tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-150470712024-03-14T00:47:29.626-05:00διάλογοςChris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.comBlogger906125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-70371847891277017222011-12-01T08:12:00.000-06:002011-12-01T08:12:30.754-06:00Questions to Ask During Change<div>Leading change is extraordinarily difficult. Go to Amazon and search "Leadership." Then count how many of the leadership books either have "change" in their title or a chapter devoted to leading change. If it's anything less than a vast majority, I'll buy you a cookie. </div><div><br />
</div><div>There's a reason that books on leading through change sell well. It's tough. Yet the best organizations are constantly changing. You won't do ministry (or business) in 50 years exactly the same way you do ministry or business today (unless you're Amish, in which case you probably aren't reading this blog post). As a result, leaders need to figure out how to lead change - either gradually or dramatically - because change is coming.</div><div><br />
</div><div>Our staff wants to position our church so that change is a part of the culture. We know that <i>good</i> strategies are often the enemy of the <i>best</i> strategies, and are trying to get really good at evaluating everything we do in light of moving toward who we want to be next decade, not just next year. As a result, we're constantly talking about change. </div><div><br />
</div><div>But it's really tough, and we're learning a lot about what it looks like to lead change well. </div><div><br />
</div><div>For us, it means constantly examining our answers to three big questions: (1) Do we believe where we're going is better? (2) What is it going to cost us? (3) Can we afford it?</div><div><br />
</div><div>If you don't believe the destination is worth traveling to, you might as well take your bags out of the car. Don't pass "go," don't collect 200 dollars. It's not worth the anxiety of saving-up for a trip you don't want to take. So forget it and plan to go somewhere else. </div><div><br />
</div><div>Every destination has a cost. There may be multiple ways of paying the cost (cash, credit, frequent flyer miles, for example) but you need to figure out what the trip is going to cost. If you are a wise traveler, you'll assess the cost before you hop on the plane so you can afford the hotel once you land. In an organization, will a trip cost you money? Will it cost you investors? Will it cost you staff members? Will it cost you good-will or credibility? Will it cost you time and energy? You need to count the potential cost before you hop on the airplane. There may be a few unanticipated costs on your trip - you can expect that. But know the big ones, so you can prepare.</div><div><br />
</div><div>Then you have to figure out if you can afford the trip today. Kari and I would love to travel to New Zealand. It's her #1 dream destination, and we're dying to go there. But we know what a trip to New Zealand would cost us in terms of finances and away-from-home time and we can't afford it right now. But, we've got a vacation line-item in our budget that is slowly saving up for New Zealand. It may take us several more years, but unless something unforeseen happens, we'll make it to New Zealand. Same deal with leading an organization. Once you know where you want to go you are able to figure out whether or not you can afford the trip right now. If you can't, since you know what it is going to cost you know how to save and you can budget wisely so you get there as soon as you can afford it. . </div><div><br />
</div><div>One last thing: you've got to ask these questions in this order. If you start counting the cost before you decide where you want to go, you'll never go anywhere; you'll lead out of fear. If you wait to save until you've got enough money, you'll hide your talent in the dirt and never invest (Matthew 25). Figure out where you want to go, figure out what it will cost, and then decide if you can afford it now, or if you need to wait. </div>Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-7016844179426347402011-11-01T09:21:00.000-05:002011-11-01T09:21:33.811-05:00Book BriefsI've been lax on book reviews recently. A good majority of the reason is that I'm still reading primarily toward completing my dissertation and those books aren't very interesting to review. But, I've read some others that I want to mention. So here are some brief reviews of the best books I've read recently (in no particular order).<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=instruments%20in%20the%20redeemers%20hands%20amazon&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FInstruments-Redeemers-Hands-Resources-Changing%2Fdp%2F0875526071&ei=gPevTqTAC6SBsgK9vJnKAQ&usg=AFQjCNFe5CAO1al00pn-d5PKtUY4iUOQLA">Instruments in the Redeemer's Hands</a> - Paul Tripp<br />
I'm reading a lot by Tripp these days. This one was recommended by a friend. Tripp is a counselor and former pastor and has written what turns out to be a guidebook for anyone who wants to walk with broken people and point those people toward the Cross. If you're familiar with "nouthetic counseling," Tripp is a nouthetic counselor without the arrogant attitude. He points people to eternal realities and helps people understand the implications of the heart on behavior and identity, but doesn't do it with a closed fist. This is a good, helpful book worth reading for anyone who finds themselves leaning-into the lives of broken people, whether professionally or just as a friend.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=tell%20me%20a%20story%20the%20life-shaping%20power%20of%20our%20stories&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FTell-Me-Story-Life-Shaping-Stories%2Fdp%2F0970651104&ei=EfmvToGPF4LDsQKN0ZjoAQ&usg=AFQjCNFgiJzijx3ngsTiSZ-kPEqKJ27fbg">Tell Me a Story: The Life-Shaping Power of Our Stories</a> - Daniel Taylor<br />
Taylor is a professor of English at Bethel College in Minnesota. As famous as English professors are for writing literature nobody wants to read, Taylor has written a gem. Written from a Christian perspective, Taylor shows how the stories of history, the stories of our lives, and the stories of our theology shape the lives that we live. We live within and interact within the plot of our own life and within the plot of the lives of others. Additionally, the stories we read, hear, understand, and believe shape our morals, values, ethics, character, and comprehension of the way the world works. This book will make you want to tell a lot more stories, hear a lot more stories, and pay awfully close attention to the stories (good and bad) you are a part of.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=replenish%20lance%20witt%20amazon&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCUQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FReplenish-Leading-Healthy-Lance-Witt%2Fdp%2F0801013542&ei=Z_qvTuboM-imsQKl34TJAQ&usg=AFQjCNEJBhec9y5bclPnahgI_hl8BXOviQ">Replenish</a> - Lance Witt<br />
