Here is the best stuff I've come across this week:
26 Pictures of the Universe that will give you pause.
Great post on preaching Christ through the Old Testament. This is a good caution for all the gospel-centered-everything people.
Ever wonder how long Jesus was actually dead? Was it 3 days? How could he die on Friday and raise Sunday and it be 3 days? This post'll help.
The NIV Application commentaries are still only 4.99. Check these out.
Here is a good post on the way Matthew gives hints in his writing. This is why we should always use cross references.
A good theology of Space is always a needed reminder. By space I don't mean outer-space, but place.
And here is a good word on the reality that Every loves authenticity, until they're the ones that needs to be authentic.
Friday, November 21, 2014
Thursday, November 20, 2014
The 3 main ways we communicate
Every Wednesday, as part of our Lake Hart Stint program, Melissa and I take part in what is called "Connection time." This is essentially a time created for us to share our life stories, and then hear from some professor/staff/friend of the ministry on any number of topics.
This week one of the main things we talked about was healthy verbal communication.
"The ground floor understanding is that communication is done essentially three different ways…" Dr Coffield from Reformed Theological Seminary shared with us. He went on to describe the three ways. -- competitive communication, informational communication, and cooperative communication.
All of these terms are rather self-explanatory, but allow me to flesh them out nonetheless:
1. Competitive communication
Imagine an argument you're trying to win. Imagine a group of young people around chatting, all of them with the motive to prove who is cooler or wittier. Imagine a person trying to prove that he is right.
Dr. Coffield said two things that I'll touch on more in a bit:
"Jesus rarely communicated competitively unless it was with the pharisees or religious elite." And,
"God rarely uses this method of communication."
2. Informational communication
This is teaching or training or just catching up. One person is sharing information with another -- not in a competitive I'm better than you sort've manner, but helpfully -- simply to inform. Gossip probably fits into this category as well; one person is sharing with another some sort of information. Think, "Tell me about your day…" or "Did you know that…" or "Let me show you how to use…" or similar communication styles.
3. Cooperative communication
Here, two or more people, as the name suggests, are working together for something.
Maybe they are communicating to strengthen a relationship -- think a genuine "How are you doing today?"
Maybe they are communicating to strengthening a cause they both share -- think Peyton Manning asking his linemen if they had any ideas for better pass protection.
This method of communication is really, if I understand correctly, the only method that allows a place for a healthy exchange of emotions -- "How did you feel about the theatre?"
Coffield argued that this was the method Jesus used most often.
If you've read this far, feel free to stop if you've gathered the information you're looking for. Good stuff.
But I have a few comments. Obviously, I'm just sharing here my understanding of what he shared. That list isn't exhaustive, nor could it probably be applied to every aspect of verbal communication. Please don't read this as me poo-pooing on Dr. Coffield. He was great, and I'm sure he'd love just hours and hours and hours to flesh out further what he means by these distinctions.
That said, I have two problems with this paradigm.
First, it seems to me that most conversations fall into more than one of these styles at the same time. Cooperation can and probably is often informational.
Competition can often be cooperative.
Informational communication can often be competitive or cooperative.
These three ways of looking at how we communicate fall a bit short, in my opinion, of addressing the nuance and varied change of so many different sorts of communication.
As an example, I'll share my second problem with the way this information was shared.
It was hinted at numerous times that Jesus mainly or mostly communicated cooperatively. I disagree with this.
One of the coolest things about Jesus was that he communicated in a way that fit all three of these styles of communication at the same time.
Consider the Sermon on the Mount. Or virtually any parable. But for our purposes let's use the parable of the Prodigal Son, which I will not paste here but hopefully is known enough to suffice. Check Luke 15 if needed.
In that story, Jesus was indeed communicating competitively. The story essentially says any life outside of relationship with the Father is dead. If you reject the Father, you are dead, should you return, you are alive. There is only one way to live life, in grateful embrace of the Father.
That is as competitive as anything I've ever said.
