A friend of mine was fired recently, oh I'm sorry he resigned through "mutual consent"
I am clearly on the side of my friend. I do not doubt the motive of those who fired him, I'm sure they want the best for the camp. My disappointment lies in the old-school/modern mindset through which the" strategic plan" was implemented.
In classic modern mentality a plan was implemented without regard to the personalities, or strengths of those that were currently involved. The need for change meant that everyone must believe the same way and behave according to a strict guidelines of job performances or they needed to leave. There could be no room for disloyalty or any sense of disunity .....and that would mean if you disagree or had a differing opinion regarding the plan you are clearly unqualified and needed to "mutually consent" to leave.
This modern mentality affects many churches as well. The pastor or board of elders has a plan of how things should be done. They push forward with that plan and ultimately pushed out of the way anyone who wants to deviate from that plan. Those that are "on board" are brought into leadership positions so that everyone is of one mind/everyone is drinking the same Kool-Aid.
Creativity is rewarded in concept unless of course your creativity means moving outside of the parameters of the plan.
God's direction, or Gods voice is only recognized when it agrees with the current plan, and any wrong direction from is clearly seen because it of course it disagrees with the plan.
The type of current or unity that this mentality creates is that of a whirlpool rather than a river. When the plan overrides relationships. When the plan filters out creativity. When the plan dismisses God's direction/redirection everything begins to spin inwardly. There is plenty of momentum and people can feel the current but it turns everyone toward those with in the current until everyone is facing each other and the Ministry slowly heads downhill.
This inward spiral breeds the desire for protection, and reaches out in an effort to find more people that agree with the plan. the protection and finding people of like mind continue to increase the strength of the flow, but unfortunately as with any whirlpool the greater the increase the further down you go, until ultimately you cannot get out and the Ministry along with the people it involves our left drained and empty.
The type of current our unity in a relational Ministry flows and looks for unity of purpose, and unity of character, and shares in purpose and character a desire for God to lead it also has flexibility for God to move.
This post modern mentality reaches out for relationships that will strengthen the character of those involved and increase everyones ability to hear God speaking. The strength of the relationship and the character of the individual is used to develop what the ministry does and how it looks. Whether it's a camp ,or a church, or a mission for more relationships that are developed the stronger the ministry becomes.
This type of flow is that of a river. It is something that heads in a direction. It has the ability to combine with other streams, Brooks, and rivers toward a common purpose and ultimate goal. It understands that not everyone enters the river in the same place. It understands that sometimes the flow is deep and fast, sometimes it is wide and slow, but it is always powerful and changing. This type of flow keeps you looking for what is coming next. It makes you look for help from the one who knows where the river ends up. It changes scenery because when you're going somewhere you should not keep seeing the same thing.
I believe that the ministry from which my friend was fired is one that is beginning to turn inward. I believe over time if they are not careful everyone there will began to drink the Kool-Aid and all people involved will become a part of a whirlpool that will drain the life out of the ministry and ultimately leave everyone dried up.
I believe my friend will be just fine. Because although we did not always agree/believe exactly the same, we did unify over purpose, character, and flow.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Monday, February 16, 2009
February 14th elevate review
We continued our study over viewing the life of Moses.
Taking the first few verses of chapter 2 in the book of Exodus we reviewed the general concept that bringing a child into such an unjust, violent, secular society was not the best time to be doing so.
We also remember that this was not the first time Moses 's parents had brought children into this world but actually the third. So bringing a child into an imperfect world has more to do with the relationship with God and your trust in his ability to override the world's influences than trusting in your own ability to know the perfect time to have a child.
(If you are waiting for the perfect time to have a child you will never have a child)
we took a look at the description that God leaves behind regarding Moses and the way he was blessed with good looks. Although every child is beautiful in the eyes of the parents is only one that was ever described as beautiful in the eyes of God. Because of his beauty his mother recognized that this child was set apart by God and proceeded to go through the necessary techniques it would take to hide this child from being seen by the Egyptian society.
We must remember that any Hebrew male child could be tossed into the Nile by any Egyptian who saw him.
