# Videos on Sunday Morning



## VanGillMan (Oct 17, 2018)

Curious what people's thoughts are about videos being used on Sunday morning during the worship service? I admit our church has used them in the past, primarily for announcements from outside agenices, occaisionally to promote some activity going on in the church, and I never thoughts too much about it. 

More recently however they have used videos for our regular announcements and welcome in place of a Pastor or Elder doing this function. My initial thought was that it was ridiculous to 'welcome' someone via video, you need a real person doing the welcoming. But this has also caused me to think a lot more about the theology of the technologies we use on a Sunday morning. Especially the videos. Is there a place for videos being shown on a Sunday morning? 

Personally I have never liked them, but I have not thought this through Biblically and am trying to bring scripture to bear on this subject in my own mind. Input would be appreciated. My initial thoughts went to 3 John 14- face to face communication is much preferred. When I spoked to one of our Pastor's about this I was given reasons which seemed to all be pragmatic in nature and not biblical-theological. 

Our church's Sunday worship consists of full band with all instruments, orchestra, choir and we sing more modern worship songs together with hymns and choruses.


----------



## Robert K (Oct 17, 2018)

I said "No", but I'm not sure I'd be willing to be dogmatic about it for things like announcements before the worship service. Since that is not technically worship, I think that could be left to Christian prudence (WCF 1.6).


----------



## Scott Bushey (Oct 17, 2018)

I see nothing wrong per se, with using innovations in the church as long as it isn't after the call to worship. We are blessed to have things like electricity, computer etc. at our disposal and if need be, use them when it is appropriate. Most of that all falls under adiaphora. 

My only concern with all of that is using it even before the call; it tells a tale of sorts in the trickling in of liberalism. It would seem as if the better place for a thing like that would be before Sunday School or on the church's website. As well, why do we need a video for welcoming welcoming visitors? Seem impersonal to me.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Smeagol (Oct 18, 2018)

To be transparent, I voted "Depends", which I hope relays that under most circumstances in my mind the best/safest vote is a "NO" for showing a video, but I am sure there is some variation of a circumstance, where I would be "okay" with a video, especially before the formal call to worship.

An Imagined Example where I might vote YES:
Maybe a totally heretical congregation ..decides to live-stream an Orthodox worship service to replace their own worship service...which leads to repentance


----------



## Ben Zartman (Oct 18, 2018)

I voted NO because you said "in the worship service." Watching videos before or after might be OK, if they can somehow accord with the solemnity and majesty of meeting with God on His day. I just can't see it as possible. A video conference with even the most important dignitary will be less awesome than a personal meeting--there's something distant and informal about images on a screen, and the image of a minister of the gospel just can't compare with a personal address from the same. But during the time of worship itself, the idea of video is ludicrous--the person taped, who would presumably be participating in the worship, is not even there! How can you worship together with a magnetic tape (or digital file, for you young 'uns?), when the whole point of corporate worship is that people are worshipping together?
Our church indulges in videos from Ligonier and similar sources during the Sunday School time in between seasons of live instruction (usually going through the Confession). My preference for the live instruction, however more crude and shallow and less insightful it may be than a well-produced video, is so much greater that I can almost say I hate the videos.


----------



## bookslover (Oct 19, 2018)

When I first got saved in 1980, I attended a non-Reformed church for awhile. The preaching was quite good. The pastor would often use an overhead projector (remember those?) while preaching. He would use it to display maps of Israel occasionally (and other maps and charts) and would often use it to show his sermon outline, writing each point and subpoint down as he preached his sermon.

I found it to be quite helpful, especially as a new believer, and not distracting at all.


----------



## Tom Hart (Oct 19, 2018)

How about Powerpoint slides and maps? I've seen those used as well.


----------



## Ben Zartman (Oct 19, 2018)

Re; the last two replies (can't seem to figure out multi-quote yet). I can't abide projectors or slides or screens, because with them the service of God, the declaration of His Word, seems reduced to a classroom. I don't believe any Power Point presentation can equal the verbal exhortation: "Be ye reconciled to God!"
The visual aids that God has ordained are the ordinances of Baptism and the Lord's Supper. I tend to flee from any others.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Pergamum (Oct 19, 2018)

I think electric lights and flush toilets do not convey a worshipful atmosphere when original NT worship was done in more primitive conditions. And the Apostles also did not have microphones and speakers. These are all additions to what I read was done in the NT and I, therefore, reject them all. 

Not to mention, air conditioning and central heating.

