Is there any hope for Christian TV?
"This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire, but it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires and lights in a box."
A chain-smoking TV journalist named Edward R. Murrow leveled these words against the medium that made him the most trusted news anchor of the 20th century. For Murrow, television was a neutral medium--holding the potential of both grandeur and debasement. Several decades later, Neil Postman went a step further in his book Amusing Ourselves to Death, arguing that television is a trivializing medium--one that does not merely deceive us, but inoculates us to the truth.
If so, we must ask whether television is a worthwhile medium for disseminating the gospel in 21st-century America. For many, the jury’s still out. Christian TV producer Phil Cooke generated an interesting response when he recently asked the question on his blog, “What will it take to fix Christian television?”
Though many criticize it for the scandalous fund-raising techniques it takes to keep some programs on the air, this was not the main complaint against Christian TV voiced in the informal poll and accompanying comments. The No. 1 problem was a perceived “lack of creativity.” Blog commenters cited the fact that most Christian programming is a monologue (preaching and teaching), in stark contrast to the interactive entertainment that is increasingly popular on mainstream TV.
Add to this the declining appetite for TV news (which shares Christian TV’s “monologic” qualities)—particularly among younger viewers. As a 2004 study from The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press points out, only “a third of the public (34 percent) regularly watches one of the nightly network news broadcasts on CBS, ABC or NBC. The total audience for these broadcasts shrunk by about half between 1993 and 2000.”
But I don't think a lack of creativity or growing competition from secular channels are Christian TV's biggest problem. The biggest problem is a general decline in trust that people have for mainstream media outlets—particularly TV. Speaking from my own experience, I'm actually less likely to believe something once I've seen it on TV. Like many, I prefer to pick and choose from a combination of media sources—online, radio and TV—and then make my own judgments.
So, if TV in general has lost its “cultural capital”, what does that mean for Christian TV? How do you communicate a transcendent message through a medium that everyone associates with triviality, consumerism and even deception. As Marshall McLuhan said, "The medium is the message." If no one takes the medium seriously anymore, what does that say about the message?
For me, it emphasizes the importance of the local church and personal evangelism. The "one-eyed preacher" in our living rooms will never replace the flesh-and-blood pastors who invest their lives in their congregations on a daily basis. Anyone who would subcontract his spiritual health--or the fate of the lost--to the same machine that brought ALF into our homes should probably have his head examined.
by Matt Green
from The Ministry Report
September 28, 2006
28 September 2006
The One-Eyed Preacher
Is there any hope for Christian TV?
"This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire, but it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires and lights in a box."
A chain-smoking TV journalist named Edward R. Murrow leveled these words against the medium that made him the most trusted news anchor of the 20th century. For Murrow, television was a neutral medium--holding the potential of both grandeur and debasement. Several decades later, Neil Postman went a step further in his book Amusing Ourselves to Death, arguing that television is a trivializing medium--one that does not merely deceive us, but inoculates us to the truth.
If so, we must ask whether television is a worthwhile medium for disseminating the gospel in 21st-century America. For many, the jury’s still out. Christian TV producer Phil Cooke generated an interesting response when he recently asked the question on his blog, “What will it take to fix Christian television?”
Though many criticize it for the scandalous fund-raising techniques it takes to keep some programs on the air, this was not the main complaint against Christian TV voiced in the informal poll and accompanying comments. The No. 1 problem was a perceived “lack of creativity.” Blog commenters cited the fact that most Christian programming is a monologue (preaching and teaching), in stark contrast to the interactive entertainment that is increasingly popular on mainstream TV.
Add to this the declining appetite for TV news (which shares Christian TV’s “monologic” qualities)—particularly among younger viewers. As a 2004 study from The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press points out, only “a third of the public (34 percent) regularly watches one of the nightly network news broadcasts on CBS, ABC or NBC. The total audience for these broadcasts shrunk by about half between 1993 and 2000.”