Yet the story is also informational. Your Father, your God, is no curmudgeon. He is no blow-hard demanding your obedience. His love for you and his embrace of you, despite your rebellion, is ever present. He delights in you!
And he is even merciful should you be the do-gooder older brother type as well.
And the story is cooperative as well. Most all stories are, for that matter. Stories invite the reader to cooperate with the author. Where are you in the story?
After processing all this I'm having one searing thought: Jesus is the best. This guy can blow your doors down like the Big Bad Wolf, correct you like Socrates, and simultaneously invite you into a deeper, fuller, and more blessed life. What a king.
This week one of the main things we talked about was healthy verbal communication.
"The ground floor understanding is that communication is done essentially three different ways…" Dr Coffield from Reformed Theological Seminary shared with us. He went on to describe the three ways. -- competitive communication, informational communication, and cooperative communication.
All of these terms are rather self-explanatory, but allow me to flesh them out nonetheless:
1. Competitive communication
Imagine an argument you're trying to win. Imagine a group of young people around chatting, all of them with the motive to prove who is cooler or wittier. Imagine a person trying to prove that he is right.
Dr. Coffield said two things that I'll touch on more in a bit:
"Jesus rarely communicated competitively unless it was with the pharisees or religious elite." And,
"God rarely uses this method of communication."
2. Informational communication
This is teaching or training or just catching up. One person is sharing information with another -- not in a competitive I'm better than you sort've manner, but helpfully -- simply to inform. Gossip probably fits into this category as well; one person is sharing with another some sort of information. Think, "Tell me about your day…" or "Did you know that…" or "Let me show you how to use…" or similar communication styles.
3. Cooperative communication
Here, two or more people, as the name suggests, are working together for something.
Maybe they are communicating to strengthen a relationship -- think a genuine "How are you doing today?"
Maybe they are communicating to strengthening a cause they both share -- think Peyton Manning asking his linemen if they had any ideas for better pass protection.
This method of communication is really, if I understand correctly, the only method that allows a place for a healthy exchange of emotions -- "How did you feel about the theatre?"
Coffield argued that this was the method Jesus used most often.
If you've read this far, feel free to stop if you've gathered the information you're looking for. Good stuff.
But I have a few comments. Obviously, I'm just sharing here my understanding of what he shared. That list isn't exhaustive, nor could it probably be applied to every aspect of verbal communication. Please don't read this as me poo-pooing on Dr. Coffield. He was great, and I'm sure he'd love just hours and hours and hours to flesh out further what he means by these distinctions.
That said, I have two problems with this paradigm.
First, it seems to me that most conversations fall into more than one of these styles at the same time. Cooperation can and probably is often informational.
Competition can often be cooperative.
Informational communication can often be competitive or cooperative.
These three ways of looking at how we communicate fall a bit short, in my opinion, of addressing the nuance and varied change of so many different sorts of communication.
As an example, I'll share my second problem with the way this information was shared.
It was hinted at numerous times that Jesus mainly or mostly communicated cooperatively. I disagree with this.
One of the coolest things about Jesus was that he communicated in a way that fit all three of these styles of communication at the same time.
Consider the Sermon on the Mount. Or virtually any parable. But for our purposes let's use the parable of the Prodigal Son, which I will not paste here but hopefully is known enough to suffice. Check Luke 15 if needed.
In that story, Jesus was indeed communicating competitively. The story essentially says any life outside of relationship with the Father is dead. If you reject the Father, you are dead, should you return, you are alive. There is only one way to live life, in grateful embrace of the Father.
That is as competitive as anything I've ever said.
Yet the story is also informational. Your Father, your God, is no curmudgeon. He is no blow-hard demanding your obedience. His love for you and his embrace of you, despite your rebellion, is ever present. He delights in you!
And he is even merciful should you be the do-gooder older brother type as well.
And the story is cooperative as well. Most all stories are, for that matter. Stories invite the reader to cooperate with the author. Where are you in the story?
After processing all this I'm having one searing thought: Jesus is the best. This guy can blow your doors down like the Big Bad Wolf, correct you like Socrates, and simultaneously invite you into a deeper, fuller, and more blessed life. What a king.
