I'm definitely adding this to my "to-read" list.
Interview: Soong Chan Rah from Eugene Cho on Vimeo.
dreaming about what could be and what should be
Interview: Soong Chan Rah from Eugene Cho on Vimeo.
Yes great question and yes I am a reincarnation of the devil himself apparently according to those website along with a host of others you and I know. I think gentleness is the only road on this one. Stages of human development and faith development tell us that you can't grasp a different level of development other than your own center of gravity. So I don't have hope for others to just jump in head first. But I do think there are some very well place questions we can ask that really put people in a place of evaluating whether or not the Christianity they are defending is the real deal, their personalized construction overlaid with all sorts of baggage, or a modernistic version that has canonized the way we have been doing it the last 200 years as THE way. We have to ask really good questions about the core issues and the outcomes we are getting.
Well you are apparently the careful reader (lol)! Here is the deal, everyone wants in the box packaged answers. That is a product of the assembly line industrial revolution. We have been doing that for some time. Go to conferences get the in the box small group stuff, or evangelism training package or the usher greeter training kit.... you know what I mean. So people want more of the same. But if we haven't learned anything in the last 100 years haven't we learned that all the in the box programs really haven't brought deep lasting life change? I am convinced that indigeniety is the key. You need some sound processes that you indigenize in your local context in ways that work with who you and your leadership team are for the ethos of your church and the people you are trying to reach. One size does not fit all in fact one size means it fits everyone poorly. So I try and avoid the platitudinous prescriptions that people are always pressing for.
We are imago dei creatures infected as we are, and the good news is that shalom wholeness and wellness is available to every single person which reverses that infection. Our role on the planet is to broker that shalom wholeness and bring everything back to the original edenic state. That includes me, others, and the entire creation.
Don't let anyone convince you to do reruns, do overs or keep doing the way we have always done it. Reflect and seek interior quiet more than you do. Help people navigate liminal space more than pump them full of doctrine. Give up monologue and engage in dialogue. The million dollar skill set into the 21st century will be dealing with great emotional process in your own life and the lives of those around you. It is the #1 I'm being asked about these days and one of the main things I am talking about.Thank you so much Ron for taking the time to not only answer my questions but also to speak into our lives.
I guess there are a few things that have been occupying my thoughts these days. 1. The need for us to engage a new transformational model of life change. All our information exchange is apparently not getting it done...lives aren't being changed if Gallup and Barna are even close to correct. 2. We need to figure out how to revoice Christianity. By revoice I mean what Karen Armstrong alludes to in The Great Transformation. We are known for being legalistic (think Dave Kinnaman's research in UnChristian) and narrow. How do we revoice and reposition our following Jesus in a way that is inclusive and compelling? 3. I am more convinced than ever we need a blending of kataphatic and apophatic spirituality, in fact this is the focus or the book I am working on right now.
Static was an effort to deal with 5 big static creating terms and reframe into a larger story the common fall-redemption story so common in evangelicalism, a story that makes it sound like the gospel exists to get people to heaven. Instead I suggest a creation-fall-redemption-restoration paradigm that starts the story of God with imago dei of Gen 1 instead of the fall of Gen 3. Kind of neat to start the story where God starts it huh? TA was an effort to take that bigger framing story and put it on the ground in spiritual conversations. A sort of postmodern...can I say the word....ugh...evangelism. Hate that word. But the point of TA is to help people rethink God, the goal of relationship with God and how to enter that from a variety of new vantage points...like the drive we all have to be god, and the propensity to see God in creation.
Boy that is a loaded one but let me make a couple really brief observations. 1. Jesus' interaction with the politics of the day as a mechanism of change for the masses didn't seem to be a high agenda item for him. 2. While I think we need to work all we can for a more just society I wonder what models Jesus left us that invite us to plunge in neck deep to the political process. I struggle with answering that well.
I often do field gaze mediation, a kind of eyes open centering practice that is a very 3P practice. My 1P experiences are more of me learning to realize this person sitting across from me is imago dei. They are "breath of God" creatures. What does this mean to how I love, interact, not judge them? Loving them as self is a 1P practice. Not loving them as I love my self that is very egoic. But loving them as if they were self...and they are...I'm imago dei and so are they. This is a daily practice I engage, and has it ever challenged me, uncovered my impure motives, nastiness, and how self centered I am.
This is a re:post from Craig Groeschel's Swerve blog. I thought this was a great insight on how to live our Christian lives and go about making disciples.
If you plan to reach the next generation for Christ, don’t ask them to believe what you believe, instead invite them to do what you do.
Beliefs are a dime a dozen. This generation has seen every variety of spiritual beliefs you could imagine (and many you couldn’t imagine).
They’re extremely turned off by people who don’t live what they claim to believe.
This generation doesn’t want to hear about what you believe. They want to see your beliefs in actions. And if you’re daring enough to live like Jesus, you’ll have a shot at reaching the next generation.
- If your version of Christianity is limited to what you’re against, you’ll not likely reach many.
- If, on the other hand, your faith is so alive you must feed the hungry, clothe the naked, heal the sick, and love the outcasts—all in the name of Christ, the King, you will attract interest.
As strange as it might sound, if you truly live a missional and Spirit filled life, the young generation might join you and do what you do, then one day believe what you believe.
I think this is a great model for discipleship, stop instructing people to believe the way you do and just start inviting them to do what you do. Thoughts?
So do not worry about tomorrow. Let tomorrow worry about itself. Living faithfully is a large enough task for today.
Our problem, it seems, is that we too quickly identify the concrete-historical expressions of church as the body of Christ. And while there is a truth to this, for the church is the body of Christ, perhaps the greater truth is that the body of Christ is the church. When we say that the church is the body of Christ, it claims a certain authority for a particular expression of church. To say that the body of Christ is the church is to open up possibilities as to how it might physically and organizationally express itself. This doesn't just localize it to one particular expression of church. The body can express itself in many different ways and forms. The distinction is paradigmatic. To restate it in these terms enables us to escape the monopolizing grip that the institutional image of church holds over our theological imaginations, and allows us to undertake a journey of reimagining what it means to be God's people in our own day and in our own situations.