Ministry Matters: Shane Raynor

ARTICLE: God the Micromanager

Wed, 30 May 2012 05:00:00 GMT

At the risk of starting a theological debate, I’d like to ask why so many of us seem to be buying into the philosophy of fatalism. Most people seem to say they don’t believe that all events are predetermined, but then they go and drop a bomb like this one:

Everything happens for a reason.

Well, duh. Of course everything happens for a reason. (Sometimes the reason is we didn’t use our brain.) But that’s not exactly what they mean. When someone says, “Everything happens for a reason,” they usually mean that it’s part of God’s master plan. In other words, he wrote the script a long time ago and we’re just acting it out.

Usually people use this line when they’re trying to make us feel better after something bad happens.

“Sorry your house burned down. But I guess everything happens for a reason. Sometimes we don’t understand why...”

Could it be that the house burned down because the wiring was faulty? Or maybe rebellious Junior was smoking behind your back and got a little careless as he was getting rid of the evidence. Perhaps the cat knocked over one of your scented candles. You know, the ones you left burning when you went to your weekly Bible study.

Would it disappoint you terribly if you discovered that your house fire wasn’t part of God’s master plan from the beginning of time? Could it be that God doesn’t micromanage things to that degree?

We recognize God’s omniscience, and rightfully so. And we know he knows the future. The problem is, we say those things, but we think of them in our terms. To us, knowing the future is the equivalent of watching a movie we’ve seen before. When we think of God knowing the future, we think of a linear timeline, and we imagine God processing things the way we do. We may say stuff along the lines of, “God is outside time,” but truth be told, we haven’t a clue as to what that means. God is basically a big version of us with superpowers. And that's where we go wrong.

Suppose the whole concept of time is just too much for us to grasp? Trillions of events and choices happen on a daily basis and those things shape time as we know it. Yet God in his omnipotence and omniscience is still more than able to accomplish whatever he wants. I heard someone say once that God can win every hand, even if he only has a pair of 2’s. That seems much more impressive to me than a god who is a control freak.

I have no idea how God’s foreknowledge affects actual outcomes and events. But I do know two things: God values human free will and he trusts his people with expanding his kingdom. The fact that good things happen even when human beings mess up indicates that God is actively involved, but it also shows he’s not a micromanager. He’s neither the God of the Deist nor some celestial screenwriter who forces everyone to stick to some unalterable script.

Thank God for that.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

BLOG: God the Micromanager

Wed, 30 May 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Everything happens for a reason.

Usually people use this line when they’re trying to make us feel better after something bad happens.

“Sorry your house burned down. But I guess everything happens for a reason. Sometimes we don’t understand why...”

Thank God for that.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

BLOG: Handling Worship Distractions

Fri, 11 May 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Are you easily distracted during Sunday worship? People who have ADHD or those who find it hard to focus in a school or work setting will often have similar struggles during prayer or worship times. Here are a few things I’ve found distracting during church services over the years, especially during worship segments:

The guy who sings off key.
The woman who doesn’t sing off key but sings louder than everyone else.
Crying babies.
The worship leader who talks too much.
The guy who says the word just too much when he prays. Or the one who says Father God before each sentence of his prayer.
People who arrive late. I’ve often found myself having a conversation (with myself) about how the church is practically empty even though we’ve already started and what would we do if no one else showed up this week... blah, blah, blah...you get the idea.
The woman who never sets her cell phone to vibrate until it rings at least once.
The person in front of me who’s texting, especially when they don’t hold their phone so I can read what they’re sending.
Kids fidgeting.
Adults fidgeting.
Typos in the worship Powerpoint slides.
Typos in the bulletin.
The guy who who raises his hands during every song.
People who stare at me when I raise my hands.
The people who never raise their hands unless we’re singing “Here I Am, Lord”.
Anyone who punches me and tries to continue a conversation during the opening song. This distracts me during movies too.
The wasp flying around the ceiling. How did he get in?

There’s no easy answer for handling distractions during worship. (Mean mugging the ones causing the distractions usually isn't very effective.) What I have figured out is that if I take the pressure off myself to focus (and the accompanying guilt that I feel when I can't), then I start taking pressure off of everyone else not to distract me in the first place. In other words, if I focus too much on whether or not I'm focusing on God, then I'm not really focusing on God to begin with, I'm being self-centered. True Christian worship is always more about God than it is about us.

The second thing I try to remember is that group worship is not my private prayer and worship time. I don't get to have God all to myself. I have to share him with others in the group, even the ones who don't have the right political views, those who don't use the right Bible translation, the theological eggheads, the people who read the fluffy books from the Christian celebrity I don't care for, people who don't talk to me, and the garden variety hypocrites. Group worship is not simply worshiping God by myself with other people in the room who happen to be doing the same thing. I believe that's one of the mistakes we sometimes make with modern praise worship services. Worshiping with a group means sometimes interacting with the group, not tuning them out so that it's "just me and God."

Perhaps a reason we often have such impossible expectations for group worship is we're not getting enough quality time by ourselves with God. I've found that if my own private prayer/worship times are consistent and healthy, I'm bothered much less by distractions when I get to church.

What things distract you during Sunday worship? How do you handle distractions?

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

BLOG: Money and Guilt Trips

Mon, 07 May 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Several years ago, I was preaching to a group of teenagers about stewardship and I unfortunately played the “feel guilty for spending money” card. I referenced the World Vision gift catalog, found out how much money it took to feed a village for a week (or buy a chicken, dig a well, supply diapers, provide health care for a needy child, build a school, etc.), then I proceeded to compare these amounts to the stuff teenagers love to spend money on. Things like music, cell phones, clothes, fast food, and video games. I even made a visual presentation that would have made the toughest dictator in the world cry. My goal was to get the youth to show concern for people other than themselves.

What on earth was I thinking?

My intentions were good, but I’m afraid I sent the wrong message that day. I essentially told these kids (whether I meant to or not) that spending money on themselves was selfish, especially when there are so many people in the world who are much worse off.

While all of us probably could (and should) simplify our lives so we can give more to the Kingdom, once we start heading down the road I was on at that youth group meeting, we risk putting people in bondage.

Besides, how do we define how much money is too much to spend on something?

Take my denomination, The United Methodist Church, for example. For the last two weeks, we held a quadrennial worldwide conference in Florida that by some estimates cost up to $10 million. As the conference moved along and frustrations mounted, I noticed people on Twitter criticizing how much money we were spending on the event. “How many hungry people could we feed with that money?” some wondered. Or how much could we have sent to help wipe out malaria, save the environment, provide microloans in the developing world, insert your favorite cause here.

Good questions, but I have a couple of others. Like... How many meals could you provide for the hungry if you got rid of your iPhone? Or your car. Or your Netflix membership. How much money could you save by downgrading your wardrobe from Banana Republic to Gap, or from Gap to Old Navy, or from Old Navy to Target ...to Walmart to Goodwill....

Remember what happened when the woman in Mark 14 poured the expensive perfume on Jesus?

Some grew angry. They said to each other, "Why waste the perfume? This perfume could have been sold for almost a year’s pay and the money given to the poor." And they scolded her. Jesus said, "Leave her alone. Why do you make trouble for her? She has done a good thing for me." Mark 14:4-6 CEB

Do you get where I’m going with this? What some consider extravagant, we may see as basic or essential. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be better stewards, but we need to frame the discussion around our freedom in Christ, not around guilt.

We must never put a yoke on others that we can’t even handle ourselves.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

BLOG: A Virtual General Conference?

Mon, 30 Apr 2012 05:00:00 GMT

The other day I commented on how much time and money United Methodists spend on General Conference every four years, and I wondered aloud why we aren’t trying to move toward a virtual GC.

We’re already streaming it live and the delegates are even communicating with each other on Twitter. Couldn’t we spend some of the millions of dollars we already spend on GC to customize a state of the art teleconferencing system and add voting functions?

But then it hit me why it wouldn’t fly, even if we could get the technology to work reliably for every delegate. (And truthfully, we’re twenty years away from that, especially in some areas of the world. I can’t even get a decent cell phone signal in parts of downtown Nashville.)

It wouldn’t work because a virtual General Conference would get rid of most of what people like about GC and keep the things they don’t like. I’ve never been a GC delegate, but I’ll tell you this much: hanging out with friends from around the connection and worshiping with a worldwide group of Methodists would definitely be more fun than all the long sessions, early mornings, late nights, and droning speeches.

Do you seriously believe that anyone would sit in front of their computer monitor and put up with two weeks of committees and parliamentary procedure? I’d do it in person but not over the internet. When delegates are at a conference, they’re a captive audience. When they’re in their living rooms on their laptops, not so much.

The idea of moving some of the legislative committee and subcommittee work to the internet and cutting back General Conference to a week, however, has some merit. The first week is sort of like a pre-game show anyway. Couldn’t all the committees hash out legislation on GoToMeeting? Or maybe we should do away with the committees altogether. Bishop Will Willimon wondered in an interview last week why a church that already has too many rules and laws wants to create more. Good question.

In the end, General Conference probably won’t change much. It’s an institution. It’s the United Methodist Oscars. Most of us complain about it, but there are many die-hard Methodists who enjoy it and look forward to it. As dysfunctional as it is, we’d miss it on some level if it didn’t happen. It’s the one time where representatives from the worldwide United Methodist Church get together in one place.

I’m just glad it only happens once every four years.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

VIDEO: Interview: Bishop Will Willimon

Mon, 30 Apr 2012 05:00:00 GMT

This is my complete interview with William H. Willimon, United Methodist bishop and author of Bishop: The Art of Questioning Authority by an Authority in Question.

BLOG: For Breaking News, Go to Twitter

Fri, 27 Apr 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Those who aren’t United Methodist probably have trouble understanding why some of the ones who are UM get so wrapped up in this whole General Conference thing. For one thing, it only comes around every four years. It’s kind of like the Olympics. Well, not really. NBC doesn’t pay ridiculous amounts of money to put our General Conference on the air. We have to settle for a Livestream feed on the Internet which, more often than not, shows color bars. (Couldn’t we at least get a roving reporter with a cell phone cam fishing for sensational quotes between sessions?)

Eight years ago, I remember going to the UMNS website to get breaking news about GC2004. There must have been a lot of demand on the servers during that GC because I remember the site being down a lot. In those days we relied mostly on UMNS articles and the occasional mainstream news story to find out what was happening. Today we have all kinds of news sources and blogs with GC updates, but my favorite way of keeping track of what’s happening is Twitter.

I realized the power of Twitter as a news source on the Sunday night when Osama Bin Laden’s death was made public. CNN had announced an unusual White House news conference that would happen later in the evening. I changed the TV to Fox News Channel and Geraldo Rivera was saying the same. (If anyone was going to let the cat out of the bag prematurely, I figured it would be Geraldo, but not this time.) So I signed on to Twitter, and Bin Laden’s death was already trending. Television news had been scooped by the masses—what’s not to love about that?

Anytime you put power in many hands, it’s bound to get messy. That’s the nature of democracy and freedom. And there are few things as free and as democratic as Twitter. You obviously can’t believe everything you read there, but as long as you understand the limitations of the source and verify the information, you can learn a lot. And you can learn it before a reporter can write the first paragraph of their news story. It’s amazing how much can be said in 140 characters.

But Twitter won’t replace traditional news sources. It isn’t meant to. It will, however, help make in-depth reporting and analysis more important than ever. People will always want to go somewhere to find out more.

I glance at the #GC2012 Twitter feed from time to time while I’m working. I’m not that interested in every little detail of GC, but it’s fun finding out what’s happening in the legislative committees in real time. And the cool thing about Twitter is you can see every side of the story if you read enough tweets. Even sides you don’t want to see and sides you didn’t know existed. Plus you get the information and the emotion—unfiltered.

It’s a wild west, no doubt, but that’s the beauty of it.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

BLOG: How Long Should You Preach?

Wed, 25 Apr 2012 05:00:00 GMT

If you preach on a regular basis, you probably have guidelines for how long your sermons should be. You may not always have a choice in the matter—sometimes, especially when you’re speaking somewhere else, you’re given a time slot and you have to fill it. But if you’re a senior pastor or regular preaching pastor, you likely have major influence over the structure and length of your church’s worship services. That means you decide how long you’re going to speak and what needs to be cut or added to the rest of the service to make it happen.

When it comes to sermon length, I’ve observed three kinds of preachers:

Short and sweet: These are the preachers who never go beyond the fifteen minute mark. Ever. Perhaps it’s because they’re from traditions that don’t encourage lengthy preaching. Maybe it's the way their homiletics professors taught them in seminary. Or it’s possible they realize that preaching isn’t their strong suit and they’re trying to spare everyone the agony of a long sermon. Whatever the reason, listeners who aren’t used to such short sermons will probably be in denial that they’ve just heard a real sermon. (If a visitor’s face lights up with delight as they exclaim, “That’s it?”, it’s a bad sign.)

Half hour or less: Preachers who speak for 20 to 30 minutes are fairly common. That’s because really good speakers will find that a 20 or 25 minute sermon leaves the audience wanting more. Not so good speakers will realize that they probably couldn’t keep the congregation awake longer than 20 or 25 minutes anyway, so they don’t dare venture into second half hour territory. Some probably shouldn’t even go into second quarter hour territory.

Half hour plus: Back in the 80’s and 90’s, Domino’s Pizza had a guarantee on pizza delivery that went something like this: If you don’t get your pizza within thirty minutes, it’s free. Domino’s discontinued the guarantee when drivers were having too many car accidents trying to make the half hour deadline. Sometimes I think churches should have a similar guarantee: If the sermon stinks and goes over a half hour, you get your tithe back. I kid, of course, but in all seriousness, only the most gifted and interesting preachers should preach over 30 minutes. And even they should proceed with much caution. Are you one of those preachers? If you have to ask, probably not yet.

So how long should your sermons be? It depends.

Do you preach from a manuscript? You should keep it to 15 minutes or less. Seriously, if people can tell you are reading (even if you only look down every few seconds), they will get bored quickly. Unless you’re really good at delivering a manuscript sermon (and I’ve met few preachers who are) keep it short. If you want to go longer, preach from an outline or train yourself to speak without notes.

Does your sermon have one big idea? (Not three—one!) If you had to condense your sermon down to a Tweet (140 characters or less) or an elevator pitch, could you do it? Is there one main thing people should get from it? Then you should feel free to take 20 or 25 minutes. If not, keep your sermon to 15 minutes or less, because it’s probably too complicated. Taking more time is just going to confuse everyone.

Are there a lot of young people in your audience? Unless you’re a crackerjack speaker (worthy of an HBO special or a gig at a Christian conference), keep your sermon to 15 or 20 minutes tops. Hint: Watch the teenagers while you’re preaching to see how you’re doing. They’ll be more honest with their body language than their parents will be. Some will even tell you to your face later if you were boring.

Do you spend a lot of time planning your sermon but speak with a minimum amount of notes? Then by all means, approach the 25-30 minute mark. If you walk around and make eye contact and experiment with voice inflection for effect, you’re probably one of those preachers who can pull it off. I’ve observed that people generally prefer hearing a well-prepared sermon, but they want it to be delivered as if it were being preached extemporaneously. It’s one of the great paradoxes of church life.

Do you use PowerPoint for every sermon and have slides for nearly everything, including your jokes? If you do, stop it. You don’t even get 15 minutes. Powerpoint is most effective when used sparingly. It’s not meant to carry the whole sermon or serve as a teleprompter for the speaker. PowerPoint isn’t what it used to be. Boring teachers and college professors have truly killed it for the rest of us.

So should you ever go over 30 minutes? Sure, but only if you’re already preaching for 25-30 minutes and people are regularly showering you with compliments like, “I don’t know where the time goes when you preach!” or “You have me on the edge of my seat every week with your sermons!” Or if you’re in a church tradition that has trained the congregation to expect longer discourses. But even then, you’d better learn how to deliver the goods. Otherwise, keep it shorter.

With most preachers, less is more. Even the best speakers should constantly be working to learn how to say more in less time. We’re in a short attention span world now whether we want to admit it or not.

Questions: Are you coasting with your preaching or are you spending time regularly learning how to make more efficient use of time in your sermons? Are you preaching the right amount of time or are you speaking past your ability to hold the attention of your congregation?

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

BLOG: Working in the Cloud

Thu, 19 Apr 2012 05:00:00 GMT

When I came to Ministry Matters in 2010, I set two major goals as I was acquiring tools to help me do my job. First, I wanted to go as “paperless” as possible. It's not that I was trying to make some kind of environmental statement (although being green is certainly an added benefit). I just get overwhelmed quickly by stacks of stuff on my desk!

My second goal was to do as much work “in the cloud” as I could so I wasn’t tied to a particular computer or location.

If I could work toward these goals, I figured I’d bring a couple of important things to my job—simplicity and flexibility. The idea was for me to keep productivity and creativity levels high while keeping stress levels low.

I’ll write about going paperless in another post, but first I want to share some of my experiences with cloud computing.

Cloud computing, if you’re not familiar with the term, is loosely defined as using computer services through the internet, usually through a web browser. Rather than running software or storing files on your local computer, you do everything online. If you’ve used Gmail, Hotmail, or Yahoo! Mail, for example, you’ve already used cloud computing.

The biggest advantage to the cloud is that I’m able to work from almost any device (phone, tablet, PC, or netbook) anywhere that I have an internet connection. This is huge for me. If I need to complete a project before the end of the day, instead of sticking around the office I can leave on time, beat the traffic, relax a little, then finish up at home. If I’m traveling, I can do work from the airport or hotel using my laptop. And if I’m waiting somewhere, I can access almost everything from my smartphone and work during the downtime. I’ve even written and edited articles using my phone while visiting a coffeehouse or riding a bus.

My company uses Microsoft Outlook for email, but I prefer using Gmail, so I have two email accounts. Gmail's search functionality is superior and I love the user interface. Outlook sometimes makes me want to punch the wall of my cubicle. But even so, I can still access my Outlook account from any computer through a web browser, and I also have it set up to sync with the email program on my phone. You have to really discipline your workaholic tendencies if you’re going to take your email with you everywhere. It isn’t always easy—it requires setting priorities and being able to discern what really deserves your attention when you aren’t in the office. I don’t obligate myself to read or respond to email after hours, and most of my regular email contacts know this. But I’ve found that it’s nice keeping in contact with the office in case something big does come up. Like anything else, you have to set boundaries to make it work.

Here are some of the cloud programs I use on a regular basis:

Gmail: I already mentioned this one—it’s my favorite email client, bar none.
Google Docs: I use this instead of Microsoft Word, Powerpoint, and Excel. It’s free and you can open and edit Microsoft files inside Google Docs. I do run across an occasional formatting issue, but nothing major. You can also collaborate on documents with others using Google Docs and see each other’s changes in real time.
I also use a smartphone app called Documents to Go. This one isn’t free, but it’s worth every penny if you need a powerful way to access and edit your Google Docs with your phone. You probably won’t be doing a lot of heavy lifting with this app, but it’s nice to be able to if you want.
Another good alternative is Zoho, which offers similar features to Google Docs, as well as tons of productivity and business applications for managing projects and collaborating with others.
Evernote: This is my personal assistant and my other brain. I use it to save ideas, lists, sound files, photos, and various documents. I also use it to take notes during meetings. There’s a smartphone app, desktop client, and web-based version and they all sync together nicely. It’s free, but there’s also a paid version that gives you more functionality, the ability to create and upload bigger files, and the ability to collaborate.
Dropbox: I have this program on all my devices. It essentially creates folders that are shared across your devices. So if I put a file in a Dropbox folder on my desktop PC, I can get to that file easily on my phone, netbook, laptop, or tablet. I can also create folders that I make accessible to whomever I choose. It’s free too, but for a few bucks a month I can get additional storage space.
WeVideo: I was skeptical at first about doing video editing in the cloud, but I love this service. It's great picking up where I've left off on a project without having to somehow get the file to my other computers. To really get all the bells and whistles with WeVideo, I recommend getting a paid account, but the free account will let you try it and see if it’s for you.
Amazon: This isn't work-related, but I'll share it anyway because it's in the cloud. When I buy music, I buy it from Amazon because I can download it anytime I want or use their free cloud player no matter what device I’m using.

I've been able to use many cloud applications to replace some of the more traditional software programs typically used in the company I work for. Have you used any of these applications for work? What are some of your favorite cloud applications that I didn't mention?

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

BLOG: Biblical Checks and Balances

Wed, 18 Apr 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Once you were alienated from God and you were enemies with him in your minds, which was shown by your evil actions. But now he has reconciled you by his physical body through death, to present you before God as a people who are holy, faultless, and without blame. But you need to remain well established and rooted in faith and not shift away from the hope given in the good news that you heard. (Colossians 1:21-23a CEB, emphasis mine)

I saw a quote on Twitter a while back that went something like this: “If you watch what you think, you won’t have to watch what you say.” Sin begins in our minds, and culminates with our actions and the chain reaction of consequences that results from those actions. So even if we could “be good” without being cleansed by Jesus, we’d still be enemies of God, because our sin originates on the inside of the cup. Thankfully, because of Christ’s death on the cross, we’re reconciled to God and we don’t have to be his enemies anymore.

Did you notice this passage has a second but?

Part 1: Once you were God’s enemy… (bad news)

BUT…

Part 2: Now he has reconciled you through the death of Jesus (good news)

BUT…

Part 3: You need to remain established, rooted in faith, and not shift… (this one’s open-ended)

The first sentence in the passage puts us in a hopeless predicament. Then the first but gives us a way out of the darkness. Jesus has done something for us that we can’t do for ourselves. But the second but brings the ball back to our court. It tells us that Jesus paid the price, however, we have to appropriate the power of what he did on the cross by connecting (and staying connected) to the vine. Our faith should be an active faith, not a passive one.

We leave out parts 1, 2 or 3 at our peril. Omitting part 1 denies the need for parts 2 or 3. Omitting part 2 leads us into the error of works salvation, and leaving out part 3 makes Christianity nothing more than cheap grace and fire insurance.

The Word of God is full of checks and balances to keep us from wandering into theological extremism– this passage is just one example.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

BLOG: Losing the Offering Plate

Tue, 17 Apr 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Change is a buzzword in church circles. Even some traditional congregations have added modern worship music, practical sermon series, 21st century marketing concepts, theater style seating, and small groups in recent years. But the last thing some churches want to touch is the traditional offering with the passing of collection plates and baskets. If Social Security is the third rail of American politics, taking an offering could be the third rail of the church. Anywhere money and church mix is a potential hotspot for controversy, and some churches are probably slow to change the way they do the offering because they’re afraid donations will decrease. The bigger risk, however, could be continuing to do things the old way.

If your church is still relying on passing the collection plate, here are some reasons you might want to rethink that:

Many people don’t use cash and checks anymore. I haven’t written an actual check in ten years. I do all my bill-paying online, including tithing. However, doing that has required some set-up on my part, and I’m not sure most people would or could go through the trouble. To facilitate giving, some churches are setting up giving kiosks in their main lobby or narthex. These are equipped with machines that accept debit and credit cards. Think self checkout stations in the supermarket. This supplements online giving opportunities churches may offer. The major upside to kiosks is that people can donate while they’re at church, which is when more of us are generally inspired to give.

Some people believe the negative stereotypes about churches and money. I talked to a friend recently who visited a new church. “How did you like it?” I asked. “The service was good except for one thing. They asked for money too much. The pastor kept passing the plate until the people had given a certain amount.” What a horror story. While most churches don’t approach that level of tackiness, you’d probably be surprised at how some practices we consider to be innocuous are actually perceived by visitors.

Passing the plate puts people on the spot. A few years ago, I was helping a fellow finance committee member count the Sunday offering. As he straightened a stack of dollar bills, he remarked, “People need to be educated about tithing. They think this place is the dollar movie theater.” I found the comment amusing (if rather harsh) but it made me think about why people give what they give. I’m sure there are some who only have a dollar to give, but I wonder how many put a dollar or two in so they won’t look like they’re giving nothing. We certainly shouldn’t think that way, but I’ll admit, since I give online and not during the church service, I sometimes wonder if people think I don’t give at all. (That’s assuming anyone even notices or cares. But when you’re in any kind of leadership, you’d be amazed at the conclusions people jump to.) The bottom line is, the offering is an awkward time for some people—second only to “pass the peace/greet everyone around you” time.

Someone could get the idea that church has a cover charge. Don’t laugh. When people are looking for reasons not to go to church, not wanting to feel pressure to give comes in just under not wanting to be judged and not having the proper “church attire”. Most churches are really good about telling visitors not to feel compelled to give, but passing around offering plates still creates a potentially uncomfortable situation. With church, there are two types of uncomfortable—"good" uncomfortable and "bad" uncomfortable. This is bad uncomfortable.

Getting rid of the collection plates doesn’t mean getting rid of offering time. People need to have opportunities to give to God and invest in your church’s ministry. It’s an important part of worship. The main idea here is to create alternative ways for people to give—such as the kiosks I mentioned earlier, strategically placed (and securely mounted and locked) offering baskets or boxes, and an easy-to use online giving option. A mobile giving app is another idea that offers both convenience and immediacy for the giver. If your church has weekly communion or prayer time, people can bring offerings to the altar rail (or equivalent) too.

Even if you choose to retain the collection plate, pushing alternative ways of donating gives people who don’t use the plate permission to be more comfortable in your church. And that’s a definite win for everyone.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

BLOG: 5 Lessons from 'Caine's Arcade'

Sun, 15 Apr 2012 05:00:00 GMT

The newest celebrity on the Internet is a nine year old kid from East Los Angeles. If you haven't heard of Caine Monroy, he's the star of a short film by Nirvan Mullick that has gone viral on YouTube and Vimeo. Since "Caine's Arcade" was posted last week, it has been viewed around 4 million times between the two video sharing sites. And a college fund the filmmaker set up for Caine now has over $151,000 in it.

If you haven't seen the video yet, watch it below, then scroll down and I'll tell you why I think "Caine's Arcade" has struck a chord, and I'll also share a few lessons I believe we can learn from this kid.

On The Fox Report newscast last night, someone mentioned that this video has been making grown men cry. Perhaps it's because it connects so many of us to our childhoods. I remember being Caine's age and building vending machines out of cardboard boxes. You probably remember doing something similar when you were a kid. If you did, this video will make you feel like a kid again, at least for a few minutes.

But there's more to this story than stirring up nostalgia and sentimentality—there are some simple lessons in the video that we can benefit from if we'll pay attention:

A positive attitude pays off. Caine Monroy sets up a "business" where there there is little foot traffic, and until the filmmaker comes along, he has no customers. But day after day, he doesn't get discouraged, and he doesn't give up. In fact, he keeps building games for his arcade. Because of his positive attitude and perseverance, this kid is probably going to do something huge someday.

Sometimes you need to learn to work with what little you have before you're given more. Creative people are going to find a way to make things. And in some way, most of us are creative. Caine creates his games from used cardboard boxes and odds and ends in his dad's used auto parts store. His industriousness and resourcefulness are pretty impressive.

Sometimes you have to be persistent. His father's auto parts store isn't in a great part of town anyway, and most of the business is done on eBay, so there aren't many potential customers for Caine. But he keeps asking people to play his games, and he doesn't give up because people say no.

Fathers are important. Caine's dad is quietly supportive. He gives him space to build his arcade (partly to keep the kid occupied, granted) and he encourages him. But I also get the impression that this man doesn't coddle his son. In the film, Caine's dad doesn't try to protect him from disappointment or failure. The fact is, just being there for his kid is the biggest thing a father can do. I wonder how much of Caine's work ethic and positive attitude comes from watching his dad constantly reinventing a declining auto parts store.

We need to recover our childhood wonder. Somewhere between the ages of 10 and 30, many of us forget how to dream the way a kid dreams. And it's a shame. Cynicism has taken its toll on our culture, which is part of the reason so many of us fall into a pessimistic existence. We don't dream as big, and we stop believing we can do great things. Instead of really living life, we settle for just getting through it. When I watched this video, I thought about when Jesus said to become like children. The wonder, the excitement, the simple belief that we can accomplish huge things—that's part of what we need to rediscover.

This video is about one kid, but there are kids everywhere like Caine who need encouragement. I was a latchkey kid in the 80's and I thought I was forced to grow up fast, but I didn't have anything on kids today. Too many of them are already losing hope by the time they reach middle school, and it's heartbreaking.

"Caine's Arcade" is a reminder of the good things that can still happen in America.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

BLOG: Is Mass Evangelism Dead?

Thu, 12 Apr 2012 05:00:00 GMT

I’ve come to the realization that mass evangelism is becoming increasingly less effective. I know that’s not exactly an earth-shattering revelation. It has become fairly obvious, at least here in the United States. In 1994 I attended my first open air evangelistic crusade in Raleigh, NC—the evangelist was Franklin Graham, and his father Billy made a special appearance on the final night of the event. It was huge! Over 20,000 people attended. If you’re Gen-X or older, you know the routine. There was opening music from a Christian rock band. (Franklin was considered much edgier than his dad back in the day.) Then there was a stirring sermon with an invitation to come down to pray with a counselor and commit your life to Christ. Many people became Christians or renewed their commitments to Jesus. Baptist, Methodist, Pentecostal, and Catholic churches (and every other Christian denomination) came together to make sure the event was a success. For this wide-eyed college student, it was a pretty awesome sight to behold.

Times have changed. You don’t see big crusades as much nowadays. 21st century ministries and churches rely more on festivals, concerts, and community outreach extravaganzas to reach the lost. And even those events aren’t as explicitly evangelistic as their predecessors were a generation ago. While many churches still do some form of the altar call, more seem to be moving toward relational and small group evangelism as the primary strategies for bringing people to Christ.

Why is that? The Gospel certainly isn’t less true than it was in the heydays of John Wesley, Charles Finney, or Billy Graham. And we know people generally aren’t less sinful now or less in need of mercy and grace. Has wholesale evangelism really become less effective, or are we just doing it wrong?

I think it’s some of both, but it’s definitely harder nowadays to get through to a lot of people, so one on one evangelism has become critical. I’ve come up with a few reasons why I believe that’s the case.

There’s too much noise. In 2012, everywhere we go, there’s a screen with virtually an infinite amount of entertainment and information choices competing for our attention. And many of us tend to gravitate toward the people and ideas we’re most comfortable with. As society has become increasingly unchurched, the odds of a nonbeliever wandering into a gospel crusade or church are much smaller now. And unless they’re up at 6am flipping through basic cable channels, the likelihood of bumping into Joyce Meyer is less also. Truth be told, evangelism has always been about relationships. The Franklin Graham crusade in the 90’s relied on people bringing their nonchristian friends and relatives to make it work. But back then, you could often see results by dragging someone to an event and letting someone else preach the Gospel to them. It’s not as easy now, partly because—

People are more cynical and skeptical. This is closely related to the noise factor. When more people are saying different things, their perceived “authority” gets diluted. Consider how this has played out in the television news industry. In 1994 there were the three big network newscasts and CNN. While some would say those outlets often exhibited an ideological or partisan bias, most people viewed them as somewhat authoritative. I’ve even heard the three network news anchors of earlier eras half-jokingly referred to as “the voice of God”. Now that there are two additional big cable news channels and many other specialty channels, people can choose their news and opinion to match their own political views. But not without a price. When the news can be served any way you want it, people start losing faith in the news. It’s the same with religion. When it comes to finding out more about Jesus, many nonchristians are more likely to respond to someone they know well and respect than some stranger or televangelist.

