Category: Why Not Wednesday?

Why not Wednesday? Soak time

· 2 Comments ·

Sometimes we rush things. Plan soak time. Soak time allows us to not focus in an idea, and therefore focus on it. Confused?

Watch House M.D. That’s soak time.

Creativity is the art of non-focus.

The best ideas are obvious, simple and as a result elusive. Evading our envisioned enterprise, the elusive exists on the edge of the eye. This is why we need soak time. It’s allowing the aha moment and fresh perspective.

Soak time is simple: work on a project then shelve it for a period of time and focus on something else until you pick the project up…or you get that aha moment.

Bottom line:
Plan soak time into your projects.

Why not Wednesday? Failed ideas…

· Leave a comment ·

Irony: 747 became the best cargo option for the 787 projectIdeas can fail for a few reasons:
Bad idea
Bad timing
Bad placing

Take a look at failed ideas and think through if they will work again? People’s initial reaction to anything new is often NO! Very few people just grab on to any change. Take a look in your closet of failed ideas. Today may be the day where it will be a:
Good idea
Good timing
Good placing

Erie Canal vs Steam locomotive
Grace concern arose in NY over the horseless carriage as it may destroy the economy surrounding the Erie Canal. NY survived the paradigm shift to trains, and the canal became a thing of history (and awesome school field trips).

Cargo Plane vs Jumbo Jet
Boeing failed the large cargo plane competition. However, the ideas developed for the project turned into the most successful jumbo jet- the 747. One failed idea turned into an iconic aircraft.

100’s of failures vs 1 mistake
The lightbulb was discovered by a mistake after hundreds of failures.

The bottom line:
A failed idea may not be a bad idea. Sometimes ideas we had that did not work then may work now. And then again, they may not work now. But, you’re likely wiser and more experienced than you were on the first attempt.

Why not Wednesday? The power of paper & pen

· Leave a comment ·

There is something about being able to write and sketch that will never go away. Technology cannot replicate the sheer delight of pen on paper. My tool of preference is the Moleskin Cahier Journal, ruled & pocket-sized. Whatever you choose, you really need something.

Why Moleskin?
I’ve given some of these away, used many. They are a perfect repository for ideas, craziness, or that needed brainstorm. The following just did not work: computer, planner, journal, diary, notebook, sticky notes, portfolio, memo book or composition notebook. They were all too bulky. Size and the ability to be nearly invisible is essential.

Why Paper?
Paper is crash proof. About the only thing that can really destroy them is fire or a shredder. What’s even better, paper helps you be unplugged. To me, computer equals work. There is something about a blank yet confined space that allows one to just feel free to think, draw, sketch, or scribble.

Why Collect?
People do not always need to enjoy your moments of inspiration or epiphanies. They are enjoyable to look back upon when alone on a rainy Sunday afternoon. You never know when that idea will come about, or that plot outline written. People always want to leave the mark in some way, whether a cave drawing of a hunt or an insightful witticism by a friend. Ideas are important, they’re what makes us human.

The Bottom Line:
Have something that is easy to carry around with you to write ideas, inspirations, or whatever else you just need to write. Technology cannot replace pen & paper.

Link: Moleskin Cahier Journal

Why not Wednesday? Collecting proverbs

· Leave a comment ·

I recently had the thought to write all the ‘proverbs’ I’ve gained or developed over the years. As I wrote each one down, I noticed there is a story behind each one. Some are original, others not, and more its hard to tell.

The book of Proverbs talks about collecting the sayings of the wise. We often think about brief statements, but there is much more to them. The proverb is as alive today as any other day. It is a good activity to write these things down. I came up with about 61.

I am not sure if I’ll create a separate category for my proverbs or not. Truth be told, many of them permeate why I write about anyway. On the flip side, the story of how they were obtained is interesting and part of life and learning. What do you all think? Leave a comment below.

Why not Wednesday? Embrace constraints

· Leave a comment ·

Need means that which is essential. It is surprisingly small. In ministry you only need three things: Bible, People, A place to meet. That’s it. If necessity is the father of invention, then constraints is the mother of creativity.

The little camps that do
Camp Hickory Hill embraced creativity. Its speakers were largely the staff, mostly college student. Its activities and adventures made up with minimum supplies and resources. I have interacted with well resourced camps, seen them in action. But, their leadership development and problem solving skills do not even come close. There is a quality to “lesser” camps that cannot beat, and they are the qualities you’d want you kid to have. I have heard this statement from camps like Hickory Hill: “They don’t have ___________, but the ministry here is incredible!” Bible, People, A place to meet.