Every pastor needs to read this book. I read it at the recommendation of a friend and mentor and it hit me between the eyes. Witt does a masterful job at helping pastors release themselves from the unhealthy expectations of themselves, the church culture, and their congregations to focus solely on numerical growth (which causes every pastor alive to feel like a loser), and to focus instead on yielding himself to the work of God through His ministry and within His church. It's written in 41 short chapters that help the pastor (1) detoxify their soul, (2) set realistic goals for ministry, (3) establish patterns that are sustainable, and (4) build healthy teams. I'm going to buy a copy for our each of our team members for Christmas (don't tell them) so our team can keep some of these ideas at the forefront of our minds.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Read-This-Before-Next-Meeting/dp/1936719169">Read This Before Our Next Meeting</a> - Al Pittampalli<br />
Most leaders will be able to read this book in about 30 minutes. It's an easy, easy, read. Implementation on the other hand... "Read This Before Our Next Meeting" takes on the fact that the majority of a company's meetings are a redundant drain on productivity that as a result waste a fortune of company time and money. He offers some solutions to make meetings more productive. In short, he believes meetings should be solely for the purpose of conflict and coordination by a small group of only the people who have a (strong opinion about a matter and a dog in the hunt) about a soft-decision that has already been made by the leader. Meetings for formality; social benefit, and information are a waste of time. According to Pittampalli, if it can be accomplished in a well-written memo, don't waste the time with a meeting. People can read faster than they can meet. You won't agree with all his conclusions - he uses a fairly rigid top-down leadership style. However, most of his observations and solutions are spot-on.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Forever-Why-Cant-Live-Without/dp/0310328187/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1320156606&sr=1-1">Forever: Why You Can't Live Without It </a>- Paul Tripp<br />
Tripp is Gospel-centered, Jesus-centered, eternity-centered. That's why I like a lot of what he's putting out these days. This book is a shining example of that. Tripp points out that every human is hard-wired for eternity. Our longings, disappointments, shortcomings, angers, suffering, and struggles all reveal a yearning for something different; something better. Tripp does a great job walking through our daily lives, from relationships to jobs to religion to parenting to marriage, and the various circumstances and situations we find ourselves in every day, and showing how they can drive us toward worship of the God who makes "forever" available. This book is exceptional for two purposes: (1) It helps the reader better understand what is happening in his or her heart when they process their own real life. (2) It helps the reader connect the Gospel with the struggles, habits, hurts and hangups we see in the lives of others. Understanding what Tripp says in this book can help you be an incredible evangelist wherever you are because it gives Gospel-handles to real-life situations we all face every day.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Necessary-Endings-Employees-Businesses-Relationships/dp/0061777129/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1320157027&sr=1-1">Necessary Endings</a> - Henry Cloud<br />
In order to see growth, something often has to die. Yet all of us resist endings. As far back as high school we resisted breaking up with the girl we knew was bad for us, even though we knew that's where the relationship was headed. We hang onto the wrong job; the wrong role; the wrong employee. We resist ending programs, initiatives, traditions, and all kinds of things in our lives for all kinds of reasons. Cloud has written a brilliant book to help show why endings are important, why we avoid endings, and how to accomplish necessary endings as a friend, boss, employee, or parent. This is an extremely important book for leaders, and was a tremendous encouragement to me as a young leader.Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-21911670135051441312011-10-24T06:00:00.051-05:002011-10-24T06:00:16.008-05:00Advance or Protect?Last week I tweeted something I've been thinking a lot about recently - not necessarily specifically related to anything on my radar, but also not removed from some of the questions and thoughts I <i>am</i> asking and thinking as a leader in my particular context.<br />
<br />
"At some point as a leader you have to decide if your objective is to advance or hold ground. You can't normally do both."<br />
<br />
Think back to your days playing Capture the Flag. You can't take ground <i>and</i> protect the fort at the same time. You have to decide your strategy, and it means one or the other.<br />
<br />
Now certainly in the overall war we might be protecting and advancing at the same time; that's not my point. My point is that as a leader in a specific objective, you're going to have to choose.<br />
<br />
A product cannot be "new and improved" <i>and</i> celebrate that it is "the same as it's always been."<br />
<br />
A company can't explore something never before seen if they are committed to only going places they've always been.<br />
<br />
It is impossible for something to be cutting-edge and tried-and-true at the same time.<br />
<br />
The difference isn't between right and wrong. Advancing isn't always better than protecting, or vice versa. Clear Coke advanced when Coca-Cola should have been protecting Coke Classic. IBM protected its turf while Apple and Microsoft advanced an open architecture model. You can choose to advance or protect and either one can be the right (or wrong) decision. But you can't do both.<br />
<br />
Whatever it is you're responsible for leading, a primary question to ask is whether or not you're advancing something or protecting something. Either one <i>could </i>get you killed, but fail to choose and you're a sitting duck.Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-62887148501882127742011-10-17T09:14:00.000-05:002011-10-17T09:14:19.114-05:00Processing Sundays on Mondays<div>Every pastor I know struggles with Sundays on Monday. I have a good friend whose habit I have adopted. He refuses to take Monday off. The letdown after Sunday is often so profound that he says, "if I'm going to feel this crummy, someone ought to be paying me to do it." </div><div><br />
</div><div>Sundays are a little bit like Christmas, and a little bit like Halloween. They're like Christmas in that the anticipation and planning of several weeks comes together in a huge celebration. </div><div><br />
</div><div>Sundays are like Halloween in that most people approach you wearing a mask, and it isn't until they begin talking that you know what's underneath. Since pastors are only able to engage with many members of their congregation one day a week, it's necessity that most of the kind words of people get saved for Sunday. The gripes do too. </div><div><br />
</div><div>I'm certainly not complaining - it's what I signed up for. But the result of Sunday for any pastor can be a disorienting mixture of adrenaline, emotion, praise, and criticism. Most pastors I know spend a large part of Monday trying to catch their bearings and get back on the horse. </div><div><br />
</div><div>I read the story below on a Monday morning, and it immediately connected with me when it comes to the roller coaster of Halloween that I find myself processing on Mondays. Really old guys have a tendency to say really smart things. </div><div><br />
