en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/597622 Comments by matthuggins http://mediaoutreach.com/2009/08/best-practices-does-design-really-matter/#IDComment29841849 Design does matter. Aesthetics do matter. Profoundly. And for many aspects of a place of worship more important than its website. They do not, however, grant those with a critical eye the license to "school" a congregation of fellow believers before the watching world. Let's follow your sense of mission to it's logical conclusion. Instead of stopping at web site design, let's have our mystery shoppers, our panel of experts, review the ushers, the sermon, the music, the architecture, the seating, the carpet, the congregation's physical appearance, the lighting the children's programs, the bulletin layout, the pastor's attire, the pastor's wife, the acoustics, the refreshments, etc. Let's take it upon ourselves to offer the world an impartial, unflinching, expert opinion about the "experience" offered at random churches--random churches readily identifiable by the details offered in our reviews. You could start a new "Zagat's" guide to places of worship. Speaking generally (i.e., NOT targeting an actual church body), I can say with some learning and a pile of arrogance that the vast majority of protestant churches in the USA fall far short of the aesthetic standards (including architecture, music, ritual, vestments . . . ) historically observed by churches of the Anglican tradition. It would not be difficult to assemble a panel of experts who would concur. It does not follow from these facts that it is sensible for me, a follower of Christ, to apply such understanding in a public critique of a particular church. I stand by the grade I assigned. The grade was not given on account of a disagreement about the importance of aesthetics. It was assigned because of the unedifying manner in which you chose to make use of your aesthetic aptitude. Fri, 7 Aug 2009 01:22:58 +0000 http://mediaoutreach.com/2009/08/best-practices-does-design-really-matter/#IDComment29841849 http://mediaoutreach.com/2009/08/first-impressions-site-with-no-church-location-and-little-useful-information-receives-an-f/#IDComment29343853 Will the Holy Spirit have to work extra hard to overcome that church's shortcomings? Does web-site design rank near the top of human prejudices the Holy Spirit must overthrow to bring an individual into relationship with Jesus Christ and fellowship with a local congregation of his beloved body? First Impressions, as a concept, deserves a failing grade. If you have advice for a specific church, you should offer your consulting services to them directly. If you have generic advice for the church, offer it humbly without reference to a particular body. This is no way to treat the bride of Christ. Mon, 3 Aug 2009 20:44:30 +0000 http://mediaoutreach.com/2009/08/first-impressions-site-with-no-church-location-and-little-useful-information-receives-an-f/#IDComment29343853 http://www.collidemagazine.com/blog/index.php/1148/how-to-fail-at-social-media-a-sneak-peek#IDComment28633477 We as a church will fail if we continue to elevate performance above grace. Tue, 28 Jul 2009 19:11:20 +0000 http://www.collidemagazine.com/blog/index.php/1148/how-to-fail-at-social-media-a-sneak-peek#IDComment28633477 http://churchcrunch.com/2009/07/22/twibbon-com-promoting-causes-through-twitter/#IDComment27968337 Apart from deeper concerns as to how the medium might degrade the message, I can say, as one flooded by all manner of media, that these seem cheesy and annoying. It reminds me of bumper stickers (including fish), tattoos and those Easter Seals and Cancer Society stickers some folks used to put on their personal correspondence. They make me feel like a captive being fed propaganda. especially when i am stuck in traffic. In Facebook, it is tacitly understood that folks are going to parade this stuff about for all to see. (And I have finally gotten to the point where I ignore all offers for my friends' stuff to take up residence on my own profile.) However, just because I give someone my e-mail address or choose to follow them on Twitter or enter into a forum, why should I have to endure all manner of personal advertising? So, personally, I would be less inclined to heed a message tagged with one of these doo-dads. Maybe that's just me. Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:22:25 +0000 http://churchcrunch.com/2009/07/22/twibbon-com-promoting-causes-through-twitter/#IDComment27968337 http://churchcrunch.com/2009/07/22/twibbon-com-promoting-causes-through-twitter/#IDComment27959561 I think the church's message will not likely be advanced terribly much by bumper stickers, flair or twibbons. In fact, I can think of no good coming from putting it out there alongside such earth-changing messages as NKOTB, veganism, Billie Mays, "I'm a Mac", etc. These gestures tend to reinforce the notion of the Gospel as one of many relatively trivial, trendy lifestyle options from which one may choose. Need I remind anyone?: Stan, Chotchkie's Manager: "We need to talk about your flair." Joanna: "Really? I-I have 15 pieces on. I also--" Stan: "Well, 15 is the minimum, okay?" Joanna: "Oh, okay." Stan: "Now, you know, it's up to you whether or not you wanna just do the bare minimum or, uh-- Well, like Brian, for example, has 37 pieces of flair on today. And a terrific smile." Joanna: "Okay, so you want me to wear more?" Stan: "Look, Joanna--" Joanna: "Yeah?" Stan: "People can get a cheeseburger anywhere, okay? They come to Chotchkie's for the atmosphere and the attitude. Okay? That's what the flair's about. It's about fun." Joanna: "Yeah. Okay, so more then, yeah?" Stan: "Look, we want you to express yourself. Okay? Now, if you feel that the bare minumum is enough, then okay. But some people choose to wear more and we encourage that. Okay? You do wanna express yourself, don't you?" Joanna: "Y-Yeah." Stan: "Okay, great, great. That's all I ask." Joanna: "Okay." Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:27:43 +0000 http://churchcrunch.com/2009/07/22/twibbon-com-promoting-causes-through-twitter/#IDComment27959561 http://www.collidemagazine.com/blog/index.php/1117/we-respectfully-disagree-with-john-piper#IDComment27529339 "Aren't sermon illustrations today just modern parables?" Yes and no. The following aspect of Christ's parables cannot be said to be true of our human illustrations: Luke 8:9-10 (New King James Version) 9 Then His disciples asked Him, saying, “What does this parable mean?” 10 And He said, “To you it has been given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God, but to the rest it is given in parables, that ‘ Seeing they may not see, And hearing they may not understand.’ Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:11:16 +0000 http://www.collidemagazine.com/blog/index.php/1117/we-respectfully-disagree-with-john-piper#IDComment27529339 http://www.collidemagazine.com/blog/index.php/1117/we-respectfully-disagree-with-john-piper#IDComment27529047 Perhaps I am hung up on overuse. That may well lead to the same practical conclusions, as overuse is no small phenomenon. I'll comment later on the peculiar prominence of "hearing" throughout Scriptures, time permitting. Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:05:58 +0000 http://www.collidemagazine.com/blog/index.php/1117/we-respectfully-disagree-with-john-piper#IDComment27529047 http://www.collidemagazine.com/blog/index.php/1117/we-respectfully-disagree-with-john-piper#IDComment27526582 Thanks, Bill. Little did I know I had a Rhett-and-Link-song-about-Shamwow-shaped-hole in my life. Another passage of Scripture that speaks to how we transmit Gospel truth: 1 Corinthians 2:1-5 (New King James Version) 1 And I, brethren, when I came to you, did not come with excellence of speech or of wisdom declaring to you the testimony of God. 2 For I determined not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified. 3 I was with you in weakness, in fear, and in much trembling. 4 And my speech and my preaching were not with persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, 5 that your faith should not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God. While I do no believe we are to seek to be humanly unpersuasive in presenting Scripture, I think we should think hard about whether our presentational techniques tend toward the "wisdom of men" or the "power of God." I believe the media itself, even if intended only as the conduit of the message, can project a sense of earthly power. That doesn't mean, to my thinking, that we lay aside all manner of modern media. It means, though, that we are not entitled to assume that it doesn't matter, that it is neutral, that it is necessarily good. It means we have to catch ourselves when we begin to measure the effectiveness of our communication by the world's terms. Fri, 17 Jul 2009 15:52:17 +0000 http://www.collidemagazine.com/blog/index.php/1117/we-respectfully-disagree-with-john-piper#IDComment27526582 http://www.collidemagazine.com/blog/index.php/1117/we-respectfully-disagree-with-john-piper#IDComment27524516 We do allow technique to smother content. Preaching can too often be hard to distinguish from motivational speaking. Too much preaching seems more concerned with tickling men's ears than kindling their souls. I have heard many, MANY sermons where illustrations and anecdotes and jokes crowded out substantive engagement with God's Word, where the preacher's "performance" was the central focus. I left entertained, but undernourished. I find this kind of risk far more palpable among those who tend to preach thematically rather than with an expository emphasis. There the temptation is to try to cram Scripture into human categories of the age or the moment. It is one thing to begin with "What do the Scriptures have to say?" and another to start with "What do the Scriptures have to say about...?" Fri, 17 Jul 2009 15:32:02 +0000 http://www.collidemagazine.com/blog/index.php/1117/we-respectfully-disagree-with-john-piper#IDComment27524516 http://www.collidemagazine.com/blog/index.php/1117/we-respectfully-disagree-with-john-piper#IDComment27521088 