Let's not over-restrict the circumstances of worship. I do not think the elements need to be distorted by these advances in technology. A bible verse displayed on a television screen should not be forbidden or considered worse than a quilted memory verse hung like tapestry on the wall of a church (in fact, it is better since the former is used for teaching and the latter for perhaps decoration). If it aids in understanding and clarity of the text preached than it enhances worship.

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## Smeagol (Oct 19, 2018)

Tom Hart said:


> How about Powerpoint slides and maps? I've seen those used as well.


If you outlaw powerpoint (scripture verses for the sermon or lyrics to psalms and hymns)....then would you not also need to outlaw all smart phone and tablet bible App use. I use a paper bible myself, but have no problem with some one using a bible app. Some pastors use a tablet themselves to view their sermon manuscript, do they need to repent? (hardly). Forbidding any and all power-point use in a service fails to acknowledge the culture of the bible (hence they did not have our technology), and further is impossible to maintain consistently for the reasons mentioned by @Pergamum.


----------



## Robert K (Oct 19, 2018)

I voted "No" because I had in mind videos that highlighted a particular ministry, or a skit that provided comedic relief in preparation for a sermon. These would be elements of the worship service that had no positive warrant from Scripture. I didn't consider videos which were essentially sermons (such as live-streamed sermons at multi-site campuses). In this case, since the _element_ had positive warrant, I would consider the video to be a circumstance. However, I would still consider video-based sermons to be unwise, given the additional psychological distance between the preacher and the congregation, and the inability of the preacher to see and make adjustments based on the response of the people.


----------



## PaulCLawton (Oct 19, 2018)

I was thinking about the issue of screens in worship this morning for a different reason; an idea came up at my own church that we replace the psalter/hymn board mounted on the front wall with an electronic screen upon which we would display the psalm and hymn selections for the service that day. I have an instinctive reaction against such a change and I was thinking through what a reasonable argument against such a change might be, and here is one:

_Is there anywhere a man may go today to avoid being subjected to the ubiquitous illuminated rectangle?_ 

Don't get me wrong, I'm a city kid not a farmer, I use a PC at work, I use a smartphone all the time, I read from a Kindle at night and sometimes when I have a few free moments, I watch NBA basketball on a TV screen we keep tucked away in a corner until we want to use it. I do all this without guilt or explanation.

However, as the use of digital screens becomes more and more pervasive - They are in every home, in every restaurant, every workplace, every pocket - perhaps the church (without making ourselves look silly by declaring technology itself evil) while continuing to be the only institution entrusted with the keys of the kingdom, the only place where man might ordinarily find salvation, may also serve as a place of refreshment for eyes made weary and brains addled from the near-constant digital glow of everyday life.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Tom Hart (Oct 19, 2018)

Grant Jones said:


> If you outlaw powerpoint (scripture verses for the sermon or lyrics to psalms and hymns)....then would you not also need to outlaw all smart phone and tablet bible App use.



That wasn't really what I was getting at. Whether listeners use virtual or paper Bibles is inconsequential. Similarly, whether during the singing books are or projected slides are used I would probably class as circumstances. (I would prefer paper, bound copies, though, for practical reasons -- there tend to be fewer malfunctions with books).

Rather, I had in mind visuals during a sermon, such as maps or perhaps a picture of the temple. For example, one former pastor of mine put up a map of Paul's journeys in order to explain where Corinth is.

Sure, in Bible times they had no overhead projectors. But should we really just assume that they would have used them? Indeed, is not the hearing of the word sufficient (Rom. 10:17)?

I'm not really taking a position on this, just exploring the issue.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Smeagol (Oct 19, 2018)

Tom Hart said:


> That wasn't really what I was getting at. Whether listeners use virtual or paper Bibles is inconsequential. Similarly, whether during the singing books are or projected slides are used I would probably class as circumstances. (I would prefer paper, bound copies, though, for practical reasons -- there tend to be fewer malfunctions with books).
> 
> Rather, I had in mind visuals during a sermon, such as maps or perhaps a picture of the temple. For example, one former pastor of mine put up a map of Paul's journeys in order to explain where Corinth is.
> 
> ...


 Well in that specific example that You give, then I would say No, as I think you are correct and the focus should be on hearing the word of God from the under-Shepherd.Those type of power points I believe serve better in small group and Sunday school settings.


----------



## Tom Hart (Oct 19, 2018)

Grant Jones said:


> Well in that specific example that You give, then I would prefer no visual aid, as I think you are correct and the focus should be on hearing the word of God from the under-Shepherd.Those type of power points I believe serve better in small group and Sunday school settings.