But I don't think a lack of creativity or growing competition from secular channels are Christian TV's biggest problem. The biggest problem is a general decline in trust that people have for mainstream media outlets—particularly TV. Speaking from my own experience, I'm actually less likely to believe something once I've seen it on TV. Like many, I prefer to pick and choose from a combination of media sources—online, radio and TV—and then make my own judgments.
So, if TV in general has lost its “cultural capital”, what does that mean for Christian TV? How do you communicate a transcendent message through a medium that everyone associates with triviality, consumerism and even deception. As Marshall McLuhan said, "The medium is the message." If no one takes the medium seriously anymore, what does that say about the message?
For me, it emphasizes the importance of the local church and personal evangelism. The "one-eyed preacher" in our living rooms will never replace the flesh-and-blood pastors who invest their lives in their congregations on a daily basis. Anyone who would subcontract his spiritual health--or the fate of the lost--to the same machine that brought ALF into our homes should probably have his head examined.
by Matt Green
from The Ministry Report
September 28, 2006
"This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire, but it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires and lights in a box."
A chain-smoking TV journalist named Edward R. Murrow leveled these words against the medium that made him the most trusted news anchor of the 20th century. For Murrow, television was a neutral medium--holding the potential of both grandeur and debasement. Several decades later, Neil Postman went a step further in his book Amusing Ourselves to Death, arguing that television is a trivializing medium--one that does not merely deceive us, but inoculates us to the truth.
If so, we must ask whether television is a worthwhile medium for disseminating the gospel in 21st-century America. For many, the jury’s still out. Christian TV producer Phil Cooke generated an interesting response when he recently asked the question on his blog, “What will it take to fix Christian television?”
Though many criticize it for the scandalous fund-raising techniques it takes to keep some programs on the air, this was not the main complaint against Christian TV voiced in the informal poll and accompanying comments. The No. 1 problem was a perceived “lack of creativity.” Blog commenters cited the fact that most Christian programming is a monologue (preaching and teaching), in stark contrast to the interactive entertainment that is increasingly popular on mainstream TV.
Add to this the declining appetite for TV news (which shares Christian TV’s “monologic” qualities)—particularly among younger viewers. As a 2004 study from The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press points out, only “a third of the public (34 percent) regularly watches one of the nightly network news broadcasts on CBS, ABC or NBC. The total audience for these broadcasts shrunk by about half between 1993 and 2000.”
But I don't think a lack of creativity or growing competition from secular channels are Christian TV's biggest problem. The biggest problem is a general decline in trust that people have for mainstream media outlets—particularly TV. Speaking from my own experience, I'm actually less likely to believe something once I've seen it on TV. Like many, I prefer to pick and choose from a combination of media sources—online, radio and TV—and then make my own judgments.
So, if TV in general has lost its “cultural capital”, what does that mean for Christian TV? How do you communicate a transcendent message through a medium that everyone associates with triviality, consumerism and even deception. As Marshall McLuhan said, "The medium is the message." If no one takes the medium seriously anymore, what does that say about the message?
For me, it emphasizes the importance of the local church and personal evangelism. The "one-eyed preacher" in our living rooms will never replace the flesh-and-blood pastors who invest their lives in their congregations on a daily basis. Anyone who would subcontract his spiritual health--or the fate of the lost--to the same machine that brought ALF into our homes should probably have his head examined.
by Matt Green
from The Ministry Report
September 28, 2006
11 September 2006
Dear Word-Faith Friends,
Why a religious movement that’s gained cultural prominence should take a second look at {{MORE}}
You began as a fringe movement within the Pentecostal community and made barely a ripple in the public consciousness until a handful of your proponents were exposed for financial and sexual indiscretions in the '80s. In the '90s, you faced continuous scrutiny and criticism from heresy hunters and theological watchdog groups, and several books were written deconstructing your supposed sub-orthodox doctrine.
But now, in the new millennium, you can claim victory. A cover story in the September 18 issue of TIME magazine explores your movement, asking, "Does God Want You to Be Rich?" A poll cited in the same issue of the magazine found that 17 percent of Christians surveyed identified themselves with the Word-Faith movement, and 61 percent said they believe God wants people to be prosperous.