I find your observation embedded in this question apt, but I think you prove too much: "If so, what about a joke or humorous illustration told by the preacher as part of the sermon? Is a dramatic Scripture reading on video considered entertainment?" I lament the adaptation of vaudevillian technique into preaching, whether or not video is employed. Sermons saturated with illustrations and humor often, quite often, detract from the raw power of the Word. Wearing too much make-up (up to and including clown make-up) obscures one's natural beauty and/or renders one's sincerity suspect. Psalm 119:103 declares: "How sweet are Your words to my taste, Sweeter than honey to my mouth!" Yet, like Mary Poppins, we insist on adding a "spoonful of sugar" to help the medicine go down ("in the most delightful way"). How ever will God's people develop a deep taste for God's Word if we insist on adding flavors and toppings? (What percentage of Starbucks customers would enjoy a cup of black, strong, unsweetened coffee?) I also lament the generally naive approach we take to co-opting the world's modes of entertainment. We invoke (and reinforce) either (a) a pathetic appetite for the ephemeral junk food typically found on the 24/7 media buffet or (b) a deep-seated cynicism, selectivity and/or and disdain hard-wired into most of us after years of exposure to media's blandishments. We offer salt water to those who've just come ashore from a long spell adrift at sea, some delirious from having imbibed and others, still possessed of their faculties, wanting nothing more than fresh water. We lay the Gospel alongside the Shamwow. Fri, 17 Jul 2009 14:30:15 +0000 http://www.collidemagazine.com/blog/index.php/1117/we-respectfully-disagree-with-john-piper#IDComment27521088 http://www.collidemagazine.com/blog/index.php/1104/videoteachingcom-launching-july-21#IDComment27369526 Makes me wonder why God chose Moses, who was, in human terms, a poor communicator, instead of one of the silver-tongued alternatives. A preachers' authority and effectiveness are not bound up in his eloquence. If this is such a grand idea, there's no reason why, for all these centuries, we didn't simply hire actors to give dramatic readings of the best sermons. Spurgeon and Whitfield and Edwards, etc., etc. could then "preach" in pulpits throughout the land. This technology provides nothing that was not, in all material respects, available to us long before electronic media. I believe considerations apart from technological means have kept the church, for the most part, from this model of preaching. Stop to consider whether it may be important for the Word to be preached to a congregation by one of its own, one who knows and is known by the sheep, one who prays with and for the sheep, one who leads by example during the 167 hours each week when he is not preaching, one whose ability to shape his public persona a bit less than a televised "character" with no direct connection to the congregation. Stop to consider how much an entertainment and celebrity driven mindset informs our views of preaching and preachers. Might we be tempted to conform to the world in this respect? Wed, 15 Jul 2009 19:50:03 +0000 http://www.collidemagazine.com/blog/index.php/1104/videoteachingcom-launching-july-21#IDComment27369526 http://churchcrunch.com/2009/07/14/ruminations-on-efficiency/#IDComment27278622 Raw nostalgia is of little use, but it is no more absurd than embracing all things new simply because they are new. New media has its place, but it cannot replace the experience of being physically present with others. God endowed us with native "apps" that cannot be replicated by technology. We communicate in so many ways when together which are impossible to transmit across the ether. New media often offers the illusion of being connected to everyone. For example, though, just one of five people on the planet have access to the internet. In the USA, it is still around four of five. (Fewer than that possess iPhones, BTW.) Further, our associations via social media are, by and large, even more self-selected than those in the analog world. We tend to seek out those like us in some key, demonstrable respect. Social media potentially offers another set of blinders, in addition to those we already wear due to our social setting, upbringing, education, career, etc. This is not to say that we should not avail ourselves of the range of options now available (including pen and paper) to communicate when we are apart AND have something worth saying, but it is an assertion of a distinction too often glossed over by those (like me) immersed in new media. We fail to consider efficiency as one of the idols of our culture. We fail to consider the reduction of human interactions to transactions. We fail to consider how we avail ourselves of the new media channels available to us by aping the prevalent cultural voices of our day (and listening to individual voices in the same way we absorb commercial media). We fail to consider the very real risk of conforming ourselves to the patterns of the world. We need to get past the false dichotomy of those who do and don't "get" the new technology. Frankly, those I have seen claiming most loudly that they "get it" quite often display a remarkable naivete concerning fairly well established theories concerning media and culture. Tue, 14 Jul 2009 20:12:46 +0000 http://churchcrunch.com/2009/07/14/ruminations-on-efficiency/#IDComment27278622 http://www.mediumdeep.com/?p=338#IDComment26893776 Post has been updated.