hey yall iam so sorry i dont talk on here as much i like blogging to get my thoughts out but i do this stuff better one on oneo r w/e but iam trying to get better but if u read this tonight or tomorrow monring just please pray for me cause tomorrrow mornin i have the privllage to speak at keystone highschools chapel and ya iam talkin bout worship as well but just pray my words will be Gods words and that it will all ocme out understable sweet
GOD IS LOVE
nate
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Advice needed please
So I've been thinking. I believe people can really change, but how do we tell that they have? And is it up to us? I have a friend that has come back into my life after a few months of not speaking to me, and she's with the same boyfriend who kicked her front door down and held her against her will. But she says he's going to counseling now and that he really has done some growing up. But I have a very uneasy feeling about it. How do you know that he really has pure motives, and that he's not really trying to control her like he has the last 25 women who have reported public disturbances on him. Also, she seems to want to change and slowly start coming to church, though she can't commit to every weekend. What do I do? I'm not very good at these kind of things because I trust too easily, or I become too judgemental...a little help with what I should do, please? She's asking for my advice, and asking how you can tell if a person has really changed. And how do you?
Also, if a relationship starts out bad and unpleasing to God, is it possible to turn it around to a relationship that glorifies God, or do the two need to find separate people to help them glorify God? They have dated off and on for 2 years, but have never married.
Also, if a relationship starts out bad and unpleasing to God, is it possible to turn it around to a relationship that glorifies God, or do the two need to find separate people to help them glorify God? They have dated off and on for 2 years, but have never married.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
...a little behind...
okay, so first of all i would like to apologize for not contributing to this blog much....er...at all. i'm going to go back and read through the posts and try and comment on most. not that anything i have to say is particularly important, i just want you to know i have read your post and value your insight.
i have always had an issue with writing/journaling. i hate it. (why is it every time i say "hate" i hear my mom say "hate is a very strong word". ) strike my previous statement. i strongly dislike it. there is something very vulnerable about your words being in print. (shrug)
laura
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
False Danger Number Six
the final post on "false dangers" - from The Dangerous Act of Worship, by mark labberton
6) worship that's unfamiliar
The unfamiliar spells danger. It might mean reexamining our faith. It might takes us into areas of feeling that can be awkward, or it might disrupt the statis of our community. The unfamiliar might mean having to cope with a more complex reality than we really want. It might cause us to be critical of where we have been and what we have believed or experienced. It is a danger, because it can be alluring, yet it can realign things in ways that that may be painful or disorienting."
"...we often leave our services with what we came for, which sadly and ironically means we have little more than when we arrived."
"...worshiper mostly already know what they want to know - they just want to hear it again. Many don't venture into unexplored or untested territory.
what would be considered "unfamiliar" in our context?
i think we might all agree that our services our pretty familiar. what "unfamiliar" revelations should we be giving consideration?
i'd be interested in hearing about any experience you've had when some "unfamiliar" revelation or event has enabled a unique worship experience...
6) worship that's unfamiliar
The unfamiliar spells danger. It might mean reexamining our faith. It might takes us into areas of feeling that can be awkward, or it might disrupt the statis of our community. The unfamiliar might mean having to cope with a more complex reality than we really want. It might cause us to be critical of where we have been and what we have believed or experienced. It is a danger, because it can be alluring, yet it can realign things in ways that that may be painful or disorienting."
"...we often leave our services with what we came for, which sadly and ironically means we have little more than when we arrived."
"...worshiper mostly already know what they want to know - they just want to hear it again. Many don't venture into unexplored or untested territory.
what would be considered "unfamiliar" in our context?
i think we might all agree that our services our pretty familiar. what "unfamiliar" revelations should we be giving consideration?
i'd be interested in hearing about any experience you've had when some "unfamiliar" revelation or event has enabled a unique worship experience...
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Hardware Upgrade Required?
great discussion this morning everyone! thanks for opening up and sharing your hearts!
