"Forget the yin and the yangI'll take the boom and the bang…. Don't need in touch with my feminine side! All I want is my testosterone high."
Any idea where these strange lyrics come from? It's a "worship song" from a new movement called "God Men." (www.godmen.org)
Apparently Jesus was a jerk and the only way to be a real Christian man is to be one too. Ok, I have to admit they don't come right out and say that, but they might as well. Interested in rule #1 for a real man's woman? "Learn to work the toliet seat. You're a big girl. If it's up, put it down."
The LA times quotes a man who had a little trouble when going home from the conference and trying to use his new found ideas about manly godliness.
"But some men at the conference run into trouble when they debut their new attitudes at home. Eric Miller, a construction worker, admits his wife is none too pleased when he takes off, alone, on a weekend camping trip a few weeks after the GodMen conference this fall.'She was a little bit leery of it, as we have an infant,' he reports. 'She said, 'I need your help around here.' 'He's pretty sure his wife will come around once she recognizes he's modeling his life after Jesus', like a good Christian should."
(http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-godmen7dec07,0,5040895.story?coll=la-home-headlines)
Yeah, good luck with that buddy.
Men hate going to church so let's not try and change men to be godly, let's change what it means to be a godly man. It's crap and it's distrubing to think that these are the kind of men that could be leading our churches. And they are. I've met them. And they shouldn't be.
The article goes on to describe an incident that took place at Wal-Mart.
"A few weeks later, Stephenson, 43, is still not sold on profanity. But he has ditched the nice-guy reflex of always turning the other cheek. When he spots a Wal-Mart clerk writing "Happy Holidays" on a window, he boldly complains: It should say 'Merry Christmas.' The clerk erases the offending greeting. Chalk one up for Christian testosterone. 'I wouldn't have done that before,' Stephenson says proudly. 'I am no longer a doormat.'"
Is this how we're going to demonstrate the love of Christ to the world? Is this how they will know that we are Christians? Not by our love, but by our strength and power? We've missed the boat. We've missed the ocean. I'm not even sure we're on the right planet.
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
Ouch
Following is an excerpt from one of my classmates assignments that I thought was blog worthy. Check it out....
"Thinking back...I remember as a child being invited to go to church with a neighbor. I was allowed to go. On the way to church we passed an elderly lady standing on the side of the road. What appeared to be her car was parked with the emergency flashers on and the car hood up. The woman appeared to be upset as she was looking right and left and back again – she was crying. My friend and I asked if we should stop and see if the elderly woman needed help. My friend's dad was driving and he said "No, we don't want to be late to church." I never went to church with that family again."
Ouch, that stings a little bit. I wonder how many times we let our religious "duties" get in the way of living like Jesus. Being a Christian means to be a follower of Christ. In the way we are living, are we following Christ's example? I hate to think how many times my own hypocrisy has turned someone away from the church. I thought her comments were eye opening and a very important reminder for us in the church. We need to be careful not to get caught up in doing church and instead to be fully aware of how God is presenting us with opportunities to be Christ's body to the world.
"Thinking back...I remember as a child being invited to go to church with a neighbor. I was allowed to go. On the way to church we passed an elderly lady standing on the side of the road. What appeared to be her car was parked with the emergency flashers on and the car hood up. The woman appeared to be upset as she was looking right and left and back again – she was crying. My friend and I asked if we should stop and see if the elderly woman needed help. My friend's dad was driving and he said "No, we don't want to be late to church." I never went to church with that family again."
Ouch, that stings a little bit. I wonder how many times we let our religious "duties" get in the way of living like Jesus. Being a Christian means to be a follower of Christ. In the way we are living, are we following Christ's example? I hate to think how many times my own hypocrisy has turned someone away from the church. I thought her comments were eye opening and a very important reminder for us in the church. We need to be careful not to get caught up in doing church and instead to be fully aware of how God is presenting us with opportunities to be Christ's body to the world.
Monday, October 16, 2006
The Universe and the Teacup
I can't believe I'm about to do this. I hate math and yet I'm about to suggest a mathematical read for anyone interested...
I'm taking a class called, "The Principles of Mathematics." I'm doing strangely well. So far it has been suspiciously easy. I got a perfect score on my last chapter test. Hmmm... Have I entered some strange world of existence where I understand math? Maybe reading counting books with my preschoolers is making me less math-stupid. :)
Anyway, we're reading a book called, "The Universe and the Teacup: The Mathematics of Truth and Beauty" by K.C. Cole. I've really been quite amazed at the relevance of math to the world, or more specifically, my world.
I'm going to toss out some interesting quotes and see if you're brain will make connections for your own world. Every chapter I can see connections to religion, politics church growth, being a preschool teacher and more. I would actually recommend this book to people in the church planting business. Of course it's not outright. It doesn't say, "Hey, do this and your church will grow." But it helps you put together interesting connections. Anyway, here's some quotes...
"The threat of a loss has a greater impact on a decision than the possibility of an equivalent gain..."
"As a general principle, people tend to grossly exaggerate the risk of any danger perceived to be beyond their control, while shrugging off risks they think they can manage."
"...a frog placed in hot water will struggle to escape, but the same frog placed in cool water that's slowly warmed up will sit peacefully until it's cooked. 'One cannot anticipate what one does not perceive', he says, which is why gradual accumulations of risk due to lifestyle choices are so often ignored. We're in hot water, but it's gotten hot so slowly that no one notices." - think about this in relation to your relationship with God...
"...not only does quanitity frequently determine quality, quantity (or, more broadly, scale) can affect the very notion of what is true, what is possible, what, indeed, exists."
"...quantitative changes can make huge qualitative changes."
"A different frame of reference can yield wildly different answers..."
"A difference is a difference only if it makes a difference."
"Noise in other words, is whatever you don't want to be where it is.... It's what you need to get rid of to see what we want to see, to learn what we need to learn."
"...artists learn to pay attention to the crumbs that other people are about to sweep under the rug. They learn to be good noticers. The same could be said of good teachers, good parents, effective politicians." - I would add...good pastors.
"For every decision to focus on one thing, a piece of context is lost. These trade offs are inevitable." - this has huge implications to me in MANY ways.
Anyway....
I'm taking a class called, "The Principles of Mathematics." I'm doing strangely well. So far it has been suspiciously easy. I got a perfect score on my last chapter test. Hmmm... Have I entered some strange world of existence where I understand math? Maybe reading counting books with my preschoolers is making me less math-stupid. :)
Anyway, we're reading a book called, "The Universe and the Teacup: The Mathematics of Truth and Beauty" by K.C. Cole. I've really been quite amazed at the relevance of math to the world, or more specifically, my world.
I'm going to toss out some interesting quotes and see if you're brain will make connections for your own world. Every chapter I can see connections to religion, politics church growth, being a preschool teacher and more. I would actually recommend this book to people in the church planting business. Of course it's not outright. It doesn't say, "Hey, do this and your church will grow." But it helps you put together interesting connections. Anyway, here's some quotes...
"The threat of a loss has a greater impact on a decision than the possibility of an equivalent gain..."
"As a general principle, people tend to grossly exaggerate the risk of any danger perceived to be beyond their control, while shrugging off risks they think they can manage."
"...a frog placed in hot water will struggle to escape, but the same frog placed in cool water that's slowly warmed up will sit peacefully until it's cooked. 'One cannot anticipate what one does not perceive', he says, which is why gradual accumulations of risk due to lifestyle choices are so often ignored. We're in hot water, but it's gotten hot so slowly that no one notices." - think about this in relation to your relationship with God...
"...not only does quanitity frequently determine quality, quantity (or, more broadly, scale) can affect the very notion of what is true, what is possible, what, indeed, exists."
"...quantitative changes can make huge qualitative changes."
"A different frame of reference can yield wildly different answers..."
"A difference is a difference only if it makes a difference."
"Noise in other words, is whatever you don't want to be where it is.... It's what you need to get rid of to see what we want to see, to learn what we need to learn."
"...artists learn to pay attention to the crumbs that other people are about to sweep under the rug. They learn to be good noticers. The same could be said of good teachers, good parents, effective politicians." - I would add...good pastors.
"For every decision to focus on one thing, a piece of context is lost. These trade offs are inevitable." - this has huge implications to me in MANY ways.
Anyway....
Thursday, September 28, 2006
Oh Wow...
Ok, I'm not going to take much time to respond to this b/c, well frankly, I don't have much time. But OH MY GOSH!! Check out this statement by Jerry Falwell...