Of the four largest megachurches in the country, three (Lakewood Church, Houston, pastored by Joel Osteen; The Potter's House, Dallas, pastored by T.D. Jakes; and World Changers Church, Atlanta, pastored by Creflo Dollar) preach prosperity theology. And that doesn't include other high-profile pastors and ministry leaders such as Randy and Paula White, Joyce Meyer, Benny Hinn, Rod Parsley and Eddie Long--all of whom have garnered substantial influence outside the church.
Once relegated to self-publishing your books and speaking at regional conferences and a handful of Bible institutes, you now negotiate seven-figure book contracts with New York publishers, you dominate Christian television and you have fewer critics than you did in the '80s and '90s when hardly anyone outside the church knew about you.
Simply put, you effectively adapted your teaching methods and persona to be more appealing to a broader audience. You distanced yourselves from obvious hucksters. You embraced the language of empowerment rather than greed, using terms such as "destiny", "favor", "promotion" and "increase". You harnessed media with sophistication and tact, often eschewing the pulpit theatrics of your Pentecostal forebears.
Yet your message remained consistent, and its simplicity resonated with a culture disillusioned with a God who seemed to be disturbingly unpredictable, prayers that seemed to go unanswered and a version of Christianity that seemed to have little room for three of the most venerated deities in the Western pantheon: money, health and self-fulfillment.
So, the question for you is this: Have your teachings been accepted because they have been weighed in the balances and found to be biblically sound, or because they happen to be compatible with the narcissistic longings of 21st-century Americans? You were prophetic as you reintroduced us to a God who actually hears our prayers and wants to answer them ... when you reminded us of the ability (and desire) of God to heal people of their physical infirmities ... when you encouraged us to be more liberal in giving and reminded us of the principles of reaping and sowing.
But the truth remains that your simplistic formulas for wealth transfer, divine promotion and supernatural health don't always ring true in a world where the majority of Christians in non-Western nations live in poverty. You have yet to wrestle through a biblically-coherent theology of suffering and the role it plays in a faithful Christian's life. And some of you are confused as to whether Jesus wants us to take up our cross and follow Him or discover the champion within ourselves.
Like every religious movement, you've adapted to the demands of changing times. Now it's time to adapt to the demands of an unchanging Word--to embrace the value of sacrifice, as well as success. Our culture is crying for nothing less than the same radical faith that Jesus exhibited when He assumed the identity of an impoverished, unknown, peasant-carpenter to show us what God looks like.
by Matt Green
from The Ministry Report
September 11, 2006
You began as a fringe movement within the Pentecostal community and made barely a ripple in the public consciousness until a handful of your proponents were exposed for financial and sexual indiscretions in the '80s. In the '90s, you faced continuous scrutiny and criticism from heresy hunters and theological watchdog groups, and several books were written deconstructing your supposed sub-orthodox doctrine.
But now, in the new millennium, you can claim victory. A cover story in the September 18 issue of TIME magazine explores your movement, asking, "Does God Want You to Be Rich?" A poll cited in the same issue of the magazine found that 17 percent of Christians surveyed identified themselves with the Word-Faith movement, and 61 percent said they believe God wants people to be prosperous.
Of the four largest megachurches in the country, three (Lakewood Church, Houston, pastored by Joel Osteen; The Potter's House, Dallas, pastored by T.D. Jakes; and World Changers Church, Atlanta, pastored by Creflo Dollar) preach prosperity theology. And that doesn't include other high-profile pastors and ministry leaders such as Randy and Paula White, Joyce Meyer, Benny Hinn, Rod Parsley and Eddie Long--all of whom have garnered substantial influence outside the church.
Once relegated to self-publishing your books and speaking at regional conferences and a handful of Bible institutes, you now negotiate seven-figure book contracts with New York publishers, you dominate Christian television and you have fewer critics than you did in the '80s and '90s when hardly anyone outside the church knew about you.