We’re in an age of personalization. Companies like Facebook and Google target ads to individuals now. Broadcasting was the way to reach people in the past; today it’s narrowcasting. A principle for evangelism applies here: knowing people is a key to reaching them. The better you know someone, the easier it is to have an impact on the decisions they make. (Yes, there are exceptions. It’s still quite difficult to evangelize family members. But that’s another discussion altogether.) Bottom line: We’re more likely to be effective witnessing to someone in our circle of influence than to complete strangers.

People need follow-up. John Wesley and the early Methodist movement understood this—but many of us don’t. That’s where the Methodist class meetings originated, and it’s part of the reasoning behind the church small group movement today. But without the personal factor of friends inviting friends and holding each other accountable, the odds of new converts falling through the cracks increase tremendously. No one would deliver a baby (or many babies) and leave them alone without care and nourishment. Yet we somehow manage to do that very thing in the spiritual realm every day with new believers.

Finally, there’s the prayer factor. From my observations, prayers that are more specific seem to be more effective and get the most defined answers. This is true for prayers related to evangelism and personal growth as well. There’s a big difference between praying for generic “people” to come to Christ and praying for “my friend John” to come to Christ. For one, we’re going to be more passionate about praying for individuals, and even more so when we’re close to them. Passion is a key to prayer. I’m convinced that even when mass evangelism has been successful in the past, much of that fruit can be attributed to people praying for individuals.

Mass evangelism won’t go away, it will evolve. But one-size fits all evangelism is long gone (if it ever really existed at all). Now more than ever, we can’t depend on celebrity preachers, our own pastors, or even viral online videos to do most of our evangelism for us. Some plant, some water, and God makes the seeds grow. And then some get to see the harvest. Truthfully, evangelism has always been a group effort anyway. It’s just becoming more apparent in the 21st century.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

BLOG: Getting over the 2:30 Wall

Wed, 11 Apr 2012 05:00:00 GMT

You’ve probably seen the commercials for 5-Hour Energy, the energy shot that supposedly helps you overcome the "2:30 feeling". I know the 2:30 feeling well. But for me, it doesn’t come only with tiredness and lack of energy. Usually it’s accompanied by confusion and anxiety. There are times when I experience it at such a level that I literally can’t get anything done. It’s as if I’m seized by a creative paralysis. I’ve exhibited symptoms of ADHD since childhood (before it was even called that) so I’ve always had to work hard at keeping myself focused. But this was turning into something bigger than that. A few months ago, I finally reached the point where I felt like I might need to get professional help. But I’m a stubborn guy, and I love thinking through things and solving problems, so I decided to work through it myself. I’ve given out a lot of advice over the years. Why does it seem like it’s easier to help other people with their issues than it is to deal with my own?

Whenever I run into a problem that makes absolutely no sense to me, I assume that at least part of it might be spiritual. So in late 2011 I started taking a “spiritual inventory”. But I didn’t stop there. I began to look analytically at every area of my life— including sleep, nutrition, exercise, and prayer—and I discovered some big problems.

My prayer life had become less consistent than it had been in the past. My diet was horrible. I wasn’t exercising regularly and my desk job was taking a toll on my health. I realized I had to do some things differently.

Over the last few months, I’ve gradually introduced some bold changes to my routine. Here are some of the biggest ones:

I changed the way I ate. No, I didn’t make dramatic changes all at once, but I started tracking all the food I was consuming on a daily basis. It’s amazing how simply writing down what you eat makes you eat healthier. (Tracking your spending helps you waste less money too. It’s the same principle.) I used the program at Weight Watchers Online. (You don’t have to go to meetings with this version of WW.) SparkPeople is a free alternative to Weight Watchers that is similar in its approach. I increased my protein and fiber intake and lowered my consumption of sugar. (Goodbye sugar highs and crashes!) I also added some basic nutritional supplements. As of this writing, I’ve lost 46 pounds with six more to go to reach goal. I weigh the same now as I weighed my freshman year of college. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that I’m feeling more energetic now partly because I’m not dragging around an extra 46 pounds.
I changed my sleeping habits. Honestly, I believe I’m wired to be a night owl. But that wasn’t working for me and I finally faced the truth. So I did the unthinkable. I started going to bed at 8 or 9 and started getting up at 3 or 4. Now I begin the day with Bible reading and prayer, then I get a jump start on the rest of my day by reading, brainstorming, and writing. I’ve found that by front-loading my days like this, I’m getting enough sleep and I’m not tired in the afternoons. I also am able to hit the ground running when I get to work instead of figuring out everything after I get there.
I ditched the caffeine. I’ve actually done this before and somehow I always seem to gradually go back to it. But this time I think I’m going to stay on the wagon. You see, I was probably drinking a pot or two of coffee per day! But I had trouble sleeping because of the caffeine in my system, and the "2:30 wall" was partly a result of my body (and brain) crashing. I didn’t give caffeine up cold turkey, however. I weaned myself off of it over the course of about a week. (Caffeine withdrawal headaches are the worst!) Now I’m falling asleep quickly at night and I don't experience the afternoon crashes anymore.
At work, I replaced my conventional desk with a stand-up desk. I’m not sure everyone would like doing this, but I love it. My creativity and productivity have increased dramatically, and I seem to be full of energy all day. I have a whiteboard in my office that I use to brainstorm, and I walk back and forth to use it often. I also like to pace when I think, so I’ve made sure I have room to do that. Supposedly we burn more calories standing than sitting, so that’s another plus.
I’m more active. I’ve built more exercise into my routine, and I take a couple of quick workday breaks (one mid-morning and one during lunch) to do a few laps around the walking track. I often get ideas there for blog posts and articles so I keep my smartphone with me and keep track of everything using Evernote. (I don’t care how good you think your memory is, record every idea you get somewhere.)
I pray in the morning and throughout the day. I can’t overstate how important spending time with God has been in helping me make all these changes. I once did my praying mostly at night, but I’ve got to admit, for me, going into God's presence and looking forward to the day ahead has been more effective than reviewing my day with him at night. It grounds me and gives me the right mindset to tackle everything I need to. I’m also learning the value of praying throughout the day and getting God involved in the creative process as I write.

I’m still figuring this thing out, but I’m pleased to say that I haven’t experienced the afternoon crashes for a while now. I’m full of energy, sleeping well, and my productivity at work has grown by leaps and bounds. I’m also more upbeat.

If you’ve been struggling with the same problem I was dealing with, I encourage you to take your own “inventory” and gradually make some changes that will work for you. I’m pretty good at holding myself accountable once I set my mind to something, but that may be more difficult for you, so I certainly recommend getting accountability if you need it—from a friend, counselor, pastor, life coach, doctor—whoever you need to bring in to help you.

What steps have worked for you when you’ve struggled with problems like depression, anxiety, and lack of energy?

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

BLOG: Christians and 'Christ Followers'

Tue, 10 Apr 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Lately I’ve noticed more than a few people, especially on social networks, referring to themselves as “Christ follower”, “Jesus follower”, or some other variation of Christian. It intrigued me at first and actually seemed kind of cool. Now I feel like it’s beginning to approach shopworn status.

There are several reasons someone might have for choosing to forgo the Christian label:

Negative associations: Christianity often gets a bad rap in our culture—sometimes deservedly so—but many times it’s because of an inordinate amount of negative publicity given to people identifying themselves as Christians but who come across as anything but Christlike. Some Christians don’t want to be seen as “guilty by association” so they shun the label.
Confusion: A Christian is someone who has a relationship with God through Jesus Christ. That’s how I define the word. But there’s not always a common understanding on what the word Christian means. For example, some use Christian as a term for evangelical or Protestant. When I worked in youth ministry, some of the teens in my youth group who had Catholic backgrounds thought this way. I had to explain on more than one occasion that both Catholics and Protestants can be Christians. Others consider themselves Christians if anyone in their family has ever been Christian—it’s viewed as a heritage thing. So people who avoid calling themselves Christians may choose some other term because they feel it better expresses what they're trying to say.
Word fatigue: Sometimes words are used (or misused) so much that we stop thinking about what they really mean. At that point, we take a mental shortcut and “think what we always think” rather than approaching words with fresh eyes. When someone uses the word Christian, I ask myself what they might mean by it, but there are probably some who don’t ask anything, they just assume they know. Using a less common term is more likely to catch people off guard and make them wonder what it is you're really trying to get across.
A desire to be taken more seriously: Perhaps some Christians want to let people know that they’re not just “nominal” Christians. Let’s face it, when practically anyone is allowed to use a name, the “brand” can get diluted. There’s a fascinating article out today from the Associated Press that talks about generic brand names. Did you know that aspirin, escalator, and heroin were once trademarked brand names, but they lost their trademarks because the names fell into common usage? Now, the companies owning the trademarks to Kleenex®, Band-Aid®, Xerox®, and the iPad® are having to figure out how to maintain the ubiquity of their brands without their trademarks being deemed “too generic”. Since anyone who wants to call themselves a Christian can do so, there’s technically no quality control for the brand. Maybe that’s why many believers run from the word.

When people call themselves Christ followers, my first instinct is to be a smart aleck and ask them which Christ they follow! (Christ is the same as messiah. And there are plenty of “messiahs” out there to follow.) Plus, I always feel like they’re playing that old party game Taboo, the one where you get buzzed (not that kind of buzzed) if you use a word from the list of forbidden words on the game card. And frankly “Christ follower” sounds both archaic and sci-fi—like something Teal’c might say on Stargate SG-1. I’m really not trying to be too critical—as I mentioned before, people have legitimate reasons to use different terms if they want, but I generally stick with the old school terminology. I’ve avoided using alternative terms for Christian mostly because I don’t think there is any single word that gets the same idea across with as much simplicity and clarity. I just say that I’m a Christian, explain it when necessary, and let the chips fall where they may. It is what it is.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

BLOG: Avoiding Unnecessary Mistakes

Mon, 09 Apr 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Have you ever given advice to someone knowing they were going to do the exact opposite of what you were telling them to do?

It happens to me a lot, although I guess it’s fitting. I’ve certainly ignored my fair share of good advice and faced the consequences. But as I’ve matured in my faith, I’ve discovered a simple truth. It’s usually less painful to learn from other people’s mistakes than it is to learn from your own.

Ultimately, it’s a faith issue. You see, faith is really the same as belief—not just belief on an intellectual level—an active belief. When we ask someone for their advice and don’t take it, we’re essentially saying, “I don’t believe you.” Or maybe we do believe them on some level, but not enough to take heed to what they have to say. And many times, we know the bad things that will probably happen but we still do our own thing anyway.

It’s more difficult in the short term to believe someone else’s wisdom, but it’s usually a lot less trouble in the long run. I don’t necessarily buy the notion that the only lessons that stick with us are the ones we learn for ourselves. Certainly we remember those lessons better, and we get a little more “street cred” when talking to others about certain issues, but why would we insist on going through problems when we don’t have to?

Christianity is not built on the premise, “Seeing is believing.” (Sorry, Thomas.) That’s the way the rest of the world operates. We Christians are in our element when we’re required to believe something before we see it. In John 20, Thomas refused to believe Jesus was alive unless he saw Jesus for himself and touched his wounds. Thomas was eventually satisfied and came to believe, but it wasn’t exactly a leap of faith for him. It’s easy to believe Jesus is alive when he’s physically standing right in front of you!

Biblical faith is defined in Hebrews 11:1: “Faith is the reality of what we hope for, the proof of what we don’t see.” (CEB) At the risk of oversimplifying it, faith is believing God—or taking God’s word for it. But if only it were that easy. Trouble is, God doesn’t just speak to us through Scripture and through the Holy Spirit. Often he uses other Christians, occasionally he uses an unsuspecting nonbeliever, and sometimes he speaks to us through the ones we really don’t want to listen to: our relatives!

That leads me to another point—the closer we are to people, it seems like the less we want to listen to them. That’s why I like to also get advice from solid, reputable Christians I don’t know very well. And it’s why I read tons of books. I’ve avoided making many mistakes by reading about the mistakes others have made. Books are a relatively low-cost way of learning at someone else’s expense!

Jesus told Thomas, “Happy are those who don’t see and yet believe.” Many translations also use the word blessed. When we exercise Biblical faith (believing before we see) we move heaven and receive blessings. I’m going to add my own corollary to what Jesus said... Happy and blessed are those who come to a place where they’re able to learn from the mistakes of others. We’re not meant to learn everything through our own successes and failures! Christianity has a group component! We’re supposed to build on what those who came before us learned and on what we learn from Christians around us. That’s how we reach new heights in Christ!

Do we seriously need to duplicate the same mistakes Christians make all over the planet, generation after generation? How inefficient is that?

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

BLOG: 4 Good Things about the Call to Action

Mon, 02 Apr 2012 05:00:00 GMT

When Adam Hamilton, Mike Slaughter, Rudy Rasmus, and many other United Methodist Church leaders recently signed their names on an open letter in support of the Call to Action legislation, it got my attention. If you aren’t familiar with this proposal, it essentially restructures The United Methodist Church’s governing boards and agencies to help the denomination run more efficiently and (hopefully) become more effective at bringing people to Christ and making real disciples. It also deals with clergy accountability, and one of the major changes it would make is ending guaranteed appointment for pastors. There are other proposed changes too, including the redirection of up to $60 million in church funds over four years to developing future United Methodist leaders. I won’t go into all the details—you can read more here. But I will share a few thoughts and observations:

Change is good.

In a denomination not known for changing quickly, you’ve got to give props to those who crafted this proposal. Its recommended changes are pretty dramatic. Is it perfect? No. I’m sure most of us would tweak a few things here and there if we could. But more than anything I’ve seen, it seems to “get it." Communication, ministry, and the way we must do church to reach the world are all changing. Even the rate of change is changing! When you only get one shot in four years to reorganize things, any changes that will make a noticeable impact are going to seem like a shock to the system. Is it risky? Perhaps a little, but reward usually only comes with risk. The bigger risk is doing nothing.

Accountability is good.

Some of us are uncomfortable with the idea of using metrics and vital indicators to evaluate clergy, but the reality is, numbers tell a story. Whether it’s baptisms, professions of faith, weekly attendance, offerings, or some other figure, statistics help churches gauge what’s going on in their ministries. Numbers don’t always tell the whole story, but if kept accurately and consistently, they tell a big part of it. And numbers provide a more objective way to evaluate clergy than what we currently have. The proposed end of the guaranteed appointment system seems like a positive step for accountability, although I’m not sure it will be well received without some kind of tradeoff. Many pastors see guaranteed appointment as a “perk” to offset the perceived disadvantages of being part of the itinerancy. The problem is, guaranteed appointment has become (to some) like teacher tenure or “immunity from getting voted off the island”. But systems for evaluating job performance have been ubiquitous in the private sector for years. The same pressure hasn’t existed to the same degree in the public and nonprofit sectors—but in a tight economy where productivity and efficiency matter more and more, that’s quickly changing. If it’s done fairly and consistently, I believe implementing the proposed accountability system will make The United Methodist Church stronger.

Consolidation is good.

I’ve been United Methodist my whole life, and I work for a church agency (the United Methodist Publishing House, which enthusiastically gives me a platform to share my opinions on these matters but doesn’t necessarily endorse what I write.) Yet I’ll admit, even with my UM background, I don’t understand every role and function of every agency we have. But I do know that simplifying an organization every so often is a good thing. Many churches already do it regularly at the local level. Every now and then you have to figure out where you’re duplicating efforts and get everyone on the same page. And sometimes you have to ask honest questions about the amount of leadership and bureaucracy you have. Is the system helping or hindering ministry? Even if you don’t shrink staff at all, streamlining systems and structures makes an organization more productive because it potentially frees up people and resources so the organization can do more things (or do what it’s already doing even better).

Reevaluating spending is good.

With my personal finances, I analyze my spending patterns occasionally and I look for ways to save money. I find areas in my budget where I spend too much money and figure out how I can move that cash to something that’s more of an investment for the future. I also adjust goals from time to time. What was important to me five years ago may not be as important to me today. It’s not a formal process, but I do think about my budget on a regular basis. Perhaps you do the same thing. Now if we’re that thorough with our own money, shouldn’t we at least have the same attitude about money from the offering plate? As a denomination, we’ve decided that planting churches and developing young leaders are going to be high priorities. Part of the Call to Action proposal redirects some church funds to those priorities. That doesn’t seem unreasonable to me, although I understand how controversial it might be, especially if an area that has a decrease in funding is one you’re passionate about. But in these tough economic times, most of us are having to learn to do more with less—the church is no exception. I don’t see that changing for a while, and increasing apportionment percentages isn’t a real option. For every existing budget item to get at least the same size piece of pie, we need to grow the pie. When the church grows again, the pie will get bigger.

I find it fascinating how our church’s struggles with budgets, priorities, and accountability seem to parallel similar debates taking place right now in our federal government. I’m confident, however, that The United Methodist Church will handle business in a much more civil, mature, and efficient fashion than Washington has dealt with its issues. As for the Call to Action legislation, there’s much I like about it, but I’m keeping an open mind and examining the other ideas too. Those of us who aren’t delegates have an important role in the 2012 General Conference—prayer. Let’s not take the responsibility lightly—let’s pray that God will give the delegates the wisdom they need to make good decisions later this month in Tampa.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

ARTICLE: Control Freak: 5 Ways to Stop Being One

Wed, 28 Mar 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Whether you’re a pastor, parent, teacher, youth minister—or you’re an employer or manager in the marketplace—you’re in leadership. You’re influencing people at some level. Even if you’re someone’s “boss” in a work setting, you probably understand that the most effective leaders are the ones who can get people to go places without forcing them. Think back to your days in school. Good teachers could be strict and run a tight ship, but the great teachers were the ones who made you actually want to learn, even on your own. It’s the difference between lighting a fire under someone and lighting one inside them.

People have free will. Most of us like making decisions for ourselves and we don’t like being told what to do. Even when we must submit to and/or obey authority, we want to at least be heard. We want to make a contribution. We want some ownership in the things we do. Real leaders understand this very human tendency and figure out how to make it work in their favor. Are you a micromanager? Do you want to put your hands in everything? Micromanager is actually just another way of saying control freak (it’s just a more polite way to say it!)

True leaders don’t need to control other people. They don’t need to micromanage them. This lesson has taken a while for me to learn. Many of the mistakes I’ve made in ministry, work, and life have been the result of me trying to control how other people behave. There are two big problems with this approach to dealing with others—it doesn’t usually work well and it causes a ridiculous amount of stress! We were never designed to carry this type of burden.

If you’re tired feeling “out of control” because you always want to be in control, here are a few ideas to help you break the control addiction and resist that temptation to micromanage:

Pray for the people you lead. This isn’t the "if all else fails" option, it’s the first thing you should do, and not just because of all the cool ways God gets involved in situations when you pray for people. When you regularly bring others before God in prayer, you’re admitting that there’s a line between you and others where your influence ends. Anything beyond it is an attempt to control or manipulate them. Prayer recognizes this and helps change your attitude about how you deal with others. But be careful. Sometimes we think it’s okay to pray for God to control others for us. But God respects human free will more than we do, so those kinds of prayers usually go nowhere fast.

Equip people, but let them fight their own battles. Whether it’s a work or ministry setting, it’s important to let people face their own obstacles and have the opportunity to make mistakes. Dealing with obstacles successfully gives them more confidence when they face the same kind of obstacles again, and it builds them up to face even bigger ones. That’s how people grow. When they make mistakes, they’ll learn a lot more from their mistakes than they’ll learn from hearing you tell them about yours. When I worked in youth ministry, I was quite protective of my students. I didn’t want to see any of them get caught up in alcohol, drugs, or premarital sex. I’m ashamed to say I became rather preachy and overbearing. Finally, one kid told me, “Shane, you can’t make our decisions for us. Your job is to teach us and give us advice. It’s up to us to use what you give us. We have to learn from our own mistakes the same way you learned from yours.” He was right. Of course, we can’t just let someone drive off a cliff, but in most situations, we could probably afford let go a little and trust people to use the knowledge and tools we’ve given them.

Give people choices. Even if the choices are limited, people like having a say in the projects they’re involved in and the things that affect their lives. Remember being a kid and eating in the school cafeteria? Even when your choice was shoe leather salisbury steak or burnt lasagna, at least you had a choice! And the food was a little more bearable because of it. Having choices boosts morale. Instead of telling people what they should do, you’re inviting them to collaborate with you. Giving people this kind of ownership in ministry or work projects can be a little risky, but as the leader you’re still setting the parameters for the outcome to a degree. And the dividends you get back by giving up a little control are well worth the risk.

Ask guided questions. The lessons we remember most are usually the ones we learn for ourselves. Instead of telling people what to think (or telling them what you think) try to get them to think through things for themselves by asking the right questions. It’s like the difference between copying the answer for a math problem and actually working through the problem to get the answer. You know the answer both ways, but you know much more when you find it on your own. Whether it’s something that has a definite right answer or simply a matter of personal opinion, asking questions gives others opportunities to be involved in the thinking and decision making process.

Be positive. You’ll be a better leader for doing it. Sometimes leaders see short term gains by being negative or invoking fear, but there’s usually some collateral damage—group morale, enthusiasm, loyalty, and respect for the leader to name a few. It’s much more effective to lead with hope and optimism, and a lot more fun, too.

The Bible says, “Where the Lord’s Spirit is, there is freedom.” Galatians 5 lists the fruit of the Spirit, one of which is self-control. You’ll notice that one of the main indicators of the Holy Spirit’s work in our lives is self-control, not controlling other people. Controlling ourselves is difficult enough—controlling others is next to impossible. The best leaders figure out how to influence without manipulating and how to manage the big picture without smothering their people on the details.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.
Connect with Shane: Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | RSS

BLOG: Political Questions for Christians

Tue, 20 Mar 2012 05:00:00 GMT

I’ve not been watching the battle for the United States Republican presidential nomination as closely as I did in previous election cycles, but I’ve seen enough to draw the conclusion that, barring some cataclysmic event in the GOP, Mitt Romney will be the party’s nominee. Republicans, after all, tend to nominate the person who’s “next in line” or a party “brand name”.

The big question on my mind is just how much of a role religion will play in the general election if Romney becomes the nominee. If that happens, this will be the scenario: the incumbent will be from a theologically liberal Christian tradition and the challenger will be from a quasi-Christian church.

Some will consider the label “quasi-Christian” offensive, but the fact is most Christian denominations don’t recognize the LDS Church as a legitimate part of historical Christianity. And the Latter-day Saints actually make it a practice to proselytize active Catholics and Protestants. So really, the LDS Church itself is as responsible as anyone for its exclusion from mainstream Christianity. But since faith is ultimately a personal matter, membership in the Mormon church doesn’t necessarily disqualify an individual from being a Christian. And attending or belonging to a mainstream Christian church isn’t what makes someone a Christian.

Both Mitt Romney and President Obama have both openly confessed a personal faith in Jesus Christ—as did George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George Bush the elder, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter... the list goes on. But anyone can say they’re a Christian, and considering how religious the United States electorate is (compared to other Western nations), declaring oneself not a Christian probably wouldn’t be considered too wise politically.

Whether you’re someone who takes President Obama and Governor Romney at their word or you doubt the Christian faith of one or both candidates, here are some questions and ideas to consider as 2012 moves along:

If given the choice between a Christian candidate and a nonchristian one, should Christians vote for the candidate closer to their own political views or for the one they feel is more likely to have a personal relationship with God through Jesus Christ?
Is electing a president more similar to appointing or calling a pastor or to hiring the CEO of a company?
Is it better to elect someone who’s currently “wrong” on many of the issues but will bring God into their decision-making process or someone who seems to have the issues figured out but has no Christian faith?
How much more seriously would you evaluate candidates’ faith and character if there were no political parties?
Are you letting your faith shape your political views or is it the other way around?
Is it reasonable to expect Christian government officials not to let their faith play a role in how they approach their duties?
Can a serious Christian isolate their faith from their professional or political life? Would that even be desirable if they could?
Who are you more uncomfortable around (or suspicious of)—those who share your faith but not your political views or those who share your political views but not your faith? The answer to this question could be an indicator of how much your political ideology may have become an idol for you.
Both political parties share some common goals, but they often disagree on how to go about achieving those goals. Most people want better education, less sickness, and a higher standard of living for more people. And practically no one wants people in poverty. That’s important to remember in our polarized society where political orthodoxy unfortunately seems to trump religious orthodoxy, even among many Christians.

The best way to change your mindset and get above the political fray is to commit to praying for both President Obama and Governor Romney regularly between now and Election Day. Prayer not only shapes and changes history, it has a way of changing the attitudes of those who pray. When you’re praying for someone consistently, even your enemy, it becomes much more difficult to speak of them in an attacking or disrespectful way.

We’re told in Scripture to seek God’s kingdom first, but when it comes to bringing in God’s kingdom, politics only gets us so far. This will be an extremely important election but we should take heart. No matter who wins, God will still be God.

So exercise the freedom to get involved in the political process this year and vote your conscience, but don’t forget who you are. And don’t forget that you have Christian brothers and sisters in the other political party.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.

BLOG: Positive Christians

Mon, 12 Mar 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Once upon a time I was addicted to cable news. I also enjoyed watching Bill Maher’s show (the old one on ABC), and I regularly listened to talk radio (both right and left). Even in the Christian world, I thrived for years on intense theological debates—and for a period of time I listened to a lot of Christian radio—including a show called The Bible Answer Man.

But something happened.

As I've grown in my faith, my outlook has changed. Now when I watch TV news, I generally skip commentary and debate shows and I can't stand more than a few minutes of even the hard news. I avoid Bill Maher like the plague (he’s gotten really bitter and cynical). I don’t discuss theology with most people (arguing bores me), and I’m no longer impressed by churches or ministries that spend most of their time focusing on the wrong doctrines other people believe.

Let’s be clear... it’s important to stay informed, even when there’s bad news. And a healthy dose of skepticism (not cynicism) can be useful. Discussing theology can be both positive and stimulating (especially when you're discussing theories and possibilities). Cults aren’t good, and bad doctrine isn’t either, and we definitely need teachers to explain why. Unpleasant things shouldn't be swept under the rug. And not all conflict is unhealthy.

But if negativity and disagreement aren’t kept in the proper perspective, they can pollute our outlook, affect our faith, and change who we are— for the worse.

This is actually a problem with our culture that has invaded the church. Consider the current political climate, for example. Conventional wisdom says that you can’t win an election without “going negative.” And the statistics seem to back that up. We’ve conditioned ourselves as a people to respond more to negativity than positivity—and we’re paying a price for it. People seem to trust other people less now, and in some cases I believe that’s contributed to a cycle of self-fulfilling prophecies and “living down” to others’ expectations.

How do you approach relationships? When you interact with other believers, what do you see first, their potential or their rough edges? Do you consider it more important to get rid of their bad qualities or to help them develop their good qualities? It’s not an either/or proposition—but your own outlook and frame of reference says a lot about who you are. Do you approach life as an optimist or a pessimist? (If you say you’re a realist, you’re probably a pessimist who’s in denial.)

At its core, Christianity is good news. The Bible says that God works all things together for good for the ones who love him. Even the most solemn day on the Christian calendar is called Good Friday. Where there’s pain and sickness, Christians see opportunities for healing. Where there’s sin, we see opportunities for grace, mercy, repentance, and redemption. And we’re told to deal with enemies and haters by loving them. Positivity is in our DNA.

In fact, Christians should be so hopeful and optimistic that we make the rest of the world crazy trying to figure out why we're like that.

What’s stopping us?

ARTICLE: Is a Critical Spirit Hindering Your Ministry?

Fri, 24 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT

One of the the big obstacles to Christian unity and spiritual power in the church is something I’ve observed to be an ever-increasing critical spirit. (I’m not referring to an actual spiritual being here, but rather an inclination or tendency of a person or group.) I’m as guilty as anyone. Recently I read an article published on Ministry Matters, and I didn’t make it past the first paragraph before I announced to everyone within earshot, “This guy has gone off the rails! What is he thinking?” I almost stopped reading because I figured there was nothing in the rest of the article that could possibly benefit me.

Isn’t it easy to do that? We write people off because of their politics, their theology, the way they interpret the Bible, their denomination, their book publisher... I’m not even sure why we do it. Perhaps it’s arrogance—or perhaps it’s a modern strain of doctrinal puritanism. Of course, we justify it with the excuse that we’re keeping ourselves from being led astray.

I grew up United Methodist, but I developed an early appreciation for other traditions. In high school I began working at a nondenominational Christian bookstore, and I read everything I could get my hands on. Evangelical authors, classic authors, charismatic authors, and of course, the “safe” mainline authors (sometimes too safe!) As a result, my theology became quite multi-faceted—and continues to evolve that way to this day.

The problem with shutting out voices that disagree with you is that you run out of people to listen to after a while and you stop growing! Seriously, what good is reading books by people with whom you’re inclined to agree on practically everything? Surrounding yourself with "yes men" is a telltale sign of insecurity. Confident Christians stretch themselves on a regular basis—intellectually and spiritually.

But listening to people who challenge you isn’t enough. If you’re only interacting with someone so you can shoot them down or you’re reading books with a red pen in hand and no highlighter, you’ve missed the point entirely. When I read a book or an article by someone I’m inclined to be “suspicious” of, I try to go into it with the attitude, “What might God be saying to me through this? What can I learn?” Usually I find something, whether the author is liberal or conservative, Protestant or Catholic, high church or low church. Often I’m surprised at how God reveals himself to my theological rivals and to garden variety “heretics”.

I’m not suggesting that everyone is right or that there’s no absolute truth. What I am suggesting is that sticking exclusively with your own Christian tribe is not only boring, it may keep you from experiencing everything God has for you. Theological inbreeding produces weak Christianity. There’s a biological principle called heterosis, or hybrid vigor, that says that any biological quality of a hybrid offspring will have improved or increased function. Could this principle apply in some way to theology as well? If so, it could help explain the continuing decline of rigid denominationalism and the rise of nondenominational and interdenominational churches.

A few months ago I noticed I wasn’t as excited about reading as I used to be. No matter whose books I was reading, I just couldn’t get pumped up anymore. Everything seemed to either bore me or raise my blood pressure. I thought back to my high school and college days and remembered the wonder and excitement that once pervaded my Christian life. What had changed? Then I realized—I wasn’t running out of good things to read because I had become too “spiritually advanced”. I was in this rut because of my attitude. I had become unteachable. So I began to repent, and now I’m noticing that the wonder is returning. I’m even reading and re-reading books that I blew off before.

The devil specializes in putting up walls that keep us from fulfilling our purpose and reaching our potential in ministry. But sometimes we build those walls ourselves. If your ministry has stalled in some way or you’re in a spiritual rut, take a good look at your spirit and your attitude. Are you truly teachable or do you default to being critical and cynical? Ask those in your inner circle to help you do an honest assessment, then be willing to make positive changes.

BLOG: Bring in Your Kingdom

Mon, 20 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT

The scripture passage accompanying today’s Upper Room devotional is Matthew 6:5-15, which includes the Lord’s Prayer. Those of us who grew up in traditional churches probably have this prayer memorized and could rattle it off with no difficulty. But while Bible memorization, (especially prayers!), is a positive thing, the familiarity can sometimes make it too easy to not think about what we’re saying, especially when we’re speaking a form of English that’s dated.

As I was reading today’s selection from the Common English Bible, verse 10 jumped off the page and smacked me:

Bring in your kingdom so that your will is done on earth as it’s done in heaven.