</div>(HT: <a href="http://michaelhyatt.com/the-number-one-way-leaders-get-derailed.html">Michael Hyatt</a>)<br />
<br />
<div>"A brother came to see Abba Macarius the Egyptian and said to him, “Abba, give me a word, that I may be [sanctified].’ So the old man said, ‘Go to the cemetery and insult the dead.’ The brother went there, hurled insults and stones at them; then he returned and told the old man about it. The latter said to him, ‘Didn’t they say anything to you?’ He replied, ‘No.’<br />
<br />
“The old man said, ‘Go back tomorrow and praise them.’ So the brother went away and praised them, calling them Apostles, saints and blessed people. He returned to the old man and said to him, ‘I have complimented them.’ And the old man said to him, ‘Did they not answer you?’ the brother said, ‘No.’<br />
<br />
“The old man said to him, ‘You know how you insulted them and they did not reply, and how you praised them and they did not speak; so you, too, if you wish to be [sanctified] must do the same and become a dead man. Like the dead, take no account of either the scorn of others or their praises, and you can be [sanctified].’”</div>Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-57004375625827081592011-10-10T09:08:00.003-05:002011-10-10T15:22:30.092-05:00Pastors and Political EndorsementsDr. Robert Jeffress, senior pastor at First Baptist Dallas is in the news. Again. (<a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/09/us-usa-campaign-jeffress-idUSTRE7982DV20111009">Texas Pastor Stands Ground On "Cult" Comment Against Mormons</a>)<br />
<br />
I've met Dr. Jeffress on a couple of occasions. He seems to be a genuinely nice guy. I have some good friends who either are or have been members at churches he has pastored in the past and they <i>love</i> him. I have no reason to suspect that Dr. Jeffress is anything other than a wonderful man, but I'm disappointed to see him making headlines this way again.<br />
<br />
First of all, pastors need to get out of the business of "personally endorsing" political candidates. The whole idea that this is a <i>personal</i> endorsement is hogwash in the first place. Unless your name is Joe the Plumber, the only reason anyone cares about your "personal endorsement" is that you have a position to be leveraged.<br />
<br />
Second of all, to drop a bomb like saying "Mormonism is a cult" while introducing a candidate reeks of a disingenuous, selfish publicity stunt. Even if you agree with what Jeffress said (which I absolutely do, though the word "cult" carries some baggage and innuendo that <i>doesn't</i> paint the LDS church clearly or in a way that is helpful), to surprise a political candidate by handing his campaign this little "October Surprise" was either a foolish mistake or an intentional play to stir-up some controversy with Dr. Jeffress in the middle of it. I choose to believe the former, though it isn't much better than the latter.<br />
<br />
Thirdly, <i>if</i> you're going to do something like this as a pastor, you might as well take the opportunity to tell people about Jesus. Jeffress mentioned that Mormonism started 1800 years after Christianity. Fine, but that doesn't make it a cult. People in Paul's day made the same claim about Christianity starting thousands of years after Judaism. How about some talk about the fact that Mormons believe in is a different Jesus; different salvation; different Gospel? Take the time to explain salvation by grace through faith through what Christ did on the cross. If you're going to use up the spotlight, at least go the distance. Let people know what you're for; not just what you're against. <br />
<br />
When it comes down to it, I'm less worried about Dr. Jeffress being the "Jeremiah Wright of the right," and more worried about him being the "Pat Robertson of the right." When a pastor's message is that our hope for "push[ing] back against the evil that is engulfing our country" is found in a political candidate, we're in big trouble.Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-57778604288705299762011-10-06T08:48:00.001-05:002011-10-06T08:50:03.969-05:00What I've Learned as a Leader From Steve JobsNot many people get to say they've changed the world. Steve Jobs, who died yesterday, could. If you've ever posted a picture to the internet, downloaded a song online, or done both of those things on the same device as you talk to your office on, you've benefited from Steve Jobs' leadership. Even if you've never used an Apple product, their presence and innovation pushed the market in a direction it might not have gone otherwise.<br />
<br />
I'm not a CEO of a for-profit company. I'm not an Apple afficianado - I have an iPhone and an iPad because nobody else is doing what they're doing, but I don't have any brand loyalty. If someone else made something truly better, I'd buy it instead. And, I don't necessarily want to lead like Steve Jobs. His leadership style was legendary for being crass, condescending, and focused solely on the bottom line. We're trying to do vastly different things. However, here are a few things I've learned from Steve Jobs.<br />
<br />
<b>1. Simplicity and focus can change the world. </b>There were mp3 players on the market before the iPod, but they were nearly impossible to use. In a market where billions of things were technologically <i>possible,</i> he introduced a device with one button; a device that fulfilled one function. And sold gagillions. Jobs said, "That’s been one of my mantras — focus and simplicity. Simple can be harder than complex: You have to work hard to get your thinking clean to make it simple. But it’s worth it in the end because once you get there, you can move mountains."<br />
<br />
<b>2. Presentation Matters</b>. If you cut corners you can't be trusted, and you have to go all the way. I love this quote (that I read in the Wall Street Journal, not the magazine where it originally appeared). "When you’re a carpenter making a beautiful chest of drawers, you’re not going to use a piece of plywood on the back, even though it faces the wall and nobody will ever see it. You’ll know it’s there, so you’re going to use a beautiful piece of wood on the back. For you to sleep well at night, the aesthetic, the quality, has to be carried all the way through.” Function isn't the only thing that matters; form matters too.<br />
<br />
<b>3. Intuitive systems allow for passionate followers.</b> My two-year old can use my iPhone, and I didn't have to teach him. That's why people are so passionate about Apple products... you don't need to be a rocket scientist to be a power-user and do incredible things. People don't want to spend all their time figuring out your systems; they want to <i>do</i> something, <i>create</i> something, change the world. If your products, services, messages, or organizations are so complex they take forever to figure out, they'll go the way of the IBM computer. If your systems accommodate functionality without getting in the way of it, people will fall all over themselves to be involved with whatever you're doing.Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-51499036397937009872011-09-19T06:00:00.019-05:002011-09-19T06:00:04.931-05:00Jesus and MoneyDid you ever notice how Jesus got the order backwards when He was talking about money?<br />
<br />
Matthew 6:21, "Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."<br />
<br />