In that particular case, I think the visual served as more of a distraction than anything. I'm fairly sure most of the people in the room were quite unfamiliar with maps of the Eastern Mediterranean, and the pastor's long-winded explanation of the various cities on Paul's path probably confused them further. The geographical explanations threw the listeners off of the main point of the message (which I can't recall, even if I remember the map). I think it would have been better to simply say, "Corinth was a biggish port city in Greece."


----------



## lynnie (Oct 19, 2018)

If you have a special Sunday where a missionary is speaking, it can be helpful when they have a short video presentation of the foreign situation- where they live, the church building, the people. I think it increases interest and hopefully helps people engage in prayer for them better, as well as want to donate. I don't like videos much at all other than that.

As far as the OP situation, wouldn't a pastor who loves his flock want to welcome them? Why would he not want to stand up there and greet them in person and initiate the service? It would raise red flags for me.


----------



## Edward (Oct 19, 2018)

Generally, the answer should be 'no', but I went with 'it depends' because there are some circumstances where it might be appropriate. For example, small church where a pastor is stricken ill, and there is no one prepared to preach. A streamed sermon might be better than no sermon at all.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Edward (Oct 19, 2018)

lynnie said:


> If you have a special Sunday where a missionary is speaking, it can be helpful when they have a short video presentation of the foreign situation



While it might be appropriate for the Session to permit the missionary to preach, the missionary report would be better relegated to the Sunday school hour.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## VictorBravo (Oct 19, 2018)

No on videos.

On the topic of PowerPoint, this old article hints at my thoughts:
https://www.wired.com/2003/09/ppt2/

Sorry, no biblical analysis here except that the Word of God is preached by preachers...preferably in person. Videos and "show and tell" are fine in the "off-duty" time.


----------



## Ben Zartman (Oct 19, 2018)

I'm not arguing against any circumstances that the primitive church didn't have--they didn't need central heating in Palestine as much as we do in Rhode Island! But I do feel that all circumstances must be chosen wisely, and must serve the purpose of worship well. Much of modern meeting-house decor that I see in pictures would distract immensely; screens of any sort distract me immensely; Power Point slides during a sermon would distract immeasurably. I think it is wise to do everything possible to make the elements stand out and the circumstances to play second string by being so inobtrusive that they are not noticed. If the temperature in the building is comfortable, no one will think about it. The seats likewise, so also the sound level (BTW, I think if churches grow so big they NEED microphones and amplifiers, they oughtta split off into a plant. How many members can a pastor personally know and care for? But that's off-topic).
Again, these are my opinions--I'm not advocating un-churching any congregation that puts hymn words on a screen or amplifies sound. But I prefer them not to.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Oct 19, 2018)

Should the next elected POTUS stand on the Capitol steps, and give a PowerPoint assisted speech?

Should VIPs brought in to give graduation addresses use video enhancement?

Should a poetry reading be accompanied by a kaleidoscope-like light show?

Should Christian sermons be the equivalent of TED Talks?

Consider that the setting and the task itself call for a certain form of presentation. And doing another form of presentation, rather than assisting, detracts and distracts.

A sermon is not a Sunday School lesson. A sermon may be weighty, it may be meaty and dense. Alternatively, it may be lyrical, or pointed almost to the degree of over-repetitious. It may be "good" or it may be "bad." But it is supposed to be a herald's deliverance of a king's proclamation. "Listen up," is rule number one.

Let a missionary presentation be a presentation. Let a SS class use the chalkboard, or the overhead projector. "The medium is [or is an element of] the message" as a package. What sort of business are we conducting on Sunday as we aim at preaching?

Is the pastor more, or less effective, as he stands forth to speak to God's people in the name of God, in the space Christ himself once occupied in his flesh? Is he more, or less effective, if he offers his authoritative counsel in a manner not obviously a royal address; but rather a lecture, or a rococo oration, or a motivational speech?

My suggestion: As Reformed folk we should promote (with a very narrow range of added options) a close imitation of the rhetorical style of Christ and the Apostles for preaching, and save the use of other sensory-engagement teaching aids for Bible study. Because, at some point in our adulteration of the medium, the task we are engaged with isn't preaching anymore.

Reactions: Like 2 | Edifying 2


----------



## Ben Zartman (Oct 19, 2018)

I am not against headsets for the hard of hearing--we have headsets so that Spanish speakers can hear a live translation of the sermon! I am also not against hearing aids, sign-language translation, or other aids for extraordinary circumstances. But my personal preference is for a preacher who can "Cry aloud and spare not;" who has a voice that needs no artificial amplification, and for a venue with acoustics that aid in that.
Too often a shoddy sound system does more to distract than to aid--I remember conferences where 400 people in the room could clearly hear my voice without amplification, and they kept shoving a microphone at me that only made my own voice echo in my head, to the net detriment of the ability to be understood. Far better to have eschewed the mic altogether.