"I certainly hope that Hillary is the candidate. She has $300 million so far. But I hope she's the candidate. Because nothing will energize my [constituency] like Hillary Clinton. If Lucifer ran, he wouldn't." -Jerry Falwell
Did he seriously just suggest that Hillary Clinton would be worse than Lucifer himself? It is comments like this that make me a democrat. Thank you Mr. Falwell for being an outspoken representative of the Christian community. We really need the nation to think we're a bunch of lunatics....
Here's Jim Wallis' thoughts on the matter....
Jim Wallis: There he goes again - this time Rev. Falwell compares Sen. Clinton to Lucifer
The nation is weary of the vitriolic and divisive political rhetoric that still comes from some on the Religious Right. In particular, the country is tired, truly tired, of Rev. Jerry Falwell. At the Religious Right's Values Voter Summit, Rev. Falwell said that Hillary Clinton's run for the presidency would energize the Right's base more than Lucifer. This is also the man who said the terrorist attacks on 9/11 were God's judgment on America and he specifically blamed feminists, homosexuals and the ACLU. Agreement or disagreement with Senator Clinton's politics is not the issue. Personally demonizing public figures is the issue. Such political poison isn't just bad for the Body Politic and the more civil discourse we so desperately need. It also simply isn't Christian.
http://www.beliefnet.com/blogs/godspolitics/2006/09/jim-wallis-there-he-goes-again-this.html
"I certainly hope that Hillary is the candidate. She has $300 million so far. But I hope she's the candidate. Because nothing will energize my [constituency] like Hillary Clinton. If Lucifer ran, he wouldn't." -Jerry Falwell
Did he seriously just suggest that Hillary Clinton would be worse than Lucifer himself? It is comments like this that make me a democrat. Thank you Mr. Falwell for being an outspoken representative of the Christian community. We really need the nation to think we're a bunch of lunatics....
Here's Jim Wallis' thoughts on the matter....
Jim Wallis: There he goes again - this time Rev. Falwell compares Sen. Clinton to Lucifer
The nation is weary of the vitriolic and divisive political rhetoric that still comes from some on the Religious Right. In particular, the country is tired, truly tired, of Rev. Jerry Falwell. At the Religious Right's Values Voter Summit, Rev. Falwell said that Hillary Clinton's run for the presidency would energize the Right's base more than Lucifer. This is also the man who said the terrorist attacks on 9/11 were God's judgment on America and he specifically blamed feminists, homosexuals and the ACLU. Agreement or disagreement with Senator Clinton's politics is not the issue. Personally demonizing public figures is the issue. Such political poison isn't just bad for the Body Politic and the more civil discourse we so desperately need. It also simply isn't Christian.
http://www.beliefnet.com/blogs/godspolitics/2006/09/jim-wallis-there-he-goes-again-this.html
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Yahweh and His People
My World Civ assignment this week was an interesting one. I was required to read the history of the Hebrews as well as several passages from Genesis and Judges and then write a paper answering the question: What is the nature of humanity and their relationship to Yahweh. I can't believe I found it as hard as I did. Anyway, just thought I'd post my response here too...
The ideal relationship of humankind to Yahweh is love, agape love to use the Greek term. Agape love is a selfless love. It seeks nothing for itself and everything for the object of its adoration. As human relationships demonstrate, love or even friendship cannot be required, but rather is chosen, which is why God created humanity with the ability to choose, also referred to as "free will." Yahweh knew that in order to have an agape relationship with humanity, humanity had to choose it. It is this characteristic that separates humanity from the rest of creation. As Josh C. said, God started the relationship and mankind had to choose whether or not to continue it.
By presenting Adam and Eve with a dilemma, a choice to make, God puts the relationship in their control. In Genesis 2 and 3, in the center of the Garden of Eden Yahweh places a tree, the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, and tells them not to eat from this tree. In Genesis 3, we see that much to the dismay of Yahweh, Adam and Eve make the choice to disobey by eating from the forbidden tree. The reaction of God seems as if he experiences the feelings of betrayal. This is one reason I suggest that the ideal relationship is one of love or friendship. Yahweh's response is to take away the ease of life as originally presented in the garden. Joseph H. made a great point when he suggested that perhaps the reason God dispelled Adam and Eve from the garden was less about punishment and more to keep them away from the Tree of Life. If they ate from that tree, they would no longer need Yahweh and his desire for an agape relationship with humanity would be lost.
The rest of Hebrew Scripture is about Yahweh calling humanity back into a relationship with him. Over and over God seems to put his people into situations where they must rely on him or trust him and demonstrate this trust and reliance through obedience. Yahweh asking Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac in Genesis 22 is an example. In this story Abraham seems to obey without question and along the way communicates a trust that Yahweh will provide another way. Along with that God seeks to thwart humanity's ability to rely on itself as in the story of the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11.
Protection and provision was automatically given to Adam and Eve in the garden. It was theirs to hold on to. Through their disobedience, humanity now lives absent of the protection and provision of Yahweh unless it first chooses to accept God's covenant that puts humanity in a servant role to Yahweh. If humanity will choose to serve God and will demonstrate that with unswerving obedience, God will in turn protect and provide for, even bless as said to Abraham, humanity. Or to be more specific, prior to the coming of the Messiah, God offers this covenant to the Hebrews, God's chosen people.
The ideal relationship of humankind to Yahweh is love, agape love to use the Greek term. Agape love is a selfless love. It seeks nothing for itself and everything for the object of its adoration. As human relationships demonstrate, love or even friendship cannot be required, but rather is chosen, which is why God created humanity with the ability to choose, also referred to as "free will." Yahweh knew that in order to have an agape relationship with humanity, humanity had to choose it. It is this characteristic that separates humanity from the rest of creation. As Josh C. said, God started the relationship and mankind had to choose whether or not to continue it.
By presenting Adam and Eve with a dilemma, a choice to make, God puts the relationship in their control. In Genesis 2 and 3, in the center of the Garden of Eden Yahweh places a tree, the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, and tells them not to eat from this tree. In Genesis 3, we see that much to the dismay of Yahweh, Adam and Eve make the choice to disobey by eating from the forbidden tree. The reaction of God seems as if he experiences the feelings of betrayal. This is one reason I suggest that the ideal relationship is one of love or friendship. Yahweh's response is to take away the ease of life as originally presented in the garden. Joseph H. made a great point when he suggested that perhaps the reason God dispelled Adam and Eve from the garden was less about punishment and more to keep them away from the Tree of Life. If they ate from that tree, they would no longer need Yahweh and his desire for an agape relationship with humanity would be lost.
The rest of Hebrew Scripture is about Yahweh calling humanity back into a relationship with him. Over and over God seems to put his people into situations where they must rely on him or trust him and demonstrate this trust and reliance through obedience. Yahweh asking Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac in Genesis 22 is an example. In this story Abraham seems to obey without question and along the way communicates a trust that Yahweh will provide another way. Along with that God seeks to thwart humanity's ability to rely on itself as in the story of the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11.
Protection and provision was automatically given to Adam and Eve in the garden. It was theirs to hold on to. Through their disobedience, humanity now lives absent of the protection and provision of Yahweh unless it first chooses to accept God's covenant that puts humanity in a servant role to Yahweh. If humanity will choose to serve God and will demonstrate that with unswerving obedience, God will in turn protect and provide for, even bless as said to Abraham, humanity. Or to be more specific, prior to the coming of the Messiah, God offers this covenant to the Hebrews, God's chosen people.
Saturday, September 09, 2006
Missional Living
Just thought I'd put up my next "work for hire" that I just wrote for CVC (www.churchvolunteercentral.com). It should be coming out in their October e-newsletter. If you lead volunteers in a church setting, this is by far the best resource I've found. There's a $99 yearly membership fee but that covers everyone in your church and trust me, it's worth it. Plus it's run by Group Publishing, which in my opinion is one of the best Christian publishers. Anyway, here's the article in it's form before reaching the editor....
Developing an equipping culture isn’t just about the church and its activities. It means believing that each person in your church body has been strategically gifted and placed by God in their life situations to make an impact for His Kingdom. It means that when your small group leader comes to you and says, “My child just decided to start playing t-ball and I’m going to have to miss our next small group leader’s meeting because of a game,” you don’t fear that you are losing a leader, you cheer that God has given that family another opportunity to be a minister to a whole new set of people.
