak for God on this, but I don't think it is a huge jump to say, God, our Father, is not likely pleased when we as His kids attack and tear down the work of our brothers.
I could be wrong, but that is the heart and spirit in which I am prompted to write this entry. My hope is not to prove or show one right, and the other wrong, but to bring a bond of brotherhood and unite pastors for the cause of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
I think in this so far, I have made it clear I am not a big fan cheering for multi site campuses and I am not lighting a torch to go on a crusade against them. What I am wanting to do, is to encourage and give everyone, regardless of your church model, thoughts on the topic to give consideration and think how we best serve and love our brothers in Christ in all churches.
I should also state that I am not about any individual or ministry's agenda or mission, I am sold out and surrendered to the advancement of only one Kingdom, and that is God's Kingdom. Each local church, is part of the universal Church, the body of Christ, and that is the focus of my life in serving. I am connected and serving in a local church, and I love being a part of it, I feel the love and joy of God in serving with tasks I help with there. Yet, my heart is for all of God's people and to encourage the body of Christ as a whole with my life, not just those who choose to be a part of the church and or ministries I am a part of.
If someone pastors a church of 30 and another a church of 30,000 - if both are doing what God is telling them to do, when He tells them and how - they are about doing the father's business and that sits well with me.
While we would all agree that a goal of having the biggest or a big and powerful church with influence is a wrong motive, I don't find a desire to go around rebuking those who are mislead by that false motive. I would imagine that being a pastor of a big church like that is often, a very isolating and lonely thing. I would also guess that those who get to that place, who wanted it so bad, when they get there, find it lonely and unfullfilling and see no way to ever return to the life they once had. I don't envy people who end up in the spot light like that, those who seek it or who end up in it, it I think would be isolating and lonely and a lot to carry. I also don't suppose that being in that spot light, having brothers and sisters attacking what they are doing as being of Satan is all that encouraging or of God's desire.
With that said, I now want to respond to the points in the article against having more than one church campus and using video to have a pastor preach to more than one campus at once on the basis that it is of Satan. Not to show them wrong, but to present their thoughts in such a way that they can be something to think about for those who feel led in that way of church building and those who are embarking on a crusade against them presuming to think God is calling them to crusade against His Church (the body of Christ) that reside under a multi campus church.
The article starts out alright and the arthur goes on to say he does not think any of the arguments for a multi site campus are persuasive. He goes on to say he should leave it at that. I agree, he should have. However, he did not and went on.
I think for him personally or anyone with these thoughts, they are good things to discuss among those who are looking into them. However, to write a entry to the public and with the title that they are inspired by the devil does not build up or encourage or enrich the body of Christ, but rather tears it down. That saddens me.
The author goes on to say that multi site churches are rooted in idolatry. I am not going to argue this one way or the other. He may in some cases be right, but most likely not in all.
I am writing this to be as non controversal as possible, so that it is not something that tears down my brothers in Christ who are pastors, but rather encourages and builds them up, regardless of their church building methods.
So I want to remind everyone that the only heart, the only motive we know, is our own.
Apart from a pastor putting an idol of a God up and telling their congregation to start worshiping it, or to start denying the person of Jesus and or any of the truths of who He is and everything with that, requires us to judge the heart or motive of another, and we can not know the heart or motive of another, only God does.
He goes on about this, but it all I think is answered from what I just wrote above in a good way and how to respond to it. We don't know the hearts of others, and can not judge them. Actions are one thing, but the heart and motive behind them are another and we can't tell what they are, so it is dangerous to judge them. Sometimes we can have a good idea perhaps by actions we observe, but we also don't always know the full story there either.
The author then writes that not having the video and multi campus method provides a more accountable method for the pastor to his church. That can very likely be true, but with one campus or many, if the church does not have checks and balances and the pastor have people in his life who know him well - problems are more probable to happen because of that over the number of campuses.
I've had pastors who I looked up to and respected at churches I attended for a season in my life fall and they were very different churches, but in both cases there was not accountability or transparency as there could have been. One had multi site campuses and the other did not - the problem was not the number of campuses.
He thens goes on to say that preaching to a church in person is in the Bible, and thus on Biblical grounds - where as being beamed into a church is not. By this same thought, what about the printing press? There is no printing press in the Bible and most of the Christians - did not have a full copy of the Bible (let alone multiple copies). I don't think we would say because the printing press is not in the Bible, it is not within biblical grounds to print bibles so people can have the word of God to read on their own. What about the Jesus film being used to go all around the world, from which local churches are established there, with millions of people having come to faith in Christ from that movement. What about the actors in the Jesus film? There are no examples of actors in the Bible in that manner, stories read to people, yes, but not recorded actors in films to advance the gospel. What about the actors who have played Jesus in movies over the years? Did at one time people have concern about that since people may make the image of the actor out to be an image of who Jesus is? There are no paintings or drawings of Jesus to the best of my knowledge, and that may have been with purpose. Most of the paintings we see are based on artist guesses or ideas, but not actual photos or paintings. Yet, the idea of people making actors into images of idols does not negate the use of the Jesus film to advance the gospel around the world.
The statement of my preacher is better than your preacher being made is also not a good one. Such a statement could also be stated as our church is reaching everyone in our community, we don't need you to start a church campus here and beam in your pastor. If that was the case, who would come to a new church campus? Why would there be any thought to plant a church campus there?
If the we have a local pastor who preaches and knows us is correct, then why would people leave a church to go to one where a pastor is beamed in on a screen? I do not think anyone who has a feeling of being cared for and loved by their pastor in the flesh and in person would have any desire to leave to go to a church where a pastor is beamed in on a video screen to preach. At least I personally would not.