----------



## SavedSinner (Oct 20, 2018)

Ben Zartman said:


> Re; the last two replies (can't seem to figure out multi-quote yet). I can't abide projectors or slides or screens, because with them the service of God, the declaration of His Word, seems reduced to a classroom. I don't believe any Power Point presentation can equal the verbal exhortation: "Be ye reconciled to God!"
> The visual aids that God has ordained are the ordinances of Baptism and the Lord's Supper. I tend to flee from any others.


Isn't Ben's the best answer to videos in worship? "The visual aids that God has ordained are the ordinances of Baptism and the Lord's Supper."

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Pergamum (Oct 20, 2018)

SavedSinner said:


> Isn't Ben's the best answer to videos in worship? "The visual aids that God has ordained are the ordinances of Baptism and the Lord's Supper."


That certainly sounds very pious and certain and all that. But I think the conclusion is more nuanced. Jesus used everyday objects in his teaching. Things that people could not merely imagine, but actually see. Jesus used other visual aids as well.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Tom Hart (Oct 21, 2018)

Pergamum said:


> That certainly sounds very pious and certain and all that. But I think the conclusion is more nuanced. Jesus used everyday objects in his teaching. Things that people could not merely imagine, but actually see. Jesus used other visual aids as well.



Could it be that there are different types of preaching? Note that Jesus did not take a child into his arms while preaching in the synagogue.


----------



## Pergamum (Oct 21, 2018)

Tom Hart said:


> Could it be that there are different types of preaching? Note that Jesus did not take a child into his arms while preaching in the synagogue.


It could be that there are different types.

"This is a list of seven Greek words translated "preach" for which Greek word-studies are provided at: http://www.NTwords.com.

2097 (Preach 1) euangelizo , "Announce good news." Included are "good news" (2098 euangelion) and "good newser" (2099 euangelistes).

1229 (Preach 2) diangello , "Widely announce."

2605 (Preach 3) katangello , "Publicly announce."

4283 (Preach 4) proeuangelizomai , "Previously announced good news."

2784 (Preach 5) kerusso , "Proclaim." Included are "proclamation" (2782 kerugma) and "proclaimer" (2783 kerux).

4296 (Preach 6) prokerusso , "Previously announced."

1256 (Preach 7) dialegomai , "Discuss."

Here are the other six Greek words translated "preach." Their meanings are sufficiently remote from "preach" that word-studies are not deemed necessary:

1. Akoe (0189), "hearing." Translated "preached" in Heb.4.2b.

2. Laleo (2980), "to speak." Translated "preach," "preached" or "preaching" in Mk.2.2, Act.8.25, 11.19, 13.42, 14.25 and 16.6.

3. Logos (3056), "message, word." Translated "preaching" in 1Co.1.18.

4. Parrhesiazomai (3954), "speak boldly." Translated "preached boldly" in Act.9.27.

5. Pleroo (4137), "to fulfill." Translated "preached" in Rom.15.19.

6. Procheirizomai (4400), "previously designated." Translated "preached" in Act.3.20."


So the English word "preach" does not really do justice to the variety in the Greek. I suppose we could look at each time Jesus is said to preach or teach, and see what the Greek is in those instances?


----------



## Pergamum (Oct 21, 2018)

Tom Hart said:


> Could it be that there are different types of preaching? Note that Jesus did not take a child into his arms while preaching in the synagogue.


It could be.

"This is a list of seven Greek words translated "preach" for which Greek word-studies are provided at: http://www.NTwords.com.

2097 (Preach 1) euangelizo , "Announce good news." Included are "good news" (2098 euangelion) and "good newser" (2099 euangelistes).

1229 (Preach 2) diangello , "Widely announce."

2605 (Preach 3) katangello , "Publicly announce."

4283 (Preach 4) proeuangelizomai , "Previously announced good news."

2784 (Preach 5) kerusso , "Proclaim." Included are "proclamation" (2782 kerugma) and "proclaimer" (2783 kerux).

4296 (Preach 6) prokerusso , "Previously announced."

1256 (Preach 7) dialegomai , "Discuss."

Here are the other six Greek words translated "preach." Their meanings are sufficiently remote from "preach" that word-studies are not deemed necessary:

1. Akoe (0189), "hearing." Translated "preached" in Heb.4.2b.

2. Laleo (2980), "to speak." Translated "preach," "preached" or "preaching" in Mk.2.2, Act.8.25, 11.19, 13.42, 14.25 and 16.6.