Simply put, you effectively adapted your teaching methods and persona to be more appealing to a broader audience. You distanced yourselves from obvious hucksters. You embraced the language of empowerment rather than greed, using terms such as "destiny", "favor", "promotion" and "increase". You harnessed media with sophistication and tact, often eschewing the pulpit theatrics of your Pentecostal forebears.
Yet your message remained consistent, and its simplicity resonated with a culture disillusioned with a God who seemed to be disturbingly unpredictable, prayers that seemed to go unanswered and a version of Christianity that seemed to have little room for three of the most venerated deities in the Western pantheon: money, health and self-fulfillment.
So, the question for you is this: Have your teachings been accepted because they have been weighed in the balances and found to be biblically sound, or because they happen to be compatible with the narcissistic longings of 21st-century Americans? You were prophetic as you reintroduced us to a God who actually hears our prayers and wants to answer them ... when you reminded us of the ability (and desire) of God to heal people of their physical infirmities ... when you encouraged us to be more liberal in giving and reminded us of the principles of reaping and sowing.
But the truth remains that your simplistic formulas for wealth transfer, divine promotion and supernatural health don't always ring true in a world where the majority of Christians in non-Western nations live in poverty. You have yet to wrestle through a biblically-coherent theology of suffering and the role it plays in a faithful Christian's life. And some of you are confused as to whether Jesus wants us to take up our cross and follow Him or discover the champion within ourselves.
Like every religious movement, you've adapted to the demands of changing times. Now it's time to adapt to the demands of an unchanging Word--to embrace the value of sacrifice, as well as success. Our culture is crying for nothing less than the same radical faith that Jesus exhibited when He assumed the identity of an impoverished, unknown, peasant-carpenter to show us what God looks like.
by Matt Green
from The Ministry Report
September 11, 2006
Dear Word-Faith Friends,
Why a religious movement that’s gained cultural prominence should take a second look at {{MORE}}
You began as a fringe movement within the Pentecostal community and made barely a ripple in the public consciousness until a handful of your proponents were exposed for financial and sexual indiscretions in the '80s. In the '90s, you faced continuous scrutiny and criticism from heresy hunters and theological watchdog groups, and several books were written deconstructing your supposed sub-orthodox doctrine.
But now, in the new millennium, you can claim victory. A cover story in the September 18 issue of TIME magazine explores your movement, asking, "Does God Want You to Be Rich?" A poll cited in the same issue of the magazine found that 17 percent of Christians surveyed identified themselves with the Word-Faith movement, and 61 percent said they believe God wants people to be prosperous.
Of the four largest megachurches in the country, three (Lakewood Church, Houston, pastored by Joel Osteen; The Potter's House, Dallas, pastored by T.D. Jakes; and World Changers Church, Atlanta, pastored by Creflo Dollar) preach prosperity theology. And that doesn't include other high-profile pastors and ministry leaders such as Randy and Paula White, Joyce Meyer, Benny Hinn, Rod Parsley and Eddie Long--all of whom have garnered substantial influence outside the church.
Once relegated to self-publishing your books and speaking at regional conferences and a handful of Bible institutes, you now negotiate seven-figure book contracts with New York publishers, you dominate Christian television and you have fewer critics than you did in the '80s and '90s when hardly anyone outside the church knew about you.
Simply put, you effectively adapted your teaching methods and persona to be more appealing to a broader audience. You distanced yourselves from obvious hucksters. You embraced the language of empowerment rather than greed, using terms such as "destiny", "favor", "promotion" and "increase". You harnessed media with sophistication and tact, often eschewing the pulpit theatrics of your Pentecostal forebears.
Yet your message remained consistent, and its simplicity resonated with a culture disillusioned with a God who seemed to be disturbingly unpredictable, prayers that seemed to go unanswered and a version of Christianity that seemed to have little room for three of the most venerated deities in the Western pantheon: money, health and self-fulfillment.
So, the question for you is this: Have your teachings been accepted because they have been weighed in the balances and found to be biblically sound, or because they happen to be compatible with the narcissistic longings of 21st-century Americans? You were prophetic as you reintroduced us to a God who actually hears our prayers and wants to answer them ... when you reminded us of the ability (and desire) of God to heal people of their physical infirmities ... when you encouraged us to be more liberal in giving and reminded us of the principles of reaping and sowing.