How easy it is to jump right over “Thy kingdom come” or “Your kingdom come” in the more traditionally worded prayer. But when I saw the words “Bring in your kingdom”, I realized that I’m actually asking God to do something pretty big!

What is this kingdom Jesus speaks of?

I have a few ideas about what I think it is, and you may have some thoughts as well. But I’m betting both of us are thinking too small. Christians talk a good game, but the church has a long way to go before most people would accuse of us helping bring in God’s kingdom.

That’s not meant to belittle the good things many Christians are doing.

But how much of what we do is mostly “passing out Band-Aids until Jesus comes back”?

When’s the last time most of us saw someone healed? What about an exorcism? (Do we still do those?) Do we know who the church’s modern day prophets are? (I mean besides the outspoken Christians who coincidentally happen to agree with us on most issues.) Is there an obvious spiritual dimension to what we do for God, or have we taken some of the positive things the secular world already does and just stamped “Jesus” on them?

Where’s the supernatural component to our ministries? Are there things happening that can only be explained by God’s power? Are we looking at our worship services, small groups, Sunday School classes, soup kitchens, and youth groups through spiritual eyes? Do we pay attention to what’s going behind the scenes? Do we understand that there’s an invisible realm which has a direct impact on the visible one?

When we pray to God, “Bring in your kingdom,” does it occur to us that that when we ask for one kingdom to be brought in, we’re praying for an opposing kingdom to be pushed out of the way?

Someone doesn’t like it when we do that. The Bible says that “God’s son appeared for this purpose: to destroy the works of the devil.” (1 John 3:8 CEB). When God’s kingdom is brought in, the devil’s kingdom is destroyed.

That’s exciting stuff! And it should be the norm for every Christian.

So the next time you pray that line from the Lord’s Prayer, understand the magnitude of what you’re asking for. And if you’re praying with an attitude of expectancy, get ready for big things to start happening.

BLOG: Pastor Visibility: Why Less is More

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT

I’ve attended churches where the pastor is a highly visible presence in the worship service from beginning to end. I’ve also been to churches where you’d probably have a difficult time figuring out who the lead pastor is until well into the service. So I’ll just throw a question out there for consideration: How visible should a pastor be during the main weekend service? My observations and instincts are telling me that less is more. I’ll share a few reasons why:

Strong personalities who try to dominate the service risk giving the congregation “pastor fatigue.” If your pastor is doing most of the prayers, leading the entire service, and preaching, people will be tempted to reach for their mental remotes and change the channel. Most growing churches have figured this out. Think about some of the larger “sermon-centric” churches you’ve been to. In many cases, I’m betting you didn’t even see the pastor until it was time for the message. That’s because pastors usually seem fresher and more effective during preaching if the congregation hasn’t already been watching and listening to them for 20 or 30 minutes. An unwritten rule in the entertainment industry is to “leave ‘em wanting more.” Some think it’s sacrilegious to draw parallels between the church and show business, but this principle applies to church too. No matter how talented a pastor is, there’s always a risk of having too much of a good thing.

Most pastors work better as part of an ensemble. Have you ever seen actors who are great in supporting roles but can’t carry a film by themselves to save their life? There are pastors like that too. And when they try to insert themselves into too many parts of the worship service, they come across as boring and insecure. In an episode of The Big Bang Theory, Sheldon’s friend Amy is helping him process the hard truth that he’s really not the nucleus of his group of friends—that distinction goes to his roommate Leonard. Their neighbor (and Leonard's ex-girlfriend) Penny interrupts their conversation with, “A lot of people think I’m fun to be around.” Amy replies, “Don’t be needy, bestie. That’s probably part of what chased Leonard away.” Ouch. Now there’s a life lesson—and it’s from a sitcom of all places. Don’t be needy, pastors. You don’t want to chase away your congregation.

Some pastors don’t have the gift of preaching. Yet many of them still insist on preaching week after week. Don’t misunderstand me—these pastors might be adequate preachers, but they’re not necessarily the most effective preachers. If that’s the case in your church, perhaps it would be judicious to train some gifted lay preachers (or associate pastors) to help carry the load. And it would free the lead pastor to develop areas of their ministry where they are more gifted. And even pastors who do have a big preaching gift need to give up the pulpit a few Sundays a year to get refreshed and give others in the church the opportunity to explore and develop their preaching or teaching gifts.

Too much pastor visibility sends the wrong message. The most effective churches train laypeople to do the bulk of their ministry. Some pastors would even tell you that they want more laypeople involved in the church’s ministries—but their services on Sunday mornings suggest otherwise. In setting a tone for how a church functions, perception can quickly become reality. If the congregation sees a variety of church members praying, taking the offering, reading scripture—even preaching—then they’re more likely to feel that they have permission to get involved in ministry on some level. But if they see a one-man or one-woman “show” every weekend, they’re probably going to treat Christianity like a spectator sport or rock concert. We can’t underestimate the power of personality in today’s culture, but placing too much emphasis on personality can be deadly for a church.

Pastors need opportunities to worship as part of the community. I noticed last Sunday that the pastor of my church was worshiping in a seat halfway to the back of the sanctuary. He didn’t go up front until it was time to deliver the sermon. This accomplished at least two things—it allowed him an opportunity to worship God without feeling like he was “under the spotlight” and for those who did notice him, it reinforced the fact that pastors are “regular people” just like everyone else, not “super-Christians.”

Can you think of other reasons why some pastors might do well to make themselves more scarce during the worship service? Can you think of reasons why lower visiblity might not be a good idea?

BLOG: Risky Bible Reading

Mon, 13 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT

One of the best ways to get out of a spiritual or emotional rut is listening to what God has to say about your situation. Recognizing the voice of God isn’t always easy, however, so one way to start hearing him is hanging out in the Bible and reading it with an open, prayerful attitude. Devotional books or magazines, including The Upper Room and Daily Bible Study, are great for this purpose. If you want to learn to hear what God is saying now, start by listening to what he’s already said.

I recommend using some kind of resource as a road map to avoid the “Where Do I Start” syndrome. I don’t care for detailed reading plans—I prefer something with smaller chunks of scripture. One year Bible reading plans certainly have benefits, but I find that I rush through the readings if I’m checking passages off a list. And when I get a day or more behind, I either go faster to catch up or I “hit the reset button.” Either way, I feel like I failed somehow— or I feel like I’m defeating the purpose of reading scripture. To me, digging deeper (both spiritually and intellectually) is what makes Bible study exciting. Shorter Bible passages seem to work better for deep study.

With a devotional Bible study plan, I can give myself permission to read more than is required or miss a day without guilt. I usually read the passage that’s laid out for me using a Bible with cross references—that way I can explore a topic or theme as much or as little as I feel led to. Sometimes the devotional scripture passage is just a starting point and I end up in a totally different place and on another topic entirely.

I went through a phase when I didn’t use devotional resources at all—I thought they were too “fluffy” and didn’t go deep enough. But I realize now that it’s quite possible to take just one Bible verse and go places with it I never imagined. It should be noted that scripture is inspired by the Holy Spirit on at least two levels. It was inspired when the original authors wrote it and it’s inspired by the same Spirit when we read it.

Let that sink in for a minute.

God knows what he meant then and he knows what you and I need to get from scripture now.

Sometimes I get outlandish ideas from the Bible that wouldn’t work well for doctrinal purposes but they speak to me in my particular situation. I’ve even seen the Spirit use scripture out of context on occasion. (Please don’t tell the hermeneutics police.)

When the living Spirit uses the living Word, things get unpredictable and go off script sometimes. As important as creeds, systematic theologies, and doctrinal statements are, they are always much smaller than the God they point to.

We should of course “test the spirits to see if they are from God”, get input from other Christians, and avoid unilaterally projecting novel interpretations of scripture and “strange teachings” onto other believers in an authoritative way. The church needs checks and balances to keep us from going off the deep end. But we also need to recapture an adventurous theological spirit that understands we still have a lot to learn about how the Kingdom of God works.

BLOG: How Not to Speak for God

Wed, 25 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Whether you’re a pastor, a teacher, or a "regular" Christian, God probably uses you to speak for him from time to time. You may not even realize he’s doing it. Since we often either don’t listen or can’t process it whenever he speaks to us directly (see Exodus 20:19), God uses other believers to speak into our lives and situations. It’s like a checks and balances system to keep us from deceiving ourselves.

In the Old Testament, God usually spoke through priests and prophets. Even under the New Covenant, we have pastors, priests, ministers, teachers and modern-day prophetic voices who communicate God’s word to us on a number of levels. But this is an age where the Holy Spirit is freely available to all God’s people, not just to a few chosen. So whether or not you’re in a special ministry role or have the spiritual gift of prophecy, you should look for opportunities to communicate to others what God is saying.

In Old Testament times, prophets showed up to bring a new word from God that could affect both the nation of Israel and people’s private lives. When Moses was talking about prophets who would succeed him, he said that God told him: “Any prophet who arrogantly speaks a word in my name that I haven’t commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods—that prophet must die.” (Deuteronomy 18:20 CEB).

Most of us aren’t in the office of prophet, and thankfully we’re no longer under the old covenant—talk about pressure! But God still uses people to speak for him, and he still takes it quite seriously. So there are a couple of principles you can grab and apply from this passage when you’re communicating the word of God.

Specifically, there are things you’ll want to avoid:

Don’t speak arrogantly. Don’t be presumptuous when you speak. Don’t be insolent. Don’t show disrespect, either to God or to the people you’re talking to. No one likes a know-it-all, and no one wants to be talked down to. Don’t get a big head because you have a word from God— he’s even spoken through a donkey on at least one occasion. (See Numbers 22:22-35.)

Don’t say something is a word from God when it’s not. Watch how you present information—if you’re not sure about what you're saying, perhaps you should give a disclaimer. Speaking in God's name is a big deal, even if the situation isn't a formal one. The word name in the Deuteronomy passage can mean honor, fame, or reputation. So when you're perceived by others to be speaking for God, you’re not only putting your reputation on the line, but God’s reputation too. So unless God leads you to do it kicking and screaming, you might consider omitting “This is what God says...” If what you say is truly from God, it will become evident to people over time.

Don’t speak in the name of other gods. We know there’s really only one God, but there are plenty of idols in our lives. When you’re attempting to share God’s word, make sure what you’re saying isn’t coming from your personal political and economic views and that you’re not emphasizing your own pet theologies. Watch everything else you say too. If people hear foolishness coming out of your mouth most of the time, how will they know to listen when you actually tell them something that might be from God?

Prophets speak on behalf of God to people, and occasionally, on behalf of individuals or a group of people to God. (See “prophet” in The CEB Bible Dictionary). Most of us probably don’t speak much for God in a formal capacity or come anywhere close to occupying a modern day “office of prophet”. Most Christian traditions don’t even have such a thing—not officially anyway. God, however, still uses people to get his message out, and when you’re the messenger (on whatever level), it’s imperative to take what you’re communicating seriously, verify it, and share it with an appropriate attitude.

BLOG: Being Salt

Fri, 06 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT

Salt doesn’t get as much respect as it used to. It has become so ubiquitous in modern times, especially in processed foods, that most of us probably get way more sodium than we need. With some people, too much salt has become a serious health issue.

Still, if you’ve had the misfortune of eating McDonald’s french fries with no salt at all (not even added by the restaurant), you realize how important it really is! McDonald’s fries sans the salt are a culinary disaster of the first order.

In the ancient world, just like today, salt served two basic purposes: seasoning and preserving food. Jesus probably had that in mind when he used a salt metaphor in the middle of the Sermon on the Mount:

You are the salt of the earth. But if salt loses its saltiness, how will it become salty again? It’s good for nothing except to be thrown away and trampled under people’s feet. (Matthew 5:13 CEB)

Jesus was speaking here to his disciples (see verse 1), not just to the original 12, but to his expanded group of followers. We, of course, understand these words to be meant for us as well. But what exactly was Jesus talking about when he said we’re the salt of the earth? I believe he was referring to seasoning and preserving.

Effective seasoning brings out the taste in prepared food. Using the McDonald’s fries analogy, it’s obviously not the salt by itself that makes french fries good, or else we’d skip the potatoes altogether and have salt by itself. No, salt wakes up the flavor that’s already in the fries. It brings out the best in what would otherwise be bland potatoes. I believe Christians who are salt learn how to bring out the best in other people. That’s why it bothers me when I see people who wear Christ’s name having the opposite effect. Unfortunately, some Christians even seem to get pleasure from antagonizing other people. As believers we should bless other people, gently challenge them at times, help them discover their potential and help reveal Jesus to them. That’s salt in action.

Salt also keeps food from spoiling. It’s my belief that believers in the world, when we’re living up to our calling, bring blessings to everyone around us, whether they’re Christian or not. Our very prayers for nonbelievers help bring down the blessings of God in their lives. And if we get into the business of doing the things Jesus did, we bring hope to all people. I believe it’s both the Holy Spirit indwelling Christians and the active, powerful prayers of the saints that play a big role in keeping all hell from breaking loose in the world today. If people wonder why mercy and grace seem more commonplace now than they did in the Old Testament, there’s no doubt in my mind that it’s because of the blood of Christ. But I believe that it’s the body of Christ (the church) applying that blood in prayer, praying for the world, ministering in the world and engaging the world that helps bring a level of mercy and grace to the world as a whole. In the same way God in the Bible dealt with entire groups of people more benevolently because of the faith of a few, God’s kindness overflows through Christians for the rest of the world today.

So go be salt. There’s no one else in the world besides you who reaches the same exact people in the places where you have the potential of reaching them each day. Make it your prayer that God will use you to bring out the best in everyone else, and that God will also use you as a window for him to pour out blessings on other people. This is the kind of Christianity that has the potential of shaking things up… in a good way.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.
Connect with Shane: Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | RSS

BLOG: The Spiritual Dimension

Fri, 30 Dec 2011 05:00:00 GMT

I occasionally hear frustration from those who think that some groups within Christianity aren’t intellectual enough. Others complain that certain groups are too intellectual. There are entire ministries built around Christian apologetics, some attempting to refute evolution, others trying to reconcile Christianity with evolution, some attempting to dispel the notion that Christians aren’t intellectual, others wearing anti-intellectualism as a badge of honor. I don’t always see a lot of balance in these ministries, because like many specialty groups, they tend to emphasize one area at the expense of others, even when the areas aren’t necessarily in opposition.

Our intellects are part of who we are, and we obviously need to make provision for our minds. But we also must realize that many spiritual things simply can’t be explained or perceived intellectually. That’s because our spirituality, in a sense, is part of a different dimension than our intellect and our emotions. Sometimes Christians perceive something spiritually, yet it seems so natural to them that they just can’t understand why no one else seems to “get it”, especially non-Christians. The reason is that they can’t get it. It doesn’t mean they’re intellectually slow, it means they aren’t able to tune in to that particular frequency. Sometimes the Holy Spirit reveals something to you or to me in a particular passage of Scripture, and it makes perfect sense to us until we try to explain it to someone else. Then we get frustrated because either we can’t communicate what was revealed to us, or we can’t get someone else to see it for themselves. I believe many incidents like this can be explained by spiritual elements that exist in the revelation.

In 1 Corinthians 2:14, Paul tells us that “people who are unspiritual don’t accept the things from God’s Spirit. They are foolishness to them and can’t be understood, because they can only be comprehended in a spiritual way. (CEB)” By “don’t accept”, I don’t get the feeling the original wording here is so strong that it means an active rejection. It’s more along the lines of not being equipped to process spiritual things—because it’s just an impossibility for someone who hasn’t been regenerated by the Holy Spirit to grasp certain spiritual concepts. That doesn’t mean God can’t speak to people who aren’t Christian—God speaks to people in their thoughts, emotions, or even audibly if he chooses to do so. I’m referring spiritual revelation here, the kind Peter experienced when he suddenly realized and told Jesus, “You are the Christ, the son of the living God.”

Spiritual elements can be mysterious. Have you ever heard the worship leader who wasn’t a good singer help usher in God’s presence in a powerful way while the virtuoso guitar player with the perfect voice couldn’t quite pull it off? I think there’s something going on there in the spiritual dimension that’s spilling over into the natural and we’re somehow able to discern it. Have you ever wondered why a particular church service might seem dead to one person but spiritually powerful to another? Something spiritual is probably going on that just can’t be explained intellectually. One person is possibly seeing into that other dimension while the other one isn’t. Theologian Adam Clarke said that the “natural man” can neither apprehend nor comprehend the spiritual things of God. Even Christians aren’t always going to be on the same spiritual levels with each other at certain times.

Wise Christians soon figure out that they can’t use natural tools to accomplish supernatural tasks, and they learn when spiritual revelation needs to happen. Human persuasion and intellectual arguments have their place, but there are times when the Holy Spirit and prayer have to be part of a situation to get the job done.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.
Connect with Shane: Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | RSS

ARTICLE: 4 Keys to Practicing Your Faith

Wed, 28 Dec 2011 05:00:00 GMT

The word practice means several things. In the religious sense, it means to follow or observe habitually or customarily. In the military or athletic sense it means to train or drill. In the talent or skill sense, practice describes the act of performing or doing something repeatedly in order to acquire skill or proficiency. And finally, the word also means to exercise or pursue as a profession, art or occupation. So the same person can practice Christianity, basketball, violin, and law. (But probably not all simultaneously!)

When we talk about practicing our faith, by default we think of practice in a religious way, but what if we brought in the athletic/military definition of the word and applied it to Christianity? It seems that the Bible has beaten us to the punch because the New Testament is full of references that speak of faith using war and athletic imagery. Ephesians 6:12 tells us that “We aren’t fighting against human enemies but against rulers, authorities, forces of cosmic darkness, and spiritual powers of evil in the heavens. (CEB)” In Philippians 3 , Paul pictures himself in a race where the goal he’s pursuing is “the prize of God’s upward call in Christ Jesus. (CEB)”

Using these models for faith, what exactly is it that you’re supposed to do repeatedly in order to gain skill and proficiency? I believe it’s the spiritual disciplines: prayer, Bible study, fasting, and Communion. The more you do these things, the bigger difference they’ll make in your life. In sports, the teams who win are usually the ones that practice the most often. So the more you make spiritual disciplines a consistent part of your faith routine, the more effective you’ll become as a Christian. Practice your faith often.

Practice with a team. In basketball, solo drills will improve your game, but doing drills with others will improve it even more. There are a couple of reasons for this. One is efficiency. You simply cover more ground when you have someone there to help you. Have you ever tried to practice shooting alone? You spend half your time and energy getting your own rebounds. (This has its place, too, but if it’s the only way you ever practice shooting, you won’t learn how to react quickly like you do when someone’s passing to you rapid fire.) Also, we usually push ourselves harder and see more fruit when someone else is there to push us. Proverbs 27:17 reminds us that “as iron sharpens iron, one person sharpens another (TNIV).” Prayer, fasting, Bible study and worship alone are a big deal. But if you aren’t doing these things corporately too, you’re missing major opportunities for improving your Christian game.

Practice both offense and defense. Spiritual disciplines are the practice, but the game is real life. When the phone rings in the middle of the night and a fellow believer needs your advice (or maybe you’re in your own crisis), you’ll find that all that Bible reading pays off, because God somehow brings the necessary verses to mind just when you need them. In basketball, you have to be able to turn on a dime and go from playing offense to playing defense in less than a second. Life is the same way. One minute you’re gaining so much ground for the Kingdom of God that you feel invincible—the next minute you’re licking your wounds wondering what the hell just happened to you. As you pray and study, it’s helpful to prepare for both scenarios. God is much bigger than Satan, but you have to remind yourself that the enemy is real.

Get a good coach. While it’s important to have peers to help you practice, there’s no substitute for spiritual mentors. Getting guidance from people who have “been there before” helps you make sure that your entire spiritual growth strategy doesn’t turn into a case of “the blind leading the blind.” A mentor will help you see possibilities for improvement that you didn’t even know existed.

Sports provides so many helpful metaphors for the Christian life. But principles that may be obvious for a physical activity aren’t always as easy to recognize in the spiritual realm.

What are some ways you’ve practiced your faith that remind you of something you’ve experienced in the world of sports?

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.
Connect with Shane: Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | RSS

BLOG: Mobile Ministry Matters

Wed, 14 Dec 2011 05:00:00 GMT

The number of people consuming online content using mobile devices is on the rise—and it doesn’t look like the trend will be changing in the near future. We now have an endless number of content sources and an ever-increasing number of ways to get the content. I follow most blogs, for example, through Google Reader, which I can access from my desktop computer, tablet, laptop, or phone. And since Google Reader is in the cloud, I can always pick up my reading where I left off, regardless of which device I’m using. Pretty nifty.

Google has released a new app for Android, iPhone, and iPad called Currents. Currents optimizes content from your favorite publications and delivers everything to you in a swipable magazine format. We're making Ministry Matters articles, blogs, and the most popular This Sunday components available through Google Currents. The new app is free and you can test it out (and get Ministry Matters) by going here using your mobile device. It’s less than a week old, and Google will no doubt be updating the app along the way to improve the user experience, but I’m impressed so far. In addition to MM, I’ve already subscribed to some of my favorite news sites in Currents.

In other tech news, we’ve made improvements to our RSS feeds. (Think of RSS as Really Simple Syndication). If you use Google Reader, Flipboard, Pulse, or some other newsreader/aggregator, you can subscribe to the Ministry Matters feed(s) of your choice and everything new will be pushed to you automatically. I love subscribing to content this way, because I get it as soon as it publishes—which means I don’t have to worry about missing anything important if I don’t make it to my favorite sites as much as I’d like.

NOTE: Google isn't listing us in the Currents directory yet so don't try to find us in the search. Once you get Currents installed, just visit this link and you'll see the Ministry Matters icon in your library.

Are you using a mobile device to read content from Ministry Matters? What apps are you using? Do you have ideas about how we can make everything more accessible? Send them to us at feedback@ministrymatters.com.

ARTICLE: How to Teach with Authority

Thu, 08 Dec 2011 05:00:00 GMT

There was something about the way Jesus taught that was different from the way other teachers did it at the time. In the Gospel of Mark, when Jesus went to the synagogue in Capernaum to teach, we read, “The people were amazed by his teaching, for he was teaching them with authority, not like the legal experts” (Mark 1:22 CEB). Jesus’ teaching not only impressed the people of Capernaum, it amazed them. And it was because he taught with authority. So whatever authority is, if it caused the teachings of Jesus to have that much of an impact on everyone, then I want to learn how to teach with authority. You should too.

What exactly is authority, and why do you need it to be a more effective teacher? The word itself can mean a number of things, but in the Biblical sense, it refers to jurisdiction, influence, and/or power of choice. Leadership expert John Maxwell has defined leadership as influence. So ultimately, if authority is influence and leadership is influence, then demonstrating authority is showing leadership and demonstrating leadership is showing authority. The two are inseparable. Also, there are generally two types of authority, intrinsic and delegated. In plain language, this means you either have authority because of who you are or because of who or what you represent. Ultimately, since all authority comes from God, a Christian’s authority is the delegated type. Jesus had authority because he was the Son of God. Christians have authority because of our relationship with Jesus.

If you regularly teach others, and you want this authority to be evident in your teaching, here are some things you should do:

Teach from personal experience. People want to know if all the things you teach actually work both in practice and in theory. There’s even an old saying in some religious circles that demonstrates this idea: “A person with an experience is never at the mercy of a person with an argument.” Although experience doesn’t trump scripture, it can certainly be powerful and persuasive.

Teach practically. How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Honestly, most people couldn’t care less. Sure, we all talk about these kinds of things from time to time, but when the rubber meets the road, most people want to know how to have a deeper walk with God, and how to make this Christianity stuff work. When you teach, persuade people and empower them. Don’t dwell on topics of little consequence.

Teach Biblically. The authority of the written word of God is necessary to give real authority to your teaching. Appealing to theologians, poets, and contemporary authors will add variety to what you say, but that won’t give it authority. Since Christian authority is delegated, appealing to the Word of God recognizes the source of that authority. If you’re speaking in a higher authority’s name, never underestimate the power and authority that comes with using their own words.

Ask guided questions. We’ve already established that authority is influence, and asking the right questions when you teach will ensure that your talks have their intended effect on listeners. Ask questions that take students to where you want them to go, but give them enough room to figure out at least part of the principle by themselves. Most of us learn best when we arrive at a truth at least partly on our own rather than simply having information imparted to us. Using the guided question approach avoids rigid indoctrination on one end of the spectrum and “pooling of ignorance” discussions on the other.

Make Jesus the center of your teaching. The foundation of Christianity is Jesus himself, not a creed, denomination, or a set of doctrines. Teaching that is authoritative and effective at expanding the Kingdom of God will by definition be Christ-centered. Is Jesus the foundation of your teaching and preaching, or more of an afterthought?

Pray. Jesus already had authority based on who he was, yet he still found it necessary to pray often to the God the Father. If you’re going to teach with delegated authority, doesn’t it make sense to meet as often as you can with the source of that authority to make sure your purpose and will are lined up with his? I’ve found that prayer time is even more important than preparation time when it comes to teaching the word of God.

In a world that seems to be increasingly persuaded that spiritual truth is subjective, teaching with authority will likely set you apart from many other teachers and preachers. The keys to doing it effectively are maintaining humility and remembering where your authority ultimately comes from.

What are some other ways you can be more authoritative when you teach?

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.
Connect with Shane: Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | RSS

ARTICLE: Multitasking in Ministry: Don't Do It

Tue, 29 Nov 2011 05:00:00 GMT

I’m a firm believer that most people who volunteer in churches should serve in only one ministry area. And if possible, paid ministry staff should try to do the same thing. I learned this the hard way when I tried to juggle the positions of youth worker and church treasurer for a couple of years. To make a long story short, I burned out. That’s why I feel churches should put a rule in place to prevent people from doing more than one ministry at a time.

Here’s a truth that many people don’t want to accept. Human beings can’t multitask. Some folks think they can, but multitasking is not what they’re really doing. What people think is multitasking really isn’t multitasking at all... it’s just switching back and forth from one task to another very quickly. This is multitasking in the classical sense—things you do simultaneously—like listening to music and studying, or watching TV while you read. While many boast about mastering this type of multitasking, in reality doing two things at once can almost never be done as efficiently as doing them separately.

For this piece, I’m going to expand the definition of multitasking to cover longer periods of time. In the church, I believe we’re multitasking whenever our attention is divided by two or more different interests, even if we’re not working on both jobs at a given moment. People who are in ministry of any kind know that the actual ministry activity itself is only part of the whole picture. Depending on the ministry, there may be prep time involved, and there should definitely be prayer time. Because of their importance and “on the edge” nature, many ministries may require more time for prayer than anything else! Time is finite, and common sense says that taking on a second area of work is going to take time away from the first. Leaders and ministry workers who have to focus their ministry time in two or more different places are ultimately shortchanging all the areas they serve.

A desire for excellence is another good reason not to multitask. If you want mediocrity in your church, there’s one surefire way to get it: just let your small group leaders and Sunday school teachers also lead youth group and serve on the church board. The saying, “jack of all trades, master of none” was never truer than it is in the local church. In this day and age, specialization is a key to excellence. We're told that in today’s soft job market, being able to multitask is essential. That’s true. But being able to do something in a pinch and doing it on a regular basis are two different things. Why do people shop at category killer stores like Office Max and Best Buy? Because they offer better experiences for office supplies and electronics than Walmart and Target. They do one thing and they do it well. Learn how to create a culture of specialization in your church. Train your staff and your volunteers to do one thing and to be better at it than anyone else.

When your church or ministry becomes a place where everyone finds their best fit and sticks to one major ministry role, you’ll gain a new appreciation for what it means to be the body of Christ.

What are your experiences with “ministry multitasking”?

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.
Connect with Shane: Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | RSS

BLOG: Order and Chaos

Tue, 15 Nov 2011 05:00:00 GMT

I was talking to someone the other day about spiritual struggles. This person is an athlete, and he has always found physical discipline to be much easier than spiritual and mental discipline. As I thought about what kind of advice I might be able give him, I asked him if he was regularly running and working out.

“Not so much,” he answered, “I guess I’ve let myself go a little.”

“You need order in your life—some routine,” I said, “Start somewhere—anywhere— and it will spill over into other areas of your life.”

The next day, I decided to take my own advice and add more structure to my sometimes hit-or-miss prayer and Bible reading routine. I started using The Grace-Filled Life, a devotional by Maxie Dunnam. The first devotion, appropriately, is about Genesis 1. Here’s a sentence that really grabbed my imagination: "God speaks, and everything changes at once—from nothing to everything, from chaos to order."

Did you catch that? God brought order from chaos by speaking.

Order is a good thing. Dictionary.com defines it as a condition in which each thing is properly disposed with reference to other things and to its purpose; methodical or harmonious arrangement.

Order helps us get things done. It gives us an anchor so we’re able to deal with the bigger problems we face. The truth is, if we’re unable to manage the everyday details of our lives, how are we going to deal with crises when they erupt? And how will we help anyone else with their issues?

Popular Bible teacher Joyce Meyer has said, “How are you going to face the devil when you can’t face a sink full of dirty dishes?”

She has a point.

If you need help bringing order to your life, a great place to start is the Bible. Find a devotional or plan to help you read and study God’s word in a methodical way. You’ll generally want to avoid making a practice of just opening up Scripture and reading “wherever”.

God speaks in other ways, too. Make a habit of praying, and learn how to listen to God when you pray. Surround yourself with people who know how to hear from God, who aren’t negative, and who regularly speak encouragement to you. Negative people are a dime a dozen—don’t give them access to your life.

When God’s word is spoken, listened to, and applied, things go from chaos to order.

Creating order doesn’t need to be confining. The word of God brings order, but Scripture tells us that “where the Lord’s spirit is, there is freedom” (2 Corinthians 3:17 CEB). Freedom and order aren’t opposed to each other—they work together.

If you want to experience freedom, make changes to create more order in your life. Starting small is okay—you can even tackle one thing at a time if that’s what works best for you. Soon you’ll discover that organizing your life will actually set you free to do some of the bigger things that God’s calling you to do.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.
Connect with Shane: Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | RSS

BLOG: Mayberry Church Discipline

Tue, 08 Nov 2011 05:00:00 GMT

One of my all time favorite episodes of The Andy Griffith Show is titled, “Opie the Birdman”. 7-year old Opie brings home a slingshot, and in spite of Andy’s warnings to be careful with it, he manages to accidentally kill a mother bird, leaving three orphan baby birds with no one to take care of them. After a little shrewd parenting by Andy, Opie raises the birds, then eventually lets them go when they’re old enough to take care of themselves. Apparently I’m not the only one who liked the episode—Andy Griffith and Ron Howard both say it was their favorite too.

But what does an episode like this have to do with the church? Well, if you look at discipleship and pastoring as analogous to parenthood, then plenty. If you get a chance sometime, watch the episode, because I believe there are four lessons you can pick up about leadership and discipleship.

