Monday Morning Insights

Photo of Todd
    .

    Innovation, Guitar Hero, and the Church

    Bookmark and Share

    The innovators at Guitar Hero’s parent company, Activision, understand this reality as well.  That’s why they’re set to release version three of the Guitar Hero series.  New songs, new skill levels, and a whole new level of play and challenge for Guitar Hero fans is just around the corner.  Rather than see their product sales slide, they know they need to constantly improve the product for their customer.

    Meanwhile, Activision’s rivals over at Electronic Arts are getting ready to release “Rock Band” for Playstation.  Rock Band includes not only a guitar simulator, but also a drum kit and a microphone.  EA has seen the success of Guitar Hero and improved (or at least expanded) on the idea.  They are advertising it as a “band in a box”, and it will for sure interest a whole new set of young gamers.

    What does all this have to do with the church?  Well, I’m glad you asked.

    Church innovators also have the job of looking at what they are currently doing and tweaking or improving it to reach a whole new audience.  The true leaders and innovators in today’s church are looking for ways to do things better, to be more efficient, and to utilize their time, finances, people, and resources to best leverage their return for the Kingdom.

    The true innovators find ways to do this without compromising the message of the gospel.  How do we attract more people to hear the gospel?  What do we need to change with our discipleship program to help people understand the gospel and grow faster?  How can we make it easier (that what it is now) for people to take their next step toward Christ?  What can we do better?  What can we learn from other churches?  What do we need to stop doing?  These are all questions asked by true church innovators.

    As these questions are being asked and answered, in individual churches, by individual leaders, all over the country, change is happening; and I am encouraged.

    Are you an innovator?  What small decision can you make in your ministry this week to leverage your resources, people, time, and money to be most effective for the Kingdom?  Maybe you need to add a ‘version three’.  Maybe you need to introduce the ‘drum and the microphone’. 

    Have fun with it this week… and give the glory to God for what he will do through your leadership!

    Have a great week!

    Todd

    If you have a teenager (or a Playstation), then you’ve no doubt heard about ‘Guitar Hero’. Guitar Hero is a music video that uses a guitar-shaped peripheral (resembling a miniature Gibson SG) to simulate the playing of rock music. It’s all the rage. The player must play scrolling notes to complete a song. The more notes you play correctly, the harder it gets, and the higher your score. Pretty neat idea, right? I’ve played Guitar Hero, and it is a lot of fun. But according to David Riley, a video game analyst (how would you like that job?) in this month’s Fast Company magazine: “I’m tired of repeating myself.” In other words, once you’ve played Guitar Hero for 100 hours, it gets old...

    Comments

    if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.

    1. Peter Hamm on Mon, October 22, 2007

      Innovate or DIE!


      No, seriously, the Bible makes it pretty clear that God expects us to do our best to reach people. For instance, every time Paul tells the story of his conversion, it gets a little “better told”. Often people hold on to traditions and practices because they “worked”.


      If you have innovated so little that you have received no complaints about it, you might not be innovating enough. If you innovate so much that you get no positive comments on it, then slow down…


      What I deal with is Worship Arts, for example. Look at the top 25 CCLI songs for August. “Open The Eyes of My Heart”, “Shout to the Lord”, and “Lord I Lift Your Name on High” are still on there. I wonder how many congregations are still doing those songs where they don’t know it, but their people are sick and tired of singing and hearing them and want to hear something newer. (A hymn is an ENTIRELY different situation, imho. Let’s face it, there’s a difference between “Shout to the Lord” and “All Creatures of Our God and King”.)


      We’ve been doing some shifting of our elements in our service, too. People get used to the same routine. Move the offering! Interrupt the sermon with a song! Build a stage in the middle of the room and do “church in the round”…


      This past weekend… we had NO church services. (We copied this idea and made it our own, btw… Not our own idea…) Our people went into the community and served instead of attending a service. We built up to it and planned it for weeks, and will perhaps make it an annual event. It was REALLY hard to do the first time… but… it might make all the difference in the long run.


      Do something different! It will engage people you’ve not engaged before.

    2. Dane on Mon, October 22, 2007

      Can’t argue with the need to speak the language of the culture to reach them with the gospel.  Certainly let’s use every tool available, and be creative.  God was and is.


      But I have a bit of a reaction to the comparison with the video games.  I am beginning to truly be concerned that we have substituted entertainment (bells and whistles) for the real presence of God.  We get soulish stimulation, similar to our expereince in the theatres or ballgames, and think that “that’s” God.  God’s glory can be revealed, or not, we’ve got a great show regardless.