Engaged impact as best
When all was falling apart, I made the call to just pray. Prayer is an essential. This move was bigger, though. Prayer cannot just be an easy fallback. While it was in the first instance, it was intentional on the others. Why? Because a seemingly boring and less than sparkly event had the greatest impact. (Note to self, play towards child-like faith.) The kids engaged in prayer with greater passion and focus than most adult prayer services I have been too. Engagement is best. Entertainment is fleeting. Bible, People, A place to meet.

Singspiration
I attended a singspiration event on a missions trip that took a joyful noise to a whole new level. Wanting to howl like a dog, the singing was so bad, one could not help but notice the passion in the room. A quote from a Civil War documentary said “Abraham Lincoln was so ugly there was a beauty to him.” That described the singspiration. It affected the students more than anything else on the trip. Bible, People, A place to meet.

Captain Kirk
“I don’t believe in the no-win scenario.” Ok, this may not be the most spiritual example, but watching the creative exploits of Captain Kirk and crew always got me thinking about how to be creative, to problem solve. It developed a key skill, how to take what you have and use it to communicate and carry out what is most important. Creativity far outweighs any teaching style or method. Bible, People, A place to meet.

Constraints means faith
Embracing constraints means utilizing faith in what you have instead of praying for what you don’t have. Bible: It is the central message we are communicating. That God wants to be known and to know us. People: The Holy Spirit empowers His people. Jesus died for people. People can pray, people can sing. People make ministry happen. A place to meet: Ministry is not a solo business. It can happen anywhere, in anything. Grassy field, tent, building, house, underground catacombs… The church never runs out of space, it just needs to plant to other venues. Space issues are often paradigm issues, and a paradigm is a self-imposed constrain on a non-essential. Bible, People, A place to meet.

The bottom line:
All you need to make ministry happen is Bible, People, A place to meet. I say this because in many parts of the world that is all the church has. I love technology, good music, sound systems, great architecture, books, toys, gadgets and gizmos galore. But, those are not essential. Ministry constraints are often self-imposed from a foundation of non-essentials. The only thing that can block church growth is no Bible, no people, no place to meet. Embrace constraints, they force you to focus on what is essential.

Why not Wednesday: Going green

· Leave a comment ·

When I camped as a teenager, we practiced low impact camping. The rule of thumb: leave the place in better shape than when you got there. It stood as law, not principle. It often meant packing out more trash then planned, or more work than anticipated. At the same time, we would cringe at being called an environmentalist. The Bible taught conservation.

Conservation as respecting life
Nature inspires life and breeds respect. I enjoyed the wild and nature in the raw. Taking care of such places was a mater of respect. This respect also demonstrated itself in making sure we were properly equipped for our trek. (I NEVER camped in perfectly dry weather. Nature breathes humor and drama.) Investing time and learning about nature breeds respect, and I wonder if that is why Jesus invest much time in the wilderness. This respect revolves around God placing man to take care of things. The oldest professions are science & gardening.

Conservation as common sense
I don’t know if I would label my grandparents as conservationists, but they were inventive. They did not waste anything. They had a well, and were careful with it. Trash cans were setup to collect rain water off the roof for their gardens and flowers. Used jugs were kept to store and carry rain water. Much of what I saw as a kid was using things up as much as possible. They would often share stories about the depression and using seeming junk for creating adventures. (Or in lieu there of, practical jokes. Grandma could have earned an honorary doctorate.) Common sense was king.

Conservation as problem solving not problem creating
Conservationists solve problems while environmentalists create bigger ones. As a teenager I defined environmentalists as someone who says there is a problem and the creates a solution to the problem that becomes a bigger problem then the problem in the first place. Because I disagree with environmentalists does not mean I stand against the environment. Nor do I see a conservationist as a moderate environmentalist.

I sense the environmentalist movement as acting like an overbearing & overprotective parent. I see conservationists as a parent who teaches principles like respect & common sense that will serve the child well. The first creates bigger problems and solves little, the second creates an environment for solutions. The first produces guilt and worry, the second inspiration and confidence. The first may work in a very short period, the second pushes the envelop of the human experience. The first breeds misery, the second joy.

The Bottom line:
There is a need for a proactive (not reactive) “green” movement founded on respect & commonsense. I feel as though the Christian experience should consider how to act and live in the world God gave us. True, the Bible says it will burn up, but I don’t think that means we can be careless with the planet. Such is not wise. God places a premium on wisdom. I wonder what such a movement would look like?