You can inform your flock about the danger of sin, but you should give them freedom to make their own decisions. I learned this the hard way when I was in youth ministry. You can’t be with the people you minister to 24/7, and you can’t make their decisions for them. Even if you could, you wouldn’t be a pastor or mentor, you’d be a puppeteer. That’s not Christianity. Andy could have taken the slingshot from Opie immediately, but without some freedom to take responsibility and make mistakes, Opie might never have learned a couple of valuable lessons.
When you need to confront someone about sin, don’t try to do the work of the Holy Spirit and the person’s own conscience. Andy could tell that Opie had killed the bird because it was obvious that it was already bothering Opie. When Opie asked if he was going to get spanked, Andy told him no, then opened the window and told Opie to listen to the sound of the baby birds crying for their mother. Some people might think it harsh to put a 7 year old through such an experience, but rather than use physical punishment or a lecture, Andy allowed Opie’s own conscience to teach him the lesson. Kids forget spankings and talks pretty quickly, but they don’t forget it when their consciences deal with them.
Teach people that being forgiven doesn’t necessarily mean the natural consequences of our sin go away. When Opie apologized, Andy told him that saying sorry wouldn’t change the fact that the baby birds were now orphans. Opie even referenced this the next day when he decided to raise the birds himself. When we hurt others and make messes, God freely forgives us, but sometimes we have to fix the problems we’ve created.
Support people when they take responsibility for their sin. This means putting your money where your mouth is. Andy didn’t remain angry at Opie—he offered encouragement to his son as took on the task of bringing up three baby birds. And when the neighbor’s cat became an issue, Andy even helped Opie get a cage. At the end of the show, it was Andy who encouraged Opie to take the most important step in raising birds—knowing when it was time to let them fly away and be on their own. Pastors and mentors aren’t there just to dish out advice—sometimes we have to be there to help with the details.

In an age where there’s a church on every other corner, pastors have to take a creative approach when it comes to discipline and accountability for church members. A heavy-handed approach is neither effective nor scriptural. A “live and let live” approach, on the other hand, might seem easy, but I don’t believe it’s good for Christians to have no accountability whatsoever. Effective discipleship requires it. Once again, there’s a middle ground that’s probably best. It’s amazing how an old classic sitcom can help you make sense of spiritual stuff.

Related Post: Mayberry Style Leadership

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.
Connect with Shane: Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | RSS

BLOG: Self-Control

Mon, 24 Oct 2011 05:00:00 GMT

I’m becoming convinced that lack of self-control is a big reason why many of us live defeated Christian lives, so I’ve put together a few facts and ideas about this “last but not least” fruit of the Spirit from Galatians 5.

Self-control is a fruit of the Spirit, not a gift of the Spirit. Gifts are free… fruit must be grown. There’s not a “spiritual supermarket” where you can buy it, and in most cases, I don’t think that praying for self-control to fall out of the sky is very effective. To grow fruit in the natural realm, you have to plant the right seeds and put some work into it. The spiritual realm is no different in that regard.
Developing self control is not as hard as one might think. The fruit of the Spirit grows when we cooperate with the Holy Spirit’s work in transforming us. Self-control doesn’t come easily, but it’s definitely within reach. Unfortunately, many Christians tend to overemphasize teaching about depravity at the expense of teaching about personal holiness.
The idea of self-control scares us. When you start telling people that self-control is not just a possibility but an expectation, they sometimes freak out a little. Paul blew Felix’s mind so much teaching about it (and a couple of other hard topics) that Felix sent him away so he could absorb it all: "After several days, Felix came with his wife Drusilla, who was Jewish, and summoned Paul. He listened to him talk about faith in Christ Jesus. When he spoke about upright behavior, self-control, and the coming judgment, Felix became fearful and said, 'Go away for now! When I have time, I’ll send for you.'" (Acts 24:24-25 CEB)
Self-control is not the same as letting God control you. I’ve heard people say, "Give God control of your life," but I’m not sure that’s what God wants. God isn’t a dictator who pushes a magic button to take over our free will. I think he’d prefer that we voluntarily bring our lives and purposes into agreement with what he wants to accomplish. God gives us the power we need and he expects us to master our flesh, our appetites, our passions, and even our tongues!
We shouldn’t try to control anyone but ourselves. I have a tendency to be a control freak, but God has been helping me get away from that. I’ve done a lot of mentoring, and I’ve found that when I try to push my advice on someone too strongly, it can have disastrous consequences. When God has anointed (or appointed) you to do something, you should figure out where your anointing ends and never cross into "unauthorized" territory. Guilt trips and lectures can easily become manipulation, and although our counseling efforts may be offered with the best intentions, we should guard against attempting to usurp someone else’s free will. Even when we give advice, we must allow people to make their own decisions.

What specific things can we do to develop self-control?

BLOG: Megachurches Do It Better

Tue, 18 Oct 2011 05:00:00 GMT

There’s a photo going around Facebook and Google+ showing what’s supposed to be a megachurch auditorium, complete with cushioned theater seats, lights, big TV screens and fancy windows. The caption reads, “Megachurch: Because This Is More Important Than Feeding the Starving."

The person who created this graphic probably meant well, but their idea that somehow megachurches are morally inferior to smaller churches because they have larger, more elaborate buildings, is a misguided one.

The fact is, most megachurches run more efficiently than smaller churches, which frees up more money for service and mission. Take the largest congregation in the U.S., for example, Lakewood Church in Houston. In 2005, Lakewood moved into the Compaq Center, a former sports arena. The church paid $75 million to renovate the space, and then paid just under $12 million in advance for 30 years of rent. At the time, there were critics who complained that Lakewood was being too extravagant with its building plans.

But consider that Lakewood Church averages about 43,000 people per week at its weekend services. That comes out to around $1750 per person for the renovations and 76¢ per person per month for rent. If a church of 300 reached this level of efficiency, they’d be spending a little over half a million bucks on their building followed by $228 a month for rent or mortgage.

That sounds like a lot of bang for the buck, by anyone’s standard.

But rather than applauding megachurches for their efficiency and stewardship, some of us prefer taking shots at them. It’s the old “would Jesus buy a Lexus” debate revisited. The problem is, when we start down that road, sooner or later the standards we use to judge others end up being used against us. How can I condemn the big television screens in a megachurch when I have a high definition TV in my own house? Are the cushioned theater chairs and fancy lights in large churches less virtuous than the cushioned pews and stained glass in small ones? Not really. In fact, considering that the large church probably spent less per capita, the reverse might actually be closer to the truth.

Megachurches probably spend less on clergy salaries per member than small churches, and because of their size, their clergy and other staff are more than likely able to specialize in a particular area of ministry. That means pastors can spend time doing one thing really well rather than being the ecclesial jacks-of-all-trades that many smaller churches have come to expect.

Larger churches have the resources to offer more ministries to meet the needs of communities. From sports leagues to soup kitchens to homeless ministries to schools to recovery groups, megachurches generally provide more options with more flexibility than smaller congregations. And I suspect they plant more churches too.

So who is it that’s really beating this anti-megachurch drum? Leaders of smaller churches? I'm not sure. But here’s something to consider. Instead of “punching upwards”, maybe we should all just aspire to make our own churches bigger. Small churches do certain things well, but when it comes to efficiency, large churches usually do it better.

It seems to me we need more big churches, not fewer.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.
Connect with Shane: Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | RSS

BLOG: Cult is a Four-Letter Word

Wed, 12 Oct 2011 05:00:00 GMT

People don’t talk about politics or religion in polite company. At least that’s what an adult told me when I was in middle school. I had no idea what "polite company" meant, but I did know that I loved talking about both politics and religion, so I reasoned that perhaps impolite company was the place I preferred to be.

Recently the press has been discussing politics and religion—a lot—especially since the pastor who introduced presidential candidate Rick Perry last week told reporters that Mormonism is a cult.

Talk about your four-letter words.

Cult is one of those terms that means different things to different people. Even the dictionary gets a little confused about cults. Take these definitions from Merriam-Webster, for example:

cult: n. a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents

Well according to that standard, anybody who formally believes anything is in a cult. Folks like Billy Graham, the Pope, you, me—even Mark Driscoll. (I always knew Mars Hill was a little weird.)

Considering that the guy who used the cult label is pastor of a 10,000 member megachurch that likely adheres to a belief system, this probably isn't what he meant by cult.

So let’s try another definition.

cult: n. formal religious veneration : worship

If I’m reading this correctly, Merriam-Webster considers cult and worship to be synonyms. Hmmm. How was your church’s cult service this week? Has your congregation’s cult leader released a CD yet?

I don’t think that one works either.

cult: n. a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents

“A religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious...” Problem is, the dictionary doesn’t tell us who’s doing the regarding. That’s an important detail to leave out. Mitt Romney doesn’t regard Mormonism as a cult. Neither do the 14 million plus Latter-day Saints worldwide. But many Christians consider Mormon beliefs to be unorthodox. (That’s a less inflammatory way of saying someone believes the wrong things.) By the way, Mormons don’t think traditional Christians are very orthodox either.

Was Robert Jeffress right? Is Mormonism a cult? It depends on whom you ask, and which definition you use.

Nowadays, when most of us think of cults, we picture small groups of people with crazy beliefs and magnetic, authoritative leaders. (Think Jim Jones and David Koresh.) With millions of members and almost 200 years under their belt, Mormons have at least made it to sect status by now.

The theology of the LDS Church differs significantly from traditional Christian beliefs, but it's not really accurate to call it a cult.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.
Connect with Shane: Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | RSS

BLOG: Don't Give 'em What They Want

Mon, 10 Oct 2011 05:00:00 GMT

In the West, it’s hard to grow a church without catering to people’s wants and felt needs. We preach super practical sermon series, we offer small groups that are designed to appeal to individual interests, and we serve gourmet coffee in the narthex. (That’s the lobby for those of you who don’t know churchspeak, or your congregation meets at the neighborhood cineplex.)

We try our hardest to stay on top of church trends so we don’t lose market share in our community to the local megachurch and its charismatic pastor. The best way to get people to show up is to give them what they want, right?

Then there are the churches that do the complete opposite. These churches are stuck in the 1950’s, and it’s usually for one of two reasons—either they don’t get that times and methods have changed, or they’re intentionally bucking the perceived consumerism trend by protecting their traditions. Some of these congregations even seem to wear this elitist attitude as a badge of honor. (“We don’t care if we grow. We like being small!”)

“People may say they want to worship with a certain style of music, but what they need is a little culture and more theological depth in their music.”

“People may say they like topical preaching and sermon series, but preaching from the lectionary is what’s best for them!”

“People may say they want more home group Bible study options, but what will happen to Sunday school if we do that?”

“People may say they want to use the DVD’s from Beth Moore for their study group, but they obviously don’t understand that our denomination doesn’t agree with all of her theology.”

What we have here are the classic “give them what they want” and “give them what they need” philosophies. Burgers and fries vs. Brussels sprouts.

Steve Jobs, founder of Apple Computer, had an interesting opinion about giving consumers what they want. He didn’t let that sort of thinking drive him because he assumed that consumers either didn’t know what they really wanted, or he thought that by the time he had figured out how to give it to them, they would have moved on to wanting something else anyway.

People who run businesses giving consumers what they want spend their entire careers being reactive instead of proactive.

Instead of giving people what they already wanted, Jobs instead showed them what was possible. Then he convinced them that they wanted it.

When news of the first generation iPhone broke, I couldn’t wrap my mind around it. I thought my Blackberry was the best thing since sliced bread, and I couldn’t imagine a touchscreen phone without a physical keyboard. I figured it would be an expensive toy purchased only by the most loyal Apple fans.

At least I was right about the expensive part.

Now I own an Android, but I can’t deny that the iPhone is the major reason for my phone’s existence. I would have never even wanted a touchscreen smartphone if I hadn’t seen the iPhone in action. Now my new phone helps me to be much more productive than my old phone ever did. And it’s a lot more fun to use.

Sorry, Blackberry.

There’s a lesson here for the church. Instead of trying so hard to give people what they think they want, or what we think they need, maybe we should focus more on showing them what’s possible. And we should do that with as much excellence and creativity as we can muster.

What if we stretched ourselves musically, theologically, intellectually, spiritually, and homiletically? Instead of aiming for the lowest common denominator, suppose we pushed the limits of our thinking and did church in a way that didn’t cater to current wants or perceived needs, but in the end, actually ended up being what people both wanted and needed?

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.
Connect with Shane: Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | RSS

BLOG: Era of the iPhone

Wed, 05 Oct 2011 05:00:00 GMT

I’m a little embarrassed to admit that I spent part of my lunch hour yesterday reading updates from a Wall Street Journal reporter who was live-blogging the Apple press conference.

I’m not even an Apple fan. I actually prefer using a PC—and my smartphone is an Android.

Still, there’s something fascinating about Apple and its rabid fan base.

All sorts of rumors were circulating this week about the possible release of the iPhone 5—turns out it’s only going to be the 4S—and the possibility of number three mobile carrier Sprint getting an exclusive on the new phone (they’re not, apparently.) Even so, Sprint will finally be offering the coveted device, and Apple will likely gain millions of customers from their fold.

When it comes to technology, I’m definitely not a Luddite, but I’m not an early adopter either. I like to stay ahead of the curve—but not to the point that I’m obsessing over the latest gadgets. For me, it’s all about efficiency. If I can get more work done and make my life easier, then new technology is worth the investment. Otherwise, it’s only a toy and I probably don’t need it yet. (When is my phone upgrade coming up again?)

With more and more people buying smartphones, Christians have the opportunity to communicate God’s word to more people now than ever before. Churches can broadcast their services, Bible studies, sermons, or whatever else they want to share with their members and potential visitors.

The big temptation for churches is using technology for the sake of the technology itself—to be in the “club” with the “cutting-edge” churches. But as images get sharper, sounds get richer, and video gets more “high-def”, mediocre content will start to seem even worse than it really is.

Put another way, the days of posting half-baked sermons and poorly edited worship services are coming to a close.

Not that your church does that. But plenty do.

Practically everyone has a smartphone now, so that means everyone has their own bullhorn. It also means there’s a lot of noise out there. Content has to reach a certain level of quality to get noticed, and even that’s not a guarantee. The cream rises to the top.

Will all the people rushing to get the latest iPhone think that what your church has to say is worth using up part of the bandwidth on their metered data plan?

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger at Ministry Matters.
Connect with Shane: Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | RSS

BLOG: Degrees of God's Presence

Mon, 03 Oct 2011 05:00:00 GMT

The presence of God is an interesting thing. On one hand, we know that God is everywhere. But his presence certainly seems more intense at certain times and in certain places. Many of us have been to worship services where God’s presence seems to manifest in a powerful way. Does that mean God isn’t there at other times? Not at all. But it does suggest that there are levels or degrees of God’s presence.

Think of it on a personal level. Christians pray to be filled with the Holy Spirit, but we also acknowledge the ongoing, indwelling Spirit. The Holy Spirit never leaves us, but there are times when he’s there in a more obvious, powerful way. This tells me two things: (1) We should never take the presence of God for granted, and (2) If some of God’s presence is a good thing, more is even better!

I hesitate to speak of God’s presence as if it’s quantifiable—because doing so makes the Holy Spirit seem like an impersonal force. But if we use terms like “filled” or “power” when referring to God’s spirit (which scripture does), such misconceptions are a real possibility.

Moses didn’t take God’s presence for granted. In Exodus 33, God promised to send a messenger ahead of the Israelites, but Moses insisted on God himself going with them. (You either have to be really crazy or really confident about where you stand with God before you start insisting that he do something.) Moses wasn’t talking about God’s omnipresence here, he was referring to God’s manifest presence—Moses knew that God being with them would make all the difference.

You’d think if there was anyone who wouldn’t have to ask God to come along, it would be the leader of his chosen people. God initially balks at going with the Israelites, but something happens between Exodus 33:5 and 33:14 to change his mind. Moses pleads with God in the tent of meeting and by the end of the exchange, God tells Moses, “I’ll go myself, and I’ll help you... I’ll do exactly what you’ve asked because you have my special approval, and I know you by name.”

Think about your last Bible study, youth group, worship service, or staff meeting. Did you earnestly pray for God to show up or did you just take for granted that he’d be there? (“He’s God. He’s everywhere!”) Sometimes it takes determination to move beyond the idea of the omnipresence of God so we can experience his special presence. It’s the point where we go from casually inviting God to be with us to being desperate for him to show up.

Shane Raynor is a managing editor for Ministry Matters.
Connect with Shane: Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | RSS

BLOG: Not-So-Great Expectations

Mon, 26 Sep 2011 05:00:00 GMT

Have you ever noticed that some people become negative when the conversation turns to spiritual matters? I’m an optimist, and I like to encourage people to stretch themselves spiritually. On one hand, I think we should be satisfied with Christ, but I don’t think we should ever be content to stay exactly where we are in our relationship with him. When it comes to God, we should always want more. So I sometimes clash with people who set their sights low and try to project those low expectations onto others. You know who I’m talking about. In fact, we’ve all probably been one of those people from time to time. They’re the ones who can give you all the reasons why God won’t answer your prayer, or why the Bible doesn’t mean that, or why healing probably won’t happen (but let’s pray anyway, just in case!) Some in popular culture would call these people haters. This term, of course, is slang but is defined at Urban Dictionary as follows: One who either verbally and/or physically inhibits another individual’s game or mode of operation primarily due to jealousy, envy, animosity, bitterness, resentment, and contempt.

That about says it all. Spiritual haters often think they’re satisfied with their level of spirituality, but they tend to be easily threatened by other people’s experiences, especially if those experiences deviate from what the haters perceive as “the norm”. Let’s go to the basketball court for an example. If you’ve ever played pick-up basketball at a park, you know that there are players who are really good and players like me who aren’t so good. That doesn’t mean that one player is worth more than another, it just means that because of a combination of natural talent and experience, the players are at different playing levels. The really good players consistently try to improve their game, hopefully while exercising humility. The players who need more improvement usually go one of two ways: they either try to learn from the better players (and make a habit of playing with them often), or they “trash talk” and disparage the better players.

Most of us don’t have a problem giving other people props in the world, but when we get into the church and start talking about things like prayer, wisdom or Biblical insight, we are offended at the idea that one person might be more skilled or gifted than someone else. (You mean some people actually get more results praying than others? That’s not fair!) The truth is, people are at different levels spiritually. We all know people who have gone further than us in certain areas, and others who haven’t made it to where we are. Instead of trying to learn from those who are more advanced, some of us choose instead to treat them with contempt. We attack their theology and nit-pick. We point out their character flaws. We won’t even admit that they’ve gone beyond us spiritually somehow. Most trash-talkers on a basketball court are usually blind to the fact that the person they’re insulting is actually better at basketball than they are!

So what’s my point? Simply that we shouldn’t let other people keep us from reaching new spiritual heights. Don’t make it a habit to hang out with someone who consistently kills your dreams, peddles mediocre spirituality as normative or defends the status quo as acceptable. Ephesians 3:20 tells us that God "is able to do far beyond all that we could ask or imagine by his power at work within us”. Some of us aren’t even asking God to do the great things we can imagine, let alone the things we can’t! Negativity is abundant in the church and people who don’t believe God are a dime a dozen. (There is such a thing as being realistic and rational to a fault.) Not only should we aim to be people of great faith, we should surround ourselves with Christians who build us up, not ones who tear us down.

That is, if we actually want to improve our game.

Shane Raynor is a managing editor for Ministry Matters.
Connect with Shane: Google+ | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | RSS

BLOG: Extremists and Moderates

Wed, 21 Sep 2011 05:00:00 GMT

Brian McLaren writes that most extremists are the last ones to know that they’re extremists. I guess it’s a lot like having bad breath or body odor. By the time you figure it out, everyone else already knows.

Brian goes on to discuss what he sees as an unhealthy dichotomy that has developed between moderates and extremists (both liberal and conservative). He feels there should be a third way.

Ah, that ever-elusive third way. Some would argue that such an animal doesn’t exist. They’d say that any kind of third way is either the best of both worlds, or the worst of both, but nothing new.

You know what I think? I think Brian overthinks these things.

Granted, extremist is almost never used today in a positive way. The first defintion for extremist that pops up on a Google search is: “A person who holds extreme or fanatical political or religious views, esp. one who resorts to or advocates extreme action.”

Great. Now we have to check to see whether extreme is defined in a positive or negative way. (I love how dictionaries make you look up a second word to define the first one you looked up.) Dictionary.com offers five definitions:

of a character or kind farthest removed from the ordinary or average: extreme measures.
utmost or exceedingly great in degree: extreme joy.
farthest from the center or middle; outermost; endmost: the extreme limits of a town.
farthest, utmost, or very far in any direction: an object at the extreme point of vision.
exceeding the bounds of moderation: extreme fashions.

Call me crazy, but based on most of these defintions, is being extreme always a bad thing? Come on... who truly wants to be an ordinary Christian? Or an ordinary basketball player? Or an ordinary writer?

I’m not even crazy about Ordinary Time.

Don’t we all want to be extraordinary?

And is exceeding the bounds of moderation a bad thing? Sure, moderate means calm or temperate, but it also means mediocre. Another defintion of moderate is average, or less than average in quality.

I don’t know anyone who wants to be considered average or mediocre.

But moderate can also mean balanced. I don’t mind being called balanced—that’s a compliment.

The 18th century Christian leader John Wesley was accused of being an extremist, but they used a different word back then: enthusiast.

enthusiast

a person filled with or motivated by enthusiasm; fanatic
archaic a religious visionary, esp one whose zeal for religion is extravagant or unbalanced

On one hand, we think of fanaticism as a bad thing. Yet we generally see enthusiasm as positive. It seems to me that there’s not a heck of a lot of distance between between enthusiastic and fanatical—between good extreme and bad.

Some of it is in the eye of the beholder.

Perhaps Brian McLaren has it wrong. Instead of looking for a third way, maybe we need to just appreciate both extremists and moderates as necessary parts of the Body of Christ. Without visionaries and enthusiasts pushing the envelope, we’d probably miss some prophetic words and moves of God. And without moderates reining them in, who knows how many more solid Christians would wander into heresy?

Opposite “extremists” tend to balance each other out, and moderates keep them in check. As messy as that gets, isn’t it the way God probably designed things to work in the church?

BLOG: The SpongeBob Effect

Tue, 13 Sep 2011 05:00:00 GMT

The American Academy of Pediatrics told us this week that SpongeBob Squarepants may be contributing to Attention Deficit Disorder in kids. They didn’t say it in those exact words, but that’s what their recent study with four year-olds seems to suggest. Apparently, watching a nine minute clip of the hit Nickelodeon cartoon negatively affects their attention spans.

This doesn’t surprise me, because watching Sponge Bob affects my attention span.

More and more, our culture is becoming one where it’s harder and harder to hold people’s interest. This trend has been developing since the early days of television, but the rise of the VCR in the 1980’s and the availability of on-demand kids programming for busy parents were the factors that really brought us to the spot where we currently find ourselves.

More to the point, almost everything is visual now, and if your church or ministry hasn’t jumped on that train, it’s not just the kids you’re going to lose, but the adults too.

Remember Barney the purple dinosaur? His first fans are turning 20 next year. The first generation of toddlers to really experience television as a babysitter have now become young adults, and they’ve brought their shorter attention spans with them from their teenage years.

Of course everyone isn’t equally affected by television, and some of us watched more of it growing up than others. But I can’t help but think that our fast-paced multimedia world is having a negative impact on our ability to sit down and do things like read the Bible, pray, or listen to a sermon that’s more than 10 or 15 minutes long. And it’s only getting faster. Check out a music video from the 1980’s and then watch one from today. Count the time between camera angle changes, wipes, fades and cuts. You’ll probably notice that it’s gotten a lot shorter.

I worked in youth ministry for much of the 2000’s. Many of the kids I ministered to hated to read, especially the boys, so motivating them to explore the Bible on their own wasn’t usually easy. Getting them to stay focused for even a 15 or 20 minute talk was sometimes next to impossible. But the reality is that this generation still needs to read and hear the word of God as much as previous ones needed to.

So how should the church be responding to what I believe could be a crisis?

I wish there was an obvious answer. Probably the most effective way would involve a combination of meeting people where they are while simultaneously taking them to another level.

Perhaps a combined strategy of innovation and conditioning.

Having our senses bombarded with noise and visuals can be addictive. I’m discovering that this week. Every now and then I do a total “TV fast” for a few days to focus on studying Scripture and learning to listen to God better. The first night I nearly drove myself crazy trying to read my Bible! I’ve grown so accustomed to reading with cable news or music going in the background that I was having trouble concentrating because of the silence! The second day went much better, and I expect I’ll find it even easier as the week moves along. The human brain can do some amazing things... overcoming media withdrawal isn’t such a tall order—but at first it’s definitely a shock to the system.

The church should be using cutting edge media to reach people—especially to get their attention. Like it or not, that’s the language the world speaks and we need to be able to speak it too. But it’s important to gradually teach Christians to be able to sit still, to pray, and to read. God can speak through flashing visuals while we’re responding to text messages and listening to an iPod. But from my experience, he’s more likely to speak when all that stuff is turned off.

If upcoming generations never really learn how to function with everything turned off, and they aren’t able to be engaged by written words with nothing other than their imaginations to assist them, we’ve got a big problem.

BLOG: Don't Just Pray—Get Moving

Tue, 06 Sep 2011 05:00:00 GMT

Elvis Presley used to sing, “A little less conversation, a little more action please.” Politicians have used this song (slightly out of context) over the years in their campaigns, and their message is clear. You can't just talk, you have to be willing to move forward.

I was reading over this week’s lectionary passages and when I came to the Old Testament reading I decided to jump back to the beginning of Exodus 14. Pharaoh and his army were chasing the Israelites, and when the Israelites realized it, they became scared and started giving Moses grief.

They said to Moses, "Weren’t there enough graves in Egypt that you took us away to die in the desert? What have you done to us by bringing us out of Egypt like this? Didn’t we tell you the same thing in Egypt? ‘Leave us alone! Let us work for the Egyptians!’ It would have been better for us to work for the Egyptians than to die in the desert." (Exodus 14:11-12 CEB)

It’s easy to criticize the Israelites for their whining because we know how the story ended. (I’d like to think that I’d have been one of the calmer ones in the group, waiting for God to do his thing. But somehow I doubt it.) Moses did his best to reassure everyone, although he didn’t seem certain about what was going to happen either.

Moses said to the people, "Don’t be afraid. Stand your ground, and watch the LORD rescue you today. The Egyptians you see today you will never ever see again. The LORD will fight for you. You just keep still."(Exodus 14:13-14 CEB)

Then Moses prayed. But scripture doesn’t tell us what he said. The narrative goes from Moses telling the people to keep still, to this: "Then the LORD said to Moses, 'Why do you cry out to me? Tell the Israelites to get moving.'" (Exodus 14:15 CEB)

But didn’t Moses just tell everyone to keep still? Now God is saying to get moving.

I wonder what it was that Moses prayed. Was he asking for help or was he telling God about everyone’s complaints? Whatever it was, the LORD bluntly told Moses that it was time to do more than pray—it was time for action.

Perhaps Moses was praying after he had his answer, or maybe he was waiting to receive more information than he needed to move forward. I do the same thing. It's easy to overspiritualize prayer, especially when we use it as an excuse to put off doing what we know we need to do. I call this prayer paralysis. Maybe that's not what was going on with Moses, but it is clear that it was time for him to do something. Take note that God pushed back the sea, but not until Moses had stetched out his hand over it. God could have done it automatically—but he didn't.

Be still, but get moving.

Pray, but be ready to put legs on your prayers.

BLOG: Mayberry Style Leadership

Thu, 18 Aug 2011 05:00:00 GMT

As a kid I loved reruns of The Andy Griffith Show, which was considered required after school viewing in the small North Carolina town where I grew up. People liked the show (and they still do) because it reminded them of a simpler, more innocent time in their lives. That, and the show was just plain funny.

At the time, I mentally divided the show into two eras, the black and white episodes and the color episodes, which also happened to be, respectively, the ones with Andy’s deputy Barney Fife (portrayed by Don Knotts) and the ones without him. Most people today consider the black and white episodes to be the funniest, and some folks won’t even watch the color episodes. A few years ago, a few television stations that were running the show in syndication even took the unusual step of “decolorizing” the color episodes because they didn’t want ratings to drop when they aired them. I enjoyed both groups of episodes, but almost considered them two separate shows—I found it practically impossible to compare them as apples to apples.

The more I think about it, however, the more I realize that The Andy Griffith Show was really three shows, not two, and the differences between the show’s eras had less to do with Barney and Technicolor than with Andy himself. I’ve come to the conclusion that Andy Griffith portrayed three different Andy Taylors over the course of the show’s run:

Season 1: The lovable and funny Southern rustic
Seasons 2-5: The good-natured, wise sheriff surrounded by wacky supporting characters, a sage-like figure
Seasons 6-8: The more solemn, somewhat irritable sheriff who seemed worn out by the rest of the town’s antics

While each “era” of Andy had its ups and downs, the show really seemed hit its sweet spot during Seasons 2-5. This was somewhat by design, as Andy Griffith realized after the first season that he could only get so much mileage out of the “aw shucks” country shtick. He found that he could actually be funnier by not being quite as funny. Here’s why: The real chemistry on the show was when Andy played straight man to the rest of the cast—the voice of reason, the parental figure. Andy’s character didn’t create his own messes, he got everyone else out of theirs, and it made for hilarious television.

But then later on, with the departure of Don Knotts and changes in the writing team, Andy became almost too serious. The chemistry wasn’t there anymore. Ratings were as high as ever and the show still possessed a certain charm, but looking back, most Andy Griffith Show purists recognize that something was missing in the last three seasons. Andy Griffith eventually became bored and left the show at the end of the eighth season, and the rest of the cast continued the show under the title Mayberry, R.F.D. (the fourth era!)

There are leadership lessons to be learned here. Imagine that The Andy Griffith Show is a church, and Andy Griffith is the pastor. Season 1 represents a church whose pastor tries to go beyond his calling or gifting to fit a certain expectation. Seasons 2-5 would portray a pastor who has realized that the healthiest church is one that has an ensemble cast where everyone’s strengths come together and offset everyone’s weaknesses, rather than a vehicle to propel one “star” forward. Finally, the later seasons represent a pastor who is either coasting on past successes or has become burned out or cynical. This pastor’s church might go on for years, but it’s going to die (get canceled!) sooner or later, or become irrelevant or impotent, which is essentially the same as dying.

The most effective church is the one that finds its seasons 2-5 (wise leadership with teamwork mentality and a good staff chemistry) and stays there.

BLOG: Changing God's Mind

Mon, 08 Aug 2011 05:00:00 GMT

One of the most puzzling passages in the Bible to me is the account of the encounter Jesus has with the Canaanite woman in Matthew 15. Here are the basic details of the situation: A very bold non-Jewish woman is desperate to have her daughter delivered from demonization, so she directly asks Jesus to do it. When he appears to ignore her, she keeps pushing. Finally the disciples ask Jesus to make her go away. The woman specifically asks Jesus to help her. He tells her that he has been sent only to the Jewish people, and then adds this jaw-dropper:

“It is not good to take the children’s bread and toss it to dogs.”

So what has God said to you lately?

Seriously, how would you respond to something like that? While his statement is clearly metaphorical, it’s hard to get around the idea that he called the woman, her family and all Gentiles… well... dogs. The woman was likely used to hearing this sort of thing, as it was how Gentiles were referred to by Jews in that culture. Perhaps Jesus used that harsh language to make a big point, and by his actions that followed, he actually planted a seed for a change of Jewish attitudes that would be further realized when Peter had his vision of the animals on the sheet later in Acts 10. Don’t misunderstand—Jesus was still sent to the Jews first—but God appears to have used this episode to give a sneak preview of his plan to save all people groups through Christ.

The bigger issue in play here is the woman’s boldness, and her apparent success at changing Jesus’ mind. What’s that? You think Jesus was testing her all along and knew he would end up healing her daughter? Perhaps, but that’s assuming the Holy Spirit had revealed that much information to Jesus up to this point. (Remember, as a human being Jesus had set aside certain attributes of his deity and was operating under the power of the Holy Spirit.) The great scandal of this passage is Jesus’ apparent reluctance in the beginning to do something to help the Gentile daughter. Can you imagine what cable news channels would have done with this story if they had existed back in the day?