But the truth remains that your simplistic formulas for wealth transfer, divine promotion and supernatural health don't always ring true in a world where the majority of Christians in non-Western nations live in poverty. You have yet to wrestle through a biblically-coherent theology of suffering and the role it plays in a faithful Christian's life. And some of you are confused as to whether Jesus wants us to take up our cross and follow Him or discover the champion within ourselves.
Like every religious movement, you've adapted to the demands of changing times. Now it's time to adapt to the demands of an unchanging Word--to embrace the value of sacrifice, as well as success. Our culture is crying for nothing less than the same radical faith that Jesus exhibited when He assumed the identity of an impoverished, unknown, peasant-carpenter to show us what God looks like.
by Matt Green
from The Ministry Report
September 11, 2006
You began as a fringe movement within the Pentecostal community and made barely a ripple in the public consciousness until a handful of your proponents were exposed for financial and sexual indiscretions in the '80s. In the '90s, you faced continuous scrutiny and criticism from heresy hunters and theological watchdog groups, and several books were written deconstructing your supposed sub-orthodox doctrine.
But now, in the new millennium, you can claim victory. A cover story in the September 18 issue of TIME magazine explores your movement, asking, "Does God Want You to Be Rich?" A poll cited in the same issue of the magazine found that 17 percent of Christians surveyed identified themselves with the Word-Faith movement, and 61 percent said they believe God wants people to be prosperous.
Of the four largest megachurches in the country, three (Lakewood Church, Houston, pastored by Joel Osteen; The Potter's House, Dallas, pastored by T.D. Jakes; and World Changers Church, Atlanta, pastored by Creflo Dollar) preach prosperity theology. And that doesn't include other high-profile pastors and ministry leaders such as Randy and Paula White, Joyce Meyer, Benny Hinn, Rod Parsley and Eddie Long--all of whom have garnered substantial influence outside the church.
Once relegated to self-publishing your books and speaking at regional conferences and a handful of Bible institutes, you now negotiate seven-figure book contracts with New York publishers, you dominate Christian television and you have fewer critics than you did in the '80s and '90s when hardly anyone outside the church knew about you.
Simply put, you effectively adapted your teaching methods and persona to be more appealing to a broader audience. You distanced yourselves from obvious hucksters. You embraced the language of empowerment rather than greed, using terms such as "destiny", "favor", "promotion" and "increase". You harnessed media with sophistication and tact, often eschewing the pulpit theatrics of your Pentecostal forebears.
Yet your message remained consistent, and its simplicity resonated with a culture disillusioned with a God who seemed to be disturbingly unpredictable, prayers that seemed to go unanswered and a version of Christianity that seemed to have little room for three of the most venerated deities in the Western pantheon: money, health and self-fulfillment.
So, the question for you is this: Have your teachings been accepted because they have been weighed in the balances and found to be biblically sound, or because they happen to be compatible with the narcissistic longings of 21st-century Americans? You were prophetic as you reintroduced us to a God who actually hears our prayers and wants to answer them ... when you reminded us of the ability (and desire) of God to heal people of their physical infirmities ... when you encouraged us to be more liberal in giving and reminded us of the principles of reaping and sowing.
But the truth remains that your simplistic formulas for wealth transfer, divine promotion and supernatural health don't always ring true in a world where the majority of Christians in non-Western nations live in poverty. You have yet to wrestle through a biblically-coherent theology of suffering and the role it plays in a faithful Christian's life. And some of you are confused as to whether Jesus wants us to take up our cross and follow Him or discover the champion within ourselves.
Like every religious movement, you've adapted to the demands of changing times. Now it's time to adapt to the demands of an unchanging Word--to embrace the value of sacrifice, as well as success. Our culture is crying for nothing less than the same radical faith that Jesus exhibited when He assumed the identity of an impoverished, unknown, peasant-carpenter to show us what God looks like.
by Matt Green
from The Ministry Report
September 11, 2006
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)