Tarheel Baptist said:
^^^This^^^
One Church, Many Campuses
- Thread starter HeDied4U
- Start date
^^^This^^^
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2013
- Messages
- 8,018
- Reaction score
- 54
- Points
- 48
Wait...
Looking at the title for this thread, I thought this would have been another "Local Church vs. Church Universal" debate. ;D
Looking at the title for this thread, I thought this would have been another "Local Church vs. Church Universal" debate. ;D
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 6,351
- Reaction score
- 129
- Points
- 63
Tarheel Baptist said:
I have no problem with leveraging the strength of the existing church to get the new one up and running. Another church near me has started (note not planted) 10 churches in the last 8 years. Only one failed to grow and closed. They used the main church to train and develop the leadership that were sent to build the new congregations. At least one of the remaining churches has already sent out its own team to start a church. What you don't hear is the pastor at the original church claiming to be the leader 11 congregations or having "x" number of members. He leads a church that starts churches. That seems not only a wise use of resources but also eerily biblical.
Mathew Ward said:
Same with me
It would not be my choice but the idea of a much wiser, older man as Lead pastor over several younger inexperienced pastors makes some sense to me.
The younger guys may be able to preach & even do some counseling but not have the experience to manage a large ministry. There is much more to pastoring than just preaching the sermon.
For you Home church guys this model would work great.
Main campus in your home & a satellite church in of your neighbors’ homes.
Each sub-division street would have its official church.
Main Street Baptist Home church
First Street Baptist Home church
Second Street Baptist Home church & so on.
Main campus in your home & a satellite church in of your neighbors’ homes.
Each sub-division street would have its official church.
Main Street Baptist Home church
First Street Baptist Home church
Second Street Baptist Home church & so on.
subllibrm said:Tarheel Baptist said:
I have no problem with leveraging the strength of the existing church to get the new one up and running. Another church near me has started (note not planted) 10 churches in the last 8 years. Only one failed to grow and closed. They used the main church to train and develop the leadership that were sent to build the new congregations. At least one of the remaining churches has already sent out its own team to start a church. What you don't hear is the pastor at the original church claiming to be the leader 11 congregations or having "x" number of members. He leads a church that starts churches. That seems not only a wise use of resources but also eerily biblical.
This man clearly does not have a Pride problem & is getting the job done.
This should be a model for all large ministries.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 847
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 0
My former church planted one church each year (usually within a 50 mile radius of our church) for some 25 years before (and ever) exploring other options beginning with on-campus "venues" about 15 years ago for a number of reasons:
1. Flexibility of campus usability. - Church was full even after multiple services so having other existing buildings on campus used via - closed-circuit TV created "more space".
2. This also offered group affinities. I was in leadership of the singles ministry and we were the first to start. It was successful with 400-500 attendees each Saturday service that occured at the same time as the 430pm and 630pm "big house" service. Interestingly some singles initially felt "marginalized" but it wasn't mandatory of course and some singles can feel slighted in a "family-church". There would later be other successful affinity venues based on music or ethnic styles. Each venue had it's own ministry team...pastor, worship leader and a very heavy emphasis on small groups including part-time Small Group Community leaders. (We had 5 such leaders for over 300 small groups just in the singles ministry...some went to the venue....others not).
3. Based on the success of the venues and the way people related to CCTV sermons, we began with one satellite campus about 15 miles away. There was a fairly decent sized paid staff including full-time pastor, Sunday School leaders and counseling and Celebrate Recovery program. Three times a month the sermons were from the original campus and then the other was preached live by the local satellite pastor.
4 This grew and many other satellites in the Southern California area were birthed. Now some internationally.
Pro's
* Good use of financial resources by not putting major dollars into buildings. Start with renting schools or other temporary facilities until viability is assured. At that point some have purchased property and have become more autonomous.
* Raises up leaders from the church in an internship style. Most of the satellites have been started by those who began in the main church.
* Builds a brand. Like staying at a Marriott, a person can know what to expect.