Don't we always say it the other way?<br />
<br />
"Find something you have a heart for and give your money there."<br />
<br />
But Jesus gets it backwards. He says, "Your heart will follow your money," <i>not</i> "Your money should follow your heart."<br />
<br />
He says, "Figure out where you <i>want</i> your heart to be, and start investing <i>there</i>."<br />
<br />
Funny how Jesus messes that up...Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-36552591272374592892011-09-15T15:39:00.000-05:002011-09-15T15:39:04.052-05:00Gospel and JusticeI'm reading a lot these days in the area of external focus, social justice, and the mission of the Church. A lot of what is being written is incredible stuff, and it's neat to see my generation attempting to help put our hands and feet where our mouth is when it comes to issues of faith. That isn't a tension the Church has held well in the past and I'm optimistic that my generation could do better. Unfortunately, I'm also worried that we'll simply swing the pendulum back to another side.<br />
<br />
A lot of what I'm reading today talks about social justice as a part of the "Gospel." Richard Stearns' book "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Hole-Our-Gospel-Changed-Richard/dp/B004H73734/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1316117036&sr=8-2">Hole in Our Gospel</a>" is a popular example. Writers warn about "bifurcating the Gospel;" that is, dividing the Gospel of the Kingdom (Matthew 24:14) from the Gospel of Jesus' death and resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:1-8). The Gospel of the Kingdom is the "good news" of the promised kingdom in which Jesus will reign in righteousness and justice and the creation will be restored to what God intended it to be: justice will be served, the poor won't be poor, violence will be no longer, etc... The Gospel of Jesus' death and resurrection is that because of Jesus' death on the cross you can be reconciled to God personally.<br />
<br />
Stearns (and many, many others) argue that you can't separate the two. The Good News of Jesus' death and resurrection is inseparable from the Good News that Jesus is King and the world (through you) should reflect that. This leads to the conclusion (or at least implication) that if a person is not tangibly reflecting the Kingdom, they aren't trusting the Gospel and aren't going to heaven.<br />
<br />
However, we have to be very, very, very careful that we don't just assume when the Bible says "gospel" it's always talking about the same good news. The word doesn't seem to be that specialized.<br />
<br />
Plus, some degree of "bifurcation" is necessary. The message of the Kingdom is <i>not</i> good news until <i>after</i> you've trusted the message of Jesus' death and resurrection on your behalf. In fact, the news that the King of the Universe is going to rule on David's throne and judge in perfect righteousness and justice is terrible news if you are on the wrong side of justice. If you're a traitor, the message of the Kingdom is the <i>worst possible</i> news you could receive.<br />
<br />
Until you're rightly related to God, the message of the Kingdom isn't "good news" at all. Once you've believed the Gospel of Jesus' death and resurrection, the message of the Kingdom is great news. But they're different messages we can't afford to get scrambled.Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-20589827728654651182011-09-12T21:19:00.000-05:002011-09-12T21:19:54.623-05:00Forgiveness and 9-11<div>The cross is the standard for Christian forgiveness. Our inability to meet that standard of forgiveness proves we need it too. </div><div><br />
</div><div>The men who flew planes into the World Trade Center towers, Pentagon, and a field in Pennsylvania were wicked, evil, godless fools who perpetrated an unspeakable act against people created in the image of God. As I watched the non-stop television coverage on the anniversary of the terrorist attacks yesterday I found anger that had been suppressed for a decade somehow rekindled inside of me.<br />
<div> </div><div>Surely there is a stopping-point for the kinds of people God legitimately expects us to forgive, right? </div><div><br />
</div><div>Right. </div><div><br />
</div><div>Matthew 18:21-35 is pretty clear. Jesus only expects us to forgive to the degree that He has forgiven. Beyond that, we're not responsible. </div><div><br />
</div><div>In Luke 23:34, Jesus Himself models forgiveness. He forgives the Roman soldiers who spit in the face of God Himself while He slowly suffocated to death on a cross. As heinous as 9-11 was, it's not even a blip on the radar screen of heinous compared with what Jesus was willing to forgive just minutes before He died. </div><div><br />
</div><div>Of course, forgiveness like that isn't realistic for you or me. It doesn't seem possible for me to erase the debt of those depraved lunatics who commandeered jets and killed thousands of innocent people. </div><div><br />
</div><div>And that very fact should remind me that I need forgiveness too. I need a Savior too. My inability to live-up to Jesus' example of forgiveness only highlights the gap between Him and me. And when we're talking about an infinite God, an infinite gap puts me a lot closer on the scale to the people I despise than to the God I aspire to be like...</div><div><br />
</div><div><br />
</div><div> <div><br />
</div><div><br />
</div></div></div>Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-69257781449732189752011-09-07T15:19:00.000-05:002011-09-07T15:19:46.500-05:00Commit to Answering, not Specific AnswersIt's a foregone conclusion that the world is changing at a rapid pace. Culture changes, trends change, philosophies change, needs change... Organizations need to change too. <div><br />
</div><div>One of the things I notice about leaders who navigate change effectively is that they commit to answering the right questions but they don't sell out indefinitely to a specific answer. </div><div><br />
</div><div>For example, take the question: "How can we get someone from one place to another as efficiently and effectively as possible?" In the late 1800s, the best answer to the question was "horseback." But organizations that sold out to that specific answer were left in the dust once Mr. Ford's Model T came around in 1908. </div><div><br />
</div><div>Organizations that made it were the organizations who stayed committed to answering the question. Organizations that failed to make it were the organizations who stayed committed to their specific answer. </div><div><br />
</div><div>We've got to be good at asking the right questions, even when we are confident that the answer hasn't changed. Because with most of the things we do, someday the answer <i>will</i> change. The question won't change; the need won't change; the reason for an answer won't change; but the specific way we answer the question might, and we need to be ready. </div><div><br />
</div><div><br />
</div>Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-47932444152640433182011-09-05T06:00:00.001-05:002011-09-05T06:00:00.039-05:00Managing MissesIf you know me at all, you know I love to play golf. I'm not much of a golfer; I need to play more and am confident I could get there.<br />
<br />