In a miraculous feat she was able to hide the child for three months. It was my conjecture that she hid him on her body which is why after three months she had to hide him somewhere else because he was no longer small enough, or quiet enough to remain on her person undetected.
When she put it in the basket we got to imagine exactly why she might have done it. There were a few options.
Number one, she put him in a perfectly sealed basket and shoved him out in the river with hopes that he would make it out to the ocean and some nice fishermen would take him home and adopt him.
Number two, such she strategically pushed Moses into an area of the river where she knew the princess would be taking a bath in hopes that she would find him and have mercy on a Hebrew male baby and adopt him into the royal family.
Number three, she had given up hope that the baby would survive so she put them in a really nice basket for the crocodiles to come by and eat him.
Number four, she hit him in a waterproof basket in the thick reeds so that he would sleep, he rocked by the gentle motion of the river, and not be heard one he was hungry and crying. Then she told his older sister to an essence babysit him and when he was hungry to come get her so that she could feed him and thereby keep them hidden as she had for the previous three months.
As you can guess I'm going with number four, but it is in essence a guess so you get to have fun to .
Through a set of circumstances that only God could have orchestrated Moses was raised by his own family and the family was paid to do it. This of course is an illustration of God's ability to work through circumstances in a bizarrely anti-God world. And also a picture of the production consumption reality of the Egyptian society. That a princess could pay someone else to raise her child and then when the child was old enough to be taken away to the Egyptian universities the government walks into the only home that Moses has ever known, tells the family they are no longer worthy to raise this child and sticks him in a brand-new home, with a brand-new mommy and daddy, and sends them off to school to be trained up in the ways of the Egyptian royalty.
Moses becomes the first "foster child"
Moses grows in stature both as a leader and a military strategist.
He evidently also has a clear sense of his upbringing understanding that although he is the Egyptian royalty he is also connected to the Hebrew people.
We see him later in the chapter walking about observing the Hebrew people and the mistreatment that his government has placed on them. Within the essence of the Hebrew language this did not happen with one day's walk through a particular city. The idea is that Moses spent months and may be years observing the Hebrew people and how they had been slowly integrated into a slave society to support the consumption of the Egyptians. He also knew from his training at this was a systematic approach to control an ever-growing number of people/bored people that had moved into his nation several generations ago.
In a sudden turn of events Moses tries to in secret to exact judgment on an Egyptian for treating a Hebrew unfairly. He kills Egyptian and then buries Egyptian in the sand. The next day he continues to observe the Hebrew people and steps up to try and mediate peace between two Hebrews. They did not appreciate his leadership skills, nor did they want his influence or interruption.
They knew what he had done the day before and when Moses realized that the information we get ultimately back to Pharoah he packed up his stuff and headed out into the desert. We don't know what town/city Moses was in when he killed Egyptian, and we really have no idea how long it would take to get back to the palace. We do know that he left immediately.
We explored the idea that Moses probably was trying to exact justice on behalf of of the Hebrew people. We explored the possibility of a concept that Moses could have had the Egyptian killed through the military connections he had, the royal connections he had, or the personal connections he had.
Moses acted as Judge, jury, and executioner and by doing so short-circuited his opportunity to lead the Hebrew people, or to influence the Egyptian society through his high ranking in the royal family.
We saw that justice is not a partner with violence. And Moses paid the price by losing both his royal status, and his real family.
Taking the first few verses of chapter 2 in the book of Exodus we reviewed the general concept that bringing a child into such an unjust, violent, secular society was not the best time to be doing so.
We also remember that this was not the first time Moses 's parents had brought children into this world but actually the third. So bringing a child into an imperfect world has more to do with the relationship with God and your trust in his ability to override the world's influences than trusting in your own ability to know the perfect time to have a child.
(If you are waiting for the perfect time to have a child you will never have a child)
we took a look at the description that God leaves behind regarding Moses and the way he was blessed with good looks. Although every child is beautiful in the eyes of the parents is only one that was ever described as beautiful in the eyes of God. Because of his beauty his mother recognized that this child was set apart by God and proceeded to go through the necessary techniques it would take to hide this child from being seen by the Egyptian society.
We must remember that any Hebrew male child could be tossed into the Nile by any Egyptian who saw him.