Con's
* Build's a brand. Can evolve in loyalty to the brand and not God.
* Can become celebrity-oriented.
* Possible discomfort for established churches in a "new area" when the "brand" rolls into town. I would feel uncomfortable about this I think but I'm a business guy who looks at competition from a different angle.
* IMO when it's done in a regionalized area it has the appearance of less "flash" or celebrity-minded than a multi-state or international footprint.
1. Flexibility of campus usability. - Church was full even after multiple services so having other existing buildings on campus used via - closed-circuit TV created "more space".
2. This also offered group affinities. I was in leadership of the singles ministry and we were the first to start. It was successful with 400-500 attendees each Saturday service that occured at the same time as the 430pm and 630pm "big house" service. Interestingly some singles initially felt "marginalized" but it wasn't mandatory of course and some singles can feel slighted in a "family-church". There would later be other successful affinity venues based on music or ethnic styles. Each venue had it's own ministry team...pastor, worship leader and a very heavy emphasis on small groups including part-time Small Group Community leaders. (We had 5 such leaders for over 300 small groups just in the singles ministry...some went to the venue....others not).
3. Based on the success of the venues and the way people related to CCTV sermons, we began with one satellite campus about 15 miles away. There was a fairly decent sized paid staff including full-time pastor, Sunday School leaders and counseling and Celebrate Recovery program. Three times a month the sermons were from the original campus and then the other was preached live by the local satellite pastor.
4 This grew and many other satellites in the Southern California area were birthed. Now some internationally.
Pro's
* Good use of financial resources by not putting major dollars into buildings. Start with renting schools or other temporary facilities until viability is assured. At that point some have purchased property and have become more autonomous.
* Raises up leaders from the church in an internship style. Most of the satellites have been started by those who began in the main church.
* Builds a brand. Like staying at a Marriott, a person can know what to expect.
Con's
* Build's a brand. Can evolve in loyalty to the brand and not God.
* Can become celebrity-oriented.
* Possible discomfort for established churches in a "new area" when the "brand" rolls into town. I would feel uncomfortable about this I think but I'm a business guy who looks at competition from a different angle.
* IMO when it's done in a regionalized area it has the appearance of less "flash" or celebrity-minded than a multi-state or international footprint.
My sister attended a "mega" church for awhile, then the church started an outreach of starting new churches in near by towns. Although they loved their church and were comfortable with it, my sister and her family decided to help in one of the outreach churches. It is less than a year old, and growing fast. They are very active in the community-very impressed. I was able to attend this past November. While not my style, I am very impressed how the Lord is using them. They baptize at the main campus, and initially all the "workers" came from the main campus. It is working-reaching others for Christ!
Teaching the same sermon is impossible per scripture. Teachers are full of the spirit which leads their preaching. If he is using another Elder/Pastors Sermons then he needs to step down from that position and allow the other Elders, who are gifted enough in Teaching and preaching, to do exactly that.HeDied4U said:
This is how Apostle Paul set it up, it is commanded. A church in direct violation of this is no church at all.
Some smaller assemblies, especially home churches, may not have the luxury of having multiple Elders who can teach. And people may live in an area where there really isn't a true biblical church and choose to settle. But any true Biblical church large enough would have plural elders as indicated in 2 Tim with the word "those"
2 Tim The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 847
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 0
kaba said:
Good post. Glad it is working well for this new church.
It also brings up a good point. "Exciting" churches with small "c" charismatic pastor can draw people for many reasons...some the preaching, some the music style, some the "experience", etc. Hopefully more than one. It's exciting to be part of something big and growing. But there are many there who are willing to leave that environment to rise early Sunday morning to lug about and set up chairs and sound equipment in the local high school gym, setup ad hoc SS classrooms, information tables, coffee, etc. and then tear it all down in a few hours. They have chosen to leave behind the comfort and "excitement" for the hard work of church building.
(purposely avoiding here the overused "megachurch" here as in it's pure form only relates to size) with not the most pure of motive (for entertainment,