I think both make some good points. At times, however, they are hard to follow with all the "seminary speak" being thrown around.

Ed,

This was a great conversation. I really liked the part about the church being attractive. I think that part of the exchange wisely dealt with what I believe is a waste of time, us vs. them, fight between "attractional" and "missional" people. Scripture does seem to promote both "come and see" and "go tell." Thanks.

Give us part two! I'm most interested in the megachurch discussion.

hey man i really liked the video. Im not sure if you even remember me sense you meet so many people all the time, but i met you in cleveland tn at a church of god gathering. anyway I was wondering if you ever did coaching for young leaders. any insight would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Very helpful conversation. I appreciate the clarity of your missional "definition" including, "to join God on His mission . . . to identify that God, by nature is a missionary God . . . our task [therefore] is to join Him on His mission . . . so it is not about our agenda, it is not about our preferences, it is about us joining God on His mission for His purposes."

I also appreciate your conversation on witness/evangelism. Videos like this can/will help to bring balance to the discussion.

I thought Bill did a great job of putting this together. Thanks for taking the time to do this and I look forward to the rest of the video.

Um, you going to let us know when part 2 is done? Great marketing. Get to the juicy part and leave us hanging.

Loved the "attractive" comment. Attractive is cultural. What one person/culture will find attractive, another won't. For many, the church hasn't been attractive for years. Oh, and "attractive" goes beyond the surface, right?

Since moving to Syracuse, NY, I appreciate the "could take 5 years" in teaching people the story of Christ. At the same time, could we use that as a cop out for not pushing buttons a little bit? When I read in Acts, these weren't Christian societies that are seeing people accept. Basically the question is, how do we jive the 5 years comment with what we read in Acts?

Thanks for that post, great video and conversation and I am looking forward to the second. In reference to the foundational aspect of reaching the lost, I am curious about how much you support chronological Bible teaching.