In a miraculous feat she was able to hide the child for three months. It was my conjecture that she hid him on her body which is why after three months she had to hide him somewhere else because he was no longer small enough, or quiet enough to remain on her person undetected.
When she put it in the basket we got to imagine exactly why she might have done it. There were a few options.
Number one, she put him in a perfectly sealed basket and shoved him out in the river with hopes that he would make it out to the ocean and some nice fishermen would take him home and adopt him.
Number two, such she strategically pushed Moses into an area of the river where she knew the princess would be taking a bath in hopes that she would find him and have mercy on a Hebrew male baby and adopt him into the royal family.
Number three, she had given up hope that the baby would survive so she put them in a really nice basket for the crocodiles to come by and eat him.
Number four, she hit him in a waterproof basket in the thick reeds so that he would sleep, he rocked by the gentle motion of the river, and not be heard one he was hungry and crying. Then she told his older sister to an essence babysit him and when he was hungry to come get her so that she could feed him and thereby keep them hidden as she had for the previous three months.
As you can guess I'm going with number four, but it is in essence a guess so you get to have fun to .
Through a set of circumstances that only God could have orchestrated Moses was raised by his own family and the family was paid to do it. This of course is an illustration of God's ability to work through circumstances in a bizarrely anti-God world. And also a picture of the production consumption reality of the Egyptian society. That a princess could pay someone else to raise her child and then when the child was old enough to be taken away to the Egyptian universities the government walks into the only home that Moses has ever known, tells the family they are no longer worthy to raise this child and sticks him in a brand-new home, with a brand-new mommy and daddy, and sends them off to school to be trained up in the ways of the Egyptian royalty.
Moses becomes the first "foster child"
Moses grows in stature both as a leader and a military strategist.
He evidently also has a clear sense of his upbringing understanding that although he is the Egyptian royalty he is also connected to the Hebrew people.
We see him later in the chapter walking about observing the Hebrew people and the mistreatment that his government has placed on them. Within the essence of the Hebrew language this did not happen with one day's walk through a particular city. The idea is that Moses spent months and may be years observing the Hebrew people and how they had been slowly integrated into a slave society to support the consumption of the Egyptians. He also knew from his training at this was a systematic approach to control an ever-growing number of people/bored people that had moved into his nation several generations ago.
In a sudden turn of events Moses tries to in secret to exact judgment on an Egyptian for treating a Hebrew unfairly. He kills Egyptian and then buries Egyptian in the sand. The next day he continues to observe the Hebrew people and steps up to try and mediate peace between two Hebrews. They did not appreciate his leadership skills, nor did they want his influence or interruption.
They knew what he had done the day before and when Moses realized that the information we get ultimately back to Pharoah he packed up his stuff and headed out into the desert. We don't know what town/city Moses was in when he killed Egyptian, and we really have no idea how long it would take to get back to the palace. We do know that he left immediately.
We explored the idea that Moses probably was trying to exact justice on behalf of of the Hebrew people. We explored the possibility of a concept that Moses could have had the Egyptian killed through the military connections he had, the royal connections he had, or the personal connections he had.
Moses acted as Judge, jury, and executioner and by doing so short-circuited his opportunity to lead the Hebrew people, or to influence the Egyptian society through his high ranking in the royal family.
We saw that justice is not a partner with violence. And Moses paid the price by losing both his royal status, and his real family.
Monday, February 9, 2009
blasphemy
I was recently reminded of an event that occurred several years ago. I was accused of blaspheming the Word of God.
I was speaking at one of the fundamentalist conservative theologically Baptist, Bible institutes in my past. I took the opportunity to speak there because I thought it would be kind of fun to visit the old campus, and possibly enter into some form of dialogue with one or two familiar faces still in the administration. I was philosophically and theologically much different than when I was a student but I was hopeful to engage in conversation and would be beneficial and hopefully eye-opening to those who were still there.( this was a modern concept of mine that needed to change.I was not the one who changes things or the only one who knows what is right)
I spoke from John chapter 6, and used the narrative approach. I knew the lack of a three-point outline and alliteration would be a stretch for many of the students. I know this because I am so familiar with the training that this institute is committed to. They were and are a perfect picture at modernity and its "if we are right and everyone else must be wrong" mentality.