The ultimate takeaway for this passage is that Jesus responded to the woman’s faith, and that faith seemed to somehow override his original intention. This is good news for us, because faith is where the ball is really in our court. Someone once said that faith is the currency of heaven. I think they were on to something.

God is approachable (only because of the blood of Jesus) and he still responds to faith today. I believe there are times when he changes his mind (or at least the course of events) in response to our prayers. Anyone who downplays this notion risks making prayer nothing more than a spiritual formation exercise for personal growth—nice thought, but no thanks. We should want to grow closer to God, but ultimately, we when we pray, we want his kingdom to come and his will to be done. That’s not always automatic, so our prayers play a big part.

Sometimes God delays an answer to prayer to see what kind of faith we really have. That’s what was essentially going on in the encounter with the Canaanite woman. She wouldn’t take no for an answer. She wasn’t thinking about spirituality on some deep level, she was trying to get help for her daughter who was vexed by a demon. She was willing to buck protocol and risk humiliating herself to get Jesus to help her. She was desperate, and in her desperation she found the faith she needed to approach Jesus, and Jesus responded to it.

When we’re desperate enough to refuse to take no for an answer, that’s when God will sometimes change his mind. Just ask the Canaanite woman. Or Abraham.

BLOG: Real Heart Faith

Mon, 01 Aug 2011 05:00:00 GMT

The things we say and do matter as much as the things we think and feel. Understanding this concept can help us unlock the mystery of what faith really is. The apparent tension between faith and works pops up throughout both scripture and church history. Romans 10 is a passage that deals with faith in a concise and straightforward way—Paul really gets down to brass tacks:

If you confess with your mouth "Jesus is Lord" and in your heart you have faith that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. Trusting with the heart leads to righteousness, and confessing with the mouth leads to salvation. (Romans 10:9-10 CEB)

This passage illustrates the connection between our words and our beliefs, and it can perhaps be interpreted in light of another scripture that deals with the same topic: “What fills the heart comes out of the mouth.” (Matthew 12:34 CEB)

In scripture, particularly the New Testament, the words faith and belief are often used interchangeably, and it’s important to purge any “Disneyfied” ideas about faith and belief in order to understand the biblical meaning of the words. Faith isn’t the same thing as hope, and it isn’t just mentally agreeing with certain doctrines. Real biblical faith involves your mind, emotions, and will. You exercise faith with your intellect, feelings, and actions. If any of these areas are neglected, it could be a sign of a faith that’s weak or dysfunctional.

Where did I get this definition? Well, the Bible is full of references to the human heart—and it’s obvious that it isn’t talking about the blood-pumping organ with the same name. According to Strong’s Dictionary, the Hebrew word often translated heart in the Old Testament, leb, is used to refer to “the feelings, the will and even the intellect”. The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Lexicon has a similar definition: “inner man, mind, will, heart, understanding”. (The word can also mean “the seat of emotions and passions” and “the seat of courage”.) In the New Testament, the Greek word generally translated heart is kardia, and according to Thayer’s Greek Lexicon it means “the soul or mind, as it is the fountain and seat of the thoughts, passions, desires, appetites, affections, purposes, endeavours”. A secondary definition is “the seat of the will and character”.

When I put all of that together, I come up with mind, emotions, and will. In other words, you use your heart to think, feel, and decide. And Paul says in Romans 10 that salvation depends on having faith in your heart. You exercise faith with your whole heart. And according to Matthew 12:34, if this heart faith is genuine, you’re going to talk about it.

Such a balanced, fully developed view of faith no doubt bedevils those of us who like to stress only one part of it. It’s quite tempting to oversimplify faith and make it only about doctrine, only about feelings and emotions, or only about actions. There are churches and denominations that have grown up around the particular element of faith they like to emphasize. But biblical faith must include all three.

BLOG: How to Wrestle God (and Win)

Mon, 25 Jul 2011 05:00:00 GMT

If you’re going to wrestle with God, you may as well put up a good fight.

That’s what Jacob did in Genesis 32. And it’s one of those mysterious passages in the Old Testament that I love. Everybody who preaches or teaches about this story seems to have a different opinion of what’s going on. But two things are pretty clear—this was a huge event in Jacob’s life, and he wasn’t the same afterward.

Jacob was about to meet his estranged brother Esau, and he was scared spitless. He had previously taken Esau’s birthright and cheated him out of his father’s blessing, so Jacob probably expected Esau to be more than a little sore. And when he heard that Esau was heading his way with 400 men, Jacob knew his chickens were most likely coming home to roost.

So he did some quick maneuvering and split his group up into two camps. Then he begged God to save him from his brother, and sent servants ahead to meet Esau with gifts of livestock. (I guess he figured it was better to lose part of his wealth and stay alive than lose his life.)

After what looks like an unsuccessful attempt to get some sleep, Jacob decides it’s time to really get serious. He gets up during the night and moves everyone and everything to the other side of the Jabbock River, then he goes back to be alone. And that’s when God shows up.

“Jacob stayed apart by himself, and a man wrestled with him until dawn broke.” (Genesis 32:24 CEB)

But this was no ordinary man. Some believe it was an angel, others that it was God taking human form. There’s speculation in some commentaries that this stranger is the preincarnate Christ. It’s not clear what was going on exactly, but at the end of this passage, Jacob seems to believe he had encountered something more than an angel. I believe God himself was wrestling with Jacob, and that there was a real physical conflict happening.

But there was a spiritual conflict going on here too. Jacob was essentially in a battle of wills with God.

Let’s face it, God could have physically annihilated Jacob with half a thought if he’d wanted to. But Jacob’s will would be a bit harder to break. God created us with free will and he allows us to make choices. The wrestling match that went on that night was first and foremost about getting Jacob’s heart where it needed to be, not about defeating him physically.

Finally God both wounded and healed Jacob with a single touch.

“The man said, ‘Let me go because the dawn is breaking.’ But Jacob said, ‘I won’t let you go until you bless me.’” (Genesis 32:26 CEB)

For the Christian who reads this Old Testament account, it’s a picture of real spiritual prayer. Jacob’s tenacity was pretty remarkable. God obviously wanted to bless Jacob, but he made him really ask for it. I suppose God could have showed up in some vision and given Jacob the same blessing, but he knew Jacob wasn’t prepared to receive it before the wrestling match.

Jacob knew the value of a blessing, so much so that he had cheated to get a big one from his father Isaac. But he wasn’t going to be able to fake his way into getting this blessing. Unlike his earthly dad, God wasn’t nearly blind. On the contrary, God could see into the deepest parts of Jacob’s heart.

This blessing wouldn’t even come with honest sweat. It only came when Jacob was running on empty, but still refused to let go. (The name of the river in this passage actually means “emptying”. Coincidence?)

That blessing became the most important thing to Jacob, and he got it. A lot happened to Jacob that night. His heart changed, his walk changed—he even got a new name, Israel. And a few hours later, he would patch things up with his brother.

Note that Jacob didn’t run from God, he engaged him. There’s nothing wrong with wrestling with God, because sometimes it’s the struggle that gets us to the place where he can change us.

But at some point, we realize that there’s only one way to win in a struggle against God.

Lose.

Then don’t let go.

BLOG: The Ministry Formerly Known as Crusade

Wed, 20 Jul 2011 05:00:00 GMT

If it didn’t have all the medieval military baggage attached to it, crusade would actually be a pretty cool word. It means “marked by the cross.” But I understand why the parachurch ministry Campus Crusade for Christ is dumping it—the same reason Billy Graham’s organization has moved away from it in recent years. It doesn’t do much for cross-cultural relations, especially in the Muslim world.

Going forward, Campus Crusade’s official moniker will be one of its informal nicknames: Cru.

Campus Crusade didn’t change its name only for cross-cultural concerns—the organization expanded its ministries beyond college and university campuses years ago, so the old name really didn’t tell the whole story.

But neither does Cru.

The bad news is, they’re going to have to build a new brand from scratch in the mind of the public. But that could also be good news, depending on what kind of reputation Campus Crusade already has in different parts of the country. Sometimes it’s good to start with a clean slate.

When I was in college, I was involved with InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, and because of the word Varsity, a lot of people thought we were an athletic organization. We’d shorten the name occasionally to IV or IVCF, but people didn’t know what those meant either.

Then there’s the United Methodist campus ministry, Wesley Foundation. It sounds more like a fundraising charity than a college fellowship group, so most people I know just call it “the Wesley” or some local shortened variation. Short form names are all the rage, especially with the Twitter generation.

Will Campus Crusade’s new short form name catch on? Probably. But I doubt they'll turn down a check made out to the old name.

It’s a little like IHOP. I’m old enough to remember when the restaurant chain was referred to by its long form name, International House of Pancakes. I guess people got tired of saying that, so “IHOP” was born. The company probably figured they’d just go along with everyone else and make it official. And IHOP has a lot more than pancakes on its menu now, so it’s a win-win.

There’s also DQ, KFC, and FedEx. Most Dairy Queens also serve hot food now, most of which is decidedly non-dairy. And Kentucky Fried Chicken changed its name to KFC in 1991, then brought the old name and logo back as a variation in 2007. If you go to their website today, neither name can be found at the top of the page, only a likeness of KFC founder Colonel Sanders. Perhaps the chain is taking a cue from Prince and wants to be known by a symbol now, not a name.

And is there anyone on the planet who still calls FedEx by the name Federal Express?

Names are a big deal, especially when you’re establishing a brand. But when a brand outgrows its name or the name becomes misleading, it’s time to consider changing it. With Campus Crusade, it was a little bit of both.

Question: What can established churches and denominations learn from businesses and organizations that have changed their names or re-branded themselves in recent years?

BLOG: Mark Driscoll and Social Media

Thu, 14 Jul 2011 05:00:00 GMT

When Mark Driscoll put his foot in his mouth on Facebook last week, it was the status update heard around the world. Rachel Held Evans quickly labeled him a bully and encouraged people to contact Mars Hill Church to request that Driscoll be held accountable by the church’s elders.

Apparently it worked--Mark responded, not with an apology, but with a something closer to a concession--that perhaps he should handle sensitive issues more judiciously and in a more appropriate forum than Twitter or Facebook. He even mentioned his executive elders “sitting him down” for a talk.

I received some feedback about the incident--dubbed Effemigate by a few of the blogs-- and while most people were in agreement with Rachel, some criticized her for her tone. It occurred to me that Rachel actually resorted to bullying Mark to remedy the situation. (Bullying means intimidating or making one’s way aggressively.) That’s not a swipe at her--some would argue that if you buy into her charge that Driscoll was being a bully, then it’s necessary to intimidate the bully in return. Fight fire with fire. "Stand up to him" is how Rachel put it. Call it what you want, she got results. (It worked for me in middle school too. I actually became friends with a long-time nemesis by beating him up.)

But I don’t buy her argument that Driscoll was a bully. I didn’t find his original comment to be the big deal so many made it out to be. It’s not like he approached the Don Imus level of reckless. But he did learn a lesson about the power of social media. Once you put something out there, you can’t take it back even if you want to.

In this age of instant push-button publishing, there are hardly any barriers to keep us from sharing our thoughts with the world as soon as we think them. That’s both exhilarating and terrifying, because if we fire something off from our smartphone before we’ve given it enough thought, we can create major problems for ourselves and others. And sometimes it’s not what we say, but how we say it that gets us into trouble.

Driscoll eventually deleted his original post, but not before it was immortalized in blog posts and screen captures. Still, in the grand scheme of things, this incident didn’t amount to much more than a little row.

I'm sure Congressman Anthony Weiner would be more than happy to trade scandals with Mark Driscoll.

BLOG: Receiving God's Word

Mon, 11 Jul 2011 05:00:00 GMT

In Matthew 13:3-9, Jesus speaks of a person scattering seed that falls in four places: on a path, on rocks, among thorns and on good soil. Some people interpret this parable to be specifically about evangelism, but I believe there’s more to it than that. At its most basic level, the parable is about hearing God’s word. That being the case, we can apply some of the principles we find here to any situation where the word of God is being communicated.

Most of us probably call this the parable of the sower, but a better name might be the parable of the soils, because soil is essentially the focus of Jesus’ message here. (The new CEB actually uses Parable of the Soils in some of its headings.) Note that there’s no big to-do here about sowing methods. The sower simply scatters seed, and seems to scatter it somewhat indiscriminately, not overly concerned about getting it all on the “good” soil. And interestingly enough, the first type of soil mentioned has several factors contributing to its lack of suitability. Let’s take a look at that soil in the first three gospels:

As he was scattering it, some fell on the path where it was crushed, and the birds in the sky came and ate it. (Luke 8:5)
As he was scattering seed, some fell on the path, and birds came and ate it. (Matthew 13:4)
As he was scattering seed, some fell on the path; and the birds came and ate it. (Mark 4:4)

Now let’s look at Jesus’ explanation in the same three gospels:

The seed on the path are those who hear, but then the devil comes and steals the word from their hearts so that they won’t believe and be saved. (Luke 8:12)
Whenever people hear the word about the kingdom and don’t understand it, the evil one comes and carries off what was planted in their hearts. This is the seed that was sown on the path. (Matthew 13:19)
This is the meaning of the seed that fell on the path: When the word is scattered and people hear it, right away Satan comes and steals the word that was planted in them. (Mark 4:15)

Here are my observations and takeaways:

Paths are not plowed ground. No good crop can come from ground that hasn’t been prepared for planting. On a personal level, we are responsible for making sure our hearts are ready to receive (and understand) God’s word. We are also accountable for helping other believers do this. Worship, prayer, conviction (brought by the Holy Spirit) and repentance all play significant roles in preparing our hearts to receive what God has to tell us.
Other people will sometimes trample our hearts and the word of God. If the soil in this parable represents our heart, then we need to consider the possibility. Our interactions and relationships with other people (on whatever level) can soften or harden our heart. This is why scripture tells us how important it is to guard our heart. If plowed ground represents a heart that’s sensitive to leading of the Holy Spirit, then a hardened path represents a hard heart that has been desensitized.
Giving the wrong people inappropriate levels of access to our lives can literally make it difficult for us to receive the word of God. The word will be crushed before it has a chance to take root, and even if it grows a little, what comes up will be quickly trampled down. The devil can easily steal the word of God from someone whose heart is hard. When we don’t keep our heart prepared to hear from God, we make it easy for Satan to take God’s word from us. The sad part is, we usually don’t even realize what happened, because God’s word never even penetrated our heart. Sometimes when we hear the word of God, we make the mistake of reasoning with the devil instead of receiving it right away.

Questions to Consider:

How can you better prepare your heart to receive God’s word this week?
Who (or what) in your life might be helping to harden your heart?
Who is crushing the word of God?
How can you begin to surround yourself with people who will build you up instead of tear you down?
What specific choices can you make that will help keep the enemy from stealing God’s word from you?

BLOG: Don't Do Ministry Without It

Thu, 07 Jul 2011 05:00:00 GMT

One of the most helpful tools I’ve ever used for ministry is a little philosophy that Methodist movement founder John Wesley picked up from a Moravian friend, missionary Peter Böhler. The year was 1738, and Wesley had not yet experienced his famous Aldersgate conversion. He was burned out and somehow couldn’t grasp the concept of justification by faith alone. He told himself, “How can you preach to others if you don’t have faith yourself?” John asked Peter if he should stop preaching. Böhler replied, “By no mean.”

Then Wesley asked, “But what can I preach?”

Böhler answered, “Preach faith till you have it; and then, because you have it, you will preach faith.”

John took Peter’s advice, and although Wesley wasn’t even sure of his own salvation, he shared the Gospel with a guy on death row named Clifford. Thus began a long ministry of stepping beyond the bounds of his perceived faith to do extraordinary works for God. I believe this idea of “preaching faith till we have it” is one of the major keys to experiencing power in our ministries even today.

The author of Hebrews writes that “faith is the reality of what we hope for, the proof of what we don’t see.” (Hebrews 11:1 CEB), and in Romans 4:17, Paul tells that God “gives life to the dead and calls things that don’t exist into existence (CEB).” Real Biblical faith cannot be based on empirical evidence or even on feelings. It must be based only upon what God has said or revealed. According to 2 Corinthians 5:7, “we live by faith and not by sight.” I believe we could substitute “feelings” for sight and that verse would be equally true. The Bible is saying that when it comes to the things of God, we often must believe things before we see them. I realize that this may seem counterintuitive, because many of us grew up hearing the mantra, “Seeing is believing.” Indeed, that’s the way the world generally operates. But in the Kingdom of God, the converse is true. First we believe, then we see. “Preach faith until you have it,” is essentially derived from Hebrews 11:1 and 2 Corinthians 5:7. Peter Böhler wasn’t pulling it out of thin air.

The Böhler Principle can revolutionize the way we do ministry, because it sets us free from the idea that we can only teach something up to the level we’ve personally experienced. This realization has been especially liberating to me as I’ve taught others about prayer and fasting. Although I’ve learned much about prayer, both from personal experience and second-hand, I’ve struggled with discipline and consistency in my prayer life. The temptation is for me to avoid teaching on the topic at all until I “get it together”, or to feel that I don’t have authority to teach beyond my own point of “mastery”. “Preach faith till you have it,” turns that fear on its head.

One of the most significant things about Peter Böhler’s radical idea is that it places the teacher in the role of student. Once a teacher or mentor understands that they are also teaching themselves (or more accurately being used by God to teach themselves), they are less likely to “hold back” or feel inhibited when they minister to others. As a result, teaching will become more about stretching faith boundaries and less about simply imparting information.

“Preaching faith till we have it,” doesn’t make us hypocrites, as long as we do it in the right spirit, and not in a pretentious way. On the contrary, it makes us fellow disciples with flaws that others can relate to. Think about it-- no one wants to be instructed by someone who isn’t secure enough to risk letting their student’s faith surpass their own. And that’s what sometimes happens when we explore new frontiers with the people we minister to.

“Preach faith till you have it; and then, because you have it, you will preach faith.” John Wesley listened to his friend and built a ministry that’s still changing the world over two centuries later. Shouldn't we take the same advice?

AUDIO: Interview w/ Jon Acuff

Wed, 06 Jul 2011 05:00:00 GMT

Do you know what your "dream job" is? Have you ever thought about leaving your day job to chase that dream? Jon Acuff has some thoughts on the subject. After graduating from college, Jon held eight full time jobs in eight years. He's now a blogger, speaker, best-selling author, and member of the Dave Ramsey team.

This is my recent interview with the best selling author of Stuff Christians Like. His latest book, Quitter: Closing the Gap Between Your Day Job and Your Dream Job is now available, and has already made the Wall Street Journal's business bestseller list.

Jon is headlining the Quitter Conference, a one day event, July 30 in Nashville.

ARTICLE: Unconventional Author Takes Bible Beyond Christian Club

Thu, 30 Jun 2011 05:00:00 GMT

I've been a Stephen Miller fan since the late 90's. He writes Bible reference books that are unlike any you've ever seen, and his latest title, The Complete Visual Bible, is in my opinion his best so far. I recently interviewed Stephen about his writing and his unique style.

You're known for Bible reference books that take a different approach from most titles in that genre. What is your mission as a writer? What are you hoping to accomplish?

Just one thing. Get people into the Bible to read it for themselves.

I want them to make up their own minds about what it says, instead of trusting other people to do their thinking for them. That’s one reason I don’t preach at readers in my books. The other is that I’m not a preacher. Never wanted to be. Ever. In a million years.

You wrote in the introduction to The Complete Visual Bible that your books take you a year to complete. Walk me through the process of a Stephen Miller book from your first idea through publication.

Looking over my shoulder at where I’ve been makes me tired. Looking ahead is what’s energizing. But let me see if I can backtrack a bit on The Complete Visual Bible.

The idea. I’ve worked with Barbour Publishing long enough now that they don’t ask me to write the 40-page book proposals I used to write, complete with samples of what goes in the book. Instead, I give them a list of book ideas that interest me. They pick the one that most interests them. And we’re off to the races—in a one-year marathon.

The writing. I wrote my way through the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation. I was at my desk each weekday by around 8 a.m. Thirty-minute lunch break at noon, with the Kansas City Star newspaper and a national TV news station running in the background. Back at it until around 4 p.m., though much later on some days. And there’s occasional work on weekends.

I researched and then wrote each one-page or two-page feature in the book—a bit like you’d write magazine articles. So this particular book is one heaping helping of magazine-style articles.

After writing each article, I’d do the art research and most of the acquisition for that piece. I avoided the normal stock photo companies because their images show up so often in other Bible reference books. It’s a lot more trouble getting unique art from individual photographers and artists all over the world. (I had to wait on one photo of a camel race until the photographer in Pakistan got back from the Himalayas. He said he’d send me the photo when he got back. I asked him not to fall off the mountain. Jinxed myself. I went mountain biking a few weeks later with my son: Whistler Mountain, where the 2010 Olympic skiing events were held. I found Canadian medical care accommodating. I recommend their self-service morphine.) I think the extra effort in searching out good art is worth it. I end up with lots of images that have never been published before. I also make most my own maps, with the help of NASA data and some super geeky cartography software, which is a royal pain.

Reviewing the work of others. I’m always nervous when I get back the edited pages and then the designed pages. The copy editing focuses mainly on matters of style and fact-checking. I don’t need to worry much anymore about editors making the writing sound starch formal, dirt dry, and ugly as all get out. Used to be a problem with other publishers. Especially denominational publishers. More than anything those editors want to keep the Boss happy. And I’m not talking about God. Here’s the way to keep bureaucratic bosses happy: don’t draw attention. And here’s the way to keep from drawing attention: be boring.

Design is always a problem. We always end up having to cut my guts out: words and pictures and maps. That’s okay with me. Each two-page canvas needs to look gorgeous. And sometimes we simply have too many words or too many images to pull that off. So we have to pull something out. My guts. It’s time-consuming, and a tad painful if we’re killing a map I spent 2 days creating.

The give and take at this stage can get a bit testy at times, especially on my end. I have to work on phrasing myself less bluntly. Take it from me, “Gag me green,” is not a good thing to say to a designer.

Fortunately for everyone, Barbour has some excellent designers working on these complex projects. And they are complex, perhaps the most time-intensive books Barbour does at the moment.

You've said that your target audience includes the unchurched, those who aren't familiar with the Bible, atheists, and agnostics. How do these books make it into the hands of your intended audience?

Most of those folks wouldn’t be caught carcass dead in a Christian bookstore. Lucky for me Barbour Publishing has some excellent resources for getting my books out to where the people are: drugstores, rest stops, restaurant gift shops, and discount stores like Wal-Mart. They’re also available online at sites like Amazon.

Tell me about some of the challenges of presenting the Bible in fresh ways to a new audience.

I probably shouldn’t tell you too much. It could get me in trouble.

I get pressure from just about everyone in the Christian book publishing world to make my books more acceptable to the traditional Christian market. I have to fight that battle from time to time. When you target people outside the Christian Club—and that’s what Christianity is to many outsiders—you approach the Bible stories and teachings differently than if you’re writing for insiders. You start by asking the tough questions they ask, and by making the seemingly irreverent observations they do.

Example. The Song of Songs is a book about sex. You’ve got two youngsters juiced up on hormones talking the talk. The gent essentially says, “Hey babe, I’m going to climb you like a tree. And you know what I’m going to do to those dates hanging there!”

Let me tell you, that gets the attention of readers outside the Christian Club. Some of them will actually crack open a Bible to see if that’s really in there. But tell me, how on earth am I going to write that in a way that gets the attention of those readers, without offending some longtime Christians? Beats me.

So I’ve stopped worrying about offending them. I put them out of my mind when I’m writing. Instead, I think about non-Christians and newbies when I write—people like my neighbors. After all, when Jesus gave his commission to the disciples he didn’t say, “Hey guys, go talk among yourselves.”

There are plenty of people writing for the traditional Christian crowd. They don’t need me doing it, too.

One thing I’ve discovered though is that if you can write a Bible reference book that’s interesting enough to engage non-Christians, you’re going to pick up a lot of Christians who have been bored out of their gourd by traditional Bible study books.

How do you deal with writer's block?

I don’t get writer’s block. That’s for fiction writers.

I was reading your books back in the "black and white days" before they looked like slick, colorful magazines. Besides the obvious visual component, what has changed about your books in the past 10 or 15 years?

Yeah, some of those black and white books are still out there. If I were the editor, I’d retire them. It’s not a black and white world anymore.

In recent years I’ve been allowed to add my personality to the writing. Barbour lets me write like I talk. Most other publishers I’ve worked with have wanted the writing more formal. Even Reader’s Digest Books, known for its easy-reading style, wanted nothing to do with humor, wise cracks, and the kind of attitude you might expect in a magazine article. At least they didn’t want them in their Bible reference books.

Even Barbour had an internal discussion about that when I submitted my first book to them: Who’s Who and Where’s Where in the Bible. Thankfully, the editor backed me up. The sales of that book pretty much gave us all the green light for more of the same. That book won the Christian Retailing award as the non-fiction book of the year. Actually, it tied for first with a book about Billy Graham, who’s no pushover.

You leave a lot of questions and controversies unanswered-- or you present multiple views and let the readers decide. Why do you use this approach?

Personally, I’ve had it up to here with preachers telling me what to think—in their sermons, and in their sermons repackaged as books.

My own pastor is a rare exception to the rule—rare at least in the history of my pastors. My distaste for this all started when I was in grade school—first grade as I recall. My pastor wrote a note for me, excusing me from square dancing in gym class—on religious grounds. I still can’t dance. I went to a wedding over the weekend, and it bums me out that I don’t have any idea how to get my groove on. Heck, even one of my former pastors was shaking it up with his Mrs. and their kids. He’s another exception to the rule. Obviously.

Many of the controversies I skip don’t have any clear-cut direction in the Bible. Abortion, for example. The Bible doesn’t talk about it, though people were practicing it at the time.

It really irritates some Christians when I say that. In fact, I lost a book deal because I refused to take a position on that topic—and I had already written the book on contract. (They lost their advance, too. Ain’t no way I was going to give it back when they knew from the beginning that my position was not to take a position.)

The editor and a sales guy tried to convince me that the Bible talks about abortion because it forbids murder. But every murder I know about in the Bible is of a breathing person. And there’s that controversial passage about a man purposely injuring a pregnant woman and having to pay only a fine if the baby dies. But if the woman dies, he pays with his life.

There are Christians on both sides of most tough issues. I prefer to let readers hear from both sides so they can make up their own minds.

Do you ever hear from your critics? If so, what are their biggest issues with your books?

Surprisingly, I get very little criticism thrown at me. When it comes, it’s often unpredictable. And sometimes weird. Like the fellow who said the Holocaust never happened, and that Jesus had blue eyes.

I always write people back—once. Not twice or more. I told him that my dad fought in General George Patton’s army during World War II, and that he knew otherwise about the Holocaust.

Some folks catch mistakes I’ve made, or they tell me about phrasing that confused them. I love those kinds of emails. We get the mistakes corrected before the next printing.

You've mentioned that you teach the Bible in your church. How does your research as an author contribute to your teaching? How does your ministry at church help your writing?

Question 1. Well, it helped last Sunday when the discussion leader couldn’t pronounce Zerubbabel. It’s (zuh ROO bub bull). But, sadly, I wasn’t able to help another Sunday School teacher several years ago when he pronounced Yahweh YAH-whoo. Once that came out of his mouth, he was beyond help. He’s one reason I often include phonetic pronunciations in my books. For the record, it’s YAH way.

In my writing, I try to pull out interesting background facts. I do that in my teaching, too.

I’ll even take a stab at paraphrasing the Bible for the class. Proverbs is especially fun. I still remember the class’s reaction when I gave them the handout that read: “If you build a fire in your pants, what makes you think you won’t get burned?” (Proverbs 6:27, my paraphrase). One lady couldn’t believe it was in the Bible, so she cracked it open to see for herself. That’s exactly what I’m hoping readers will do.

Question 2. As for the flip side of your question, leading Bible study classes helps me stay focused on the kinds of questions people are asking about the Bible and Christianity. Even longtime Christians seem pretty doggone unfamiliar with Bible stories I’ve heard all my life. So when I write, I don’t take for granted that my readers know much of anything I’m writing about. A journalism prof of mine once told me to write news that way: “Pretend your readers are from Mars.” Good advice, I think, though probably more than half of my readers are from Venus.

How do you decide which photos and images to use in your books? How time-consuming is it to acquire these images?

I have one phrase I repeat over and over to myself when I’m looking for images: “Artfully informative.” I want the image to be visually strong enough to vacuum the reader’s eyeballs into the page. And I want the image to say something about the topic.

The art research and acquisition part of my job is incredibly time consuming. Some images can take hours to find, days to track down, and months to get. It’s my fault. I want the best images available. I don’t want to get outdone by some other hardworking grunt illustrating a competing book. I want the readers to find their best stuff in my books. If that’s pride, I’ll take a little of the Lord’s grace right about now.

You've carved out quite a niche for yourself in Christian publishing. Who would you say is your "competition"?

I’m not sure there’s anyone out there just yet with my combo of lavishly illustrated, light-hearted Bible reference books. They’ll come in time. But I hope I’ll always be my own snowflake.

In the meantime, I feel a lot of pressure from myself to make each book better than the one before. The Complete Visual Bible is a tough book to follow. But I’m doing the best I can.

Every day when I’m working on something, I remind myself that it’s important to do it well. There’s always a temptation to rush forward—to become an Early Settler, a writer who settles too early on something less than excellent. Deadlines can do that to you. So can procrastination.

What are your goals and strategies for expanding your ministry and the reach of your books?

I guess I should probably develop some strategies, huh. It’s just that I love writing. The other stuff is a chore. Still, I’m toying with doing some freebie videos related to ideas in my book. And I should probably get out and speak more. But that’s the flip side of the coin from the monk-like work of writing.

I do have a nice web site, though, thanks to my son. He co-owns an online marketing company. I’m glad we put that kid through college. That was a good strategy.

Your books have sold a lot of copies, but you've done it under the radar, so to speak. How did you manage to pull that off?

Yeah, well I’m forwarding this question to Barbour’s marketing department.

In fairness to them, they’re trying. But there’s only so much you can do with a writer who looks like a hound dog.

Have you ever considered moving beyond print into multimedia?

Barbour is working on turning The Complete Guide to the Bible into a iPad format. And we’ve talked about multimedia, which is something you need to plan for from the get-go. That’ll be even more complex than the complex print books I’m doing now. You add video of Bible lands. Audio of words tough to pronounce. Instructional clips for Bible study teachers. Maybe pictures of my kids.

Or not.

The market seems headed into multimedia. But at the moment I don’t think anyone knows the best way to get from here to there. It’ll come. I’d like to be there when it does.

Tell me about your next project.

I have two books in the pipeline at the moment.

Coming out in the spring of 2012 is Bible Snapshots. It’s like a bunch of books in one. It has “Bible: Fast Pass,” which is an overview of the entire Bible along with articles about how we got the Bible, how to shop for a Bible, and how to study the Bible. There’s a “Christianity: Fast Pass,” which has articles about the Christian faith. There’s even a section for atheists: “10 Tough Questions Atheists Ask.” I don’t preach there. Somebody else can do that. I just give some of the answers Bible experts give to questions atheists raise. They’re legit questions that deserve honest answers, even if the answer is “Dogged if I know. But in God I trust.”