      Do we think: “It’s sad that Moses didn’t live in our century.  He could have added a creative spark to his presentation and the people might have actually not wanted to go back to Egypt!”  None of us would support this statement.  But we get close to that spirit in some of our insistence on innovation.  There was something desperately wrong with the Israelites “craving” to have the stimulation that they had in Egypt….fish, leeks, garlic, etc. 


      Food with seasoning is far better than tasteless stuff.  But what makes the church truly tasty?  Innovation or the living Christ being pleased to show up?  Innovation is far superior to empty churches, I’ll admit.  But it’s also a poor substitute for the incomparable greatness of God’s glory. 


      Having spent lot’s of time ministering in developing world churches, I know that thousands are being truly reached, not through innovation and technology, but through prayer and the manifestation of God’s glory.


      I think desperation and not innovation is our great need.


      I think I’ve probably jumped tracks a bit in my response.  Just my concern these days.

    3. charles on Mon, October 22, 2007

      I think that the manifest presence of God and His power is an underlying assumption that Todd is making. No need to have to digress to foundational issues with every thought or insight.


      On the flip side, there are many seeking the manifest presence of God without thinking of or engaging the world around them. So the thoughts roll both ways…blessings!

    4. Bruce Rodgers on Mon, October 22, 2007

      Todd: thanks for keeping the pastorate “posted” every week. Lots of various topics and opinions, and it keeps us mentally fresh… One thing that did stick out as I read the “Guitar Hero” scenario: the comment concerning “making it easier for people to take another step toward Christ:” Our American culture is so unlike the culture of the New Testament writers (as well as some oppressed nations) that we cannot comprehend living a Christian life without being pandered, entertained, and having our “spiritual taste buds” teased (Dane mentioned in his comments in this blog concerning “placing entertainment in place of true worship”). They, on the other hand, were (and are) persecuted, mocked, tortured, put to death for their faith. It was not “easy” to take “a step towards Christ” in those days. Please don’t misunderstand my words: I am all for reaching people in our present culture with whatever tools we have, starting from where they are. But somewhere along the way, we have missed the seriousness of being a disciple and follower of the Master.

    5. Todd Rhoades on Mon, October 22, 2007

      Hey Bruce,


      You’re in Temperance?  I live just about an hour from you; and have a good friend who pastors in Morocco.


      Todd

    6. Pastor Bill on Mon, October 22, 2007

      Friends


      This comment appears to be similiar to one a few months ago even a few yers ago - regarding the type of instrument used.  I was brought up in a church where only the human voice was used.  Today, my accordion, banjo, and drum section of my keyboard (as well as a live drummer, guitarist, and singers) assist in bringing those in attendance into his presence.   I believe any instrument can be used even the jaw harp…....... but what is the critical factor!.............What is sung must always proclaim the Lordship of our Lord Jesus.  Just as the Preacher/Pastor/Minister is to be accountable for the Truth of the WORD, so to the music. Music must bring the people into his presence and not be just a musician preforming (that is what music nites are for)  I do have some reservation regarding the use of heavy metal methods for worship and songs with ambigious terms and no mention of Jesus.   But I understand Jim Bakker’s son uses (I believe) “punk” to spread the Word. There are rappers, and gospel and well as the old hymn books…but as was noted in the article as well as the follow-on comments, we are to meet the needs to those we minister.  Inner city mentality may not be accepted in De Boise Wyoming and vice versa.


      for now…............

    7. Glen Schaumloeffel on Mon, October 22, 2007

      I’m going to be the contrarian in this discussion.  I just do not see much scriptural support for what Todd suggests- “The true leaders and innovators in today’s church are looking for ways to do things better, to be more efficient, and to utilize their time, finances, people, and resources to best leverage their return for the Kingdom.”  REALLY?  Paul said “preach the Word” not “study the culture”  Paul said, reprove, rebuke, exhort” not “innovate or die as another commented.   Let’s get past “fad Christianity” and start doing the basics well.  To use a sports analogy, the teams taht win championships are teams that do the basics well most of the time….not contantly try to find new innovative ways to play baseball, football and basketball. 


      Of course, Todd adds this caveat to make the message just a bit more palatable.- “The true innovators find ways to do this without compromising the message of the gospel. “  Maybe if today’s pastors were more concerned about not compromising the gospel, they wouldn’t need to be spending a whole lot of time figuring out how to be more innovative.  Instead of catering to pop culture, we should be presenting something radically different- the transforming power of the gospel….a gospel that Paul was not ashamed of.  We should not be either.