I am constantly amazed by the human mind and its God-given capacity to not just take in so much information, but then to anaylze it (uniquely per individual, by the way), and sythesize those bytes into some sort of meaning (although for me the last part happens so infrequently). God is so ridiculous - in a good way, of course!
i've been pondering all the thoughts from this morning and i've perused all the blogs on the subject matter that i could find (including our own) and i am slowly coming to the following conclusion (still in process, mind you):
what if the Church needs a hardware upgrade?
take a walk with me here...
the argument has been made that the Church has generally strayed from its mission and purpose - now, not every fragment of the Church, but in many areas and forms - specifically the western or american expression of church. but its said that we've become business minded, consumeristic and too "seeker sensitive" (a friend of mine once said you can even take seeker out of that phrase - we've just become sensitive). we are driven by two things: 1)the need to draw people (believers and non-believers) into the gathering so we can "see" how successful we are, and 2) we believers need the emotional and intellectual high of the sunday morning gathering to "charge our spiritual batteries," so to speak. this creates a hungry monster, such that everything we say, do, and pursue has to support the sunday morning gathering and its growth (numerically, financially, and registering an appropropriate amount of conversions for the effort - mostly signified by raised hands or secret prayers).
think about this. let's say some people decide they want to plant a church (for whatever reason). one of the first things they try to do is secure a space in which to "worship" (ASAP they seek their own land and/or building, etc). then they form the structure of their local expression of church (staff/elders, etc), and seek the best ways to teach people to live the commands of Scripture (i am making a very generous assumption here).
now, i know this is a huge generalization, but for arguments sake, stick with me.
so typically we build a building to support a service on sunday (and maybe even another night or so of the week) for teaching and celebration. then we decide how best to use the building the rest of the week, maybe. it may just sit vacant for the rest of the week. we proceed by hiring a lead pastor, administrator and if the budget (read people in seats of the "church" giving money) allows, we hire additional staff for our unique expression of church, usually to support additional programs, because we feel people "need" them. you name the program - kids ministry, youth ministry, bible studies, counseling, addictions, single mothers, poetry support groups - all very important in their own right - well, most of them...as we become aware of a new need, we begin a new program. before you know it we need additional staff to support the growing number of needs in our community (and church). this is not so much a generalization. pick your favorite church and this is probably where they are.
chew on this:
alan hirsch suggests that one reason apple computers (yeah, yeah, yeah) is so successful is that it views development from three levels - 1) programs/software, 2) operating systems, and 3) hardware. apple is constantly developing at each of these levels, but unlike some lesser companies, it has been extremely innovative at the ground level - hardware. it is constantly looking at how it can improve the machine from the bottom up. all along the way it continues to develop a system that runs efficiently on the new hardware and programs that take advantage of both the hardware and operating system. what can the church learn from this concept. if nothing else, she should consider the possibility that the hardware may be outdated! she should then possibly return to the source (Jesus) and begin to "think differently" - or start with determining what Jesus wants to accomplish through her.
as i see it, Jesus lived out the commands of Scripture from the very beginning. He grabbed some guys "along the way," served and taught them (i am being overly simplistic here for times sake) and sent them out to do the same (make disciples). we've called it the great commission. Jesus interacted with the people He met "along the way" and served and taught them where they were, whether on the road, by a well, in a home, in a synagogue, by the shore...
hirsch says it this way:
our Christology (what we know about Christ) determines our missiology (our call or purpose) which designates our ecclesiology (how we do church). then to complete the circle, our ecclesiology should constantly be re-evaluated in light of our Christology.
makes sense to me...
in what ways does the current hardware of the church help and/or hinder people from living out the mission to which Jesus calls us?
or better yet, shouldn't we first be concerned with what Jesus wants to accomplish, then use that to develop our mission, and only then develop the structure that would best facilitate that?
craig
I am constantly amazed by the human mind and its God-given capacity to not just take in so much information, but then to anaylze it (uniquely per individual, by the way), and sythesize those bytes into some sort of meaning (although for me the last part happens so infrequently). God is so ridiculous - in a good way, of course!
i've been pondering all the thoughts from this morning and i've perused all the blogs on the subject matter that i could find (including our own) and i am slowly coming to the following conclusion (still in process, mind you):
what if the Church needs a hardware upgrade?
take a walk with me here...