There are a bunch of other sections, too, like the “Bible Survival Guide.” The subtitle pretty much explains that section: “When life gets dicey and faith runs thin: Bible advice, encouragement, and hope.”

That book is already at the design studio.

The book I’m writing at the moment is an illustrated Bible dictionary.

So one of my first thoughts each morning is about which entry I’ll be writing as I sip my after-breakfast coffee, since I’m writing from A to Z.

“Delilah” is a good reason to get up.

“Demon,” not so much. But there’s the coffee.

BLOG: Moving God

Wed, 29 Jun 2011 05:00:00 GMT

What kinds of things do you pray for? Only the impossible stuff? Things over which you have absolutely no control? What about requests that are “safe”?

The things we pray for probably more than anything else are impacted by our views on what’s actually happening during prayer. Why do we pray? To change God’s mind, to get results from heaven, or to grow in our faith and get closer to God?

As my own understanding of prayer has developed, I’ve found it helpful to read Biblical accounts of how people interacted with God using prayer. One in particular caught my eye yesterday.

Genesis 25:19-34 tells us the familiar story of Jacob and Esau, the fraternal twins who were such opposites that they didn’t even get along in the womb. Nothing about their lives was smooth sailing, even their conceptions.

Isaac didn’t get married until he was 40, and at some point it became apparent that Rebekah was having trouble getting pregnant. God had already promised Isaac's father Abraham that he would have more descendants than there were stars in the sky or grains of sand on the beach. And Isaac no doubt knew that God’s promise was going to be fulfilled through him. I’m not sure whether Isaac thought the pressure was on him or on God to make sure the promise was fulfilled, but he apparently decided he was going to do more than just sit on his duff and wait.

Isaac knew better than to try to “help God out” by getting a female slave to be a surrogate mother. (It probably took Sarah and Abraham a while to live down that little episode.) So Isaac did what we often do when things are beyond our pay grade. He prayed.

“Isaac prayed to the LORD for his wife, since she was unable to have children. The LORD was moved by his prayer, and his wife Rebekah became pregnant.” (Genesis 25:21 CEB)

We aren’t given every detail here. Isaac was 60 when Jacob and Esau were born, so we know that he and Rebekah had been childless for 20 years. But we don’t know when Isaac started praying or how many times he had to pray before God took action. All we know for sure is that Isaac’s intercession moved God and brought fulfillment of the promise.

Isaac wasn’t just praying in vain-- this passage portrays his prayers as pivotal. He knew what God had promised-- and still he prayed anyway. This is part of a seemingly paradoxical pattern in the Bible where God makes a promise but requires the beneficiary in some way to take possession of what’s promised.

The LORD was moved by Isaac’s prayer, and there’s no reason to think that he isn’t moved by prayer today. We can’t presume that we’ll get everything we want when we pray, and we also can’t take for granted that the will of God will be done automatically if we don’t pray.

James 5:16 says that “the prayer of the righteous person is powerful in what it can achieve.” Some translations use the words effectual or effective in this verse. The main idea is that the people of God can pray and get results.

Prayers can move God.

Shane Raynor is a managing editor for Ministry Matters.
Connect and Subscribe: Facebook | Twitter | RSS

BLOG: Politicians and Private Morality

Mon, 27 Jun 2011 05:00:00 GMT

I’ve been checking out a recent survey from Public Religion Research Institute that indicates a greater willingness by Americans to give political figures a pass for sexual misdeeds than financial ones. Stated another way, more of us are tougher on bribe recipients and tax cheats than we are on philanderers and adulterers, both real and virtual. Over 90% of Americans think bribery is a serious problem for a politician, and more than 80% think the same about cheating on taxes. But that number falls to two-thirds for sex with a prostitute, two-thirds for “sexting” a non-spouse, and 72% (or 69%) for adultery (depending on whether the politician is male or female, respectively). Over 75% said that lying to cover up moral failings or sexual misdeeds was serious.

I was surprised by some of these numbers at first, but as I analyzed them, I thought of several possible explanations for the survey results:

We relate easier to sexual sin than financial impropriety. Most of us at some point have probably been tempted to some degree by an affair or other sexual sin, and we tend to cut others more slack when we can see ourselves in their shoes. Hypocrisy is practically an unpardonable sin in American culture, so we’re more likely to take a “live and let live” approach when political figures struggle with the type of private sins that more of us are vulnerable to ourselves.

We’re more likely to hold people accountable for transgressions that are perceived to be against us. When Arnold Schwarzenegger cheated on his wife, for example, most of us likely didn’t take that as personally as we would have if he’d taken a bribe. A bribe would have been widely viewed as a betrayal of public trust, while an affair was considered a betrayal of the covenant with his spouse alone.

We try to separate a person’s character from their job performance. But this makes no sense. If a public figure isn’t faithful to his or her spouse, how can we trust them to be faithful to an oath of office? Is it realistic to expect people to be more loyal to their employer than they are to their husband or wife? As taxpayers, we’re the ones who “hire” politicians. Knowing that a politician has commited adultery, yet still trusting that same person to be politically honest is naive at best.

Bill Maher, host of HBO’s Real Time, has ridiculed the American public for judging the private sex lives of its politicians. I’ve seen the same sentiment in other places, most notably in parts of the European press. As a celebrity, Maher likely views the line between someone’s personal life and public life as virtually sacrosanct -- certainly more defined than the average citizen might see it-- and that has probably had an impact on his views. And since we’re living in a reality where nearly everyone has a cell phone camera, perhaps more of us are beginning to recognize a need to clearly define such a line. Maybe we’re becoming more willing to look the other way when a politician fails in his or her personal life because, in a world that’s becoming less and less private, we subconsciously want to protect our own privacy.

That kind of empathy from voters isn’t wise, but it’s understandable.

Shane Raynor is a managing editor for Ministry Matters.
Connect and Subscribe: Facebook | Twitter | RSS

BLOG: Evangelicalism: Getting Our Game Back

Thu, 23 Jun 2011 05:00:00 GMT

If you believe the secular press, evangelicalism is on its way out. Even the late Michael Spencer predicted a major breakdown of the evangelical movement two years ago in his essay “The Coming Evangelical Collapse”. This week, Religion News Service distributed an article titled “Evangelicals See Declining Influence in U.S.” which ran prominently on the Christian Century and Huffington Post websites, among others. So is evangelicalism falling out of favor, or does the press have it completely wrong?

From my perspective, evangelicalism is doing fine, but the term evangelical has seen better days. I see no evidence that the core elements of evangelical theology (conversion, evangelism, Biblical authority, and the centrality of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ) are in decline. The word evangelical, however, is now a loaded term in American culture, because it has unfortunately become associated with conservative politics and the Republican party in recent years. That’s not meant to be a swipe at the GOP or at political conservatives-- because it would be just as unhealthy for the word evangelical to carry widespread liberal or Democratic connotations.

In any event, whether you believe the evangelical movement is on the decline or not, you’d probably concede that evangelical Christians could do more to avoid bad PR and inaccurate characterizations. In public perception, we’ve fallen off our game-- but the good news is it’s not terribly difficult to get our game back. Here are some ideas on how we can do it:

Major on the majors. Remember those four elements of evangelical theology I mentioned? Those are generally what unite evangelical Christians-- not political parties, economic schools of thought, preferred Bible translations, evangelism strategies, or opinions on social issues. Those elements should certainly be shaped by our theology, but they aren’t central to our faith. So let’s stop making such a big deal about them.

Focus on the grassroots. Society is transformed only when people are transformed. It’s not the other way around! Injustices and evils in the world are symptoms of what’s going on in the human heart. When evangelical Christians focus too much on electing the right politicians or passing the right laws, we’re emphasizing externals instead of changing hearts. That never produces lasting transformation. Social and political activism have their place. But some things have to change from the bottom up-- and from the inside out.

Be optimistic. No one likes hanging around negative people. Evangelical Christians should be known for spreading hope, not fear or pessimism. Finding and highlighting the potential in our society is never as easy as pointing out the things that are wrong, but it’s much more effective. As much as anything else, I believe this is where we’ve lost our way.

Stop whining. I’m not sure exactly when, but at some point, evangelical Christians developed a victim mentality. We complain that we’re portrayed unfairly by Hollywood and the news media, we think the government is out to get us, and we blow controversies like the “War on Christmas” out of proportion. People who are always complaining or making excuses don’t attract other people. Unfair things happen, and Christians do sometimes get the short end of the stick, but playing the victim card rarely solves the problem.

If you must label yourself evangelical, use it as an adjective, not a noun. This is such a small thing, but I believe it impacts our thinking about our identity. If we refer to ourselves as evangelical Christians, not evangelicals, we’re acknowledging that our identity is first and foremost found in being a Christian, not in a particular label or brand of Christianity. I actually try to avoid labels and modifiers altogether, not because I’m trying to hide my theology, but because I don’t like drawing lines unnecessarily. Labels mean different things to different people, and I’ve discovered that many who reject the evangelical label don’t necessarily reject evangelical theology. So I simply use the term “Christian” whenever possible.

Question: Do you think the evangelical movement has lost its focus? If so, what steps should be taken to recover it?

Shane Raynor is a managing editor for Ministry Matters.
Connect and Subscribe: Facebook | Twitter | RSS

ARTICLE: 5 Keys to Denominational Survival

Wed, 22 Jun 2011 05:00:00 GMT

USA Today reported last week on the decline of the Southern Baptist denomination. Last year, Southern Baptist churches baptized around 5% fewer people than in the preceding year. Their total membership numbers also dropped for the fourth year in a row.

So much for the theory that conservative evangelical churches and denominations are immune to net membership losses. I still believe that evangelical congregations are more likely to grow, but clearly there’s more going on here than just theology.

Every denomination does things a little differently, so it’s difficult to write a one size fits all prescription for reversing negative trends for every kind of church. But there are some steps churches can take to survive.

1. Stop trying to survive. The sooner you face the fact that the Kingdom of God won’t grind to a halt if your denomination vanishes, the better off you’ll be. Even your theological distinctives will survive without you if they’re worth their salt. Self-preservation mode is a dangerous place for any Christian group to be, because it means that the organization has gone from being a movement to being an institution. Institutions don’t capture people’s imaginations-- movements do.

2. Cut bureaucracy. In business, there are cost centers and there are profit centers. A profit center is a unit or department that contributes to the overall financial results of a company. A cost center is a department that doesn’t produce direct profit and adds to the costs of running a company. Cost centers are created for the sake of the profit centers, not the other way around! If a cost center isn’t indirectly creating more profit than it’s spending, a smart company reduces the size of that cost center or eliminates it altogether. But in the church, we’re afraid to do this, partly because we don’t want to be responsible for good people losing their jobs.

The reality is that a leaner bureaucracy would create more opportunities for ministry (and even some ministry jobs) at the local level, which is where church growth actually happens. It’s not the local church’s responsibility to worry about saving jobs at a church agency. It’s the church agency’s job to do everything it can to help the local church grow, and to do it in the most efficient way possible. When that’s the priority, all the boats should rise.

3. Get rid of national marketing. It doesn’t work well, especially if brand consistency is non-existent within your church. Instead of running expensive, inefficient national campaigns, denominational communications agencies should focus their energy on adapting successful local church campaigns for use by like-minded churches in other markets. There are innovative, growing churches in every denomination, and it makes much more sense using field-tested marketing from the trenches than trying to use a top-down, one size fits all approach.

4. Rethink and simplify the ordination process. As a member of the United Methodist Church, I’m thinking about my denomination here, but I’m pretty sure there are other denominations that would benefit from this advice. Four years of college and several additional years of seminary followed by a grinding mill of boards and committees is overkill. Yes, I know it’s supposed to weed out the unsuitable candidates, but I suspect it weeds out just as many good candidates. Some megachurches, multi-site churches, and church associations are developing alternative tracks to ordination. If denominations don’t address the red tape and problems with their ordination processes, they’ll continue to lose gifted potential pastors to nondenominational churches.

5. Plant more churches, especially in cities. More people live in cities than in rural areas, yet for some denominations, most of their buildings and resources aren’t in urban areas. Mike Slaughter, pastor of Ginghamsburg Church, correctly points out that the United Methodist Church, for example, is essentially sending pastors to buildings rather than to people. Good stewardship of Kingdom resources means using those resources to plant and nurture new churches rather than keeping the dying ones on life support. And churches should be planted where the people are. That’s common sense.

What prescriptions do you suggest for stimulating denominational growth? And does it matter whether denominations are growing or dying anyway?

Shane Raynor is a managing editor for Ministry Matters.
Connect and Subscribe: Facebook | Twitter | RSS

BLOG: Church Trial

Tue, 21 Jun 2011 05:00:00 GMT

The Casey Anthony trial is getting non-stop coverage right now, but there’s another trial taking place in Wisconsin that’s getting a different kind of national attention. Amy DeLong, a United Methodist pastor, is facing two charges of violating church law--for officiating at a same sex union and for being a “self-avowed, practicing homosexual." Clergy members can have their ordination revoked in the United Methodist Church if convicted on either charge.

Many people probably don’t even realize that there’s such a thing as a church trial. They happen occasionally in the United Methodist Church, which, like the United States government, consists of three branches--the legislative, executive, and judicial branches.

But some United Methodists who probably don’t have a problem with the legislative and executive branches are beside themselves over the prospect of a church trial. Prominent United Methodist blogger Dan Dick, for example, had this to say about the DeLong trial:

...a child of God, a sister-in-Christ, and a member of the family of humankind is going through a stressful and excruciating process of having not only her conduct, but her very personhood judged by the church she feels called to serve. I don’t care what an individual might feel about sexual orientation and the vagaries of human sexuality in general. I care little at the moment about the legalism of the Book of Discipline and a church that runs its most important business by parliamentary procedure law rather than Spirit-filled grace.

The fact is, church trials are part of the package when you try to run a denomination like a republic--so let’s not try to paint this trial as another Inquisition. Without the judicial branch, General Conference legislation would have no teeth, and bishops would probably have too much power (or perhaps too little!) Church trials aren’t an embarrassment, and they shouldn’t be a cause for fear. If anything, the United Methodist Church and other denominations should probably have a few more of them. The problem is, these trials only seem to happen (or we only hear about them) when it’s something related to sex or sexuality. There are plenty of other chargeable offenses in the Book of Discipline, including heresy. And laypeople can be tried too. (How many of you knew that?)

The United Methodist Book of Discipline says that “church trials are to be regarded as an expedient of last resort.” I agree, and I believe that’s been the approach in this case. Everything I’ve read seems to indicate that the denomination has looked the other way for years instead of dealing with Rev. DeLong’s violations. News sources say she told denominational officials about being in a same-sex relationship a number of years ago, and it’s been two years since she performed the same-sex union. Since Rev. DeLong has admitted to both violations, the only way she can be acquitted is through jury nullification. But that would set a terrible precedent and undermine our entire United Methodist system.

A minority of United Methodists disagree with church law on this issue--I understand that. But if you disagree with church law, you should work to change it in the appropriate venue--General Conference--not the judicial branch. No matter where you stand on the issue of homosexuality, this is an open and shut case. A court is no place for activism.

Dan Dick writes that the United Methodist Church “runs its most important business by parliamentary procedure law rather than Spirit-filled grace." But it’s unreasonable to think that the Holy Spirit can move through Bishops and General Conference delegates but not through a jury. The United Methodist system is far from perfect, but it works fairly well if each branch of government is running the way it should. That means if we throw out one part, we may as well throw out all of it.

Shane Raynor is a managing editor for Ministry Matters.
Connect and Subscribe: Facebook | Twitter | RSS

BLOG: Christians and the Pledge

Mon, 20 Jun 2011 05:00:00 GMT

The Pledge of Allegiance is back in the news again. This time it’s because the NBC television network cut the words “under God, indivisible” from a presentation during its coverage of the U.S. Open over the weekend. The negative feedback was so strong that NBC was forced to apologize to viewers during tournament coverage the same day. It seems pretty obvious that the words were left out intentionally, but we don’t know exactly who was responsible for the omission. Was it a decision of the network or one or two employees?

There are people who don’t like the Pledge for a lot of different reasons. Jehovah’s Witnesses say it’s idolatrous. Some atheists like Michael Newdow don’t like the reference to God. Religious left leader Barry Lynn isn’t an atheist, but he’s no fan of “under God” because he says it violates the Establishment Clause in the Constitution. Federal Courts, however, have disagreed with Dr. Newdow and Rev. Lynn, including the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Frankly I’m usually suspicious of people who have a major beef against the Pledge of Allegiance. More often than not, they seem to have an ax to grind against God or against the United States. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not into blind patriotism, but the America-bashing and revisionist history gets tiring. I believe that in spite of all our faults and sins, God has played a major role in the history of our country. We were founded on basic principles of freedom. Those principles are linked to America’s religious heritage-- even though we’ve learned some painful lessons over the years about what “liberty and justice for all” really means.

But my own Christian faith won’t allow me to get completely comfortable with the Pledge of Allegiance, and I say that as a patriot. Here’s why: I don’t like pledging unconditional allegiance to anyone or anything other than Jesus Christ. I wouldn’t mind pledging conditional allegiance, but that’s not the way the Pledge of Allegiance is written. Anyone who takes the power of their words seriously should examine it carefully. It’s kind of like a blank check. I don’t write blank checks.

When I share my misgivings about pledging allegiance, some folks no doubt view me as a traitor (or something close to it!) Yet what many people don’t realize is that the Pledge of Allegiance didn’t even appear on the scene until 1892, and it was actually written by a socialist. The pledge itself has been changed at least four times, with the latest change happening in 1954. Since the republic managed to survive for over 100 years without the Pledge of Allegiance, I don’t feel we should use it today as a litmus test for patriotism. I’m a huge fan of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. But the Pledge? Not so much. Pressuring people in a free society to say things just makes me uneasy.

Question: What do you think of the Pledge of Allegiance? Should Christians recite it?

Shane Raynor is a managing editor for Ministry Matters.
Connect and Subscribe: Facebook | Twitter | RSS

BLOG: How the Past Holds Us Back

Fri, 17 Jun 2011 05:00:00 GMT

I’ve sometimes used Philippians 3:13-14 as a source of comfort when I’ve made mistakes. In the passage, Paul writes, “Brothers and sisters, I myself don’t think I’ve reached it, but I do this one thing: I forget about the things behind me and reach out for the things ahead of me. The goal I pursue is the prize of God’s upward call in Christ Jesus. (CEB)”

Anyone who’s done ministry for any length of time will likely own up to making a few mistakes along the way. Okay, for some of us, it’s more than a few. But when I’ve messed up, this scripture has helped me clear my head. It reminds me that the past is gone, and that the future depends on what I do right now. If I look at everything in those terms, I realize I don’t have a second to lose playing the “what if” game or getting caught up in regret mode. The Greek word translated forget, epilanthanomai, also means neglecting, no longer caring for, losing out of mind.

We’re not supposed to spend valuable time living in the past. We should literally neglect the obligation we feel to spend time worrying and beating ourselves up. Certainly we should right any wrongs we’ve done to anyone else-- I’m not advocating a callous “move on” attitude if we’ve run over others while doing ministry. We should make things right and get back on track as quickly as possible. When we make bad decisions or we aren’t as effective as we think we should be, overanalyzing the situation robs from us the ministry we could be doing now, and it robs the people we could be ministering to. A high school history teacher of mine was fond of quoting English poet Edward Young: “Procrastination is the thief of time.” Good point. And so is worrying.

Many of us can probably understand applying this passage to our failures, but what about our successes? It might sound crazy, but past success can hold back ministry as much as past failure. Sometimes we coast on past wins and forget to go beyond them, avoiding new risks entirely. We settle into a comfort zone of “if it ain’t broke...” We’re essentially paralyzed by our past victories, afraid to move forward because we don’t want to ruin our winning streak if we fail. Trying to live up to the things God did through us previously can sometimes be just as hard as living up to someone else’s achievements.

Paul’s remedy is simple: forget what happened in the past. Not forget in the sense of losing from memory altogether, but forget in the sense of putting it out of our minds. No athlete is going to win if they spend too much time gazing at trophies or looking at old scars.

The road to the future always begins with the present, not the past.

Shane Raynor is a managing editor for Ministry Matters.
Connect and Subscribe: Facebook | Twitter | RSS

BLOG: Clergy Accountability Online

Thu, 16 Jun 2011 05:00:00 GMT

Should churches monitor the online activity of pastors? At least one conference in the United Methodist Church thinks so, and is now requiring pastors and ordination candidates to sign a disclosure agreement (downloadable below) covering clergy activity on social networks and other websites.

The policy was implemented by the Kentucky Annual Conference and applies to “any and all MySpace, Facebook, or other blog and website accounts.” (MySpace? Really?) By signing the agreement, clergy are agreeing to allow the conference to “examine” the accounts. Clergy are required to add the KAC as a friend on each account, and by signing, they demonstrate an understanding that “any information of a questionable nature on these sites that are written and/or posted by me, could affect my status as a Candidate/Resident in the Ordination process with the Kentucky Annual Conference.”

The document goes on to say that officials will regularly check their accounts and that they will be held accountable for “material that would be deemed questionable in light of the Social Principles and Doctrinal Standards of the United Methodist Church or that would show lack of judgment in understanding the standards and ethics of a United Methodist clergyperson.”

I’m glad there’s growing concern for clergy accountability, but this policy seems like overkill to me. And it’s actually unnecessary because there’s already a natural accountability with social networks. To some extent, we’re all held accountable for the things we post online, by our friends, family members, co-workers, and employers. For example, I’m friends on Facebook with a number of my co-workers, including the president of the company I work for. But I didn’t “friend” them to comply with a policy, I did it because I wanted to. And when I post anything, I’m always conscious of what I write. My rule of thumb is not to post anything that I wouldn’t be comfortable putting on a billboard next to the interstate.

I understand why the policy was implemented, but it doesn’t even address the biggest dangers of social networking for clergy-- the stuff that can go on in private messaging. No one would stalk someone, initiate an affair, solicit a minor or do something illegal on a Facebook page-- these things only take place in the shadows. And this agreement can’t reach that far. The only way it could would be for pastors to keep their account passwords on file with church officials, and that’s not going to happen. While that level of accountability might be necessary for some people, it should happen voluntarily in the context of a close relationship (e.g. spouse), not under a “Big Brother” mandate.

Perhaps the most disturbing part of the agreement is the part that attempts to enforce the Doctrinal Standards and Social Principles. Now I’m all for confronting heresy when necessary, but the United Methodist Social Principles have no legal binding power. Yet this document seems to be threatening to withhold ordination from those who post something “questionable” in light of those principles. Perhaps I’m misunderstanding a major point, but doesn’t that mean that this conference is holding its not-yet-ordained clergy to a higher standard than it’s holding its elders?

This is not the way to attract younger clergy. With what seems like an increasingly complicated and grueling ordination process, is it any wonder that more potential pastors are going the non-denominational route?

Questions: Should pastors and church staff be held accountable for what they post on social networks? If so, how should this be done?

Shane Raynor is a managing editor for Ministry Matters.
Connect and Subscribe: Facebook | Twitter | RSS
(Photo Credit: Spencer E. Holtaway)

BLOG: Unintentional Diversity

Wed, 15 Jun 2011 05:00:00 GMT

When I lived in Texas, I occasionally passed by a mainline church that advertised on a banner outside, “Deliberately Diverse. Fully Inclusive.” I remember thinking, “If they have to put it on a banner, odds are the church isn’t really that diverse.” Sure, the sentiment was nice, but I suspect that the slogan was more wishful thinking than anything else. Sort of like a progressive version of “name it and claim it”. The Austin congregation I was part of for six years, on the other hand, really was diverse. We had racial diversity, theological diversity, economic diversity, you name it. And the funny thing is, we never really tried to be diverse. It just naturally happened. We didn’t have a banner made up telling everyone that we were diverse. Because when you’re really a welcoming, diverse congregation, word gets around.

Come to think of it, if we had advertised ourselves as “Deliberately Diverse” we would have been lying. We weren’t deliberate or intentional about it at all. We had our minds on basic kingdom stuff. The church simply focused on making disciples and meeting needs. We failed at times, and we often struggled numerically and financially, but we never struggled in the area of diversity. It was a gift from God. We had as many African-American and Hispanic people in the congregation as Caucasian. There were upper income, middle income, and modest income folks. Our church was fairly conservative theologically, but not everyone in the congregation was. And we had a large youth ministry for a church our size.

If we had advertised this diversity, we could have ended up killing it. That’s because diversity isn’t a primary objective of a healthy ministry-- it’s actually an indicator of a healthy ministry! An objective is a primary goal or purpose. An indicator is something that points to something else, or something that lets you know when another thing is happening. If your church is growing and it’s truly diverse, odds are the Holy Spirit is moving in such a way that people are overcoming existing barriers just to get a taste. Many times in Austin, for example, I would observe people going all the way across the city to visit a church because they had heard God was up to something there. And I don't think it's a coincidence that charismatic churches tend to be more diverse than other kinds of churches.

If you look around your church and notice that everyone looks the same, thinks the same, dresses the same, or sounds the same, the primary problem probably isn’t a lack of diversity. It just might be that you’ve domesticated God and become too comfortable with the way your church is. But when you get excited about the Gospel and you’re listening to the Holy Spirit, you find yourself wanting to reach everyone. The idea of a neighborhood church goes out the window. You start thinking multiple campuses in every part of the city, internet ministry, mission congregations, and church plants. And you’re not obsessing about the diversity within your church, you’re cultivating a heart for everyone outside the church. Deliberate diversity can be a sign of legalism or a misplaced focus. Unintentional diversity points to a bigger move of God.

Question: How can God use you to help establish ministries in your church that will create natural diversity?

Shane Raynor is a managing editor for Ministry Matters. You can find him on Facebook and Twitter.

BLOG: Words and Tracy Morgan

Tue, 14 Jun 2011 05:00:00 GMT

Tracy Morgan is learning a hard lesson. Sometimes when you say something hateful, no matter how hard you try to atone for it, it’s impossible to unring the bell. During his comedy set a couple of weeks ago in Nashville, Morgan commented that he’d stab his son to death if he talked to him in “a gay voice.”

I’m a little surprised at the backlash, really. In a culture that tolerates making fun of Jews, Christians, and kids with Down Syndrome on the Fox animated series Family Guy, I figured Morgan’s rant would get lost in the noise. So perhaps we’re finally beginning to realize how powerful our words really are--they can hurt or heal--bring life or death.

Is it ever acceptable for someone to say, joking or not, that they’d stab their child to death? I don’t think it is. But let’s not pretend that Morgan is the only entertainer who has crossed the line with his material. Like it or not, we’re in the age of 500 cable channels and YouTube, and our culture usually rewards people for being outrageous. Howard Stern has made a career out of it. But when you spend too much time on the edge, sooner or later you fall off. Words can hurt people, and when you use them irresponsibly, eventually you pay the consequences. A racist rant in a comedy club virtually ended the career of Michael Richards. And Dr. Laura Schlessinger’s on-air lecture to an African-American woman about rappers using the N-word--where she used the word herself 11 times--effectively banished her to the realm of satellite radio. Words do have power, and even with money and fame, neither Richards nor Schlessinger could un-say what had already been said. I doubt Tracy Morgan will be able to do it either.

There’s an episode of The Andy Griffith Show where Andy’s son Opie kills a mother songbird with a slingshot. Opie feels horrible for what he did, and eventually tells his father about it. “I’m really sorry,” Opie says. Andy then opens the boy’s bedroom window to the sound of crying baby birds. “Do you hear that? Those birds are crying for their mama who’s never coming back.” Apologies don't always fix the consequences of our actions. Opie couldn’t unring the bell either.

When I worked in youth ministry, one thing I constantly preached was how important it is to watch what we say. God created the universe by speaking, and the Bible tells us we’re made in the image of God, so it naturally follows that even our words have some degree of creative power, especially in the lives of those around us. And if our words have creative power, they also have the potential to destroy. Things we say to other people stick with them-- sometimes for the rest of their lives.

Tracy Morgan has been scrambling in recent days to repair his image, but his apologies may be falling on deaf ears. Some groups are even calling for him to be fired from the sitcom 30 Rock, so he may be in for a rocky road to redemption. I’m sure the public will eventually forgive him, but they likely won’t forget what he said for a long time.

Now if only a few other comedians, rap artists, and commentators would learn this lesson from watching Tracy Morgan so they won't need the same wake-up call.

Shane Raynor is a managing editor for Ministry Matters. You can find him on Facebook and Twitter.

ARTICLE: 5 Reasons to Consider Using the Lectionary

Sun, 12 Jun 2011 05:00:00 GMT

The lectionary has gotten a bum rap. First of all, lectionary is one of the worst-sounding words on the planet. It’s as if someone took two of the most boring things imaginable, a lecture and a dictionary, and combined them. In fact, I can’t think of a term more deserving of eradication from the vocabulary of the church, except maybe Sunday school. (I’m not against the idea of Sunday school, but if you’re an unchurched teenager and someone tells you they’re taking you to a place where there’s school on Sunday, what are you going to think?)

The lectionary, like many other things in the contemporary church, has been the victim of shoddy marketing, but the reality is, the lectionary hasn’t always been executed well either. And today’s megachurch culture with its needs-based marketing and current preferences for sermon series has made the lectionary seem like an antiquated relic from mainline church history.

But even with those things working against it, I believe the lectionary is a buried treasure, waiting to be discovered. Here’s why I like it:

The lectionary exposes congregations to scriptures that their pastors might not normally preach on. When’s the last time your pastor preached through Isaiah? If you’re a pastor, would Isaiah be your first choice to use for a sermon? The lectionary will take you down roads less traveled, to those places you might not go as quickly on your own.
The lectionary makes sermons more Bible-to-life than life-to-Bible. There’s nothing wrong with mixing your methods up a little from time to time, but I know that as a writer who preaches and teaches on occasion, I find it refreshing to pull apart a passage of Scripture and see what it might be saying to my audience today rather than going to Scripture with a preconceived idea of what I want to preach about and finding verses to back up my established viewpoint. With life-to-Bible preaching, sometimes we tell God what we want him to say before we give him a chance to speak.
Lectionary sermons can be topical. The topical preaching vs. lectionary preaching dichotomy is a myth. Lectionary sermons can be practical, topical, hard hitting messages. They don’t have to be drawn-out expositions or watered down feel-good homilies. Granted, the lectionary doesn’t work as well with sermon series, but I think it’s possible that those are overblown in the first place. Television networks moved away from mini-series years ago because people weren’t watching them anymore. Do you know anyone who would be more likely to visit a church because the pastor is speaking for four weeks on marriage instead of one week? Neither do I. I believe sermon series are popular in megachurches partly because they help churches consolidate marketing costs.
The lectionary provides opportunities to create synergy between churches. Not that most lectionary-based churches are actually doing this, mind you, but it’s a nice dream, isn’t it? Think about it, if mission-minded churches around the world really got together and focused on excellent preaching using the same Bible texts each week, that could become a cultural phenomenon in itself!
The lectionary emphasizes the Christian year. My non-denominational evangelical friends in college thought I was Catholic because I observed Lent. That’s because many of the cutting-edge churches don’t do much with the liturgical calendar. That’s unfortunate, because I believe the Christian year is a rich resource that, if used correctly, can add a sense of variety, beauty and discipline to worship. As with the lectionary, I think the stigma attached to the liturgical year in many evangelical circles can be blamed on poor execution in mainline churches and lousy PR.