� Sorry for stealing your bandwidth. Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:29:06 +0000 http://www.mediumdeep.com/?p=338#IDComment26893776 http://churchcrunch.com/2009/07/09/developing-the-next-generation-of-online-ministry-leaders-what-needs-to-be-done/#IDComment26792080 I think it is critical to realize that not all FB connections or traffic are equal. FB hits its stride when connecting individuals who already possess a certain quantum of relationship, of shared personal experience. The church may be able to send out its members in that sphere to seek to be and to make disciples, but I suspect that it will have little tangible (or intangible) effect with efforts that don't focus on person-to-person relationships. Content not tied to a relationship in FB is background noise. Content not tied to an existing shared interest within a relationship tends to be ignored or treated as trivia occasioning the flow of breezy banter. Thu, 9 Jul 2009 15:27:52 +0000 http://churchcrunch.com/2009/07/09/developing-the-next-generation-of-online-ministry-leaders-what-needs-to-be-done/#IDComment26792080 http://churchcrunch.com/2009/07/09/developing-the-next-generation-of-online-ministry-leaders-what-needs-to-be-done/#IDComment26788882 I think your use of the phrase "a lot of talent not being 'cultivated' properly" is very telling. I think you'll find that God "cultivates talent" in ways very different from the way we would go about it. He chooses the inarticulate Moses to speak in His behalf to the people of Israel. He chooses David, a lowly shepherd, to be the champion and King of Israel. He chooses Saul, a dedicated Pharisee, to take the Gospel to the Gentiles. In the lives of each of these figures, he uses sin, vulnerability, oppression and periods of isolation to prepare them for the work he has set before them. He places eternal treasure in fragile jars of clay. I see folly in this overly intense, to-a-hammer-everything-looks-like-a-nail focus on online ministry. It is the equivalent of (or, frankly, worse than) someone in the 70's fretting about training up the next generation of television preachers. Our problem in not a lack of believers steeped in the worlds techniques, but a lack of believers seriously in pursuit of relationship with Jesus Christ. We focus on human means while neglecting the spiritual disciplines. Technique and technology are the fabric of our culture. They mark the broad and obvious roads. Prayer and other spiritual pursuits are radically counter-cultural. They are the difficult paths we are commanded to follow. Over one hundred years ago, E. M. Bounds (1835-1913) framed the issue in his book, Power through Prayer: "We are constantly on a stretch, if not on a strain, to devise new methods, new plans, new organizations to advance the Church and secure enlargement and efficiency for the gospel. This trend of the day has a tendency to lose sight of the man or sink the man in the plan or organization. God’s plan is to make much of the man, far more of him than of anything else. Men are God’s method. The Church is looking for better methods; God is looking for better men. “There was a man sent from God whose name was John.” The dispensation that heralded and prepared the way for Christ was bound up in that man John. “Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given.” The world’s salvation comes out of that cradled Son. When Paul appeals to the personal character of the men who rooted the gospel in the world, he solves the mystery of their success. The glory and efficiency of the gospel is staked on the men who proclaim it. When God declares that “the eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to show himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect toward him,” he declares the necessity of men and his dependence on them as a channel through which to exert his power upon the world. This vital, urgent truth is one that this age of machinery is apt to forget. The forgetting of it is as baneful on the work of God as would be the striking of the sun from his sphere. Darkness, confusion, and death would ensue. What the Church needs to-day is not more machinery or better, not new organizations or more and novel methods, but men whom the Holy Ghost can use — men of prayer, men mighty in prayer. The Holy Ghost does not flow through methods, but through men. He does not come on machinery, but on men. He does not anoint plans, but men — men of prayer." Thu, 9 Jul 2009 14:36:59 +0000 http://churchcrunch.com/2009/07/09/developing-the-next-generation-of-online-ministry-leaders-what-needs-to-be-done/#IDComment26788882