Even still, over the past few years I've taken golf lessons with a guy I met through a mutual friend. He's helped the fundamentals of my swing a little bit but has helped the fundamentals of my <i>thinking</i> a lot. He has helped me approach shots differently, and think-through every hole differently. As a result my golf scores are starting to really improve.<br />
<br />
One of the big things he says on a regular basis is that "Golf is not about playing great shots. It's about managing your misses." The other day I heard someone quote Jack Nicklaus who said in a great round he only hits the ball exactly like he hoped 6 or 8 times (less than 10 percent of the time), and he's the greatest golfer to have ever lived.<br />
<br />
A lesson I'm learning about leadership (especially senior-level leadership) is that the great leaders I know function in a very similar way.<br />
<br />
There are very few perfect decisions because there are no perfect leaders and very few perfect scenarios. All decisions have collateral effects, not all of which are expected and not all of which are enjoyable. Leaders rarely have all the information they need to make flawless decisions when they need to make them, and rarely have the ability to pull off the "shot" that looks exactly like the shot they imagined in their mind.<br />
<br />
Leadership is not about hitting perfect "shots." It's about putting yourself in a position to manage your misses.<br />
You have to hit shots in such a way that they're able to be great, but not catastrophic if you miss. Shots with a catastrophic downside are rarely worth taking - you can't recover from them.<br />
<br />
You'll live an awfully discouraged life if you try to lead perfectly.The great leaders I know don't make exclusively perfect decision. In fact, they <i>rarely</i> make perfect decisions. Instead, they're able to string together a bunch of manageable misses that move them forward effectively.<br />
<br />
Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-71123444656866158552011-08-31T06:00:00.000-05:002011-08-31T06:00:16.332-05:00Prosperity Gospel TestimoniesIf you've spent much time in an evangelical church, you have probably been trained on how to share your "story." We teach people how to tell their story of faith in a way that allows the Gospel to be clear so that someone else could hear about what Jesus Christ has done in our life and think about their own response to the Gospel. No question, it's an incredible way to share your faith.<br />
<div><br />
</div><div>But (and I include myself in this), we need to be more careful how we train people to share their story. </div><div><br />
</div><div>The normal parameters for a person's story are these: </div><div><br />
</div><div>1. Tell about your life before you trusted Christ.</div><div>2. Tell how you trusted Christ. </div><div>3. Tell how your life has changed.</div><div><br />
</div><div>The problem I have as I think more about it is with the third step. Because we want people to be compelled to trust Christ through our story, the temptation is to load-up the third part of our story with all the incredible things that happened after we put our faith in Jesus. After we trusted Christ, we stopped smoking cold turkey, stopped cussing on the golf course, stopped reacting in anger against our employees, and experienced peace and joy that we'd never experienced before. The sky started raining lemon drops and gumdrops, and our home life was instantly transformed into a 1950s television show. </div><div><br />
</div><div>The problem is, in doing so we inadvertently preach a prosperity gospel to people, causing them to make assumptions that aren't true. Sometimes after you trust Christ, bad habits <i>don't</i> automatically go away. Sometimes after you trust Christ your family <i>still</i> falls apart. Sometimes after you trust Christ your friends abandon you, or you get sick, or you lose your life-savings in a bad investment you prayed hard about. </div><div><br />
</div><div>Trusting Christ doesn't ensure that your life will instantly get better, or even that it will trend better (in purely experiential terms) over the long-haul. You don't have to read the New Testament very long to recognize that sometimes life gets <i>harder.</i></div><div><i><br />
</i></div><div>We've got to go deeper in our stories and stop treating them like bad infomercials. </div><div><br />
</div><div>We don't want to rock the boat in the other direction either. The doom-and-gloom gospel isn't any more honest than the prosperity gospel. The hope of the gospel isn't simply that it improves our day-to-day circumstances. It's that it recasts those circumstances whether good <i>or</i> bad in light of eternity so that our <i>response</i> to those experiences springs-up from hope that is found somewhere <i>outside</i> what happens to us (Colossians 1:5). </div><div><br />
</div><div>The Gospel is compelling on its own. We don't have to spin a positive story to make it more compelling. In reality, when we do that we make the Gospel <i>less</i> compelling because we promise something that doesn't always deliver on the back-end. </div>Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-40518802600320804022011-08-29T06:00:00.000-05:002011-08-29T06:00:15.705-05:00Funerals are MandatoryThree years ago I made a post about how I believe <a href="http://chrisfreeland.blogspot.com/2008/01/funerals-are-mandatory.html">funerals should be mandatory</a> for leaders. It's something Rudy Giuliani talks about in his <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Leadership-Rudolph-Giuliani/dp/1401359280">book on leadership</a>.<br />
<br />
Anyone can be there when times are good; it takes a leader to show up when times are rough. But as I continue to attend funerals, I'm increasingly convinced that the primary benefactor of a funeral is the leader; not the people he leads.<br />
<br />
Maybe it's morbid and weird, but there's something about a funeral that re-calibrates you.<br />
<br />
Sometimes funerals can be encouraging. Nobody remembers your small mistakes - the ones you stew about all day - after you're gone.<br />
<br />
Sometimes funerals are stimulating. They help us think about what people <i>will</i> remember about us. Will we be remembered for a lasting contribution to the lives of others, or will people only tell funny stories about us? Will it be obvious that people are searching for anecdotal stories to fill the time, or will it be obvious that they've been forced to condense because of the legacy of a life-well-lived?<br />
<br />
I know it's a morbid topic, but if you've got half a reason to go to a funeral you really should go.Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-2076442850627269222011-08-24T06:00:00.000-05:002011-08-24T06:00:07.006-05:00Interconnected SystemsI just finished "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Leading-Change-John-P-Kotter/dp/0875847471?ie=UTF8&tag=dialogos0d-20&link_code=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969" target="_blank">Leading Change</a><img alt="" border="0" height="1" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=dialogos0d-20&l=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969&o=1&a=0875847471" style="border: none !important; margin: 0px !important; padding: 0px !important;" width="1" />" by John Kotter. It's a fantastic book for leaders who are attempting to help their organizations be better in fundamental ways.<br />
<br />
In the book, Kotter talks about the difference between leading change in unconnected and interconnected systems. His insight is brilliant.<br />