In 2005 I started wondering if “professional” ministry was where God wanted me. I had been serving in full-time ministry for about 3 years at that point and had faced some things that left me questioning. I spoke to a person who was in leadership over our church at the time and he told me that I would be letting God down and that he was sure that I didn’t want to be like the many men and women in the Bible who failed. Thankfully God’s voice in my head was louder. A few weeks after that conversation I really felt like God told me, “April, it’s not about being a “professional” minister, it’s about ministering wherever I place you.” I think my eyes were opened that day not only in regards to my own situation but also in regards to how we value or don’t value the lives of our church family members outside the church walls.
I have a friend who works at Target. He hates it. He feels like it’s a worthless job where all he does is help a big corporation make more money. That’s one of the reasons I went into full-time ministry in the first place: to do something worthwhile. But the truth is, God has strategically placed each of us where we are to make a great impact for His kingdom. The problem is that most of us miss our calling and just earn a paycheck.
I believe the church has a responsibility to help people discover their calling, not just as it relates to their service to the church but as it relates to who God calls them to be in their everyday situations. Developing an equipping culture is about preparing people to “go into all the world and make disciples.” Often times, however, fear causes the church to hold on tightly to its servants. They wonder, “If I release people to live in the world, how will I run the ministries in my church?”
Here’s what I believe with all my heart: If a church is committed to equipping people and releasing them to be ministers in their circles of influence, there will be no need to stress about the lack of volunteers because the church will grow and overflow with the lives that have been touched by the ministers who have been sent out. Jesus says to seek God’s Kingdom first, and everything else will fall into place.
What exactly does it look like to equip people to minister in their worlds? I don’t really think it’s an exact science. I don’t think you can write it into three easy steps. I do, however, want to give you a few ideas that I’ve thought of in hopes to get your minds thinking in that direction.
First of all, it’s important to consider what you communicate. How do you respond when conflicts of scheduling arise like the example I mentioned in the beginning? You could throw a fit and demand that your small group leader attend the meeting. In that case you’re very likely to lose that leader’s service to the church and you’ve missed a great opportunity to equip them to go out. What if instead of responding negatively you say, “Well we’ll really miss you at our meeting, but that’s great that you’re getting to interact with some new families. Have you thought about ways you can use your God-given gifts to love the people you are meeting?” Your leader may miss the training you wanted to give to them on small groups, but in just a quick sentence you’ve trained them to think strategically about the relationships they have. Take this example a step forward by offering a suggestion. “Susie, you are so great at hosting your small group. Have you thought about opening your home to the families on your child’s t-ball team? A meal might be a fantastic way to get to know them and show them God’s love.” In that one sentence you’ve helped them to see that God has gifted them not only to serve the church but also to reach out to the people around them.
What does your church value and how do you express it? Equipping people to live out God’s mission in their world has to be at the core of who you are as a church body. Many churches are developing mission statements and core values to help their church family clearly understand the vision God has given for their particular church. My church has a set of core values, one of which is “Missional Living.” We define this as: Meeting people's needs through acts of compassion and sharing with them the truth about God's love. We also have a list of goals that we’ve given our church members as it relates to this value.
Personal Goals:
I will do spontaneous acts of compassion daily.
I will spend time building quality relationships with my neighbors.
I will regularly pray for people in my circle of influence and be available to respond to their needs and to talk with them about their faith questions.
There are probably many more personal goals you can give people as it relates to this but these are just a few we’ve come up with to help our church family get started.
What are you teaching on Sunday mornings when the church gathers together for worship? Do your church members feel like it is a safe place to bring their friends? Do you make visitors stand up to be recognized and in my opinion, feel uncomfortable? Are you preaching about spiritual gifts only as they relate to service within the church or do you talk about how people can use their spiritual gifts outside the church?
Take a quick look at your church calendar for the next couple of months. How many days a week do you have “church stuff” planned – (i.e. small groups, Wednesday night church, Sunday night church, Sunday morning church, Men’s breakfast, Ladies lunch, Women’s Craft Night, Men’s Golf Night, Singles Events, etc…)? Stop over scheduling your church families and leave them room in their schedules to develop relationships outside the church.
Lastly, start to value the informal. What does that mean exactly? As pastors, we like to be able to measure our success. “Look, 75% of our Sunday morning attendance is in a small group! Look we have started 3 new ministries in the last six months and are touching the lives of 40 new families as a result of those ministries.” I’m not suggesting that it is bad to look at those things. It’s important to make sure the ministries you do have are actually being effective. However, don’t underestimate informal gatherings of people. Dan might have a hard time making it to a small group on week nights because of his work schedule but what you don’t know is that he’s growing spiritually with a group of Christian and non-Christian friends who meet on Saturday mornings for a bike ride and breakfast and then just happen to talk about spiritual things in the context of real life. Sharon might not be serving in one of your official ministries but what you don’t know about her is that on Wednesday mornings she invites some of the ladies in her neighborhood over so the kids can play together and she can share God’s love with them.
Ministry isn’t always measurable. We need to encourage and value ministry that happens outside our walls. We need to equip people to reach out to the people they interact with everyday at work and at their kids schools and at their gyms and in their classes. We need to instill in our church family the truth that they are ministers, not just within the church but everywhere they go and to everyone they meet.
Developing an equipping culture isn’t just about the church and its activities. It means believing that each person in your church body has been strategically gifted and placed by God in their life situations to make an impact for His Kingdom. It means that when your small group leader comes to you and says, “My child just decided to start playing t-ball and I’m going to have to miss our next small group leader’s meeting because of a game,” you don’t fear that you are losing a leader, you cheer that God has given that family another opportunity to be a minister to a whole new set of people.
In 2005 I started wondering if “professional” ministry was where God wanted me. I had been serving in full-time ministry for about 3 years at that point and had faced some things that left me questioning. I spoke to a person who was in leadership over our church at the time and he told me that I would be letting God down and that he was sure that I didn’t want to be like the many men and women in the Bible who failed. Thankfully God’s voice in my head was louder. A few weeks after that conversation I really felt like God told me, “April, it’s not about being a “professional” minister, it’s about ministering wherever I place you.” I think my eyes were opened that day not only in regards to my own situation but also in regards to how we value or don’t value the lives of our church family members outside the church walls.
I have a friend who works at Target. He hates it. He feels like it’s a worthless job where all he does is help a big corporation make more money. That’s one of the reasons I went into full-time ministry in the first place: to do something worthwhile. But the truth is, God has strategically placed each of us where we are to make a great impact for His kingdom. The problem is that most of us miss our calling and just earn a paycheck.
I believe the church has a responsibility to help people discover their calling, not just as it relates to their service to the church but as it relates to who God calls them to be in their everyday situations. Developing an equipping culture is about preparing people to “go into all the world and make disciples.” Often times, however, fear causes the church to hold on tightly to its servants. They wonder, “If I release people to live in the world, how will I run the ministries in my church?”
Here’s what I believe with all my heart: If a church is committed to equipping people and releasing them to be ministers in their circles of influence, there will be no need to stress about the lack of volunteers because the church will grow and overflow with the lives that have been touched by the ministers who have been sent out. Jesus says to seek God’s Kingdom first, and everything else will fall into place.
What exactly does it look like to equip people to minister in their worlds? I don’t really think it’s an exact science. I don’t think you can write it into three easy steps. I do, however, want to give you a few ideas that I’ve thought of in hopes to get your minds thinking in that direction.
First of all, it’s important to consider what you communicate. How do you respond when conflicts of scheduling arise like the example I mentioned in the beginning? You could throw a fit and demand that your small group leader attend the meeting. In that case you’re very likely to lose that leader’s service to the church and you’ve missed a great opportunity to equip them to go out. What if instead of responding negatively you say, “Well we’ll really miss you at our meeting, but that’s great that you’re getting to interact with some new families. Have you thought about ways you can use your God-given gifts to love the people you are meeting?” Your leader may miss the training you wanted to give to them on small groups, but in just a quick sentence you’ve trained them to think strategically about the relationships they have. Take this example a step forward by offering a suggestion. “Susie, you are so great at hosting your small group. Have you thought about opening your home to the families on your child’s t-ball team? A meal might be a fantastic way to get to know them and show them God’s love.” In that one sentence you’ve helped them to see that God has gifted them not only to serve the church but also to reach out to the people around them.
What does your church value and how do you express it? Equipping people to live out God’s mission in their world has to be at the core of who you are as a church body. Many churches are developing mission statements and core values to help their church family clearly understand the vision God has given for their particular church. My church has a set of core values, one of which is “Missional Living.” We define this as: Meeting people's needs through acts of compassion and sharing with them the truth about God's love. We also have a list of goals that we’ve given our church members as it relates to this value.
Personal Goals:
I will do spontaneous acts of compassion daily.
I will spend time building quality relationships with my neighbors.