    8. charles on Mon, October 22, 2007

      I will give Scripture…Paul writes:


      1 Cor. 9:19: “Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law. 22To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. 23I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.


      24Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize.


      25Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last; but we do it to get a crown that will last forever. 26Therefore I do not run like a man running aimlessly; I do not fight like a man beating the air. 27No, I beat my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize.” (niv)

      Paul understood the culture. He studied it, he engaged it, and became like them so that he might be most effective. He knew that his training was to run a race (to bring salvation). He trained, he ran, he saw victory. He didn’t just sit around reading about races, he engaged in the training (study of the race) and then ran. He didn’t just go out and “preach the Word.” He knew that was the power, but he also wanted to know how to relate it to culture.


      blessings.

       

    9. Glen on Mon, October 22, 2007

      Yours is a favorite prooftext of all those in the church growth movement who want to justify the use of worldly marketing methods to reach the lost .  In reality, Paul’s message in I Cor. 9 is that he was willing to put aside his own cultural and ethnic identities for the cause of the gospel.  However, Paul’s message often upset the lost…it made the uncomfortable…and caused many to mock and rebuke.  He was thrown out of many towns on his missionary journey because he boldly proclaimed the gospel adn the resurrection of Christ.  (i.e The Book of Acts).  This is a far cry from the watered down, candy coated seeker-centered, non offensive preaching today that fails to mention sin, repentance or judgment.  Being sensitive to culture has become being soft on sin.  As a result, the unchurched aren’t getting the full message and become very confused as to what it exactly means to be a Christian.  This in turn reults in a growing population of pseudo-believers in these kinds of churches. 


      The rest of I Cor 9 that you quote is about Pauls commitment to holiness so that he might not be disqualified from being a minister of the gospel…not about engaging the culture as you suggest.


      I’m tired of “fad Christianity” (i.e. 40 days, Prayer of Jabez, etc) and a gospel that is devoid of any real power to change a life. 


      Culture- particular American culture is a constant state of flux.  Fads of 5 years ago are no longer fads today.  How much longer do we as evangelicals feel the need to adapt our message to the culture, when the culture is changing so rapidly.  I think the message the world needs to hear is something that trancends culture…something completely counter culture. 


      BTW,where is one example of Paul studying the culture?  His “training” was about his pursuit of holiness and sanctification…not studying the culture.

    10. Bruce Rodgers on Tue, October 23, 2007

      After not being able to sleep, I thought I would check the blog again. Glen had an interesting thought: Why DO we always try to adapt to our “present culture,” at least in America? Ar we afraid to be “strangers, sojourners amongst foreigners?” Along with that is the trend to follow the lead of the younger people of our generation, especially in our churches. I know that Paul told Timothy to “let no one despise his youth,” or put him down for his age, but that was due to the fact that he was spiritually mature for his age, having been taught the Old Testament Scriptures from his youth. Maybe we’re so obsessed with youth that we fail as older believers to lead as we ought. Instead of spiritually mentoring the younger men and women, we ask their opinion on things. Rather than find a seasoned minister who has taught and preached for years, our churches seek someone who will turn their church into a Willow Creek-style mega church, complete with coffee and donuts (which I personally enjoy). And as Glen alluded to in his comments, where is the stability and solid growth through teaching the whole counsel of God if we follow every trend that enters the scene? I personally tire of watching church staff members burn out because they cannot keep up with the latest fad. Change just for the sake of change is foolish.  Note that, for instance, many churches successfully mix contemporary (ever-changing) music with older (time-tested) pieces, yet their message is powerful and convicting because Biblical compromise has not entered in as a factor. OK, I’ve said enough. It’s someone else’s turn…

    11. Peter Hamm on Tue, October 23, 2007

      Glen writes [How much longer do we as evangelicals feel the need to adapt our message to the culture, when the culture is changing so rapidly.  I think the message the world needs to hear is something that trancends culture…something completely counter culture. ]How much longer? Till Jesus comes!


      Our message transcends culture, I think that’s why Paul found such an easy time proclaiming it to different cultures in different places, and I think that’s why the onus is on us to continue to do that! Some of us are not watering down the Gospel, Glen, and yet we still “adapt our message” to fit the culture where we have been placed by our Sovereign king!

    12. Glen on Tue, October 23, 2007

      Understanding our culture is one thing….pandering to it…catering to it in our preaching…. quite another.  Maybe Peter can give me some biblically sound examples of how we are to “adapt the message to the culture.”  I’m interested.