Following the church calendar and lectionary doesn’t have to be an all-or-nothing proposition. I believe all churches could benefit from trying it-- because it can be done well.

Question: If your church is already using the lectionary, how might it do a better job at execution and marketing?

Shane Raynor is a managing editor for Ministry Matters. You can find him on Facebook and Twitter.

BLOG: In Elevation's Defense...

Sat, 11 Jun 2011 05:00:00 GMT

There has been some online outrage over the last few days about an incident that took place on Easter Sunday at Elevation Church, a prominent North Carolina megachurch. The mother of a 12-year old boy with cerebral palsy claims that her son was removed from the service for being a “distraction”.

Stories like this appear in the news media from time to time, and even in the Christian community, our reaction is usually to shoot first, ask questions later. Elevation Church is only five years old and averages a weekend attendance of 8,000. It’s a successful church with a young charismatic pastor, someone who’s likely viewed with suspicion by some in the religious establishment. Megachurches are big targets, and megachurch scandals are good blog fodder.

According to the mom, she and her son were escorted out of the service after the son said “his own kind of Amen” after the opening prayer. Some people have read more into this incident than what actually happened. The mother and child weren’t asked to leave the church--they were taken to an overflow area where there were other people. I suspect the service was being beamed into this area live. Some may think this was too harsh, but I think it’s hard to pass judgment without knowing exactly what happened. I’ve been in church services that were disrupted by a number of things: cell phones ringing, babies crying, people talking, kids fidgeting. And occasionally I’ve seen special needs children or adults create distractions in worship services, usually unintentionally. It’s awkward for almost everyone involved, because sometimes action needs to be taken but no one wants to come across as a jerk.

Let’s show this church a little grace. Perhaps they did jump the gun a little. But before we pass judgment on an overzealous usher, we need to face reality: most churches would take a similar action if a disruption reached a certain threshold, regardless of the reason behind it.

And consider what happened after the incident:

The mom approached the pastor about starting a special needs ministry for kids, an idea which she says was rejected. She then requested a meeting with church leaders, which according to WSOC-TV, was canceled after the pastor found out she had also contacted the TV station.

This is where we need to give the church the benefit of the doubt and ask a few tough questions.

This incident happened over a month and a half ago. Why is it coming to light now?
Would you allow a visitor to start a ministry working with kids before they had been part of your church for a while, and before they had gone through the proper procedures for establishing a ministry? I wouldn’t. No church leader in their right mind would.
Why didn’t the mom meet with church leaders before contacting the news media? She comes across more as a bully than as someone trying to work things out. And that’s saying something, because this news story was obviously advocating for the mom and son. At best, there was subtle intimidation going on.

Some local newscasts are notorious for shoddy journalism and their advocacy pieces don’t always present information objectively. This is certainly a sensitive issue, and it’s a potential PR disaster for Elevation Church. WSOC reports that the pastor has requested special needs training for staff, which is a good thing. But wouldn’t it have been nice if the church could have taken that step without having their hand forced by a local TV station experiencing a slow news day?

Related Links:
Special Needs Boy Removed from Church Service (VIDEO) - WSOC-TV 9 Charlotte
Special Needs Boy Removed from Church Service (TEXT) - WSOC-TV 9 Charlotte

Shane Raynor is a managing editor for Ministry Matters. You can find him on Facebook and Twitter.

BLOG: Pakistani Bible Ban?

Wed, 08 Jun 2011 05:00:00 GMT

According to the Catholic News agency, a fringe Islamist political party in Pakistan has requested that the country's Supreme Court declare certain Bible passages "blasphemous". If the court refuses, the party has said it will demand that the Bible be banned in the country.

Why is this a big deal?

Well, the political party isn't a big player, but it is part of an alliance of six religious parties that does have significant collective influence inside Pakistan. Most experts agree that the likelihood of a court blasphemy declaration or outright Bible ban is small. But the fact that this is even being seriously discussed in Pakistan should cause Christians around the world to be alarmed.

Just Google "freedom of religion in Pakistan" and you'll see the problem. The Pakistani government claims that Muslims and non-Muslims are treated equally and that everyone shares the same rights. The reality seems quite different. For example, defaming the Koran can be punishable by life in prison and insulting Mohammed is punishable by death.

Read this BBC report on Asia Bibi if you doubt that this sort of thing really goes on. And it's happening in other majority Muslim countries, not just Pakistan.

Unfortunately, with the exception of an occasional story, most mainstream non-religious news sources don't report much on religious persecution. But when fringe Christian pastor Terry Jones burns a Koran, it's front page news.

Pakistan harbored the world's number one terrorist and is attempting to execute a Christian woman for blasphemy against Islam. Is it a far-fetched notion that this country could ban the Bible?

I don't think it is.

Shane Raynor is a managing editor for Ministry Matters. You can find him on Facebook and Twitter.

BLOG: Anxiety and God

Wed, 01 Jun 2011 05:00:00 GMT

What does it mean to turn over all our anxiety to God? Was Peter really serious in 1 Peter 5:7 when he wrote, “Turn all your anxiety over to God because he cares for you”? This verse seems like it’s supposed to be liberating, but I’m afraid that in real life, many of us read it for comfort, but keep on worrying anyway.

Should we read this verse and just do what it says? Is it really that simple?

British Methodist theologian Adam Clarke wrote that we should cast all of our “distracting care” on God because “he meddles, or concerns himself with the things that interest” us. So God is a meddler. Any Christian who has walked with God for a length of time already knows this is true, but it’s fun reading it from a theologian. We don’t usually think of God as a “meddler” because of the negative way the word is often used, but that’s what he does. Nothing is too large or small for God to concern himself with.

The Greek word translated “turn over to”, or “cast upon” in many traditional translations means “to throw upon” or “to place upon”. The same word is used in Luke 19:35 when the disciples brought a donkey to Jesus and threw their garments on it before Jesus rode it. There’s a sense here that we’re supposed to take the things that stress us out and throw them on God. We sometimes use this kind of terminology when we hand off responsibilities to other people– How many times have we told people, “I really don’t want to throw this on you…” or “I hate placing this on your back”?

So how do we give our burdens to God? John Wesley wrote that we’re supposed to cast our cares on God “in every want or pressure.” The radical lesson I think we’re supposed to take away from 1 Peter 5:7 is that Christians shouldn’t be worrying or stressing about anything. Ever. But I don’t think we should take this to the other extreme and blow everything off either, otherwise, many of us would never pray for the things that concern us!

I’ve occasionally experienced situations that should have been stressful, but the peace of God was so strong at the time that it almost felt like the crisis wasn’t really happening. Then when someone asked me later how I managed to keep things under control, I told them the truth: I let God take care of it. I’d like to say I do that every time, but I’m not there yet. Like many other things in life, worrying or not worrying is a decision that has to be made, and it involves self-control. Self-control doesn’t usually show up overnight– it takes time to cultivate.

Shane Raynor is a managing editor for Ministry Matters. You can find him on Facebook and Twitter.

AUDIO: Interview w/ Mike Slaughter

Thu, 26 May 2011 05:00:00 GMT

I had the opportunity this week to talk with Mike Slaughter, the lead pastor of Ginghamsburg Church and author of Change the World. Here are a few highlights. The complete interview is accessible using the audio player above.

SHANE: What year did you arrive at Ginghamsburg?

MIKE: I came to Ginghamsburg in 1979, so I’ve just completed 32 years here in ministry.

SHANE: Wow, that’s kind of an anomaly in the United Methodist Church, wouldn’t you say?

MIKE: I know, I know. And this is my third appointment. I’ve been at Ginghamsburg in five different decades beginning in the 70’s, and I’m only in my 50’s, so that’s a pretty good deal.

SHANE: What’s the weekend attendance now at Ginghamsburg?

MIKE: Twice a year we do an update with our key investors, those who are faithful in giving at Ginghamsburg, and we just had a report out. For the first four months of this year, it was 5,002 people.

SHANE: Do you do services all weekend?

MIKE: We do 5 weekend services on the main campus, three on our Dayton campus, and on our middle campus (between the other two campuses), we do a small Sunday morning worship service, for folks who want a smaller experience, and the message is a video. Then on Monday night, in the original little two-room country chapel that was built in 1876, there’s a small, video kind of venue, that for some people, becomes a make-up of the weekend, but for a core group of about 25 people, it functions more like their house church. We also have Gateway Cafe on Monday nights, which is church for our food pantry clients. Our cell groups always serve a hot meal, and there’s worship and communion. That averages about 250 people.

SHANE: Ginghamsburg has been called a recovering megachurch. Do you think that’s the case?

MIKE: I think that’s somewhat the case. We fell a bit into that in the 1990’s, where we got caught up somewhat in all the church growth principles: 80% rules, create new space, maximize parking, etc. Our 130 acre main campus was referred to tongue-in-cheek as the Disneyland campus, complete with a conference center, and so forth. So in a way, we did “recover”, or wake up from that corporate model of church. But in another sense, the missional DNA has been a part of our movement all along. But I would say there was a little blip in the 1990’s where we got a little over-focused on building that mega kind of campus. So we never did follow through and build the sanctuary and the things we were planning to do-- which I’m thankful for in the economy we live in today.

SHANE: Do you see other megachurches becoming more missional? Do you think this is a trend?

MIKE: I do see a trend, because megachurches have the potential, if we give ourselves away, to do what denominations used to do before denominations became so top-heavy... if we’re careful about our costs, if we’re focused more on equipping other churches-- if we begin to focus on multiplying, as Ginghamsburg is doing with restarts. We look at churches in urban areas that are ready to close, then we move in, restart those churches, and we’re having some phenomenal results. One we restarted 2 and a half years ago is averaging 387 folks on weekends now.

SHANE: You mention in Change the World that there’s a disproportionate amount of buildings and resources in rural areas as opposed to urban. Are denominations beginning to recognize this? Why is it such a problem?

MIKE: I hope we are. Shane, 84% of Americans now live in or around urban areas. But I’m United Methodist, so I speak out of the context of what I know best. 74% of our capital resources (that’s our buildings) are where only 16% of the American population lives. The Methodist Church flourished in the 1800’s and early 1900’s in small towns and rural areas. But now we continue to send pastors to church buildings instead of populations. And if we’re really going to reach people, we’re going to have to radically rethink our paradigms of what it’s going to mean to be missional.

SHANE: Will multi-campus churches replace the megachurch as we know it?

MIKE: There’s always going to be a megachurch, but the megachurch is not really replicable. How many people have gone to conferences at Willow Creek, Saddleback, Ginghamsburg, and other places, yet don’t replicate those places? The key to all megachurches, really, is the anointed leader that God has placed in that position. Anointing is something that God does. It can’t be replicated-- it’s God’s choice. No individual can take credit for it, because it’s a gift. I believe that churches of 200, 300, 400, or 500 are much more replicable than a megachurch.

SHANE: Where do you see the house church movement heading?

MIKE: I think the house church movement definitely has potential. We have 5 here at Ginghamsburg that are pure house churches. We’ve been focusing more of our energy on restarts, but I think the house church has great potential. It’s not going to be the only model. I believe that there are three models of church that can work effectively. One is conventional church, whether a megachurch or a church of 200, 300, 400, or 500. It comes together in worship, disciplaes in small groups, and serves in mission. Another is the “cafe” kind of churches that meet in third places, outside of conventional church buildings. They’re between a house church and a conventional church. And then there are cell churches. I don’t think just one of those is going to work in our culture. We need to look at ways of doing church that represent all 3.

SHANE: Is it possible for a church to become “too missional” and not focus enough on foundational things like theology and Bible study?

MIKE: It all goes together. You can’t separate any of these dimensions because people will not sustain mission if they aren’t growing in the mind and heart of Jesus. It’s just as important to train people in the spiritual disciplines. Discipleship is relational. We learn by seeing the reality of Christ’s life in other people, and by being mentored and coached by other people. So you just can’t separate it. The church needs to look at what it means to be the community of Christ, centered in the Word, living in the power of the spirit. What does it mean to be a member of Christ’s body? What are the responsibilities we agree to and the commitments we make? And how do we hold each other accountable to those commitments?

ARTICLE: 7 Things Churches Can Learn from Christian TV

Fri, 20 May 2011 05:00:00 GMT

I suspect if someone were to take a poll on how much people in various careers are trusted by others, television evangelists would fall near the bottom, somewhere between used car salesmen and politicians. Since the Christian TV scandals of the 80’s, many people have been hesitant to put a lot of faith in religious programming.

Yet if you look at the amount of Christian TV shows out there, the genre seems stronger than ever. And have you checked out some of the shows lately? It’s not just people with bad hair sobbing anymore. Perhaps it’s the influence of the YouTube generation, but there’s actually some wheat out there among all the chaff. I’ll leave it to the reader to figure out which shows are the wheat (if you dare), because for now I want to explore this idea: Are there things churches can learn from the successes (rather than the excesses) of Christian television? I believe so-- in fact, I found seven.

Do it in an hour. I think one of my former pastors used to get really annoyed at me when I told him he needed to keep the services short. How come when Rick Warren says it, it’s gospel, but when I say it, I’m just complaining? Seriously, I’m not pointing it out so I can get home for football or beat the Baptists to Olive Garden. I believe when we focus on keeping church services brief, we leave people wanting more and we keep the quality high. Sure there are going to be exceptions. One of the arguments against limiting the length of a service is that it might hinder the Holy Spirit. But on television, they don’t have a choice. They have to be off the air at a certain time. Yet God still seems to be working through many of these ministries.

Don’t be afraid to ask for financial support. Some TV ministries ask too much, but many churches don’t ask enough! People want to be part of something bigger than themselves, and they want to know that their money is making a difference for the Kingdom of God. Whether solid or not, one thing most TV ministries have in common is the buy-in. They have supporters who believe in what they’re doing enough to help out financially. Churches should do as good a job getting people excited about giving to their ministries.

God uses personalities. Many of us, especially those of us in the mainline, are so afraid of “celebrity Christianity” and cults of personality that we work hard keeping everything generic. The problem is, our culture responds to personalities, and generic is often seen as boring. Since Old Testament times, God has occasionally used “famous” people to lead his people. As long as egos are kept in check, I believe this can be done for the glory of God.

Ask for specific responses. Television ministries aren’t shy about soliciting your feedback. “Pick up the phone. Write us. E-mail us. Operators are standing by, 24 hours a day. Order this book. Send us your testimony.” Churches should work just as hard hard to get more people involved in their ministries.

Disciple people and take them to the next level. Have you ever noticed how most television ministries offer spiritual growth resources? Every church should have a robust book table ministry and a way to get audio sermons to members and visitors. If the sermons at your church aren’t good enough to pass around or download, find some that are!

Go where the people are. Not all Christian programming is on Christian TV. I’ve seen Christian teaching shows on secular cable networks and local network affiliates. Churches should also plan some activities and ministries that take place outside of religious settings.

Don’t waste people’s time. Successful television shows figure out how to make every second count, because if they don’t, they know you’ll switch the channel. Granted, people in actual pews are a more captive audience, but what if churches acted as if parishioners all had remotes? How intentional would we be about every part of our services?

If we open our minds, we can usually learn practical things from some unlikely places. Most churches will never have a TV ministry of their own, but that doesn’t mean they can’t pick up some good practices from other ministries on the small screen.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger for Ministry Matters. He can also be found on Facebook, Twitter, and Cinch.

BLOG: Constructive Criticism

Thu, 19 May 2011 05:00:00 GMT

The six years I spent as an urban youth worker really helped shape some of my views on how to do ministry. One thing I’ve become increasingly aware of is the fact that lots of churches in America have simply become “too safe”. Many congregations try to offer everything, demand nothing, and go out of their way to avoid offending anyone. And some of those congregations are successful at bringing in new members. But from my experience, feel-good Christianity is a major turn-off in the long run, especially for men.

Probably 95% of my own ministry has been to males. When I’m teaching faith principles, I use a lot of war and sports analogies and metaphors because I’ve found these to be especially effective when explaining spiritual concepts to guys. Most of the guys from my youth ministry in Austin were not impressed with pie-in-the-sky, “touchy-feely” Christianity. They responded better to real Christianity, warts and all. Church is family, but it looks more like Roseanne to them than Leave It to Beaver. And if we’re honest, we know that’s the way it is for us too.

When I’ve counseled or mentored others, I’ve discovered that one of the things people value most is honesty, even when it hurts. Life is full of critics and “yes men”, but very few people will give someone a balanced picture. For years, my spirit was troubled by all of the “trash talk” I encountered in urban youth culture. Even the Christian kids would say nasty stuff and put each other down. I tried everything I could to stop it, and mostly failed, even with my core group. Then I realized that this “confrontational boldness” could be redirected toward something more positive. After that, I encouraged the guys to be real with each other and share truth in love, and to use the thick skin they had developed from years of trading insults to gladly receive correction and instruction from other Christians. Most of us, frankly, are too easily offended when it comes to matters of faith. And we wonder why so many have become disillusioned with the Christian life.

The Bible makes clear that we shouldn’t be judging those outside the church. Other Christians, however, are a different matter altogether. But from my experience, people don’t receive correction well unless we’ve somehow earned the right to give it to them. (And even those encounters aren’t always without drama.) Unfortunately, some Christians avoid confrontation entirely because they don’t “have everything together” themselves. The key, however, isn’t to wait until we’re perfect, but to have our own accountability relationships where we can receive constructive criticism.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger for Ministry Matters. He can also be found on Facebook, Twitter, and Cinch.

AUDIO: Hawking and Heaven

Tue, 17 May 2011 05:00:00 GMT

Stephen Hawking says heaven is a fairy tale. But he can't prove or disprove its existence, so why does he try to speak with such authority?

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger for Ministry Matters. He can also be found on Facebook, Twitter, and Cinch. Subscribe to his audio commentary here.

BLOG: Is Christianity Exclusive?

Mon, 16 May 2011 05:00:00 GMT

There’s a verse in this week’s Gospel reading that almost always seems to stir up conversation and controversy. After Thomas asks Jesus how to get where he’s going, Jesus answers, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6 CEB) The verse is comforting to some of us and troubling for others. While reading various articles and commentaries on this particular verse, I’m usually amazed by the amount of theological and rhetorical gymnastics writers display in their attempts explain it away or apologize for it.

Here are some of the questions that often come up:

What about those who have never heard of Jesus? This question, quite frankly is a red herring. If a nonbeliever is asking it while in the process of considering the validity of Christianity, then the situation doesn’t even apply to them. At best, it’s a diversion from making their own decision to follow Christ, and at worst, it’s an excuse to not believe. If the question is asked by a Christian, perhaps they should interpret it as a call to pray, act, and become an answer to their own question. When I took my first foreign language class as a teenager, I wanted to know why everything worked the way it did. I tried to overanalyze the basics of the language, and my teacher would occasionally say, “Don’t ask why, ask how.” In some cases, there’s simply not going to be an answer that will satisfy our intellect, especially when we’re at the beginning stages of something. Instead of why, a better question for us to ask would be, “How can I get involved in sharing Jesus with those who have never heard of him?”

Isn’t religious faith mostly an accident of geography? No, it’s not. Am I more likely to become a Christian if I’m raised in a Christian home or Christian culture? Sure. But there’s usually a trade-off. Some of the most vibrant Christianity in the world is in newly Christianized areas, while “Christian” countries seem to have much more lukewarm or nominal Christianity. Consider physical nourishment for a moment. Am I more likely to go to bed hungry if I’m born in certain parts of the world as opposed to others? Without a doubt. But that doesn’t affect my need for food, nor does it change the moral responsibility that’s placed upon those who are more fortunate to help me. It works similarly for spiritual food. That’s why Jesus said, “Go into the whole world and proclaim the good news.” (Mark 16:15) Much will be demanded from everyone who has been given much. (Luke 12:48)

Isn’t there good in other religions? Sure, there is. But the more pressing question isn’t whether or not a religion does good, but whether it’s salvific. Does it have the power to offer salvation? Consider the account of Cornelius in Acts 10. Cornelius was a God-fearing Gentile whose “prayers and compassionate acts were like a memorial offering before God.” (Acts 10:4) But that wasn’t enough. Cornelius and his household needed Jesus, so God went through the trouble to shake Peter up with a vision that challenged his whole belief system. Then, when Peter tried to get too analytical, “the Spirit interrupted him.” He was told to go downstairs, return to Caesarea with the people Cornelius had sent to Joppa, and not ask questions. The relatives and close friends of Cornelius then believed in Jesus because Peter preached the word of God to them. Sometimes when we’re asking difficult questions, we need for the Spirit to just come and interrupt us.

Isn’t it arrogant and intolerant to think that your religion is the only one, or even that it’s the most effective one? No. Arrogance is considering yourself superior to or worth more than others. Considering a philosophy or belief system to be superior to others and then subscribing to that belief system isn’t being arrogant, it’s being honest. Wouldn’t it be foolish to believe something that you didn’t think had some kind of edge over competing viewpoints? As for religious tolerance, that’s simply respecting the rights of people to believe what they want, even when they disagree with you. Intolerance would be forcing or intimidating them to change those beliefs to align with yours.

Jesus said that he’s the way, the truth, and the life. I think Western culture has more problems than other cultures with that declaration because we like having choices. John 14:6 doesn’t give us a “Plan B”, and it drives us crazy. The reality is, Christianity is an exclusive faith-- not because it excludes people (it doesn’t), but because it excludes competing and contradicting belief systems.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger for Ministry Matters. "Scripture This Week" is a regular blog column that explores ideas and angles for teaching, preaching, and studying weekly Scripture selections from the Revised Common Lectionary. Shane can be found on both Facebook and Twitter. (Photo Credit: Rae Whitlock | Flickr)

BLOG: Bookstore Crisis

Thu, 12 May 2011 05:00:00 GMT

Mike Shatzkin says bookstores are going away. Al Mohler hopes he’s wrong. I hope he’s wrong too, but having managed several bookstores earlier in my career, I can tell you, it’s not going to be easy for most bookstores to turn a profit in the future.

Borders recently announced that it’s filing for bankruptcy and closing ⅓ of its stores. Borders is third in sales behind behemoth Amazon.com and bricks and mortar chain Barnes and Noble. But even with annual sales approaching $3 billion, the chain is struggling to survive. Smaller chains and indies face even longer odds.

If most bookstores go away, what exactly are we losing?

Not the ability to browse physical copies of bestsellers and frontlist books-- Walmart and Target provide that opportunity.

Not the accompanying coffee bars-- even with the Starbucks cutbacks a couple of years ago, there are still more coffee joints than post offices. I think somewhere in Houston, there's still even a Starbucks across the street from a Starbucks.

So what then? Well, backlist for one. Obscure titles. Specialized titles, and if you're a Christian, religion titles. Let's face it, beyond the faces seen on TBN, there just aren't that many Christian authors with books in your local discount store.

Christians have Cokesbury, Family, Lifeway and other religious bookstores, but stocking a comprehensive backlist has become cost prohibitive for most of them.

There are always online stores and e-books, but with all the titles available to buy, how does one separate the wheat from the chaff?

Al Mohler makes a good point. In Christian bookstores (and especially in mainstream ones), I'm forced to at least get a glimpse of books I'm probably going to disagree with theologically. Is it possible that buying all my books online or through my Kindle might make me less likely to give someone with a different point-of-view a fair hearing?

The question isn't so much, "Will bookstores go away?" as it is "With less bookstores as we now know them available, how will we fill the void?"

Photo credit: brewbooks via Flickr | Used under Creative Commons License

BLOG: A Place in the Flock

Mon, 09 May 2011 05:00:00 GMT

If you’re a lectionary preacher, it’s going to be difficult to avoid the subject of sheep and flocks this week. The best known of the Psalms, the 23rd, reminds us that “the LORD is my shepherd,” and Acts 2 gives us a glimpse of what the first Christian community (flock) looked like. The John 10 passage is Jesus talking about a sheep pen, a gate, and characteristics of a shepherd and sheep. Then there’s 1 Peter 2:19-25. It talks about unpleasant things like suffering, pain, and sin.

Four weeks into the Easter season and we’re dealing with uncomfortable stuff again. Thieves are breaking into sheep pens, David is walking through dark valleys, and now, Peter wants us to endure suffering. But all four passages end on an encouraging note:

Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life, and I shall dwell in the house of the LORD my whole life long. (Psalm 23:6 NRSV)

They praised God and demonstrated God’s goodness to everyone. The Lord added daily to the community those who were being saved. (Acts 2:47 CEB)

The thief enters only to steal, kill, and destroy. I came so that they could have life—indeed, so that they could live life to the fullest. (John 10:10 CEB)

Though you were like straying sheep, you have now returned to the shepherd and guardian of your lives. (1 Peter 1:25 CEB)

To really get a sense of how Christians are like sheep, let’s consider some characteristics of these animals for a moment. Sheep are social, and they tend to flock together, mostly because there’s protection from predators in numbers. Those who try to be Christians without help from other Christians, or those who don’t believe in a literal devil should consider this carefully in light of 1 Peter 1:25. I believe that the term “straying sheep” doesn’t refer only to backsliding Christians, but also to “loner” Christians. And a sheep who isn’t with a flock is the one most likely to be attacked.

Without a shepherd present, sheep tend to follow the first sheep who makes a move, even if it’s a foolish move. So for believers, this means it’s equally important to stay with the flock and to stay connected to the shepherd. 1 Peter 1:25 says Jesus is both a shepherd and a guardian. The Greek words for shepherd and guardian are poimen and episkopos, respectively. This is also where we get the words pastor and bishop (or overseer). Jesus is like our pastor and our bishop. He both shepherds us and he appoints other shepherds for us. He may even appoint us on some level to be a shepherd over others. Our Christian faith is both individual and corporate, and I believe anyone who downplays either one is missing the point.

This is why it’s important for believers to find their unique place in the Body of Christ. Although Pentecost won’t be here for several weeks, now is still a good time to think about spiritual gifts and about how each Christian is uniquely equipped to serve other believers. Ministry Matters has partnered with the Church of the Resurrection to offer a free, online spiritual gifts assessment. After answering a series of questions, you’ll find your most dominant gifts and perhaps get a better sense of where you fit into the church as a whole.

AUDIO: Interview w/ Adam Thomas

Mon, 09 May 2011 05:00:00 GMT

If technology is supposed to save us time, why do we seem to have less time than ever? What are the pros and cons of using technology in ministry? Are cell phones and computers helping us get closer to each other virtually, but really isolating us and hindering face-to-face relationships? Adam Thomas, millennial generation Episcopal priest and author talks with Shane Raynor about his new book Digital Disciple

ARTICLE: Why Numbers Matter

Thu, 05 May 2011 05:00:00 GMT

The head usher at a church told me once that he always added 3 to the number of people attending the worship service when he filled out the attendance report.

“Why three?” I asked.

“The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,” he replied.

I won’t split theological hairs here about how many seats the Godhead might occupy in church on a Sunday morning, nor will I discuss the questionable practice of counting invisible attendees. (Are we also going to start counting the devils that show up at Tuesday night church council meetings?)

But I will ask-- should we even count the people who come to church? Do numbers really matter?

The fact is, numbers themselves aren’t a big deal-- it’s what the numbers represent that everyone should be concerned about. If doctors ever tell you that your blood pressure or blood glucose level is too high, I dare you to tell them that numbers don’t matter. Numbers aren’t goals, they’re indicators.

So yes, numbers matter, but placing too much emphasis on numbers can be as bad as not considering them at all. Imagine a basketball team that spent an entire game with their eyes on the scoreboard instead of on the ball. What a ridiculous thought! A team that did that would likely get trounced by its opponents. On the other hand, imagine how boring basketball would be if no one kept score. How long would the NBA remain popular if all the teams played only for fun?

Now is church all that different from basketball and health care? (Let’s not consider the effect that some congregations have on their pastors’ blood pressure.) There are probably always going to be people on one end of the spectrum who blow off numbers, and folks on the other end who obsess over them. Then there are the ones in the middle, those who play ball as hard as they can, but check the score from time to time to see if they need to change their game strategy. I believe that’s the way we should run our churches.

The problem is, denominations with top heavy structures sometimes focus on accountability without coaching. Think of a basketball coach who expects wins but doesn’t help his or her team build its skills to the level to where it can achieve those wins. Or a doctor who scolds you for having high blood pressure yet doesn’t give you the medicines and nutrition advice you need to bring the number down.
So the morals of the story are:

We need numbers. (They’re indicators!)
We need accountability. (Sometimes a kick in the pants is a good thing!)
We need coaching. (We’re all in this together. If one part of the body suffers, we all do.)
We need people who are passionate about playing the game. (Even though church isn’t really a game. But hey, basketball helps me understand things.)

If all four of these things are in place within a church’s leadership, I believe it will grow. But at the end of the day, it’s not churches we’re trying to grow, it’s the Kingdom of God. Numbers matter to God because they represent people, and people matter to him.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger for Ministry Matters. He can be found on both Facebook and Twitter.

BLOG: Morning Person

Thu, 05 May 2011 05:00:00 GMT

Everyone told me I’d eventually give up being a night owl. They were right, but it’s not for the reasons you might think. My college years in the 90’s were a struggle sometimes, partly because I never wanted to go to bed before 1 in the morning. Even now, my natural tendency is to stay up as late as possible. But several months ago, I started experimenting.

I made the decision to front-load my day and wake up at 4 in the morning. My theory was that I’d be able to get more things done. I effectively traded two hours of sleep in the morning for two hours of sleep at night. So far, this has worked well for me because I tend to want to unwind and do mindless things late at night, while in the morning I’m sharper, more focused, and more task-oriented. It hasn't been a cake walk. There’s still the urge to stay up later, but less caffeine and more extra physical activity during the day has, for the most part, taken care of that.

1 Thessalonians 5:5 tells us, “All of you are children of light and children of the day. We don’t belong to night or darkness.” Now I’m not going to try to make a scriptural case that being a morning person is somehow more virtuous than being a night owl. But I think there is something to be said for the attitude that’s often found in morning people. Since I’ve switched my schedule, I find that I’m:

more excited about going to work
more likely to pray
more likely to be physically active
less likely to watch television
less likely to get depressed
more organized

The best thing about waking up early is the feeling that I get a “fresh start” before almost everyone else. At night, it’s tempting to try to “hang on” to the day, rather than letting it go so I can start a new one. In the morning, rather than second-guessing myself and lamenting what I didn’t accomplish earlier, I’m anticipating what I’m going to accomplish. I spend the same two hours in a more positive way, in the morning when I’m energetic, rather than at night when I’m tired and lazy.

Sometimes we have to do what works best, even when it means changing our habits.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger for Ministry Matters. He can be found on both Facebook and Twitter. Photo Credit: mmmat | Flickr

ARTICLE: Adam Thomas QandA

Tue, 03 May 2011 05:00:00 GMT

This week, Shane Raynor had a conversation with author Adam Thomas about his book Digital Disciple. (Now FREE on e-book! See links at end of article.) They also discussed technology, social networking, and his youth devotional website.

SHANE: In your new book Digital Disciple you mention that when Christ is present, connection between Christians becomes communion, and you also write that communion can happen online. How does this change how a 21st Century church does ministry?

ADAM: Connection becomes Communion not just because Christ is present. We have to recognize Christ’s presence in our relationships, both real and virtual, to be able to participate in Communion. The 21st Century church can thrive by tapping into the amazing capacity for networking that the Internet has created, but it won’t thrive if it just delivers virtual content. The church must continue to champion real, face-to-face, embodied contact between and among people. This type of contact will be more important than it ever has been when we spend most of our lives online.