I will regularly pray for people in my circle of influence and be available to respond to their needs and to talk with them about their faith questions.
There are probably many more personal goals you can give people as it relates to this but these are just a few we’ve come up with to help our church family get started.
What are you teaching on Sunday mornings when the church gathers together for worship? Do your church members feel like it is a safe place to bring their friends? Do you make visitors stand up to be recognized and in my opinion, feel uncomfortable? Are you preaching about spiritual gifts only as they relate to service within the church or do you talk about how people can use their spiritual gifts outside the church?
Take a quick look at your church calendar for the next couple of months. How many days a week do you have “church stuff” planned – (i.e. small groups, Wednesday night church, Sunday night church, Sunday morning church, Men’s breakfast, Ladies lunch, Women’s Craft Night, Men’s Golf Night, Singles Events, etc…)? Stop over scheduling your church families and leave them room in their schedules to develop relationships outside the church.
Lastly, start to value the informal. What does that mean exactly? As pastors, we like to be able to measure our success. “Look, 75% of our Sunday morning attendance is in a small group! Look we have started 3 new ministries in the last six months and are touching the lives of 40 new families as a result of those ministries.” I’m not suggesting that it is bad to look at those things. It’s important to make sure the ministries you do have are actually being effective. However, don’t underestimate informal gatherings of people. Dan might have a hard time making it to a small group on week nights because of his work schedule but what you don’t know is that he’s growing spiritually with a group of Christian and non-Christian friends who meet on Saturday mornings for a bike ride and breakfast and then just happen to talk about spiritual things in the context of real life. Sharon might not be serving in one of your official ministries but what you don’t know about her is that on Wednesday mornings she invites some of the ladies in her neighborhood over so the kids can play together and she can share God’s love with them.
Ministry isn’t always measurable. We need to encourage and value ministry that happens outside our walls. We need to equip people to reach out to the people they interact with everyday at work and at their kids schools and at their gyms and in their classes. We need to instill in our church family the truth that they are ministers, not just within the church but everywhere they go and to everyone they meet.
Tuesday, September 05, 2006
The Evolution of Man
I just finished a unit in my World Civ class on the evolution of the human species that made me think of some things....
Just so we understand each other on this term, "evolution," and because it seems to be a word that is feared by Christians, let me quickly define it:
1 : one of a set of prescribed movements
2 : a process of change in a certain direction
3 : the process of working out or developing
4 : the historical development of a biological group (as a race or species)
5 : the extraction of a mathematical root
6 : a process in which the whole universe is a progression of interrelated phenomena (www.m-w.com)
First I'll state my opinion on the big picture: Yes, I think at some point there has probably been some sort of "evolution of mankind," that is unless the Bible isn't literally true and perhaps God created several different types of people in various parts of the world at the same time. If that's the case, people didn't have to evolve, they simply were as God created them originally. Either way, whatever. God created the world and everything in it and he saw that it was good.
There is at least one thing in reality that cannot be ignored. People are different, VERY differnent. Take for example, European Americans and African Americans. Our skin colors are different, our hair textures are different and I'm sure we are biologically different in many other ways as well but those are the most obvious. So if you are going to believe in a literal interpretation of the creation story, you have to believe in some type of evolution. If we all came from the same two people, we have to evolve or develop into the different people that we are today.
Now here's the reason I have to question the literal interpretation of the Bible. In Genesis 4 it states, "Now Adam slept with his wife, Eve, and she became pregnant. When the time came, she gave birth to Cain, and she said, "With the Lord's help, I have brought forth a man!" (Like she had never done this before and was amazed by it.) Later she gave birth to a second son and named him Abel." (My words are in italics - obviously.)
My interpretation of this is that Cain was Eve's first son and Abel her second. The story goes on to say that Cain and Abel fought and Cain killed Abel so God banished him from the land. The weird part comes in when Cain states his fear of the people "out there" who might kill him. WHAT PEOPLE??? If Adam and Eve are the only people and we all came from them and Cain and Abel were their first sons, where the hell did all these other people come from? And even if Cain and Abel weren't her first sons, seriously, she had that many babies and sent them off around the area to start new cultures? It's weird.
So herein lies our dilema. How do we interpret the Bible? Are we afraid of things we cannot know and understand fully? What role does faith play and what role does doubt play? Can we have faith in God while doubting our full understanding of truth? Can you believe that there is a God who created the world even though you don't fully understand how it came about?
I've heard Christians act like people who struggle to believe the creation story are stupid because it's just so simple. But it's not. And the more we try to explain it away and break the mystery of the Bible down into chewable pieces, the more difficult I find it. We try to put every Biblical truth into three easy to understand points and we destroy the mystery. Their is doubt and faith in everything. Even science. With the amount of discrepencies between various scientists hypotheses and discoveries and the constant changing of opinions, you have to have some amount of faith and doubt to believe in the truth of science. It's the same with Christianity. To try and take away the doubt and faith elements by explaining everything in simple, digestible nuggets, isn't helpful because it isn't real.
Anyway, I'm enjoying learning and thinking about these things. It's important to remember that learning isn't always about finding answers. Education isn't about being able to pass a test (don't get me started on The NCLB Act). Sometimes it's just about the process of growing your ability to fully think through and question things rather than just accepting easy answers. To memorize answers to pass a test (literally speaking or theologically speaking) isn't education and really isn't helpful. Information isn't the point. Transformation is (educationally and theologically speaking).
Just so we understand each other on this term, "evolution," and because it seems to be a word that is feared by Christians, let me quickly define it:
1 : one of a set of prescribed movements
2 : a process of change in a certain direction
3 : the process of working out or developing
4 : the historical development of a biological group (as a race or species)
5 : the extraction of a mathematical root
6 : a process in which the whole universe is a progression of interrelated phenomena (www.m-w.com)
First I'll state my opinion on the big picture: Yes, I think at some point there has probably been some sort of "evolution of mankind," that is unless the Bible isn't literally true and perhaps God created several different types of people in various parts of the world at the same time. If that's the case, people didn't have to evolve, they simply were as God created them originally. Either way, whatever. God created the world and everything in it and he saw that it was good.
There is at least one thing in reality that cannot be ignored. People are different, VERY differnent. Take for example, European Americans and African Americans. Our skin colors are different, our hair textures are different and I'm sure we are biologically different in many other ways as well but those are the most obvious. So if you are going to believe in a literal interpretation of the creation story, you have to believe in some type of evolution. If we all came from the same two people, we have to evolve or develop into the different people that we are today.
Now here's the reason I have to question the literal interpretation of the Bible. In Genesis 4 it states, "Now Adam slept with his wife, Eve, and she became pregnant. When the time came, she gave birth to Cain, and she said, "With the Lord's help, I have brought forth a man!" (Like she had never done this before and was amazed by it.) Later she gave birth to a second son and named him Abel." (My words are in italics - obviously.)
My interpretation of this is that Cain was Eve's first son and Abel her second. The story goes on to say that Cain and Abel fought and Cain killed Abel so God banished him from the land. The weird part comes in when Cain states his fear of the people "out there" who might kill him. WHAT PEOPLE??? If Adam and Eve are the only people and we all came from them and Cain and Abel were their first sons, where the hell did all these other people come from? And even if Cain and Abel weren't her first sons, seriously, she had that many babies and sent them off around the area to start new cultures? It's weird.
So herein lies our dilema. How do we interpret the Bible? Are we afraid of things we cannot know and understand fully? What role does faith play and what role does doubt play? Can we have faith in God while doubting our full understanding of truth? Can you believe that there is a God who created the world even though you don't fully understand how it came about?
I've heard Christians act like people who struggle to believe the creation story are stupid because it's just so simple. But it's not. And the more we try to explain it away and break the mystery of the Bible down into chewable pieces, the more difficult I find it. We try to put every Biblical truth into three easy to understand points and we destroy the mystery. Their is doubt and faith in everything. Even science. With the amount of discrepencies between various scientists hypotheses and discoveries and the constant changing of opinions, you have to have some amount of faith and doubt to believe in the truth of science. It's the same with Christianity. To try and take away the doubt and faith elements by explaining everything in simple, digestible nuggets, isn't helpful because it isn't real.
Anyway, I'm enjoying learning and thinking about these things. It's important to remember that learning isn't always about finding answers. Education isn't about being able to pass a test (don't get me started on The NCLB Act). Sometimes it's just about the process of growing your ability to fully think through and question things rather than just accepting easy answers. To memorize answers to pass a test (literally speaking or theologically speaking) isn't education and really isn't helpful. Information isn't the point. Transformation is (educationally and theologically speaking).