      It is my belief that “adaptation” of the message of the gospel to the culture is not what is really needed….but clarity and faithfulness to message of the gospel that has already been given to us.   If a doctor tells a patient with cancer that he only has the flu then he is guilty of malpractice and gross negligence.  Yet, many pastors find it difficult to squarely address man’s desperate need and his precarious separation from the God who made him.  We want the lost person to feel “comfortable” in church….to like the music…to like the message… and thus we avoid anything that just might cause them offense. It has become nothing more than what our smiling preacher in Houston is offering to his audience.   Read this: http://www.crosswalk.com/news/commentary/11557558/


      Let’s reaffirm our belief in the power of the gospel and the sufficenty of the Spirit to change lives and stop this silly notion that somehow we need to “prop up” the message to make it more palatable to the lost or ADAPT it.  I didn’t see Paul in Acts doing much adapting apart from using segues that lead into the gospel If that is what is meant by adapting, find.  However,.  I think oftentimes that is what is meant by “adapting the message” means making the message more “acceptable” to the lost when in reality the message of the cross is foolishness to the majority and a stumbling block for many.  Maybe we just need to “cut it straight” as it relates to the gospel and allow God to do his work.  We somehow believe that it all depends on us and how we present it when in reality that does not reflect the biblical record.  Thus, I find it more necessary to spend time in God’s Word knowing what exactly He has said, then studying our culture which is contantly in flux.


      “Adapting the message to our pop culture” in reality can be quite dangerous if you think about it..  Our culture is entirely self-centered, egotistical, hedonistic and anti-God.  So exactly, how do we adapt the message of the gospel to that????  Maybe it doesn’t need to be adapted and it just needs to be proclaimed….faithfully, consistently, accurately and with love and passion for the lost.  What a novel idea, eh!

    13. Peter Hamm on Tue, October 23, 2007

      Glen,


      I can give you so many biblically sound examples it’s incredible. But first, nobody here is talking about adapting the message as a means of watering it down. On the contrary, by making it understandable to ordinary women and men of today, we keep the fire of the Gospel burning brightly!


      Here’s my examples.


      Jesus using current events to make his point, the tower of Siloam. Paul quoting pagan poets, turning their words, if he knew it at the time, into Scripture. (In him we move and breathe and have our being.) Paul didn’t dumb down the Gospel by using that quote, he made the Gospel understandable by them.


      But the most compelling examples are the embarassment of riches we have in Jesus’ parables. He told stories about farmers and bankers and priests and scribes to… farmers and bankers and priests and scribes. The parables themselves are the biblical model for telling the Gospel message in the language of the common man using metaphors and language that he understands… and how much of Jesus’ teaching is composed of these parables? a LOT!


      The entire New Testament is even, I think very intentionally, written in the common (“koine”) greek of the people. There were no thees and thous in the original Bible. It is a very earthy and understandable book… Making the message understandable to the people of the time.


      Which is what I’m trying to do in the place God has placed me.


      you write [Yet, many pastors find it difficult to squarely address man’s desperate need and his precarious separation from the God who made him.] It is very difficult indeed to do this… unless I tell it in a manner and style that is understandable to the man who is separated from God.

    14. Glen on Wed, October 24, 2007

      Peter,


      The examples you provide are all during a time when the New Testament was still in development.  However, we now have a complete canon.  Our job is teach and preach what is already there- what Jesus already taught.  Almost all Bible translations- with the exception of the Old King James and Amplified are understandable to the vast majority of people today.   Thus, we don’t need to dumb down the message any further or “put the cookies on the bottom shelf” as I hear so many say.  God has put it already in an understandable way for us, so long as the preacher is faithful to his task of keeping ourselves in the study long enough to know what is there.  Yes, homiletics are important….but not nearly as important as hermeneutics.  A lot of preachers can say something, but I fear not too many have something really to say.


      The fact that Jesus told stories to illustrate biblical does not support your premise for skyscraper sermons (one story after another).  He told the story…now we have it.  Our job is to explain…not to tell different stories.


      Let’s repent of this atttitude that we need to “dress up” the Bible or dumb it down to make it understandable.  For the most part- with the exception of difficult allegorical / prophetic passages (i.e. Revelation, Daniel) it is understandable.

    15. Peter Hamm on Wed, October 24, 2007

      thanks, Glen, but I beg to differ… As do probably most who post here at MMI, a site that is really dedicated to exploring the different and culturally relevant ways that some churches choose to spread the message of Jesus’ love. I have a feeling that you don’t really appreciate those methods, and I’m sorry about that. But the kingdom is so awesome big that we both fit in it!

    16. Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >

      Post a Comment

    17. (will not be published)

      Remember my personal information

      Notify me of follow-up comments?

    Sponsors