I forged ahead, and had a blast.
When I was finished I spent close to 45 minutes with the a variety of students who were amazed, mystified, and touched by the scripture passage that they were also very familiar with. I was saddened and amazed that these poor students were so isolated and limited in their exposure that what I did would be so odd and impacting in their life's experience. I left that day after several more conversations with administrators and staff that remembered me. None of those administrators were in Chapel but they thanked me for coming and I drove away a lot disappointed, but a little hopeful that maybe next time we could talk seriously.
About a week later I got an e-mail. One of the students was accusing me of blasphemy. The administration wanted an immediate apology.
I spent hours replaying the message in my mind. I could find no recollection of ever coming close to such an egregious accusation.
I attempted to communicate with the administrators to try to gain some understanding as to where the accusation was coming from, and what exactly it was that pushed it over the line at least in their interpretation of wear that line was.
I was not given an answer, I was not allowed to speak with my accuser or communicate with them in any way.
I debated for a long time (about three hours) and decided for the sake of the offended party I would apologize. I made it clear in my apology I was unaware of my offense at the time and that I would love to entertain a dialogue around the accusation. My apology was read in front of the student body, no dialogue was introduced.
I continued to make a couple of attempts to interact with the deans. I got a cryptic reference that I treated the words of Jesus to casually during the Chapel. That was it. No more interaction, no more relationship.
I do recall speaking, actually quoting the words of Jesus as he was speaking with his disciples. I read them directly from the Bible and did my best to make them sound as though they were an interaction between friends (which is what Jesus and the disciples were). I guess that was it. In a true testament to the foundationalist mindset of the modern era the letter of the words were more important than the spirit in which they were spoken.
In another testament to the modern era once I was accused the relationship was ended. The need to stay pure and "right" was greater than the need to stay connected in order to strengthen one other.
It only took one 17-year-old student to suggest that I was theologically unsound and suddenly all relational connections had to be severed so that the "word" of God would be protected.
I understand the big picture... well at least a bigger snapshot then having to be accepted by that particular institute. I just feel bad that the potential of influence that they had has been marginalized by their lack of freedom and grace. That in the name of the letter of the law (words in the Bible) they have lost the spirit of relational transformation that the postmodern era brings with it.
I used to desire to change the modern mindsets of so many ministries and academic institutions. I now just desire to journey with God. I now understand that the existence of ministries, churches, and institutions are in His hands and it is not up to me to change them.
I do hope some day to find out why no one in the administration there even listened to the message on tape before they accuse me, and before they erased all records and access to the recording.
The Word of God is alive, and God is still speaking
I was speaking at one of the fundamentalist conservative theologically Baptist, Bible institutes in my past. I took the opportunity to speak there because I thought it would be kind of fun to visit the old campus, and possibly enter into some form of dialogue with one or two familiar faces still in the administration. I was philosophically and theologically much different than when I was a student but I was hopeful to engage in conversation and would be beneficial and hopefully eye-opening to those who were still there.( this was a modern concept of mine that needed to change.I was not the one who changes things or the only one who knows what is right)
I spoke from John chapter 6, and used the narrative approach. I knew the lack of a three-point outline and alliteration would be a stretch for many of the students. I know this because I am so familiar with the training that this institute is committed to. They were and are a perfect picture at modernity and its "if we are right and everyone else must be wrong" mentality.
I forged ahead, and had a blast.
When I was finished I spent close to 45 minutes with the a variety of students who were amazed, mystified, and touched by the scripture passage that they were also very familiar with. I was saddened and amazed that these poor students were so isolated and limited in their exposure that what I did would be so odd and impacting in their life's experience. I left that day after several more conversations with administrators and staff that remembered me. None of those administrators were in Chapel but they thanked me for coming and I drove away a lot disappointed, but a little hopeful that maybe next time we could talk seriously.
About a week later I got an e-mail. One of the students was accusing me of blasphemy. The administration wanted an immediate apology.
I spent hours replaying the message in my mind. I could find no recollection of ever coming close to such an egregious accusation.