Thursday, August 24, 2006
Is Christianity a Culture?
I just started a World Civ class at WSU and my first assignment was to create a definition for the word "culture" and then apply my definition to something specific so I chose Christianity. Doing the assignment brought some thoughts to mind that weren't really appropriate for the paper so I thought I'd add them here...
Here's my definition of culture...
Culture includes a community's entire way of life. Iit is shared beliefs and actions. Culture is not my individual feelings and behaviors as separate from the whole but rather the thoughts and actions of the greater society or community. Culture is learned behaviors, symbols, beliefs, values, meanings and unspoken rules. It is affected by those in power and therefore any cultural study should ask the question: Who has the power to affect cultural change? or Who has the authority to make decisions that affect culture? Culture is not an abstract idea that is separate from the people within that culture. It is affected by the people and it affects the people. It is not static, but is always changing. Culture is how we live out our understanding of the world and this worldview is taught to us by parents or educators or others in our culture and often subconsciously learned through experience within the culture.
Now, by my definition I would mark Christianity as it's own culture or more specifically, in the U.S., a subculture. Here's why....
The Christian culture has not been static during any part of history. It is always being changed by the people within and outside the community. It is full of unspoken rules such as what type of clothing is acceptable and where you should be on a Sunday morning (or Saturday night as this culture continues to change). There are behaviors that to an onlooker would seem strange but to those within the culture seem completely normal. There are taboos and a set of beliefs that should (but don't always) affect behavior. The structure of power is affected by beliefs about the appropriate roles of men and women. There is often an unspoken rule that it is unacceptable to vote democrat. There is an entirely different language that can sound foreign to someone who is unfamiliar with the culture. Words that may be the same as those used in the dominant culture, hold varying meanings within this subculture. And like any culture, the Christian worldview is learned through experience within the culture and teaching from people who are a part of the culture.
Now I have to ask the question...
As a "culture", do we adhere simply to similar beliefs and ways of life such as attending church on a weekly basis, or do we allow our shared beliefs and values to truly affect our way of life as in the way we treat people, the effort we put into our work, the things we talk about, etc... Can we truly look at ourselves as a culture if culture is defined by a set of beliefs that affect behavior? Other than the frivolous things like attending church on Sundays, voting Republican, and using words like grace all the time, would others see us as living differently? As a people, are we simply an American subculture or do we live the culture of Jesus? We believe that Jesus brings hope to the hopeless but do our interactions with hurting people reveal that? We believe that Jesus spent time with sinners, but do we do that? We believe that in Christ, all things are possible, but do we live that way?
The frivolous things of our Christian culture are changing. People go to church on Saturday nights, they get tattoos, drink beer and vote Democrat. So when we deconstruct what we once thought was important to the Christian subculture, will the culture of Jesus be left or is it already gone?
Friday, August 04, 2006
Defeated!
The bill was defeated! Interested in voting records?
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00229
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00229
Thursday, August 03, 2006
Sneaky Politicians
A while I go I blogged about the estate tax and how the cutting of it would negatively affect our country. In an easy answer, cutting the estate tax would essentially mean that the wealthiest people in our country would not be taxed on their inheritances. I won't bore you with specific statistics, you can research them on your own if you're interested on the websites listed below.
The bottom line is this would mean HUGE losses in revenue for our country when there are already significant budget cuts in harmful places due to all the money we are spending on this war. And not only would we lose the income directly from the taxes but this would also negatively affect charitable giving!
This didn't go through previously but it is now being coupled with the raising of the minimum wage in order to get it passed. As much as I'd like to see the minimum wage raised, the harm this bill would do far out weighs the good. This bill has already passed in the House and is going to be voted on even possibly tonight in the Senate.
Feel free to use the number below to contact your Senators and let them know how you feel about the matter.
1-800-459-1887
Tell them...
Vote No on H.R. 5970, the cynical ploy to slash the estate tax. Handing $750 billion over 10 years to a small number of multimillionaires will force cuts in health care, education and other vital investments for all. I support an increase in the minimum wage - but the cost of this reckless bill is far too high.
To keep informed on important legislation, check out these websites...
www.chn.org (Coalition on Human Needs)
www.results.org (Results)
www.soujourners.com (Soujourners)
The bottom line is this would mean HUGE losses in revenue for our country when there are already significant budget cuts in harmful places due to all the money we are spending on this war. And not only would we lose the income directly from the taxes but this would also negatively affect charitable giving!
This didn't go through previously but it is now being coupled with the raising of the minimum wage in order to get it passed. As much as I'd like to see the minimum wage raised, the harm this bill would do far out weighs the good. This bill has already passed in the House and is going to be voted on even possibly tonight in the Senate.
Feel free to use the number below to contact your Senators and let them know how you feel about the matter.
1-800-459-1887
Tell them...
Vote No on H.R. 5970, the cynical ploy to slash the estate tax. Handing $750 billion over 10 years to a small number of multimillionaires will force cuts in health care, education and other vital investments for all. I support an increase in the minimum wage - but the cost of this reckless bill is far too high.
To keep informed on important legislation, check out these websites...
www.chn.org (Coalition on Human Needs)
www.results.org (Results)
www.soujourners.com (Soujourners)
Friday, July 14, 2006
Day 4 Fiesta
Here's some fun photos from Day 4 of Fiesta VBS!
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=2104223691
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=2104223691
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
Fiesta Day 3
Here's the link to Day 3 photos. What a great day! I love seeing the friendships that kids are building with each other! I especially love to see Crew Leaders taking their role seriously and building relationships with the kids in their crew! To see how they love them means the world to me!
Enjoy!
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=2104255289&idx=1
Enjoy!
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=2104255289&idx=1
Fiesta Day 2
Here's Day 2 photos! We almost have 50 kids registered and that would put us at complete capacity! Woo hoo!
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=2104290205
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=2104290205
Fiesta Day 1
This week I'm directing VBS at my church. Woa, I'm exhausted! But it's going really well and the kids are having SO much fun! I'll probably post a link to photos for each day so feel free not to read anymore Fiesta titled blogs if you're not interested in looking at them. :-) Don't wanna waste your time with silly stuff! :-) But if you like fun photos, enjoy!
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=2104333983
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=2104333983
Thursday, July 06, 2006
Article Link
I really liked this article by Amy Sullivan.
http://www.slate.com/id/2144983/
She high lights some of the things from Sen. Barack Obama's speech that I mentioned in a previous post. One of the things that stood out most for me is her comparison between the Christianity of Obama and the Christianity of Pres. Bush. It made me think about the implications of being a public figure and speaking out about your faith. These men and women who stand up and speak about faith in the public arena are making decisions about what the text of the Bible means for today. They are interpreting and sharing their interpretations with us through their actions, their words and the policies they impose or fight for. They are saying to the world, "this is what it means to live out faith."
Now from what I can tell, not knowing Senator Obama or Pres. Bush personally, I personally prefer the Christianity that Obama demonstrates. But I believe we as Christians need to be careful about who we look up to as examples of faith and we need to be certain that our real hero is Jesus and our real example of what it means to live out faith comes from looking at the life of Jesus and making interpretations of that with our communities of faith, together.
Anyway, it's a good article. You should check it out.
http://www.slate.com/id/2144983/
She high lights some of the things from Sen. Barack Obama's speech that I mentioned in a previous post. One of the things that stood out most for me is her comparison between the Christianity of Obama and the Christianity of Pres. Bush. It made me think about the implications of being a public figure and speaking out about your faith. These men and women who stand up and speak about faith in the public arena are making decisions about what the text of the Bible means for today. They are interpreting and sharing their interpretations with us through their actions, their words and the policies they impose or fight for. They are saying to the world, "this is what it means to live out faith."
Now from what I can tell, not knowing Senator Obama or Pres. Bush personally, I personally prefer the Christianity that Obama demonstrates. But I believe we as Christians need to be careful about who we look up to as examples of faith and we need to be certain that our real hero is Jesus and our real example of what it means to live out faith comes from looking at the life of Jesus and making interpretations of that with our communities of faith, together.
Anyway, it's a good article. You should check it out.
Friday, June 30, 2006
Affecting my Politics
I was thinking more today about the blog I wrote last night...after I finally got my ability to think back.
I was asking myself some of those questions about relating the truth of Christ's character to my culture. That and the fact that I just read an awesome key note speech by Barak Obama and some thoughts by Hillary Clinton got me thinking about how that story of Jesus calling and believing in those whom society sees as failures affects my political leanings.
