To Multi-site or to Biblically Plant Local Churches
Isn't it great when a debate is framed so openly and fairly? :) Here's a discussion/debate between James MacDonald, Mark Dever, and Mark Driscoll that I got tipped off to by Dan Threlfall. Mark Dever ably takes the position of uni-site church plants. Dever spends most of the interview asking questions of Driscoll regarding his multi-site philosophy.
It always seemed to me that the uni-site approach was the more theological position while the multi-site approach was more strategic and yes, cool. I'm sure there are a wide variety of philosophy and strategy among those who advocate multi-site, just as there are innumerable approaches to the uni-site approach. On both accounts I'm sure there are plenty examples of churches that are not equally well thought out and enacted. It's easy and somewhat enjoyable to pick apart examples on either side that are ill conceived or executed poorly. That's what makes this interview so enjoyable. You get to see leaders of both approaches discuss their approach to the matter.
So, forget the personalities representing the positions. The real question is, what do you think? Pros/cons?
(Please note that the pictures are deliberately contrasting just to confuse the issue further)