<br />
Imagine walking into your office and deciding you're ready for some change. Probably, you'll do it on your own. Shift the desk from one side of the office to the other side, take down a picture and use a hammer to nail a new picture on a different wall, move the bookshelves from one place to another. And by the end of the day, you'll be able to look at your office and say, "Wow. That looks better."<br />
<br />
That's an "unconnected system." And, it's the kind of change most leaders have led successfully throughout their leadership.<br />
<br />
Now, imagine walking into the same office for the same project, only now the bookshelves are connected to the desk with steel cables. The pictures are tied to the books on the shelf. Tables and chairs have wires attaching them together, and they're connected to the desk and the bookshelves.<br />
<br />
That's an "interconnected system." It's the kind of change that's extraordinarily difficult for leaders <i>and</i> for those he leads.<br />
<br />
The leader thinks he's simply moving the desk. Everyone in the office knows the desk needs to move. But when he moves the desk, the books fall off the bookshelf and everyone (including the leader) is surprised. Everyone knows the picture needs to go but can't figure out why nobody can seem to get the picture to budge from the wall.<br />
<br />
Leading change within an interconnected system is tough work. The end-result is this: You'll likely have to change things that aren't intuitive to everyone in order to keep the bookshelves from falling over; expend more energy than your team initially expected; and make more changes than you imagined at first. It's tough, but it's the only way to the office everyone dreams of.<br />
<br />
Have you experienced this? What other insight would you add to Kotter's discussion of interconnected systems?Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-1175510712258398022011-08-22T06:00:00.000-05:002011-08-22T06:00:11.582-05:00Bridge or Destination?One of the conversations our staff is having a bunch these days: Is this program a bridge or a destination?<br />
<br />
Churches are notorious for creating programs to meet specific needs at specific times but with very little long-term clarity about how the program fits within the overall purpose of the church. That kind of lack of clarity leads to bloated budgets, overwhelmed staff, confusion of purpose, untouchable sacred cows, and programs that no longer accomplish what they were designed to accomplish.<br />
<br />
From my perspective, programs need to be either bridges or destinations.<br />
<br />
Bridges have the singular goal of helping a person span from one destination to another. You don't live on a bridge. They're utilitarian. As a result, you can tell whether or not a bridge is working by figuring out whether or not the people who get on the bridge exit the bridge in the place the bridge was designed to take them. If they get stuck on the bridge, fall off the bridge, or end up in the wrong place, you might want to examine your bridge.<br />
<br />
Destinations are the places you land. You stick there and live for long periods of your life. You shouldn't need many destinations because destinations should sustain life fairly well. You can tell whether or not a destination is working by looking at how frequently someone has to hop on a bridge to get their legitimate needs met at another destination.<br />
<br />
Would you build a house in a place where you had to drive long distances on a regular basis to get your basic needs met? Where you had to drive across one bridge to get groceries, cross another bridge to get to the doctor, cross two bridges to buy clothes, and another bridge to go to the restroom, and another two bridges to return to your home? Of course not - you would spend your whole life in the car.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, a lot of churches do this to people all the time. We create hundreds programs, each designed to provide a single basic discipleship need for people. We've got hundreds of bridges that go in hundreds of directions toward hundreds of destinations. Then we wonder why our churches aren't knocking the ball out of the park when it comes to disciple-making. People can't navigate our systems and don't want to live there anyway. So, they pick and choose the bridges and destinations that are closest and ignore the rest.<br />
<br />
We've got to be more strategic at asking fundamental questions before we start a new program: If it's a bridge, is it the most strategic bridge to get people where they're going? If it's a destination, do we really want people to live here?<br />
Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-87217333741028451942011-08-18T08:08:00.000-05:002011-08-18T08:08:50.950-05:00Something...On my "to do" list for the last two weeks has been, "blog <i>something.</i>" So here it is.<br />
<br />
I've been completely under water with some classwork I'm finishing up and some neat things at church so the blog has suffered. I'm committed to getting back on the horse - blogging is too important to me for <a href="http://chrisfreeland.blogspot.com/2010/10/commonplace-blog.html">several reasons</a>.<br />
<br />
We've got a big Vision night for leaders this Saturday and then a neat Sunday - baptizing somewhere around 30 people this week. I'll be back in the saddle next Monday.<br />
<br />
<br />
Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-64694357027257104352011-08-08T16:43:00.000-05:002011-08-08T16:43:03.823-05:00Small Improvement to a Big OverhaulI read this quote the other day by Robert E. Kelly in "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/How-Star-Work-Breakthrough-Strategies/dp/0812931696?ie=UTF8&tag=dialogos0d-20&link_code=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969" target="_blank">How to Be A Star at Work.</a><img alt="" border="0" height="1" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=dialogos0d-20&l=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969&o=1&a=0812931696" style="border: none !important; margin: 0px !important; padding: 0px !important;" width="1" />"<br />
<br />
"Star performers do small day to day self improvements that add up over time. Roof raising impact seldom happen without a long string of smaller efforts preceding them."<br />
<br />
It's not just true in work; it's true in life. Small changes every day add up, and often last much longer than grandiose overhauls. If you decide you want to be a Bible reader, your best bet is to commit to a small change in your routine today: get up 5 minutes earlier and read a chapter of the Bible before you get out of bed. Add 5 minutes and 1 chapter every month and by the end of the year you'll be reading your Bible for an hour every day and on track to read through the Bible somewhere around 3 1/2 times per year.<br />
<br />
Decide tomorrow that you're going to start waking up an hour early every morning to read 12 chapters of the Bible, and you'll be lucky to make it a week.<br />
<br />
If you're looking to grow in an area, small tweaks over a relatively short amount of time can really pay off.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div>Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-61200373589250045172011-08-04T08:07:00.000-05:002011-08-04T08:07:18.511-05:00Vision and DirectionOne of the most difficult things for a leader is clarifying vision or direction for the group she leads. <br />