I was asking Matt if he had heard any of the good excuses about why Congress voted to not raise the minium wage but he hadn't. He suspected that it had to do with the fear that companies would outsource more jobs if they had to pay Americans more money. Makes sense.
So my question is why aren't we creating laws that limit companies ability to outsource jobs? Oh yeah, free market. I think this is a perfect example of how we as a nation have a serious tendency to favor the rich and powerful and ignore those who are "less" in the eyes of society. We pass laws that benefit corporations and hurt the poor. That's crappy policy making in my opinion. It seems to me that if our political leaders claim to speak for God (or be placed in their positions b/c of God's favor) then maybe they should be trying to stand for the things Jesus stood for. If politicians are going to play the faith card, they should be fighting to overcome poverty and injustice for the weak and powerless, not seeking more and more ways to bless the rich and powerful.
I read an article that referred to the Bush administration as having a reverse robin hood complex. That phrase has rolled around in my head a lot.
By the way, you should check out the key note speech by Barak Obama. Great, fair and honest speech! I'm hoping he might be a possible candidate for the next presidential election...
http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=news.display_article&mode=C&NewsID=5454
I was asking myself some of those questions about relating the truth of Christ's character to my culture. That and the fact that I just read an awesome key note speech by Barak Obama and some thoughts by Hillary Clinton got me thinking about how that story of Jesus calling and believing in those whom society sees as failures affects my political leanings.
I was asking Matt if he had heard any of the good excuses about why Congress voted to not raise the minium wage but he hadn't. He suspected that it had to do with the fear that companies would outsource more jobs if they had to pay Americans more money. Makes sense.
So my question is why aren't we creating laws that limit companies ability to outsource jobs? Oh yeah, free market. I think this is a perfect example of how we as a nation have a serious tendency to favor the rich and powerful and ignore those who are "less" in the eyes of society. We pass laws that benefit corporations and hurt the poor. That's crappy policy making in my opinion. It seems to me that if our political leaders claim to speak for God (or be placed in their positions b/c of God's favor) then maybe they should be trying to stand for the things Jesus stood for. If politicians are going to play the faith card, they should be fighting to overcome poverty and injustice for the weak and powerless, not seeking more and more ways to bless the rich and powerful.
I read an article that referred to the Bush administration as having a reverse robin hood complex. That phrase has rolled around in my head a lot.
By the way, you should check out the key note speech by Barak Obama. Great, fair and honest speech! I'm hoping he might be a possible candidate for the next presidential election...
http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=news.display_article&mode=C&NewsID=5454
It's about Jesus
I can already tell this is going no where, no where that makes a lot of sense anyway. I've discovered in the last few days why I've been blessed/cursed? with a minor ability to draw. Hours and hours of my time have been spent drawing large mural-sized chili peppers with cute little smiley faces. That's so not the point of this but perhaps a disclaimer...
Matt's sermon on Sunday got me thinking a few things. By the way, he's a good speaker! I mean I'm glad we're not in some kind of talent competition b/c with his guitar/vocal/piano/bass skills and now his preaching skills, he's totally kicking my butt in that department.
Ok to my point. Or to more ramblings, I don't know...
I feel like for most of my life, I've missed the point. My brain can't even begin to wrap itself around the new things I'm seeing in life but I can only believe that this newness, this constant confusion over truth and God is good b/c maybe for once I'm catching the bigger picture.
Matt said in his sermon that the Bible isn't about me. Yeah. It's not a rule book or a text book or a step by step how to book. It's a passionate account of God's working in the world, in all of creation. It's not about me. It's about God.
This led me to thinking more about the story of Jesus calling his disciples to follow him. I wrote about it in another blog so I won't go into it all. Growing up the point of that story was how the disicples dropped everything they knew and followed Jesus so that must be a rule. I should drop everything and follow Jesus. Not a bad point. But I'm just not sure it is the point. Maybe the point is Jesus. His character. His life.
Who did he call? The people that society looked down on as failures. He called them and believed in them. From that we can take that Jesus calls us and believes in us no matter who we are and what we've done.
Cool.
But I think it's bigger than even that.
If we are called to be like Jesus, than we are called to believe in those whom the world has deemed hopeless, lost causes, failures. How is that real to us? How does that play out in our culture, in our lives? We need to ask ourselves those questions every time we encounter the life and character of Jesus in the Bible. We need to stop looking for rules, and start looking for Jesus.
Crap, I wanted to go on but now I'm just too tired. Oh well, you get it...
Matt's sermon on Sunday got me thinking a few things. By the way, he's a good speaker! I mean I'm glad we're not in some kind of talent competition b/c with his guitar/vocal/piano/bass skills and now his preaching skills, he's totally kicking my butt in that department.
Ok to my point. Or to more ramblings, I don't know...
I feel like for most of my life, I've missed the point. My brain can't even begin to wrap itself around the new things I'm seeing in life but I can only believe that this newness, this constant confusion over truth and God is good b/c maybe for once I'm catching the bigger picture.
Matt said in his sermon that the Bible isn't about me. Yeah. It's not a rule book or a text book or a step by step how to book. It's a passionate account of God's working in the world, in all of creation. It's not about me. It's about God.
This led me to thinking more about the story of Jesus calling his disciples to follow him. I wrote about it in another blog so I won't go into it all. Growing up the point of that story was how the disicples dropped everything they knew and followed Jesus so that must be a rule. I should drop everything and follow Jesus. Not a bad point. But I'm just not sure it is the point. Maybe the point is Jesus. His character. His life.
Who did he call? The people that society looked down on as failures. He called them and believed in them. From that we can take that Jesus calls us and believes in us no matter who we are and what we've done.
Cool.
But I think it's bigger than even that.
If we are called to be like Jesus, than we are called to believe in those whom the world has deemed hopeless, lost causes, failures. How is that real to us? How does that play out in our culture, in our lives? We need to ask ourselves those questions every time we encounter the life and character of Jesus in the Bible. We need to stop looking for rules, and start looking for Jesus.
Crap, I wanted to go on but now I'm just too tired. Oh well, you get it...
Saturday, June 10, 2006
Thoughts on the "Un-Churched"
I'm not usually very good at actually reading the magazines I get. They sit on my coffee table for weeks and then get thrown in a pile in my closet. I just happened to open my "Rev!" magazine today and came across an interesting article titled, "What Do the Unchurched Want?" I have always struggled with traditional ideas of evangelism and church growth and what not so I found some great thoughts I wanted to share....
When you work in a church there's a lot of talk about why people come, why the stay and why they don't stay. There's a lot of speculation about what draws people to connect to a certain church over another. A lot of people think it's the music. Others think it's a great sermon. Others think as long as people are friendly, they will come back. Well for a new book, the Barna Research Group interviewed thousands of "unchurched" people and found some interesting things about this. 1) People won't remember the topic, much less the key points of a sermon the first few times they visit. 2) People don't come to church for good music. If they want music, they'll turn on their ipod. What they are looking for is "something unique and of value that justifies changing their habits of avoiding church." They don't understand worship but they can experience the presence of God. And truly experiencing God's presence, even though they might not be able to describe it, will usually cause them to want more of it. The other thing is that people can sense when a church is truly a community and not just a group of people fulfilling their duty. "The unchurched want to experience love - from God and people - and if they feel that in the church environment, they'll return. If they don't sense it, they're history - probably forever...."
After that George Barna shares some things he would do to reach people outside the church. He talks about how people aren't very likely to "accept Christ" in a church service. That is something more that comes out of personal relationships. So one of the key things he would do is gear worship services exclusively to those who love Christ. If a person who doesn't typically attend church wanders in, it's better for them to be blown away by the presence of God, commitment of the people to that presence, the passionate worship taking place and the sincerity of the people regarding knowing God more deeply. The goal of worship is worship, not evangelism. (Great book on this topic: "Worship Evangelism.")
Another point that really hit home for me was this: "I'd shift the strategy from training people in the steps we think will lead people to Christ to empowering people to just be real." He goes on to talk about how nonbelievers are more impressed by a good friend who truly loves Jesus and lives like he/she does than a by a well-intentioned debator who wants to argue everyone into the kingdom. He suggests that we stop looking for ways to manipulate situations to interject God and Scripture (and invitations to church - my addition) into conversations to accomplish our goals. People know when we are real. This has by far been the hardest thing for me about being a part of a church. Always being told that I should be looking for ways to get people to church. I always feel like I'm supposed to have this ulterior motive to building friendships with people. Like I meet someone in the store and try to be nice to them but I better find a way to tell them about my church in the meantime. I'd rather just try to live like Jesus and love people the best I can and hope that God's Spirit takes care of the rest.