the argument has been made that the Church has generally strayed from its mission and purpose - now, not every fragment of the Church, but in many areas and forms - specifically the western or american expression of church. but its said that we've become business minded, consumeristic and too "seeker sensitive" (a friend of mine once said you can even take seeker out of that phrase - we've just become sensitive). we are driven by two things: 1)the need to draw people (believers and non-believers) into the gathering so we can "see" how successful we are, and 2) we believers need the emotional and intellectual high of the sunday morning gathering to "charge our spiritual batteries," so to speak. this creates a hungry monster, such that everything we say, do, and pursue has to support the sunday morning gathering and its growth (numerically, financially, and registering an appropropriate amount of conversions for the effort - mostly signified by raised hands or secret prayers).
think about this. let's say some people decide they want to plant a church (for whatever reason). one of the first things they try to do is secure a space in which to "worship" (ASAP they seek their own land and/or building, etc). then they form the structure of their local expression of church (staff/elders, etc), and seek the best ways to teach people to live the commands of Scripture (i am making a very generous assumption here).
now, i know this is a huge generalization, but for arguments sake, stick with me.
so typically we build a building to support a service on sunday (and maybe even another night or so of the week) for teaching and celebration. then we decide how best to use the building the rest of the week, maybe. it may just sit vacant for the rest of the week. we proceed by hiring a lead pastor, administrator and if the budget (read people in seats of the "church" giving money) allows, we hire additional staff for our unique expression of church, usually to support additional programs, because we feel people "need" them. you name the program - kids ministry, youth ministry, bible studies, counseling, addictions, single mothers, poetry support groups - all very important in their own right - well, most of them...as we become aware of a new need, we begin a new program. before you know it we need additional staff to support the growing number of needs in our community (and church). this is not so much a generalization. pick your favorite church and this is probably where they are.
chew on this:
alan hirsch suggests that one reason apple computers (yeah, yeah, yeah) is so successful is that it views development from three levels - 1) programs/software, 2) operating systems, and 3) hardware. apple is constantly developing at each of these levels, but unlike some lesser companies, it has been extremely innovative at the ground level - hardware. it is constantly looking at how it can improve the machine from the bottom up. all along the way it continues to develop a system that runs efficiently on the new hardware and programs that take advantage of both the hardware and operating system. what can the church learn from this concept. if nothing else, she should consider the possibility that the hardware may be outdated! she should then possibly return to the source (Jesus) and begin to "think differently" - or start with determining what Jesus wants to accomplish through her.
as i see it, Jesus lived out the commands of Scripture from the very beginning. He grabbed some guys "along the way," served and taught them (i am being overly simplistic here for times sake) and sent them out to do the same (make disciples). we've called it the great commission. Jesus interacted with the people He met "along the way" and served and taught them where they were, whether on the road, by a well, in a home, in a synagogue, by the shore...
hirsch says it this way:
our Christology (what we know about Christ) determines our missiology (our call or purpose) which designates our ecclesiology (how we do church). then to complete the circle, our ecclesiology should constantly be re-evaluated in light of our Christology.
makes sense to me...
in what ways does the current hardware of the church help and/or hinder people from living out the mission to which Jesus calls us?
or better yet, shouldn't we first be concerned with what Jesus wants to accomplish, then use that to develop our mission, and only then develop the structure that would best facilitate that?
craig
Friday, February 22, 2008
False Danger Number Five
post five on "false dangers" - from The Dangerous Act of Worship, by mark labberton
5) worship that isn't comfortable
"Traditional churches and seeker churches alike have made an art form of figuring out how to make unchurched people feel comfortable."
hospitality is biblical, but where do we draw the line in our church?
when do we become nothing more than coddlers who do nothing but make the unchurched feel warm and fuzzy!
ok. I am sitting in Dayton, Ohio right now listening to author and theologian alan hirsch. check this out. he gives us this formula that I think fits very well with this danger:
Xty - x = religion
Xty is Christianity. x is Christ and the whole story of His life (including the tough teachings). religion is our general expression of church in America.
his premise is that most churches spend plenty of time on the cross and resurrection of Christ to secure people's salvation, but seldom spend time on the teachings and life of Christ that would cause us to reevaluate and realign our lives to be more like Him.