<br />
The leader lives with the vision for a long time before he begins to go public. At that point, he sees all the interconnected parts and can be tempted to assume others will innately see those things as well. By that point, the vision is patently obvious to him - it's frustrating when it isn't patently obvious to everyone else.<br />
<br />
If your team isn't "getting" your vision, it could be a problem with the way you are communicating the vision. It might be a problem with the vision itself. And it could be a problem with the person you are trying to lead.<br />
<br />
Two-thirds of the problems with helping vision stick are the fault of the leader. Only one third is the problem of the people we lead. Yet in my experience, leaders tend to blame others the majority of the time.<br />
<br />
"They weren't paying attention."<br />
"They have different instincts."<br />
"They aren't a team player."<br />
"They are pulling in a different direction." <br />
<br />
At least two-thirds of the time it's not "their" fault. Assume first that it's a problem with <i>your</i> leadership. Assume they want to follow you if you'll lead them clearly. Rule out a flaw in your leadership before you bank on a problem with someone's followership. When you play the odds, it is usually to your benefit.Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-90420989662165146692011-08-02T13:33:00.000-05:002011-08-02T13:33:21.137-05:00The Error of the "But"As you might expect, I've had a few conversations about Rob Bell's recent book "Love Wins." Yes, I read it several months ago and will review it one of these days when my anger subsides.<br />
<br />
However, in the meantime, I hear an opposite error from many people who want to critique Bell's theology that I think is also dangerous.<br />
<br />
From time to time, while pointing out the fallacy of saying that if love "wins," hell can't exist, I hear people remind each other that "God is loving <i>but</i> He is also just."<br />
<br />
It's a subtle error, but often subtle errors are sometimes just as catastrophic as the more obvious kind.<br />
<br />
When we are talking about the perfections of God, Justice and love aren't opposites; they exist together.<br />
<br />
If love is defined from a purely human standpoint, love and justice do contrast; but God doesn't define love by our romanticized, erotic, and selfish perspective. He defines love at the cross (1 John 4:10). The cross is the place where love and justice intersect. The Father loves us so much He sent His Son to die <i>for</i> <i>us.</i>The Father is so concerned about justice that He sent His Son<i> to die</i> for us<i>.</i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
If God is not just, He can not be loving. If God is not loving, He need not be just. If God's love doesn't <i>demand</i> His justice, Jesus' death goes down as the greatest overreaction in all of history.<br />
<br />
When you set the two up as a contrast, you end up with the same heresy Bell does; you just come at it from a different side. When God's justice and love are separated from one another, you end up with neither justice or love... exactly where Bell ends up.<br />
<br />
It isn't that God is just <i>but</i> also loving; it's that God is just <i>and</i> also loving.Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-2063097815482069912011-07-22T08:11:00.000-05:002011-07-22T08:11:44.605-05:00Why I'm Not PostingI'm finishing up my doctoral classwork this week and next. Through preparing for it, preparing to preach a couple of sermons even though I'm out of the office, and living in new house where (it seems) the World Wide Web doesn't stretch to our world, the blog was the casualty.<br />
<br />
I'll get back once I get the canoe turned back over...Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-58280416870192193652011-07-07T06:00:00.000-05:002011-07-07T06:00:00.867-05:00The Gospel is for EveryoneOne of the gigantic misconceptions I lived with for a good deal of my life was that the Gospel, the death and resurrection of Christ, was something only the <i>unbeliever</i> needed to respond to. I grew up in a tradition that made that much clear - if you hadn't trusted Christ you needed to trust Him for everlasting life. But I got the impression that the believer had little use for the Gospel except to learn how to share it with an unbeliever.<br />
<br />
That understanding began to change in college, and now it's very different. I don't preach at a "seeker" church, but every single Sunday my goal is to see every single person respond to the Gospel. Some respond for the very first time and cross from death to life in our services. Some respond to the gospel <i>again</i>, not so they can have life forever (they already have that); they trust Christ for life for <i>now.</i><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
To put it a more theological way, whether we're talking about "justification" or "sanctification," being saved from the penalty of sin forever or being saved from the power of sin today, the object of our trust is always the same: the death and resurrection of Christ.<br />
<br />
Paul makes this really clear.<br />
<br />
What does the believing husband need? He needs to respond to the Gospel and love his wife like Jesus loved Him (Ephesians 5:25-33). If Jesus really died and rose from the dead for him, it should motivate him to respond by loving his wife differently.<br />
<br />
What does the believing person who struggles with anxiety need? She needs to respond to the Gospel and trust that the very worst thing that could happen will <i>never</i> happen because Jesus died and rose from the dead so that her life would never face utter destruction (2 Corinthians 5:1-10).<br />
<br />
What does the believer who struggles with insecurity need? To respond to the fact that Jesus' death and resurrection provides humanity with a chance for a new identity hidden "in Christ" so that redemption, adoption, inclusion, and a guarantee from the Spirit are our present-tense possession (Ephesians 1:1-14).<br />
<br />
Paul tells believers "So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, so walk in Him" (Colossians 2:6). How did you receive Him? By grace, through faith, <i>in the Gospel.</i><br />
<br />
The Gospel isn't just something elementary that we trust to get out of hell and then grow out of. It's Truth that demands our response in every single situation we face.Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-79057325996568284552011-07-05T07:52:00.000-05:002011-07-05T07:52:07.500-05:00Good Theology, Bad ApplicationI've been reading through the book of Job recently. Something strikes me about Job's friends.<br />
<br />
If you're at all familiar with the story of Job, you're probably familiar with his "friends" Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar, who fit firmly in the "With Friends Like These Who Needs Enemies?" category. These guys are convinced that Job has sinned and that Job's troubles are God's discipline. So, they do what any good "friend" does when you're suffering: launch into long sermons giving you a well-thought-out rationale for why you're suffering.<br />
<br />