The last point he makes I thought was a great one since I'm a kid's pastor...He says "I'd focus the majority of our outreach resources on children, not adults." He talks about how the majority of people are converted even before reaching their teen years and that it is much more effective to reach kids and empower them to reach out to their families than it is to target the families.
Anyways, just some good thoughts...
When you work in a church there's a lot of talk about why people come, why the stay and why they don't stay. There's a lot of speculation about what draws people to connect to a certain church over another. A lot of people think it's the music. Others think it's a great sermon. Others think as long as people are friendly, they will come back. Well for a new book, the Barna Research Group interviewed thousands of "unchurched" people and found some interesting things about this. 1) People won't remember the topic, much less the key points of a sermon the first few times they visit. 2) People don't come to church for good music. If they want music, they'll turn on their ipod. What they are looking for is "something unique and of value that justifies changing their habits of avoiding church." They don't understand worship but they can experience the presence of God. And truly experiencing God's presence, even though they might not be able to describe it, will usually cause them to want more of it. The other thing is that people can sense when a church is truly a community and not just a group of people fulfilling their duty. "The unchurched want to experience love - from God and people - and if they feel that in the church environment, they'll return. If they don't sense it, they're history - probably forever...."
After that George Barna shares some things he would do to reach people outside the church. He talks about how people aren't very likely to "accept Christ" in a church service. That is something more that comes out of personal relationships. So one of the key things he would do is gear worship services exclusively to those who love Christ. If a person who doesn't typically attend church wanders in, it's better for them to be blown away by the presence of God, commitment of the people to that presence, the passionate worship taking place and the sincerity of the people regarding knowing God more deeply. The goal of worship is worship, not evangelism. (Great book on this topic: "Worship Evangelism.")
Another point that really hit home for me was this: "I'd shift the strategy from training people in the steps we think will lead people to Christ to empowering people to just be real." He goes on to talk about how nonbelievers are more impressed by a good friend who truly loves Jesus and lives like he/she does than a by a well-intentioned debator who wants to argue everyone into the kingdom. He suggests that we stop looking for ways to manipulate situations to interject God and Scripture (and invitations to church - my addition) into conversations to accomplish our goals. People know when we are real. This has by far been the hardest thing for me about being a part of a church. Always being told that I should be looking for ways to get people to church. I always feel like I'm supposed to have this ulterior motive to building friendships with people. Like I meet someone in the store and try to be nice to them but I better find a way to tell them about my church in the meantime. I'd rather just try to live like Jesus and love people the best I can and hope that God's Spirit takes care of the rest.
The last point he makes I thought was a great one since I'm a kid's pastor...He says "I'd focus the majority of our outreach resources on children, not adults." He talks about how the majority of people are converted even before reaching their teen years and that it is much more effective to reach kids and empower them to reach out to their families than it is to target the families.
Anyways, just some good thoughts...
Thursday, June 01, 2006
Don't Be Silent
So our President and Congress are up to no good. Bush is out to help his wealthy friends by gutting the estate tax. The divide between the richest and poorest in this country continues to widen while the government makes tax cuts in a time of war where budgets are already being cut in unacceptable places. We must make our voices heard. We must let our senators know that it is not ok with us to bless the rich and hurt the poor. The ever-increasing number of people living in poverty in this country is ridiculous while Bush makes every efforts to keep his rich buddies happy.
Below I have copied the text from an article written by Jim Wallis regarding the Estate Tax. You can better understand this tax by reading this article. Then go to http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizationsORG/chn/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=288 to email your senators and let them know that this is unacceptable.
To protect the common good by Jim Wallis (http://www.sojo.net)
According to the biblical prophets, the greatest moral offense of poverty is the inequality that often lies behind it. When poverty abounds and the wealthy refuse to share their prosperity, God gets mad. If the congressional leadership has its way, American inequality is about to take a giant step forward with their efforts to destroy or gut the estate tax - an effective measure to combat inequality that has been working for 100 years.
Sometimes, there are public policy choices that simply make no moral sense. When a nation is at war, when deficits are rising at record rates, and when everyone knows that even more budget cuts are coming that will directly and negatively impact the nation's poorest families and children, you don't give more tax breaks to the super-rich. But that is exactly what the administration and the Republican leadership are strenuously trying to do. And with the latest Census Bureau income and poverty report showing that the poverty rate has gone up for the fourth straight year, the moral offense is compounded. There are 37 million Americans now living below the poverty line, 4 million more than in 2001. That includes 13 million children.
So why are George Bush, the Republican leadership, and some Democrats on Capitol Hill pushing so hard to completely repeal or substantially gut the estate tax? It's been in place for nearly 100 years, is a substantial source of government revenue, and has been a major catalyst to charitable giving (including to faith-based organizations, something the administration claims to support). A repeal of the estate tax will cost an estimated 1 trillion dollars in federal revenue over the next 10 years (that's right, 1 trillion), substantially increase the deficit, dramatically diminish the resources available to help low-income families escape poverty, and further increase the pressure on the budget from the high cost of war. The only thing the repeal of the estate tax will accomplish is to make sure the wealthiest of Americans will bear no sacrifices during war-time belt tightening and tough decision making but, rather, will reap a windfall of benefit and be the only Americans who do.
Repeal supporters have cleverly changed the language of the debate by calling the estate tax "the death tax" and claiming that it mostly affects family farmers and small businesses who are unable to pass their farms and businesses along to their children. That is simply not true. To put it less delicately, they are lying to cover up the fact that the estate tax mostly affects their richest friends. The tax affects only the wealthiest half of 1 percent of Americans - estates with a net value of more than $2 million ($4 million for couples). That is exactly what this tax was supposed to do when it was introduced in 1906 by President Theodore Roosevelt (a Republican, remember) to counter the European practice of passing on enormous wealth from generation to generation, thereby encouraging aristocracy. The more American idea was to ask those who have benefited enormously by accident of birth to contribute back to the common good and expand opportunity for all. Many wealthy people, such as Bill Gates Sr. and Warren Buffett, agree and vigorously support the estate tax. But that American ideal is now under attack by a political leadership which seems anxious to restore an American aristocracy.
Those who want to retain the estate tax are willing to reform it to make sure that family farmers and small business people are not adversely affected and to ensure that the tax - let's call it a "common good tax" - is focused where it was intended, on those who have benefited so much from the opportunities of America. In a very real sense, the estate tax is a repayment for the public services and infrastructure that enable wealth creation - our transportation system of highways, bridges, and airports; our legal and educational systems; and many other investments we make in our society. It is only right that having benefited so much from the opportunities of America, the wealthiest should be obligated to return some of their good fortune to expand the opportunities of other Americans (maybe we should call the estate tax "the opportunity tax").
Is this the America that we want? One whose top policy priority is to make the rich richer while abandoning the most needed efforts to reduce poverty and protect the common good? That, in particular, was the original purpose of the estate tax, initiated by different kind of Republican president who was committed to the equality of opportunity for every American.
It is time for Democrats, moderate Republicans, and people of good social conscience across the county to draw a line in the sand against this administration's radical policies to redistribute wealth from the bottom and middle to the top of American society. It's time for a moral resistance to such unbalanced social policies and the place to begin is to defeat the dangerous and disingenuous effort to destroy the estate tax. In the name of social conscience, fiscal responsibility, equality of opportunity, protecting our communities, and the very idea of a "common good," it's time for the moral center of American public opinion to say "enough." The repeal of the estate tax would literally be an attack upon the common good and it must not succeed. Instead, we need policies that would create better and more balanced national priorities.
For even more information on this issue go to http://www.citizen.org/documents/EstateTaxFinal.pdf
Below I have copied the text from an article written by Jim Wallis regarding the Estate Tax. You can better understand this tax by reading this article. Then go to http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizationsORG/chn/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=288 to email your senators and let them know that this is unacceptable.
To protect the common good by Jim Wallis (http://www.sojo.net)
According to the biblical prophets, the greatest moral offense of poverty is the inequality that often lies behind it. When poverty abounds and the wealthy refuse to share their prosperity, God gets mad. If the congressional leadership has its way, American inequality is about to take a giant step forward with their efforts to destroy or gut the estate tax - an effective measure to combat inequality that has been working for 100 years.