I attempted to communicate with the administrators to try to gain some understanding as to where the accusation was coming from, and what exactly it was that pushed it over the line at least in their interpretation of wear that line was.
I was not given an answer, I was not allowed to speak with my accuser or communicate with them in any way.
I debated for a long time (about three hours) and decided for the sake of the offended party I would apologize. I made it clear in my apology I was unaware of my offense at the time and that I would love to entertain a dialogue around the accusation. My apology was read in front of the student body, no dialogue was introduced.
I continued to make a couple of attempts to interact with the deans. I got a cryptic reference that I treated the words of Jesus to casually during the Chapel. That was it. No more interaction, no more relationship.
I do recall speaking, actually quoting the words of Jesus as he was speaking with his disciples. I read them directly from the Bible and did my best to make them sound as though they were an interaction between friends (which is what Jesus and the disciples were). I guess that was it. In a true testament to the foundationalist mindset of the modern era the letter of the words were more important than the spirit in which they were spoken.
In another testament to the modern era once I was accused the relationship was ended. The need to stay pure and "right" was greater than the need to stay connected in order to strengthen one other.
It only took one 17-year-old student to suggest that I was theologically unsound and suddenly all relational connections had to be severed so that the "word" of God would be protected.
I understand the big picture... well at least a bigger snapshot then having to be accepted by that particular institute. I just feel bad that the potential of influence that they had has been marginalized by their lack of freedom and grace. That in the name of the letter of the law (words in the Bible) they have lost the spirit of relational transformation that the postmodern era brings with it.
I used to desire to change the modern mindsets of so many ministries and academic institutions. I now just desire to journey with God. I now understand that the existence of ministries, churches, and institutions are in His hands and it is not up to me to change them.
I do hope some day to find out why no one in the administration there even listened to the message on tape before they accuse me, and before they erased all records and access to the recording.
The Word of God is alive, and God is still speaking
Monday, February 2, 2009
January 31 elevate review
For those of you who were unable to join us and or those of you who would like to catch up with anything you might have missed At the Last Elevate let me review.
We began a narrative review of the book of Exodus.
In the realm of background we saw that Joseph had provided a rich land for the descendents of Abraham to live on. And God provided a rich opportunity to grow in number.
This growing in number meant multiple births, basically zero infant mortality rate, and quick deliveries. Because of the growing number of workers and the rich land they lived on the Hebrews were able to produce much of what Egypt needed to live on. This supply and demand proved to be a wonderful and seductive combination for everyone involved. The Hebrews were the producers Egyptians were the consumers and everyone seemed to be getting along.
It was noted that when Joseph died he wanted to be brought back to the promised land when the Hebrews left Egypt. He seemed to recognize that with his passing the Hebrews should also look to be leaving and going back to where God had originally directed Abraham to live.
We noted how easy it is to forget what God has called us to do when our lives seem to be going so well somewhere else. And although God was blessing the Hebrews with many children, good land, and a strong sense of community he was doing it to fulfill his promise to Abraham to make of him a great nation, God was also doing it as a public testimony to all the idol worshipers in Egypt as to his power and life giving personality.
When Pharaoh noted that the Hebrews "filled the land" and was not that they had over popularized the area that they live it was because the Hebrews basically ran, or grew everything the Egyptians needed to survive. The Pharaoh and his advisers recognized that if the Hebrews ever left the country(which I'm sure they had heard the Hebrews mentioned) and went back to their promised land, or if they joined with another nation and attacked, then everything the pharaoh knew and loved would be destroy.
Their plan was to enslave the Hebrews thereby forcing them to live and serve forever in the land of Egypt. Egypt was not under attack and by all accounts seem to be living in prosperity. The way they began to enslave the Hebrews involved regulation, taxation, supervision, and work hour requirements.from their they moved into out right big dictatorship, and slave masters.
We explored the concept that this did not happen overnight and that somewhere in Hebrews had to start making choices to continue to stay in Egypt, or give up their home, country, and community that they had grown up in. Hebrews chose to stay in the land of the enslaved rather than leave.