SHANE: Are there ways you think churches can misuse technology or rely on it too much?

ADAM: One area that jumps to mind is the current trend to allow people to fulfill their monetary pledges to their churches via Paypal or some other Web application. I am wholeheartedly against this practice. (For that matter, I’m against people snail-mailing their pledges as well, unless there’s a health reason for it.) When we set our pledges to direct debit from our accounts, they just become another bill. We lose the necessary step of bringing it to church and offering it up to God during the service. Pledging isn’t just about making sure the church has enough money to keep the heat on. It is a spiritual practice that helps us connect our blessings back to God’s overwhelming generosity. Paypal pledging erases this connection, in my mind.

SHANE: Do you think the internet and social networking are widening the generation gap or helping bridge it?

ADAM: Well, if you look at Facebook trends, you’ll see that women over 55 (I think that’s the number) are currently the biggest new group on the social networking site. In that sense, the younger generations are pulling the older ones online. However, at my church I am conscious of the need not just to post my sermons online but also to have a dozen copies in the back of the church for folks who do not feel comfortable browsing for it on the Internet. In that sense, the Tech has created another dimension, in which (mostly) younger folks live to the exclusion of those who do not have the know-how to access it. It all comes down to this: the younger generation of Americans (Millennials and those after us) grew up bilingual (or, in some cases, trilingual). We know English and Computer. Older generations had to take “Computer-as-a-second-language” classes. That’s where the gap exists.

SHANE: How does "the Tech" make your life easier in parish ministry on a daily basis? Are there times when it has the opposite effect?

The Tech makes my life easier in parish ministry mostly from an administrative standpoint. I make a whole lot of documents every week – from bulletins to lesson plans to flyers to signups. Without the MacBook I’m using to type this right now, I don’t know where I’d be. It can have the opposite effect, though. I use email quite a bit to converse with parishioners, but email is really not the best vehicle to use for that purpose. A face-to-face chat is infinitely better in a pastoral situation than any number of emails. Furthermore, email is never the place for private or privileged discussion. But it happens, sometimes without the pastor being aware that an email chain is leading that way.

SHANE: Someone recently said that Facebook is killing the church. The argument goes that people don't need church to connect anymore. What do you think about this?

ADAM: I think the exact opposite. Facebook allows us to connect, yes, but every connection made via the Tech is a pale imitation of the ones made in real, physical, you might say, Incarnational ways. I think online connections have the potential to be real and transformative because God is present in every connection. But while Facebook allows us to make and sustain connections, the need to shake someone’s hand or sing a hymn with a group of people in the same room will never lose importance. In fact, with more connection happening online, it might just very well become more important to have a sanctuary where real contact is prized.

SHANE: You talk about a "Tech Sabbath" in Digital Disciple. How do you think mobile phones and the internet have affected churches' expectations that their pastors be reachable? How can pastors set boundaries on this?

ADAM: Of course, mobile phones make reaching the pastor much easier: I carry my iPhone with me everywhere. I also tend to leave my Gmail open whenever I’m in the office, so people know I get back to emails (a little too) quickly. That being said, I’m not convinced that the Tech is changing people’s expectations. As far as I know, people have always expected their pastors to be reachable 24/7. The only difference is that now we actually are. That brings the boundaries question into focus. I am quite thankful for caller ID and voicemail. I do not answer every phone call. And my wife is training me not to check my email as often as I usually do. Pastors must develop for themselves a system about when to answer a call or respond to an email. If I answer an email at 7:00 am on my day off then people will email me on my day off. It’s up to me to figure out my own boundaries.

SHANE: As someone who has worked with youth, you've seen the positives and negatives of Tech in kids' lives. What is your advice to parents about how to manage their childrens' technology?

ADAM: The biggest change that I have witnessed in young people in the last decade or so (since I myself was one), is the change in where information is stored. Young people today know how to find and access information, but they don’t know how to store or analyze that information. The Tech has created external brains for people, and youth who have always had broadband don’t need to worry about storing information in their own heads when it’s just as fast to google something. That being said, my advice to parents would be to engage your children in critical thinking. Ask them questions that don’t have searchable answers. Also, ask them questions that need emotional answers: how do you feel about a particular thing and so on. The more they train their brains to analyze and critique, the more they will need to keep information “in house.”

SHANE: Because of technology, Christians have more information at their fingertips than ever before-- theological works, Biblical reference materials, you name it. What potential do you think this has for the church as a whole?

ADAM: The potential here mirrors the potential that began with the Gutenberg Bible. With the advent of the printing press, the Bible went viral (well, as viral as something could go in the 16th century). In the same way, all the secondary and tertiary material about the Bible is now more readily available. This has the potential to make non-seminary trained followers of Jesus more informed about text-critical issues and the like. Of course, there’s always a danger – and this is one I know personally. When I can go online and keyword search the Bible, I read it less and less. Back before their were chapters and verses, you found the passage you were looking for by reading until you found it. Not so anymore. I read the Bible on my computer now more than I do a bound copy. I’m not so sure that’s a good idea.

SHANE: There's a lot of noise out there. How can a Christian avoid information overload?

ADAM: That’s a great question. There are a couple of sections in Digital Disciple about this very topic. The bottom line is this: human beings miss the constant things because we adapted to notice what is changing. This keeps us from noticing the presence of God as readily as we might because that presence is constant. Practicing noticing God’s presence is the absolute best way to avoid information overload because it involves being tranquil, being silent, and listening for that still, small voice.

SHANE: You run a blog and a site called "Devo 180". How much time do you spend publishing these sites and what do you hope to accomplish with them?

I probably spend about an hour and a half a day on devo180.com. Since it’s a daily thing, it takes more maintenance than wherethewind.com, which is my blog. However, since the Devo site is designed to have a more conversational tone, I don’t spend as much time polishing the writing on it. If I post something on the blog, I have really worked on it. Thus, the blog posts tend to be more infrequent, but higher quality. With the Devo site, I hope to provide people a tiny bit about following Jesus every day – just three minutes can go a long way. With the blog, when I began it, I was really just looking for an outlet for writing following seminary. I know that my grandmother reads it, and that keeps me accountable.

SHANE: What has it been like writing your first book? Do you have any advice for first time authors?

ADAM: Writing my first book has been both exhausting and exhilarating: exhausting because I already have a full time job and I wrote the book during vacation time; and exhilarating because I have this golden opportunity to have my writing begin conversations with other people. The funny thing is that, while I was writing, I told myself I wasn’t writing a book. I convinced myself that I was writing forty blog posts. This helped me take things in sizable chunks. If I had sat down to write a BOOK, then I never would have done so. The second draft is the time to take the material and make it all flow. Advice for first time authors? Let’s see. Read Bird by Bird by Anne Lamott. That’s where I found all the advice I could digest. Also, start a blog if you don’t already have one. Those of us who know how to spell and use grammar correctly need to unite against the tangle of bad spelling and horrid sentence structure that is found online.

Adam Thomas was ordained to the Episcopal priesthood in 2008 at the age of 25, making him one of the first priests from the millennial generation. Adam writes the blog wherethewind.com, and the youth devotional site, Devo180. His first book, Digital Disciple, is out now, and is FREE on Kindle, Nook, and CBD this week.

Get it on Kindle

Get it on Nook

Get it at CBD

BLOG: Dull Minds, Slow Hearts

Mon, 02 May 2011 05:00:00 GMT

The Emmaus road encounter in Luke 24 should be reassuring for us. For starters, the account involves two disciples from a different tier than the main eleven. (Remember, Judas is no longer part of the group.) We’re not told much about these guys, other than one of their names: Cleopas. We know they’re going to a village about seven miles from Jerusalem called Emmaus, but we’re not told why. Perhaps they’re going there to sort things out, or because they’re afraid. Whatever their reasons, I’m guessing they’ve pretty much given up on Jesus at this point.

The women had told them about the empty tomb and the angels. According to the account in Luke, “their words struck the apostles as nonsense, and they didn’t believe the women.” These guys weren’t buying it either, or I believe they would have stuck around longer. They had waited until the third day to leave, so perhaps they had remembered what Jesus said in Luke 9:22: “The Human One must suffer many things and be rejected—by the elders, chief priests, and the legal experts—and be killed and be raised on the third day. (CEB)” But by Sunday afternoon, all they had to hang on to were rumors and speculation. And for all they knew, the authorities might come after them if these stories started spreading.

Jesus shows up and joins their walk, but they are “prevented from recognizing him.” It’s not clear who or what does the preventing, at least as far as I can tell. If these are the same two guys from Mark 16:12, we’re told Jesus appeared to them in a different form. But he didn’t reprove them for not recognizing him-- he reproved them for not believing everything the prophets had said: “You foolish people! Your dull minds keep you from believing all that the prophets talked about. Wasn’t it necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and then enter into his glory?” He wasn’t insulting their intellect-- he was rebuking them for their reluctance to believe. He told them they had dull minds because they had closed their minds-- and their hearts too.

They didn’t recognize Jesus partly because he had appeared in a form they weren’t expecting. But that’s really what had already happened. Jesus had been crucified without being the political messiah they had hoped for-- so in a sense they didn’t recognize him before the crucifixion either. But after having a crash course in scripture from the Son of God himself, and sitting down to eat with him, they finally connected some of the dots.

Could this be a picture of the importance of both the Word and Holy Communion in instilling faith?

Some people say this episode gives us another angle to look at the Lord’s Supper -- not only as a commemoration of the Last Supper but as a resurrection meal. I think they might be on to something, and that topic could be fun to explore, but based on this passage, we’re not sure if these guys even finished the meal. And maybe that’s the point. They were probably too excited to eat!

Jesus appeared to two regular disciples... not just to the well-known ones. God uses ordinary Christians even today, and this story reminds us that it’s not enough to know Scripture on an intellectual level, we also have to “get it” on a spiritual level. The risen Jesus taught Cleopas and his friend-- we have the Holy Spirit speaking directly to us and through other Christians as we study the Word.

BLOG: Little Foxes

Fri, 29 Apr 2011 05:00:00 GMT

Song of Solomon 2:15 says, “Catch the foxes for us, the little foxes that ruin vineyards. Our vineyards are blooming.” So I guess foxes must be bad if you’re trying to run a vineyard. Little ones, especially. Most foxes are little anyway-- not even the size of the average dog. So either this scripture is pointing out that foxes are generally little, or that foxes that like to spoil vineyards are especially little. Either way, the point is clear. Destructive things come in small packages.

Life is a lot like that, too. Big things rarely bring us down-- it’s mostly the little things, especially after they’ve compounded. Little lies cause us problems when we have to tell bigger lies to cover them up. 20 ounce soft drinks don’t cause us to gain weight by themselves. (It takes a surplus of 3,500 calories on average to create a pound of body fat.) A bottle of Mountain Dew has 290 calories. If everything else about your diet and activity level remains the same, one bottle a day would still make you thirty pounds heavier a year from now. Little foxes seem harmless, but they can do major damage.

Vineyards are a picture of our productivity-- and the grapes are what we get accomplished for the Kingdom. Foxes dig the vineyards up, preventing grapes from growing, and they eat many of the grapes that do grow. Simply put, foxes kill productivity. And in my life, the productivity killers are usually the time killers. Games (Angry Birds, anyone?), the Internet, and cable news (including Fox News). Everyone needs some down time, but too much down time can become wasted time. Little foxes seem cute and harmless, but underneath that facade, they’re really jackals. Or close relatives, anyway.

What are the little foxes that are trying to destroy your vineyards, and what’s your plan to catch them and get rid of them?

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger for Ministry Matters. Look for him on Facebook and Twitter.

BLOG: No More Disbelief

Sun, 24 Apr 2011 05:00:00 GMT

The John 20 reading this week is probably familiar to most people. It’s the passage that made “Doubting Thomas” a household term. It’s evening on the first Easter Sunday and Jesus appears to the disciples-- except for Thomas, who wasn’t there at the time (and likely kicked himself over the course of the next week for missing the appearance.) When the others tell Thomas they’ve seen Jesus, he says, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands, put my finger in the wounds left by the nails, and put my hand into his side, I won’t believe.” The next week, Jesus shows up again, and accommodates Thomas, although Scripture doesn’t mention Thomas actually touching the wounds as he had said.

While doing some research at Ministry Matters and elsewhere, I found some interesting spin on this passage. Some praise Thomas for his doubt, and one even writes, “Doubt is like wind in the sails of faith. It pushes us forward.”

I don't see it exactly like that.

Doubt and faith are opposites. Jesus tells Thomas in John 20:27, “No more disbelief. Believe! (CEB)” The NRSV translates it, “Do not doubt but believe” The NIV goes with, “Stop doubting and believe,” and the ESV with, “Do not disbelieve, but believe.” The original language seems to bear this out. The Greek word translated believe is an adjective, pistos (πιστος). The word translated disbelief is also an adjective, apistos (απιστος). (Retaining adjectives in the translation would result in less natural English: “Don’t be disbelieving, be believing.”) The prefix α- in Greek, like a- in English, usually expresses negation or absence.

So how is it that Jesus tells Thomas to stop doing something, yet some modern commentators cheer Thomas on when he does it? It’s probably because we see ourselves in Thomas. Doubting is human nature-- it’s normal. And we want some kind of assurance that we’re normal. Nevertheless, normal isn’t always a good thing. The American Heritage Dictionary defines normal as, “Conforming with, adhering to, or constituting a norm, standard, pattern, level, or type; typical.” But when it comes to matters of faith, I don’t want to be normal or typical. I want to be extraordinary-- unconventional even. In the Bible, when Jesus commended people for having great faith, it wasn’t because they achieved the norm-- it’s because they far exceeded it!

I don't want to be too hard on Thomas, but believing something only when you see it isn’t a very high level of faith. In fact, when considered in light of 2 Corinthians 5:7, (“We live by faith and not by sight”), it could be argued that it’s not really faith at all. Think about it. It’s easy to believe something once you’ve seen it, just like it’s easy to love people who love you.

But no one should feel an overwhelming sense of guilt for having doubts. Doubt can be a useful thing. And what’s nice about faith is that we can get more of it. So rather than looking at doubt as “wind in the sails of faith,” perhaps we should look at it as a kind of spiritual resistance training. That means pastors, small group leaders, Bible teachers, and mentors are essentially spiritual trainers. Leaders should be honest about their doubts, but they shouldn’t be content to hang on to those doubts and never move beyond them. Ask yourself this. How long would you listen to a personal physical fitness trainer who didn’t show progress themselves and didn’t expect you to show any either?

BLOG: When Schools Ban Rosaries

Thu, 21 Apr 2011 05:00:00 GMT

I recently ran across an article about a high school student in St. Louis who was suspended for five days because he wore a rosary to school. The reason for the suspension, according to the school system, was violation of the school’s anti-gang dress code.

There’s more wrong than right with this picture. First, why would a kid be suspended for wearing something as benign as a rosary? And for five days? I didn’t get in that much trouble when I tried to take an airplane bottle of Jack Daniels to show-and-tell in Kindergarten. (Long story, but quite innocent. I did get into trouble that year for spitting, lying, and fighting, but surprisingly not for having alcohol at school. My, how times have changed.)

I’m sure gangs somewhere have adopted rosary beads as part of their “uniform”. But I’ve worked with at-risk youth, including gang members, and I’ve seen as many rosaries on kids who aren’t in gangs as I’ve seen on kids who are. Over the past couple of years, rosaries have been particularly trendy with Hispanic males. So not only does a rosary ban seem to target Catholics, it also appears to single out an entire ethnic group. And this kind of stuff goes on all the time. A kid in my youth ministry had his red shoelaces confiscated because the color red had a “gang connection.” Yet his high school’s primary color was red! The Keystone Kops would be proud.

So is this how it works? Law enforcement connects an article of clothing to gang activity, and we ban it in the public schools? Are we willing to give gangs that much power? Some might argue that the recent trend of using a rosary to make a fashion statement had its origin in gangs, but so what? Do we really believe that within a school, gang members aren’t smart enough to know who's in which gang without color coded accessories?

No wonder so many kids want to drop out of public school. At least in Catholic School, they don’t freak out about a rosary.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger for Ministry Matters. He can be found on both Facebook and Twitter. Photo Credit: Alan Creech via Flickr

BLOG: Easter All Week

Mon, 18 Apr 2011 05:00:00 GMT

Sometimes I think we get Holy Week all wrong. It shouldn’t be this way, but some churches have essentially isolated the message of the resurrection to one Sunday a year. And congregations that rigidly observe the liturgical calendar are most likely to be among the worst offenders.

I mentioned last week that Sundays in Lent are technically not part of Lent-- they are supposed to be “mini-Easters”. But I never realized this when I was growing up, and I suspect most people don’t realize it now. I believe if we really understood what happened on Easter, every Sunday would become a mini-Easter. Every day would become a mini-Easter, even Good Friday.

We take our churches through the seriousness of Lent and the drama of Holy week with the best of intentions, but we shouldn’t take for granted that everyone understands what’s going on. We’re not reliving everything, we’re commemorating it. The fact is, the risen Jesus is just as much at work in the world and in our lives during Lent as he is during the Easter season. He’s always working miracles-- throughout Advent, Christmas, Kingdomtide, and Ordinary Time.

What... you don’t think Jesus puts his mission on hold to accommodate our church calendar, do you?

Don’t misunderstand me... Holy Week services can be powerful. But casual attendees don’t pick up on everything. For example, in a Palm Sunday discussion online last week, someone mentioned that people who show up only on Sundays (especially those who show up only on Easter) likely miss the whole narrative of the Passion. Well, consider the flip side of that. There must be an occasional visitor to a Good Friday service who doesn’t make it back for Easter. That’s no big deal if they were brought up in church and have a basic understanding of Christianity. But what if they weren’t? How depressing Good Friday would be if that’s where the story ends!

I grew up in church, and to this day, I have bad memories of the Good Friday Tenebrae service. But part of the reason is I didn’t understand until recently that there’s a hint of Easter at the end of it.

The hidden candle that’s brought out at the close of Tenebrae represents the hope of the resurrection. Good Friday isn’t the last word. But for years, that symbolism was lost on me. Apparently, I’m not the only one. The United Methodist Q & A at the denominational website tells us: “The service concludes in darkness, sometimes with a final candle, the Christ candle, carried out of the sanctuary, symbolizing the death of Jesus.”

No, hiding the candle symbolizes the death of Jesus, but we bring it back out to foreshadow the resurrection. And if we don’t bring it back out, I believe we should. We know that on the first Good Friday, the original followers of Jesus didn’t totally get the forthcoming resurrection. But considering we’re living on this side of the resurrection, is it really necessary for us to reenact their lack of understanding and the accompanying despair? It might make for good theater, but it opens the door to lousy theology.

This week, when you’re experiencing the Scripture accounts of the Last Supper, arrest, and crucifixion of Jesus, remember to look at all of it in light of the coming Resurrection. On Good Friday, be sure to read and emphasize the Lectionary passages from Hebrews-- they present the crucifixion in the context of what it accomplishes in our lives. And in those passages, you get hints that Good Friday isn’t the end.

Don’t let people leave any service this week without seeing the hope of the Resurrection.

BLOG: Linkin Park and Bible Translation

Fri, 15 Apr 2011 05:00:00 GMT

A couple of months ago, Linkin Park was the musical guest on NBC's Saturday Night Live. This California rock band achieved widespread popularity about ten years ago with its album Hybrid Theory, and the group has attempted to reinvent itself on virtually every album since. Success can be a double-edged sword for musicians. On one hand, fans expect the same kind of music that made the artist or group famous in the first place. But it's a balancing act, because music buyers also want everything to be new and fresh.

During the SNL performance, I checked Twitter to see what people were saying. While the band received some kudos, many of the comments I saw were negative, mostly from fans who were nostalgic for "the old Linkin Park."

This reminded me of the dilemma Bible publishers sometimes find themselves in when they're publishing a new translation. Bible buyers say they want translations to be in modern English, but when the rubber meets the road, many of us seem to want new translations to read like the ones we grew up with. For many in my generation, that translation was the NIV. It's easy to fall into the trap of using our favorite version as a benchmark for judging a translation rather than using the original languages, especially when we've had no formal training in Greek or Hebrew.

If it doesn't sound like our "trusted" Bible, it must not be translated right. Or so we think. But we should realize that while the Bible doesn't change, English does change.

The Linkin Park of 2011 doesn't sound like the Linkin Park of 2001. And that's a good thing, because the band is trying to reach people in the here and now, not the past.

Nostalgia will only get you so far.

Shane Raynor is an editor and blogger for Ministry Matters. You can find him on both Facebook and Twitter. Photo credit: Felipe Ramírez Amigo via Flickr

BLOG: Two Sundays in One

Mon, 11 Apr 2011 05:00:00 GMT

The Christian calendar certainly seems schizophrenic this time of year. Consider the fact that we’re in the middle of Lent-- the forty days when believers prepare for Holy Week and the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Lent is considered a fairly serious time-- one of repentance, prayer, introspection, and self-denial.

But there's some fine print -- Sundays during Lent don’t count. That’s right, we don’t really observe Lent on Sundays because they are “mini-Easters”. (Although it should be noted that Jesus didn’t experience any such “mini-Easters” during his forty days in the wilderness.) That’s why scripture is all over the emotional map during this particular season. Last week, we experienced Ezekiel’s valley of dry bones and the death and raising of Lazarus. God breathed life into hopeless situations, and we heard scriptural accounts that are second only to the Easter story on the hope and joy meter. But we had to experience the sorrow before we got to the joy.

This week, it’s the other way around, and depending on how your church observes Palm Sunday (aka Passion Sunday, Sunday of the Passion, and Palm Sunday of the Passion of Our Lord), the day and the tone will either seem a little out of place for the season, or like a liturgical roller coaster.

Some churches do the Palm and Passion readings in one service. Others effectively observe Palm Sunday during the morning services and Passion Sunday in the evening, and the rest save the Passion readings for later in Holy Week. I was checking out some of the chatter this weekend on Facebook and Twitter, and noted that a few congregations are moving away from “Palm” Sunday and toward “Passion” Sunday because of decreased attendance and interest in Holy Thursday and Good Friday services in recent years.

If you do try to pull off both Palm and Passion readings in one service, be sure to transition well. You’ll be juxtaposing the the imagery of Psalm 118 with Psalm 31. “This is the day that the LORD has made; let us rejoice and be glad in it” vs. “my life is spent with sorrow, and my years with sighing; my strength fails because of my misery, and my bones waste away.” And the triumphal entry of Christ followed by his crucifixion five days later is a major gear shift for one service. But there’s probably not a more effective way of pointing out the irony of that welcome than covering everything in a single worship experience.

BLOG: Speaking to Dry Bones

Fri, 08 Apr 2011 05:00:00 GMT

There’s some resurrection preview action going on this weekend with two weeks to go until Easter. Whether you’re a preacher, teacher, or simply a student of Scripture who uses the Lectionary for study, this week’s selections should light a fire in you. If you don’t find that to be the case, then get a fresh translation-- read, re-read, meditate, and pray-- over and over again if necessary, especially if you’re presenting these passages to others. If you aren’t getting excited about what you’re reading, chances are, the people who will be listening to you won't get very excited either. And it’s hard to not let these selections get to you-- I’ve been thinking about Ezekiel and the valley of dry bones for days now (Ezekiel 37:1-14).

When pastors get frustrated with a perceived lack of vibrancy in their congregations, I sometimes hear the dry bones passage trotted out and applied to the congregation. (Not usually in a sermon, mind you, but “off the record”. Congregations and small groups would probably see the passage a little differently.) As I was reading Ezekiel’s vision this week, I reminded myself that nothing is impossible with God. Even when everyone else, including our own common sense, says to give up hope, Ezekiel reminds us that nothing is so far gone that we need to give up on God.

I love the beginning of the vision when God shows Ezekiel the dry bones and asks, “Can these bones live?” The prophet avoids the Sunday school answer (“Sure, God! You can do anything!”) and the pessimistic (some would say realistic) answer (“Are you kidding me?”) In fact, he avoids answering altogether by saying, “Lord GOD, you know.”

That’s pretty much another way of saying, “I don’t know. You tell me.” Deep down, I bet Ezekiel suspected the answer was no, but he had enough sense of who God is to not say such a thing out loud.

Then God told Ezekiel to speak to the bones. And as he spoke, the bones came together, with ligaments and muscles-- even skin. But still no real life. Not yet, anyway. Ezekiel was instructed to speak to the breath, or the Spirit, who would breathe on the people who had been killed so that they might live. So he did, and suddenly, there were enough living people standing to form a large army.

God explains to Ezekiel that all the people of Israel are like the bones. “The people say, 'Our bones are dry, and our hope has vanished. We are completely destroyed.'” (Ezekiel 37:11b)

But even in what seems like total destruction, there is hope. And this is what we can’t let people miss when we share this passage.

I was talking to a friend this week who has been looking for a job since Christmas. But most recently he’s been doing it in a half-hearted way, he told me, because he’s lost hope. So I encouraged him, and I spoke to his situation. (Sometimes we have to speak to situations, the same way Ezekiel spoke to the bones.) Then after I had finished the conversation with my friend, I had another conversation with God. In a sense, I spoke to the bones (a seemingly hopeless situation), then I entreated the Spirit to breathe life into that situation.

As Christians, God has given us the awesome privilege of prophesying into each other’s lives, whether or not we’re pastors or teachers.

Ezekiel 37 is too exciting to be preached only on a historical level. It needs to be applied to life! And the Lazarus passage can be brought in too, as it nicely rounds out the “never give up hope” message.

ARTICLE: Marketing the UMC: Interview with UMCom's Larry Hollon

Sun, 01 Aug 2010 05:00:00 GMT

General Conference 2008 approved the launch of the UMC’s newest ad campaign, Rethink Church. United Methodist Communications has led the way, reminding people inside and outside of faith communities that church is not just a place we go, but something we do. The campaign urges congregations to reach out in new ways, and the campaign’s companion website, 10 Thousand Doors (www.tenthousanddoors.org) invites seekers to find their path to spirituality and meaningful action through one of the many ministries of the UMC. UMCom General Secretary Larry Hollon shares vision for the campaign.

Where did the idea for the Rethink Church campaign and the 10 Thousand Doors seeker website originate?

As we prepared to move into the third quadrennium of our advertising strategy, we realized we needed to take this campaign to the next level. As the world changes and the media environment changes, we know that we have to change too. We began to ask the question, “What comes next?” The past eight years have led us to a new place. And so the idea came about through an interactive conversation that was based upon research, based upon our previous experience with the campaign, and based on the realities that we are perceiving in the church and society that now call the church to look at itself differently and refocus on mission and ministry.

In what ways is Rethink Church attempting to build a United Methodist brand?

The brand has already been created: it’s the people of The United Methodist Church—and the brand promise is that you will be received with open hearts, open minds and open doors if you engage with the people of The United Methodist Church. That brand is rooted in the Wesleyan tradition of serving people who are not a part of the established church, but who are seeking spiritual meaning. Rethink Church takes the promise as well as the invitation, and makes it more active. It takes it to the level of engagement and active expression. It presents options that make the invitation to discipleship concrete.

United Methodist congregations are all over the map theologically. How can both theologically conservative and a theologically liberal (for lack of better terms) congregations benefit from RethinkChurch.org? How can a large marketing initiative cast such a wide net without losing potency?

The purpose statement on the site claims: “This is a relevant, open-minded place to explore your spirituality. Come as you are and discover ways to live with purpose and meaning.”
RethinkChurch.org is targeted at persons who are looking for spiritual connections and are more open to finding that through involvement in mission activity. No one side of the theological spectrum you describe is more or less attuned to that part of our faith than the other. Mission becomes the new point of entry, and eventually as people on this journey look to be more fully a part of the faith community they can decide whether the church’s theology is a good fit with their own faith journey.

Suppose someone who has never been to a church encounters the Rethink Church campaign. In their minds, how will the UMC be different from other denominations or nondenominational churches? According to RethinkChurch.org, what makes the UMC stand out?

One of the challenges that denominations typically face is that people don’t really know that much about them. Our research has given us a snapshot of how others see us, and the indication from the first eight years of the campaign is that it has helped to reframe people's indistinct perceptions about the church into something more positive. The goals of Rethink Church are to change the current perception of The United Methodist Church into one of a relevant, active community of believers; to redefine the church experience beyond Sundays and a building; and to return to the first century roots of the church as one of the original social networks.

What exactly are we "selling" with RethinkChurch.org? An experience? An idea?

RethinkChurch.org is not a sales tool but an invitational destination. We invite people to this destination with the hope they will find a way to engage with The United Methodist church in a local congregation or through an activity, service project , mission opportunity, study group, or in some other way that interests them. “Get Involved” is the section of the site that features a highly interactive map highlighting churches and ministries. By linking this section of the site with the Find-A-Church database, seekers are able to locate churches in their geographical area with ministries that best meet their needs/interests. And so that we maintain that the site is a place for engagement, not just information, it allows them the ability to leave comments regarding their experiences.

One criticism I've heard and made about RethinkChurch.org is that there isn't enough there about Jesus Christ. What is currently in RethinkChurch.org that makes it different from any secular organization involved in social concerns and projects?

We know that we must speak in a way that is relevant to our audience’s concerns. It’s a matter of communicating in the language that people are familiar with in the media environment that they are comfortable in and reaching them with concerns that are directly related to their day-to-day experiences and concerns. RethinkChurch.org is an invitation to be missionally engaged disciples of Jesus Christ. It may invite you to become engaged by using some doorway that is nontraditional, but the mission of the church is to make disciples. Therefore, a life of disciplined study, prayer and service following the teachings of Jesus is deeply embedded in the invitation.

The environment changes rapidly. However, we know from research that religious references frequently block communication. Therefore, we must get around the blockage to be heard and we must demonstrate an inviting, vibrant, authentic welcome. It's a delicate communications challenge that we must handle with care for the people we want to engage and our faithfulness as disciples of Jesus Christ.

How does a church measure the success of a marketing effort? Increased membership? Name recognition? Positive feedback from surveys or focus groups?

One of our hopes as we promote Rethink Church is that the church as a whole will look beyond what we have traditionally measured – membership, or worship attendance – and begin to explore ways we can measure how churches engage with their communities. How many lives are touched? How many children are cared for, how many people are fed, how many persons are connected to the places where they can find reasons to have hope?

In the last several months we have tied marketing efforts to community outreach activities and have seen wonderful responses from the communities and church members alike. At one such Rethink Church event on April 11^th in Topeka, Kan., twenty-two churches partnered together to get out of their churches and into the area parks for a day of clean up. Over 800 church members participated and they were joined by more than 200 volunteers from the community. One of the pastors interviewed that day has average worship attendance on Sunday mornings around 50 people, but his church had 66 people participate. With Rethink Church, we are really measuring engagement.

What role does church "quality control" play in the success of a good campaign? How do we keep young people who visit local UMCs from being disappointed and possibly being inoculated against church in the process?

If we do not deliver welcoming and hospitality to those folks who come to the church and take that step of being vulnerable by coming to the church, then we have failed in our faithfulness to be a welcoming community. Our welcoming training reminds churches that if visitors aren't made to feel welcome within the first 30 seconds or the first 100 feet, they are not likely to want to return. One of the reasons for the RethinkChurch.org web site is to provide a self-guided way for individuals who are interested in a new spiritual home to explore the people and work of United Methodist Churches in their area. In every case, we hope that the experience of RethinkChurch.org leads a person toward finding an experience that is authentic, compelling, and the start of a fulfilling journey.