USA/Canada pastors invited to live online chat about Nazarene revisioning

[Hans Deventer]

See http://www.ncnnews.com/nphweb/html/ncn/article.jsp?id=10006169

[Jon Twitchell]

Ok... but why are we eliminating all of the pastors who use Internet Explorer (either because they prefer it, don't know any better, or can't figure out how to install Firefox)???

That seems really odd....

[Jon Twitchell]

And... I have to travel to NH that day for a funeral, so I won't be able to participate. I hope that someone will post a link to the transcript once it is posted.

And... Why is this topic just for USA/Canada pastors? That seems about as odd as it being only for pastors with Firefox or Safari browsers!

(I'm not trying to be critical... I'm very glad that these discussions are taking place!)

[John Kennedy]

But have you seriously considered whether you really want the church to fall into the hands of those who don't have Firefox or Safari?

[David Pettigrew]

Well, gee. I'm glad I discovered this four hours too late. :mad: I guess you have to be a subscriber to NCN news to keep up with things.

[Susan Unger]

Well, gee. I'm glad I discovered this four hours too late. :mad: I guess you have to be a subscriber to NCN news to keep up with things.

Or read Hans' posts the day he posts them? :basic05

[Billy Cox]

See http://www.ncnnews.com/nphweb/html/ncn/article.jsp?id=10006169

I'm curious how it went. The limitation to FireFox or Safari is an oddball requirement.

[Ryan Scott]

Yeah, was anyone participating in this? Was it worth it?

[Hans Deventer]

I'm curious how it went. The limitation to FireFox or Safari is an oddball requirement.

Don't ask me. I'm not a pastor nor am I from the USA or Canada. I'm obviously not the target group..........

[Kevin Rector]

I read the transcript of the chat. Not much of substance was said. Perhaps there was some value as it appeared many of the questions intimated that perhaps the local churches need more support and need to keep more of their resources for local ministries. But ultimately I'm glad that I had something else I had to do or I would have participated and then felt like it was a waste of my time; spending five minutes reading the transcript was a way better use of my time than 80 minutes reading the chat.

Dave's revisioning article got a shout out so Kudos to you Dave.

[David Pettigrew]

Ok, I just read the transcript. What was the process of submitting questions? Every question seemed incredibly articulate with no crankiness, which strikes me as very odd.

Edited to add: What I mean is, the questions almost seemed to be like friendly-audience-only town hall meetings. Kind of like "I know we're already doing good in this area, but how can we do even better?" Or am I just being too cynical? I think the whole discussion is a huge step forward, so I'm thankful for it.

[Billy Cox]

Ok, I just read the transcript. What was the process of submitting questions? Every question seemed incredibly articulate with no crankiness, which strikes me as very odd.

Edited to add: What I mean is, the questions almost seemed to be like friendly-audience-only town hall meetings. Kind of like "I know we're already doing good in this area, but how can we do even better?" Or am I just being too cynical? I think the whole discussion is a huge step forward, so I'm thankful for it.

The chat was moderated.

[Eric Vail]

Ok, I just read the transcript. What was the process of submitting questions? Every question seemed incredibly articulate with no crankiness, which strikes me as very odd.

Edited to add: What I mean is, the questions almost seemed to be like friendly-audience-only town hall meetings. Kind of like "I know we're already doing good in this area, but how can we do even better?" Or am I just being too cynical? I think the whole discussion is a huge step forward, so I'm thankful for it.

During the chat everyone got to see what everyone else was saying. The misc. comments (e.g., Amen's, thank-you's, side-bar comments, so-and-so has entered or left) were all deleted. Also, it was stated up front that any questions or comments could be edited. When people asked questions we all saw their original form. When Tom Neese answered the question, it would often be a restated form of the question. I actually thought in most cases that was helpful in clarifying the original or in getting at the heart of the matter. Very seldom did I think that the restated question missed the point of the original.