I value knowing and feeling that my pastor cares for me as part of his flock and while I find his preaching also good, even if a pastor with better preaching came into town on a video screen I would not leave. I am loyal to my church and it is like family to me. This is something though that I have as a personal view of church, it is like family and my commitment to being a member at a church, is like family. The last church I was a member at, when I left because of multiple reasons, I experienced what I can only describe as church divorce, it was sad, and not a easy season in my life. If in our church, we experience family, even if the preaching or the worship is not the best, we remain loyal to family and we are loved and give love to our church family.
The argument of one pastor should do all the preaching for the campuses because he is good is the wrong statement or question to be working with. Does the lead pastor feel called by God to be doing it? That is the question that should be asked. If no, then they should find others to preach, if yes then they should preach in that way.
If anyone in the church thinks that is wrong, then the thing is not should it be done, the thing of focus is that they do not feel their head pastor is obeying God and perhaps they should find another church. That is not a controversial thought, but simply one based on the premesis that if you don't believe your pastor is hearing and following God on that, how can you in confidence believe the sermons or other parts of the church are not following that example? The outcome of this is not easy, and leaving a church where you have family, is not easy, but is supporting a pastor you believe is in disobedience to God right? Ultimately you have to take it to God and do what He leads you to do in that, but it is something to think and pray about.
As for elevating one pastor over the others, there has to be a chain of command, God does not call committies of pastors to lead a church. The statement then made that it neglects the development of other preachers who are not good enough, is also a indication of the view of the author. If you are called to do something, you will be doing it in some form, regardless of title or job you are given by other people, if you are called to preach, and you don't have a role to preach at your church, you will be preaching in some form, in some way, if you are called to preach. If you sit around waiting to be given a job or title so then one day you will do what you are called to do then are you really called to do it? I would say start praying for opportunities to preach, and or jobs or pray about starting a church plant to go and preach.
That leads me to something else, I would guess that most multi site campuses were started or were grown by the pastors that are being beamed into multi site campuses. They did not seek to be given a place to teach or preach, they were led by God to start a church and it grew from there. God is not a respector of persons, if you are called to preach, start praying, and He will open the doors to do so.
The author then goes on to say a church does not grow because of a gifted preacher, but because of God growing the church. This statement is in support of what I just wrote, if you are called to preach, pray about starting a church or being given a role to preach. We must however guard against a feeling of entitlement to being given a church to take over and preach at and thank and praise God for the size of the church He blesses us with to preach or teach at. If you are given a chance to preach to a group of 20 and feel you should preach to a church no less than 100 and pass it up, when you have nothing else lined up where you can preach, perhaps the thing God is first going to work on is not your preaching growth and skills, but on your pride and feeling of entitlement.
The author goes on to say that these campuses are retarting the growth of young men with a gift of preaching and that the gift of preaching is developed by preaching. This is only half true. The gift of preaching is develped by preaching, but the gift of preaching is not enabled or retarted by other men, but only by our own actions. We can look to great preachers of the past to see this, just look at John Wesley, by all mens accounts a very impactful preacher, who was not given prime preaching church roles to develop his preaching from start to finish without huge bumps along the way, rather he was often ran out of town, and asked never to come back to churches and yet he would then go and preach on side walks and it is even said when he went to preach in a pasture that tens of thousands of people later came to hear him preach. He did not develop his preaching waiting for other men to give him a slot to preach, he kept preaching, in what ever way he could, because he was called to preach.
The idea that a multi site church loses the local church because there is not a local pastor preaching there is basing a church in being built upon the local pastor, not the body of believers who go there. If we are going to say that beaming a pastor in from afar on a video, is making them an idol, because they are the center, then we would also be saying that the local pastor, is needed, and is a center of our local church, without them, we are not a local church.
The idea that the multi site campus works but that it can't really be determined if it works for decades out is pushing it. By that measure, what about the Jesus film? What about the printing press? What about the common man having a Bible, every common man, having it, to read and understand on their own? Those were both once things not common. What about Sunday School? What about electricity in churches? What about A/C in them?
My friend shared that we need to "correct and rebuke" people as the word says. I later pointed out that after "correct and rebuke" comes "encourage with great patience and careful instruction".
I hope that this may encourage and set an example of great patience for those who are called to a small church and those who are called to multi site campuses. I also hope it is a reminder that to correct we should do so when it is clearly something that is in violation of the word, and it should not be on what we in our best guess think the heart and or motive of another is doing in their actions. We can guess wrong. Before we rebuke, we should try to correct and always with encouragement and in great patience and offering instruction on what can be done to remedy the concern in our best understanding of it.
I can see where the author came from, but as the word says "The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him." Proverbs 18:17.
I am also reminded that is something is of God it will grow, if not, it will cease (Acts 5:39) and God does not need us to judge the hearts and minds of our brothers - He knows the hearts and the motives of them, we do not. We can only guess, and rebuking is harmful when we are guessing - remember Job's friends?
There are movements in Christianity I do not agree with, but the word does not prohibit the things I don't agree with, and saying those things I don't like are of Satan, is a dangerous thing.
"And if I drive out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your people drive them out? So then, they will be your judges." - Matthew 12:27.
Is it by that spirit that people are being saved and growing in their relationship with God at multi-site churches?
I am no fan of multi-site churches, but not because I don't think they are biblical. I am not promoting multi-site churches, nor am I attacking them, but I am making a statement that we should be careful before we speak and careful on what we condem, unless it is clearly outlined in the word.
I want to see my pastor preach in person, but it is a personal preference.
I do not want to see brothers tearing down the work of other men and women serving God or calling the things they have served in, that have blessed other men and women in their walk with God, being called a movement of Satan.
Those are my thoughts and I hope they leave you in what ever church you are in giving thanks for your church and those around you who are serving Christ too.
