Thinking out loud here- Like the list. There are a few on there that I have never heard of that I will have to check out.
I guess I can see why lifechurch.tv is number one due to their pioneering efforts in the multi-site ‘revolution’.
I love Mars Hill in Seattle and have attended several times even though I do not live in the area, but I’m not sure why they were ranked at number two simply because I am not sure what has been so innovative- influential for sure, but not super innovatve although they are definitely starting a multi-site push as well.
I’m really suprised that Mars Hill Bible Church is so low on the list. They are very innovative in philosophy, teaching, loving, and giving.
I am also very suprised that Cornerstone in Simi Valley, Imago Dei in Portland, Ecclesia in Houston , and even Lakewood in Houston (who is very inovative in their video, internet, and publishing miistries) were not on the list.
I guess that I am having a hard time differentiating between innovative and influential.....
Jesus, bottom line, is the reason for all of this though- not to try to immulate these places, but to be encouraged by them and to pray for them and to join in their efforts to advance the Kingdom.

Mars Hill’s “Ask anything” Series is a pretty amazing use of technology. 

I have never heard of a church asking their congregation to use their cell phones during service before.  Last weekend they invited the congregation to text in their questions, and Driscoll answered them extemporaneously after his sermon. 

I think there where two benefits from this approach, 1, it allowed the congregation to see a pastor, not just a preacher, and 2, it allowed Driscoll to answer questions that even he would be weary to bring up.

Thanks to featuring this, Todd.  And I’m glad Outreach Mag is doing this.  It’s a welcome step forward.

I just wish I knew their criteria for developing the list.  Anthony’s point (above) is well made—the list only seems to be the fairly large, influential churches.  [Let quickly note though, that truly innovative churches should & would naturally BE influential.  So I guess my point is that since innovation is more typically done in smaller settings… think R&D;… then this list is probably leaving out MANY of the most innovative churches… simply because they’re not yet recognized.

And let’s have a discussion, and reach a conclusion… What is this ‘innovative’ characteristic that we’re looking for?  Is it just ‘technology’?  And in the final analysis, won’t it be tightly related to the criteria defining success at carrying out the Great Commission in our cities & neighborhoods?

And although ‘large’, which of these innovative churches have optimally presented the gospel by deed and by Word… to every person in their neighborhood?  Typically even the LARGEST church in the city still only has a membership of less than 1% of the city’s population.  So surely the Great Commission as a collaborative mission, is best accomplished TOGETHER, city by city.  So show me an ‘innovative’ church pulling the body of Christ TOGETHER in a city, and getting the job done.

Might THAT help define ‘innovative’?

While I applaud innovation and ingenuity, I’m really tired of seeing ‘most innovative church’ lists. It’s as if some people think that innovation in ministry equals success.

How about a list of the churches that make the most disciples? We could split the list between bulk (most total disciples) and ratio (most disciples made on a per capita basis).

At what point did anyone decide that innovation should become a measuring stick for churches? Is it possible someone is missing the boat?