Why not Wednesday? Looking back to look forward

· Leave a comment ·

We all had dreams and passions throughout life. We sometimes were even criticized for them, and then slowly walked away from those core dreams or passions. They’re important, they are part of who we are. Take time to stop and smell the roses. Think through these questions:

1) What was I most passionate about as a child….as a teen…as a college student…?

2) Have I lost those passions or dreams? Why or why not?

3) Should I bring back that passion? (Maybe how it looks is vastly different then our first idea, but the essence and passion is still there to grab a hold of.)

First loves are an important thing. We can easy lose our grip on what is core to who we are. We never know what will trigger this though process. For me, it was reading a book. As I was reading it, I kept asking why it struck such a huge core. Well, the things discussed were core to my passion as a teenager. It’s refreshing to bring that back.

Bottom line:

Stop and smell the roses, reflect on past dreams and passions. They will fuel future and current challenges you are facing.

Why Not Wednesday? Giving Churches

· 1 Comment ·

Francis Chan raised a question that I am still trying to wrap my mind around: What if Churches were known more for giving then taking? I tried a few attempts to write this blog entry, but I cannot seem to get my thoughts in line. Perhaps that is why Chan’s question is so potent. Here is what I have observed and sensed:

Meeting the needs of the disadvantage:
In many conservative circles the worry is about following the “social gospel.” They point fingers accusing of other churches or ministries as being part of the social gospel. These anti-social gospel churches are not against disadvantaged people, but they not known for being actively there for the disadvantaged.

Market driven content:
Market forces play a huge role in church curriculum, books and conferences. This often leads to a loss of historical knowledge or ideas that are incredible and often needed today. Its hard to support such financially if one uses a market approach. A worker is worthy of his hire, and we must follow the laws of the land. The bigger trend seems being more capitalistic then one church body. We love to protect or control what we feel is ours, whether physical or intellectual.

Church planting:
The data supports that relational evangelism and church plants are the top ways to lead people to Christ. Yet, why are so many churches not actively pushing church planting? Mega churches have grown who throughout their growth also planted churches. These churches planted and they grew at the same time. I have no clue how to process this one. It is perplexing to me. I see ‘wisdom’ on both sides of the discussion.

Giving:
What does it look like for a church to be giving? Not only to the community, but to the church community as well. Looking back at history, it seems we as churches like to give seconds. I saw this all the time in the area of missions. (I cringe stories of missionaries who were sent used tea bags.) We discuss with the church’s walls the need to give our best to God. What does giving our best to God as local church bodies look like?

Bottom Line:
I think the bottom line is the question: What if churches were more known for giving? I think this raises more questions and calls for more thinking. Perhaps this is the next big question Christ wants the church to deal with in the next few years to come. I wonder if the real issue is that as churches we desire control more than anything? To give ultimately means losing our grip on what we can control.

I wish I had more answers, but for now only questions. It would be fun to see this become a broad discussion amongst our churches.

Why Not Wednesday? A Collaboration Model for Ministry?

· 1 Comment ·

Here is the Why Not? question: What would happen to church effectiveness if we moved to a collaboration model verses an institutional model for content and resourcing content?

To better understand institution vs collaboration I highly recommend watching these TED Talks on the subject. Each is about 20 minutes long:

There are 4 points why to consider a paradigm shift:

  1. God is the true owner of all things ministry.
  2. “Non-professionals” often have significant contributions..
  3. Small churches and church plants often lack great resources because of the cost.
  4. Money invested in reaching the poor and meeting needs should be more of a focus than obtaining rights to use content.

God is the true owner of all things ministry.
A friend of mine once raised the wish that things could be given to the church. That the owner of an idea or concept was the church, not a particular church, author or creator. Having things “Copyright The Church” has numerous benefits. Theologically, it is already the truth though in law it is not.

Solomon tells us that there is nothing new under the sun. We further see in Scripture that every perfect gift is given from God above. While a controversial figure, Rush Limbaugh’s often quipped statement is a truth we should all carry with us: “Talent on loan from God.” The trinity enables us to perform ministry effectively. This points to the next idea.

“Non-professionals” often have significant contributions.
We often equate good ideas with success. Success, ideas and ability are are three different things. One may not have ability or success, but their idea may carry incredible impact. This is demonstrated when we only consider an idea based on its success. This is further demonstrated when we discount an idea based on a person’s inability to implement it.