Jesus, friend of sinners and tax collectors, went where they were, met them where they were, spoke to them where they were, but never compromised His message or shied away from confronting people with their sin. "go and sin no more."
wow! more on this later.
craig
5) worship that isn't comfortable
"Traditional churches and seeker churches alike have made an art form of figuring out how to make unchurched people feel comfortable."
hospitality is biblical, but where do we draw the line in our church?
when do we become nothing more than coddlers who do nothing but make the unchurched feel warm and fuzzy!
ok. I am sitting in Dayton, Ohio right now listening to author and theologian alan hirsch. check this out. he gives us this formula that I think fits very well with this danger:
Xty - x = religion
Xty is Christianity. x is Christ and the whole story of His life (including the tough teachings). religion is our general expression of church in America.
his premise is that most churches spend plenty of time on the cross and resurrection of Christ to secure people's salvation, but seldom spend time on the teachings and life of Christ that would cause us to reevaluate and realign our lives to be more like Him.
Jesus, friend of sinners and tax collectors, went where they were, met them where they were, spoke to them where they were, but never compromised His message or shied away from confronting people with their sin. "go and sin no more."
wow! more on this later.
craig
Thursday, February 21, 2008
False Danger Number Four
post four on "false dangers" - from The Dangerous Act of Worship, by mark labberton
4) worship that isn't popular
"Popular worship services...up the stakes of congregational approval by regularly surpassing expectations and becoming the place with 'the buzz'."
wow! i've been there...i am so glad that "buzz" is not what we have to be about...
i mentioned earlier that people often approach me after a worship event and express how "great" worship was...well, another remark that often confuses me is when people approach me after i've taken a weekend off and say something like, "we missed you last sunday...so and so was good, but we miss it when you aren't up there leading us." how do you deal with that nicely? again, i shrug my stupid shoulders and say, "thanks," but what i want to do is shake them and say, "YOU DON"T GET IT! DO YOU?" i know they mean well, but...AAARGH!
hopefully you all know me well enough by now to know that i mention this not boast, but to point out that i know it's NOT ABOUT ME, YOU, or ANYONE ELSE ON THE TEAM...it's about where each individual worshiper's heart is in relation to God...why do people tend to rely on any one person to "provide" them with a worship experience?
how can we, individually and as a team, be excellent in what we do and not draw attention to ourselves?
how can we avoid leading people toward "needing" any one of us in order for them to "worship?"
what is it going to take from us to help people realize they are responsible for the worship they give?
Several favorite quotes in this short section:
"Jesus' ministry drew large crowds, but that never determined what He said or did."
"Justice is not popular. Mercy is not a hot topic...Yet both absorb the heart of God."
i love Labberton's explanation of Jesus' motivation on page 55:
"What he [Jesus] did drew attention to himself, sometimes for dramatic and spectacular reasons. But the expectations that he fulfilled were the Father's."
4) worship that isn't popular
"Popular worship services...up the stakes of congregational approval by regularly surpassing expectations and becoming the place with 'the buzz'."
wow! i've been there...i am so glad that "buzz" is not what we have to be about...
i mentioned earlier that people often approach me after a worship event and express how "great" worship was...well, another remark that often confuses me is when people approach me after i've taken a weekend off and say something like, "we missed you last sunday...so and so was good, but we miss it when you aren't up there leading us." how do you deal with that nicely? again, i shrug my stupid shoulders and say, "thanks," but what i want to do is shake them and say, "YOU DON"T GET IT! DO YOU?" i know they mean well, but...AAARGH!
hopefully you all know me well enough by now to know that i mention this not boast, but to point out that i know it's NOT ABOUT ME, YOU, or ANYONE ELSE ON THE TEAM...it's about where each individual worshiper's heart is in relation to God...why do people tend to rely on any one person to "provide" them with a worship experience?
how can we, individually and as a team, be excellent in what we do and not draw attention to ourselves?
how can we avoid leading people toward "needing" any one of us in order for them to "worship?"
what is it going to take from us to help people realize they are responsible for the worship they give?
Several favorite quotes in this short section:
"Jesus' ministry drew large crowds, but that never determined what He said or did."
"Justice is not popular. Mercy is not a hot topic...Yet both absorb the heart of God."
i love Labberton's explanation of Jesus' motivation on page 55:
"What he [Jesus] did drew attention to himself, sometimes for dramatic and spectacular reasons. But the expectations that he fulfilled were the Father's."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)