3. Logos (3056), "message, word." Translated "preaching" in 1Co.1.18.

4. Parrhesiazomai (3954), "speak boldly." Translated "preached boldly" in Act.9.27.

5. Pleroo (4137), "to fulfill." Translated "preached" in Rom.15.19.

6. Procheirizomai (4400), "previously designated." Translated "preached" in Act.3.20."


I suppose we could look at each and every instance where Jesus speaks and see what greek word is used to describe what He did (preach/teach/said, etc).


----------



## Ben Zartman (Oct 21, 2018)

Pergamum said:


> That certainly sounds very pious and certain and all that. But I think the conclusion is more nuanced. Jesus used everyday objects in his teaching. Things that people could not merely imagine, but actually see. Jesus used other visual aids as well.


Perg,
I'm not arguing against all visual aids or circumstances at any time: I am urging caution and thoughtfulness in bringing in distracting things. We have the commanded elements of worship. We must use prudence as we surround them with necessary circumstances. To me, an object pointed out or a feature of the building mentioned in order to illustrate would not be as distracting as a screen with bullet points. If a preacher brought in a mustard seed as a visual aid, it would not cause the same sort of scandal as if he brought in a donkey to illustrate Balaam's ass.
This matter of circumstances is for sure hard to sort out, and the pendulum goes to either extreme even on this board, where we have acapella EP-ers as well as the full band of the OP's congregation. I tend to fall on the side of keeping circumstances to a minimum, so that they are an aid to worship and do not distract.


----------



## Smeagol (Oct 21, 2018)

Ben Zartman said:


> I tend to fall on the side of keeping circumstances to a minimum, so that they are an aid to worship and do not distract.


, this is key.


----------



## VanGillMan (Oct 21, 2018)

Ben Zartman said:


> I don't believe any Power Point presentation can equal the verbal exhortation: "Be ye reconciled to God!"



I like that. When the Holy Spirt is working all the points are Power Points. I stole that from a local Pastor here who regularly says that in his talks - "I don't use power point, because all my points are power points".


----------



## Pergamum (Oct 21, 2018)

Ben Zartman said:


> Perg,
> I'm not arguing against all visual aids or circumstances at any time: I am urging caution and thoughtfulness in bringing in distracting things. We have the commanded elements of worship. We must use prudence as we surround them with necessary circumstances. To me, an object pointed out or a feature of the building mentioned in order to illustrate would not be as distracting as a screen with bullet points. If a preacher brought in a mustard seed as a visual aid, it would not cause the same sort of scandal as if he brought in a donkey to illustrate Balaam's ass.
> This matter of circumstances is for sure hard to sort out, and the pendulum goes to either extreme even on this board, where we have acapella EP-ers as well as the full band of the OP's congregation. I tend to fall on the side of keeping circumstances to a minimum, so that they are an aid to worship and do not distract.


Very good response. Thank you. 

"I tend to fall on the side of keeping circumstances to a minimum, so that they are an aid to worship and do not distract." That sounds like an excellent principle.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Silas22 (Oct 22, 2018)

In the past, the churches I've attended have provided videos of the missionaries we support over seas before collecting a missions offering. I dont find those kinds of videos to be distracting. I would never use a video to illustrate a sermon point, nor would I have an "introduction to this preaching series" video that megachurches commonly employ- that's just theatrics.


----------



## Jack K (Oct 22, 2018)

The _purpose and tone_ of the video or pictures matters a great deal.

I say NO to theatrics.
NO to entertainment.
NO to pacing and variety (when it's a sub-set of entertainment).
NO to showing visitors that we can be edgy.
NO to turning a sermon into a classroom lecture.

But YES to providing words so the congregation can sing in unison or follow along as Scripture is read.

YES to guarded use of pictures for instructional parts of a sermon. The fact that a sermon has some instruction in it does not mean it has been turned into a classroom lecture. Good preachers are able to teach and still also preach. There may be times when a map or other illustration aids in understanding. If it destroys the solemnity of the occasion, it's probably wise to refrain. But again, I think many preachers would be able to use a map and still keep the proper sense of occasion. Much depends on the preacher, and perhaps the congregation.

YES to pictures and video as a part of a missionary report. When the church has sent a missionary, I believe there is warrant for an edifying report from that missionary to be included in the church's Lord's Day gathering, based on passages like Acts 20:7-12. If you would be more comfortable doing this before the call to worship or after the benediction, that's fine, but don't exclude your missionary from reporting. And a video fits the nature of a report.

MAYBE to a video welcome from a pastor. But I have to ask, why not do it in person? In most cases, I suspect a video would be chosen for one of the NO reasons listed above.

Reactions: Like 1


----------