God continued despite the incredible oppression to bless the Hebrews with multiple children, easy childbirth, and virtually no infant mortality.
the pharaoh recognizing this continued blessing of God decided to order the midwives to kill the Hebrew male babies as they were coming out about the womb. This order was given to the directors of the midwives and clearly expected to be obeyed without question. The midwives did not obey and probably over the course of a year the pharaoh figured out that there were an awful lot of Hebrew male babies still in his country.
The pharaoh then gave in order that all of Egypt to throw Hebrew male babies into the Nile River.
We gave the assumption that this probably was tied into some form of idol worship so that the Egyptians would feel like murderers but rather corporate worshipers of the God of the Nile and of course their god Pharaoh.
Some of the concepts we left out for discussion.
living by one of two philosophies....fear and scarcity, as exampled by Pharaoh during a time of peace and prosperity he feared the potential of loss and destruction.
.....peace and abundance as example by God continue to provide abundantly with children for his people, and bless those who obeyed his principles.
What enslaves us.
Do we hold on to blessings from God, until we become enslaved by them.
We look forward to continuing this narrative journey on February 14
We began a narrative review of the book of Exodus.
In the realm of background we saw that Joseph had provided a rich land for the descendents of Abraham to live on. And God provided a rich opportunity to grow in number.
This growing in number meant multiple births, basically zero infant mortality rate, and quick deliveries. Because of the growing number of workers and the rich land they lived on the Hebrews were able to produce much of what Egypt needed to live on. This supply and demand proved to be a wonderful and seductive combination for everyone involved. The Hebrews were the producers Egyptians were the consumers and everyone seemed to be getting along.
It was noted that when Joseph died he wanted to be brought back to the promised land when the Hebrews left Egypt. He seemed to recognize that with his passing the Hebrews should also look to be leaving and going back to where God had originally directed Abraham to live.
We noted how easy it is to forget what God has called us to do when our lives seem to be going so well somewhere else. And although God was blessing the Hebrews with many children, good land, and a strong sense of community he was doing it to fulfill his promise to Abraham to make of him a great nation, God was also doing it as a public testimony to all the idol worshipers in Egypt as to his power and life giving personality.
When Pharaoh noted that the Hebrews "filled the land" and was not that they had over popularized the area that they live it was because the Hebrews basically ran, or grew everything the Egyptians needed to survive. The Pharaoh and his advisers recognized that if the Hebrews ever left the country(which I'm sure they had heard the Hebrews mentioned) and went back to their promised land, or if they joined with another nation and attacked, then everything the pharaoh knew and loved would be destroy.
Their plan was to enslave the Hebrews thereby forcing them to live and serve forever in the land of Egypt. Egypt was not under attack and by all accounts seem to be living in prosperity. The way they began to enslave the Hebrews involved regulation, taxation, supervision, and work hour requirements.from their they moved into out right big dictatorship, and slave masters.
We explored the concept that this did not happen overnight and that somewhere in Hebrews had to start making choices to continue to stay in Egypt, or give up their home, country, and community that they had grown up in. Hebrews chose to stay in the land of the enslaved rather than leave.
God continued despite the incredible oppression to bless the Hebrews with multiple children, easy childbirth, and virtually no infant mortality.
the pharaoh recognizing this continued blessing of God decided to order the midwives to kill the Hebrew male babies as they were coming out about the womb. This order was given to the directors of the midwives and clearly expected to be obeyed without question. The midwives did not obey and probably over the course of a year the pharaoh figured out that there were an awful lot of Hebrew male babies still in his country.
The pharaoh then gave in order that all of Egypt to throw Hebrew male babies into the Nile River.
We gave the assumption that this probably was tied into some form of idol worship so that the Egyptians would feel like murderers but rather corporate worshipers of the God of the Nile and of course their god Pharaoh.
Some of the concepts we left out for discussion.
living by one of two philosophies....fear and scarcity, as exampled by Pharaoh during a time of peace and prosperity he feared the potential of loss and destruction.
.....peace and abundance as example by God continue to provide abundantly with children for his people, and bless those who obeyed his principles.
What enslaves us.
Do we hold on to blessings from God, until we become enslaved by them.
We look forward to continuing this narrative journey on February 14
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)