The body principle of the church operates states: Every part of the body needs to do its part. God gives varying abilities and hence contributions to the body of Christ. For the church to succeed we need to open up the ability for each part to contribute what God has given them. This may only be one idea their entire life, and someone else may be the one who makes the idea succeed. An institutional model inhibits this from happening.

Small churches and church plants often lack great resources because of the cost.
Too often I have heard the statement: I could really us [insert name of resource] but our church does not have the money. The thought is ‘if it were really that important a church would find a way.’ This mindset neglects a key reality: Once one need gets met, another will arise. The church is again faced with the same resource challenge. Or worse, in meeting needs there is an opportunity that arises with no monetary resources to get materials (content) needed, even though they have the other resources needed to pull it off. This struggle is insane.

Where do we, and in we I mean the church, want our leadership teams to invest their energy? In trying to figure out how to gain content resources to meet people’s needs or in actually meeting people’s needs? Church plants, often the most effective form of evangelism, really could use the best the church (that’s all of us) has to offer. This leads into the fourth point…

Money invested in helping the poor and meeting needs should be more of a focus than obtaining rights to use content.
What if content became essentially free? How much greater impact would that have in meeting people’s needs? I realize these are very hard questions to answer, and that people’s livelihoods are affected by these questions. But, as a church, what is the overhead cost of how we develop our curriculum?

For a church of about 1,000 people, it costs about $4,350+ for a an excellent curriculum (access rights) and a club program (registration & books) for children’s ministry. Taking those funds elsewhere could look like:

At Children of the Nations (www.cotni.org) it costs $32 month to sponsor a child. A church of 1,000 could sponsor 135+ children at the cost of content. If 10 churches made that move, 1,350+ children could be fed a year.

Think of the total content budget for a church. How many native pastors could be supported? How many future pastors, missionaries, or church planters’ education could be supported? How many church plants supported? Native pastors are for more effective in reaching their country. Schooling debt is a major hurdle for gaining needed training for and then jumping into ministry. Church plants are often the most effective means of evangelism.

The bottom line:
Given today’s technology and the relatively low-cost of disseminating content, we are able to make a paradigm shift that was not available in times past. A new paradigm for content and resourcing our content has the potential to increase the impact of our churches, and better focus our resources on our mission.

Why not Wednesday: A not so perfect start

· Leave a comment ·

A professor of mine wrote a quote on the whiteboard that shattered all thinking in the room:

“It something is truly worth doing, its worth doing poorly.”

Yeah, but…
Even now I bet you are thinking “yeah, but…” The classroom filled with those kinds of statements. The prof, as is normal for teachers, sat back and smiled at the ensuing discussion. We are, after all, trained to think: If you can’t do with excellence, don’t do it at all.” We are, after all, taught that doing something poorly might result in not being able to try it again.

Some, after the prof’s enduring silence, took the statement to mean: “You have to start at some point.” The ‘yeah, but…’ statements kept flowing, though. These transitioned into the statement being an excuse for pool quality. We were left at a loss because the statement was still on the board.

A poor start
Remember the early days of Toyota, Honda, or Hyundai? They were known for poor quality. They rose to the top. Recently, Hyundai is starting to edge out Toyota and Honda. They started poorly, but all three came around. Here is the meaning:

They key words are “truly” and “doing.” Some things are not truly worth doing- like crime. Some things are truly worth doing- like saving a life. Doing gets things done. An idea or potential is just that, an idea or potential. They mean nothing until you act, that’s doing. Helping meet transportation needs has true worth. Toyota, Honda and Hyundai started to act. They made cars, and the did it poorly at first.

So what, do it!
What ministry adventure would you like to do? Is it truly worthwhile to take that step? Then do it! Because you start poor does not mean you have to stay poor. You can grow, you can learn, you can overcome- if it is truly worth doing. I am not saying this will be easy- it may be very painful.

This week as we’re looking at how ‘Not Perfect is a Holy Thing,’ the theme is how God used people who had epic failures. Practically speaking, it is better to act now, even though you may not be ready or may even make significant mistakes. Why? Because if something is truly worth doing, its worth doing poorly. Pursing God is worth doing, and though you may not have it all figured out or even know what you’re doing, what may start as poor can turn into something incredible down the road.

The bottom line:
So, start now, and don’t be afraid of making mistakes! Greatness or excellence is not the absence of failure or mistakes.