Sometimes, there are public policy choices that simply make no moral sense. When a nation is at war, when deficits are rising at record rates, and when everyone knows that even more budget cuts are coming that will directly and negatively impact the nation's poorest families and children, you don't give more tax breaks to the super-rich. But that is exactly what the administration and the Republican leadership are strenuously trying to do. And with the latest Census Bureau income and poverty report showing that the poverty rate has gone up for the fourth straight year, the moral offense is compounded. There are 37 million Americans now living below the poverty line, 4 million more than in 2001. That includes 13 million children.
So why are George Bush, the Republican leadership, and some Democrats on Capitol Hill pushing so hard to completely repeal or substantially gut the estate tax? It's been in place for nearly 100 years, is a substantial source of government revenue, and has been a major catalyst to charitable giving (including to faith-based organizations, something the administration claims to support). A repeal of the estate tax will cost an estimated 1 trillion dollars in federal revenue over the next 10 years (that's right, 1 trillion), substantially increase the deficit, dramatically diminish the resources available to help low-income families escape poverty, and further increase the pressure on the budget from the high cost of war. The only thing the repeal of the estate tax will accomplish is to make sure the wealthiest of Americans will bear no sacrifices during war-time belt tightening and tough decision making but, rather, will reap a windfall of benefit and be the only Americans who do.
Repeal supporters have cleverly changed the language of the debate by calling the estate tax "the death tax" and claiming that it mostly affects family farmers and small businesses who are unable to pass their farms and businesses along to their children. That is simply not true. To put it less delicately, they are lying to cover up the fact that the estate tax mostly affects their richest friends. The tax affects only the wealthiest half of 1 percent of Americans - estates with a net value of more than $2 million ($4 million for couples). That is exactly what this tax was supposed to do when it was introduced in 1906 by President Theodore Roosevelt (a Republican, remember) to counter the European practice of passing on enormous wealth from generation to generation, thereby encouraging aristocracy. The more American idea was to ask those who have benefited enormously by accident of birth to contribute back to the common good and expand opportunity for all. Many wealthy people, such as Bill Gates Sr. and Warren Buffett, agree and vigorously support the estate tax. But that American ideal is now under attack by a political leadership which seems anxious to restore an American aristocracy.
Those who want to retain the estate tax are willing to reform it to make sure that family farmers and small business people are not adversely affected and to ensure that the tax - let's call it a "common good tax" - is focused where it was intended, on those who have benefited so much from the opportunities of America. In a very real sense, the estate tax is a repayment for the public services and infrastructure that enable wealth creation - our transportation system of highways, bridges, and airports; our legal and educational systems; and many other investments we make in our society. It is only right that having benefited so much from the opportunities of America, the wealthiest should be obligated to return some of their good fortune to expand the opportunities of other Americans (maybe we should call the estate tax "the opportunity tax").
Is this the America that we want? One whose top policy priority is to make the rich richer while abandoning the most needed efforts to reduce poverty and protect the common good? That, in particular, was the original purpose of the estate tax, initiated by different kind of Republican president who was committed to the equality of opportunity for every American.
It is time for Democrats, moderate Republicans, and people of good social conscience across the county to draw a line in the sand against this administration's radical policies to redistribute wealth from the bottom and middle to the top of American society. It's time for a moral resistance to such unbalanced social policies and the place to begin is to defeat the dangerous and disingenuous effort to destroy the estate tax. In the name of social conscience, fiscal responsibility, equality of opportunity, protecting our communities, and the very idea of a "common good," it's time for the moral center of American public opinion to say "enough." The repeal of the estate tax would literally be an attack upon the common good and it must not succeed. Instead, we need policies that would create better and more balanced national priorities.
For even more information on this issue go to http://www.citizen.org/documents/EstateTaxFinal.pdf
Wednesday, May 31, 2006
Oooops
So I just noticed that I wrote in my previous post that I'd mentioned in the past how much I loved Rob Bell's book, Velvet Elvis. But I remembered that I have not blogged about that book on this site. I blogged about it on my less "public" site. So I thought I'd add bits of my other blog here because it's just such a good book and I have to convince you to read it. lol...
"...This past week I finished reading Velvet Elvis by Rob Bell. LOVED IT!....
...One of the things Bell talks about is a comparison of faith being a trampoline or faith being a brick wall. If your faith is a brick wall, one brick (doctrine) can fall out and the entire wall can crumble. And time is often spent defending the wall. A trampoline on the other hand is not something you spend time defending. You are excited to invite others to join you in jumping! If one spring (doctrine) breaks, the trampoline is still standing.
I really am not a fan of apologetics. Proving faith to be true on the basis of logical arguments just doesn't hold a lot of weight for me. I'm not saying others aren't convinced that way, I'm just not.... So you won't find me arguing the finer points of faith with people.... I believe faith is bigger than logic. If you know me (at least in my recent years) you probably wouldn't say I'm someone who blindly accepts everything that comes my way either. My husband actually described me as a "thinker" in the "feeler/thinker" comparison. I question...a lot. I desire to understand Jesus and his teachings better than I currently understand them. But I'm not going to argue them....
Now on to recent times...
{I talked about The Da Vinci Code hype here but it's not that important...}
...Back to the whole faith as a trampoline vs. brick wall thing... What if it were true? I'm not suggesting that it is. But what if it were? What if Jesus was married? Does that make him less divine? What if Jesus had a family? Does that make him a sinner? And what if there are descendents of Jesus and Mary today? Is our God not big enough that Jesus could have a family that was fully human, not divine, while he was still both fully human and fully divine? Would your wall crumble if it were true?
Our faith must be stronger than a brick wall. It must not crumble if our understanding of one thing changes....
I'm not trying to say that everything we believe to be true is wrong. I'm just saying that our faith has to be bigger. We have to believe that God is so much bigger than our simplistic understanding of things. We must be humble, not seeking to argue but seeking to understand and walk alongside. We must believe in God more than doctrine. Our faith must be alive not static.
...If a church is a church that follows Christ than it teaches the Bible. It may be a different understanding or interpretation of the Bible, but it is still the Bible. No one person or one denomination holds a monopoly on the truth of Bible. We all bring our own undestandings and experiences to the words on the pages. No one is objective when it comes to the Bible. That is why your faith cannot crumble if one thing you believe to be true is questioned...."
Anyway, that's just a peek at some of the direction of Bell's book. I appreciate the fresh perspective he brings on God, the church, the Bible, culture and more. Read it! :)
"...This past week I finished reading Velvet Elvis by Rob Bell. LOVED IT!....
...One of the things Bell talks about is a comparison of faith being a trampoline or faith being a brick wall. If your faith is a brick wall, one brick (doctrine) can fall out and the entire wall can crumble. And time is often spent defending the wall. A trampoline on the other hand is not something you spend time defending. You are excited to invite others to join you in jumping! If one spring (doctrine) breaks, the trampoline is still standing.
I really am not a fan of apologetics. Proving faith to be true on the basis of logical arguments just doesn't hold a lot of weight for me. I'm not saying others aren't convinced that way, I'm just not.... So you won't find me arguing the finer points of faith with people.... I believe faith is bigger than logic. If you know me (at least in my recent years) you probably wouldn't say I'm someone who blindly accepts everything that comes my way either. My husband actually described me as a "thinker" in the "feeler/thinker" comparison. I question...a lot. I desire to understand Jesus and his teachings better than I currently understand them. But I'm not going to argue them....
Now on to recent times...
{I talked about The Da Vinci Code hype here but it's not that important...}
...Back to the whole faith as a trampoline vs. brick wall thing... What if it were true? I'm not suggesting that it is. But what if it were? What if Jesus was married? Does that make him less divine? What if Jesus had a family? Does that make him a sinner? And what if there are descendents of Jesus and Mary today? Is our God not big enough that Jesus could have a family that was fully human, not divine, while he was still both fully human and fully divine? Would your wall crumble if it were true?
Our faith must be stronger than a brick wall. It must not crumble if our understanding of one thing changes....
I'm not trying to say that everything we believe to be true is wrong. I'm just saying that our faith has to be bigger. We have to believe that God is so much bigger than our simplistic understanding of things. We must be humble, not seeking to argue but seeking to understand and walk alongside. We must believe in God more than doctrine. Our faith must be alive not static.
...If a church is a church that follows Christ than it teaches the Bible. It may be a different understanding or interpretation of the Bible, but it is still the Bible. No one person or one denomination holds a monopoly on the truth of Bible. We all bring our own undestandings and experiences to the words on the pages. No one is objective when it comes to the Bible. That is why your faith cannot crumble if one thing you believe to be true is questioned...."
Anyway, that's just a peek at some of the direction of Bell's book. I appreciate the fresh perspective he brings on God, the church, the Bible, culture and more. Read it! :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)