What's amazing as you read these guys, however, is that their mini-sermons almost all begin with extremely good theology. They accurately portray God's sovereignty, holiness, power, and inability to make mistakes. The problem is with their application of good theology.<br />
<br />
We normally read the story of Job to learn how to suffer well from Job's example. But a lot of us (myself included) could stand to read the story of Job to learn the danger of really good theology misapplied.<br />
<br />
We're clear on God's sovereignty, and use it for an excuse to be passive in evangelism.<br />
<br />
We're clear on God's omnipotence, and use it for an excuse to neglect needs we could meet.<br />
<br />
We're clear on God's immanence (nearness), and use it for an excuse to treat Him casually, as if He were our "homeboy."<br />
<br />
We're clear on God's grace, and use it as license to sin.<br />
<br />
We're clear on God's holiness, and use it as an excuse to be mean.<br />
<br />
When good theology is applied badly, it can be just as damaging as if we led with bad theology in the first place.Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-45661730868699796652011-06-29T08:26:00.000-05:002011-06-29T08:26:08.699-05:00Cynics and SkepticsOne of the leadership lessons I continue to learn is the difference between <i>cynics</i> and <i>skeptics, </i>and how to deal with both. <div><br />
</div><div>Cynics are people who have a "no" posture. They begin trying to figure out why they're against what you're proposing before a conversation has begun. They know they're against whatever it is you're doing - they just haven't figured out why yet. Cynics often feels as though they're the most important person in the organization. It's their self-given role to keep the leader "humble," or "in line." They're not interested in moving forward; they're interested in being <i>right</i> at someone else's expense. </div><div><br />
</div><div>It's in the organization's best interest to run cynics off (or marginalize them) as quickly as possible. They don't add value, only division; chipping away at the foundation of the organization one objection at a time. </div><div><br />
</div><div>Skeptics are late adopters. They take a long time to warm-up to ideas and are often difficult to convince. They often give a lot of push-back, but for very different reasons. Skeptics work from a "caution first" posture. They <i>want</i> to be convinced, they're just not yet. But if they ever <i>are</i> convinced, they'll become the biggest champion for your idea.</div><div><br />
</div><div>It's in the leader's best interest to have at least one or two trusted advisors who are skeptics. Unlike the cynic, the skeptic is <i>for</i> the leader and the organization. They can keep a leader from running too fast, too far, or in the wrong direction. They often (not always) will shine light on the leader's blind-spot and help him consider perspectives he might not see on his own. If nothing else, they will help the leader shape communication to take various perspectives into account. </div><div><br />
</div><div>The challenge for leaders is this: it's far too easy to mistake skeptics for cynics. </div><div><br />
When a leader is passionate about something, opposition or criticism of any kind is hard to take. Too often, when we receive push-back - especially strong push-back - we immediately assume the source of the criticism is a cynic and seek ways to marginalize him. This kind of response only betrays our arrogance and often prevents us from hearing feedback that could help us lead better. </div><div><br />
</div><div>Be on the lookout for cynics and root them out. They'll kill your organization. But beware of giving someone the "Cynic Tag" too soon. You might marginalize someone who could have helped you go further, faster, while accumulating a lot fewer scars in the process. </div><div><div><i><br />
</i></div></div>Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-79981103267046372622011-06-28T07:40:00.000-05:002011-06-28T07:40:54.404-05:00RestingI've always been fascinated by the Creation account of the fact that God rested on the seventh day (Genesis 2:2-3).<br />
<br />
Was God tired? Did creation wear God out? Did He need a nap after a long, hard week at work?<br />
<br />
Of course not. Never mind the fact that God doesn't get tired (Isaiah 40:8), Genesis says that God simply spoke things into existence. He didn't exactly tax Himself creating the universe.<br />
<br />
So why did He rest?<br />
<br />
Not because He was tired; because He was satisfied. God was able to rest because He was satisfied with the work He had done. It was very good (Genesis 1:31). He was done.<br />
<br />
Which makes it all the more interesting that humanity is later called to follow God's model of resting (Genesis 2:3; Exodus 20:8-11).<br />
<br />
I don't think God was calling the Israelites to rest because their bodies needed the break. He wasn't establishing (much to my dismay) an unusually high value on naps. The motivation for God's rest wasn't fatigue, it was satisfaction. I think He calls people to do the same thing.<br />
<br />
That's the point the Pharisees missed (Matthew 12:1-8). They thought the point was simply rest <i>from</i> something. Jesus pointed out that the Sabbath principle was more about resting <i>in </i>something... or rather <i>in </i>Someone.<br />
<br />
See, our work is never done like God's was. Whatever work we do, there is no way to completely rest because we have everything like we want it.<br />
<br />
To use myself as an example: I am never satisfied that a sermon is ready to preach. Preaching <i>always </i>feels premature. But every week I pick one day (usually Saturday) that I do everything within my power to not think about a sermon. It's a discipline of worship for me where every week I knowingly, willingly, consciously remind myself that I can be satisfied <i>in</i> the God of creation. If He doesn't go before me on Sunday, the message will fail whether or not I work on it Saturday or not.<br />
<br />
I'm never satisfied with my "creation," but choose to rest from my work on Saturday because (thanks to Jesus) God is satisfied in His. My rest is a reflection of the fact that I'm satisfied in Him.<br />
<br />
What about you? What do you need to rest from so you can rest in the Creator God?Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15047071.post-1244253763523294002011-06-22T08:16:00.000-05:002011-06-22T08:16:17.895-05:00One of the things Dave Browning mentions in the book "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Deliberate-Simplicity-Leadership-Network-Innovation/dp/0310285674?ie=UTF8&tag=dialogos0d-20&link_code=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969">Deliberate Simplicity</a><img border="0" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=dialogos0d-20&l=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969&o=1&a=0310285674" />" is the difference between the "outreach church" and the "seeker church." I think it's a helpful distinction and Browning goes on to clarify what he means:<div><br />
</div><div><i>Both the seeker church and the outreach church believe that a bridge needs to be built between God and the lost. They just start building that bridge at different sides of the chasm.</i></div><div><br />
</div><div><i></i>I think it's an extraordinarily helpful, and important, distinction.</div>Chris Freelandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02959685692971056289noreply@blogger.com0