Tuesday, November 18, 2014
A Grief Embraced
I am a bit of a romantic. By that, I don't mean the sort of person that watches endless Sleepless in Seattle or The Notebook reruns, but I mean the type of person with big dreams and big desires.
I struggle to celebrate the little things, and I often fall short of encouraging and uplifting everyday service and sacrifice. This is to my shame. Yet, I struggle with these things not because I do not value them, but because in the depths of my being I yearn for more -- and bigger -- and greater.
I want to see God blow the doors off college campuses with His grace. I want to watch as the love of Christ brings a city literally to its knees in prayer and appreciation for his goodness.
One of the difficult things we've had to sort through over the past twelve months is the reality of our broken dreams.
God, it seems, works at his own pace, and on his own timetable. I know this is common head knowledge, but I'm not sure it was heart knowledge for me. He is mysterious. "He is not," as Lewis describes Aslan in the Chronicles of Narnia "a tame lion."
This has brought us face to face with grief. The reason I feel like our broken dreams are something to grieve is because I believe wholeheartedly that they are something that God himself grieves. He does not grieve that we did not get or see what we wanted, but rather that His dreams have been thwarted as well. He is heartbroken that college students worldwide have not come to know him personally. He is sad at the state of brokenness and decay in large portions of South America. His love brings about his grief.
"There will be a new morning… and we look forward to that."
"The cross and the kingdom go together."
"When bad and sad things happen, as they do… those awful things can be held lovingly and wisely within the embrace of the God of whom we speak when we tell that story."
Wright says those three things in the above video and they sum up my grieving as well as anything.
Kingdom and cross must absolutely and never be separated. Kingdom without cross can tend to a happy-go-lucky, carefree spirituality that is drastically different than traditional christianity. Cross without kingdom can tend to a horrible, masochistic, pride awakening burden. But together they form a beautiful gospel.
First, Jesus has initiated the kingdom of God. God reigns. A new way of being human is presented -- a way of peace and love and mercy and humility. God's reign means the hurting and broken will be brought into the loving embrace of the king.
And yet, the way of that king was a way of sacrifice. The people of the initiated kingdom are people so awakened by the love and delight of king that they move sacrificially to alert others.
It's a beautiful thing that on the cross -- the place of devastation and despair, pain and misery -- we find a place for our grief as well. There we find hope, and meaning, for our grief. There we find counsel, and the tenderness of the king.
I struggle to celebrate the little things, and I often fall short of encouraging and uplifting everyday service and sacrifice. This is to my shame. Yet, I struggle with these things not because I do not value them, but because in the depths of my being I yearn for more -- and bigger -- and greater.
I want to see God blow the doors off college campuses with His grace. I want to watch as the love of Christ brings a city literally to its knees in prayer and appreciation for his goodness.
One of the difficult things we've had to sort through over the past twelve months is the reality of our broken dreams.
God, it seems, works at his own pace, and on his own timetable. I know this is common head knowledge, but I'm not sure it was heart knowledge for me. He is mysterious. "He is not," as Lewis describes Aslan in the Chronicles of Narnia "a tame lion."
This has brought us face to face with grief. The reason I feel like our broken dreams are something to grieve is because I believe wholeheartedly that they are something that God himself grieves. He does not grieve that we did not get or see what we wanted, but rather that His dreams have been thwarted as well. He is heartbroken that college students worldwide have not come to know him personally. He is sad at the state of brokenness and decay in large portions of South America. His love brings about his grief.
"There will be a new morning… and we look forward to that."
"The cross and the kingdom go together."
"When bad and sad things happen, as they do… those awful things can be held lovingly and wisely within the embrace of the God of whom we speak when we tell that story."
Wright says those three things in the above video and they sum up my grieving as well as anything.
Kingdom and cross must absolutely and never be separated. Kingdom without cross can tend to a happy-go-lucky, carefree spirituality that is drastically different than traditional christianity. Cross without kingdom can tend to a horrible, masochistic, pride awakening burden. But together they form a beautiful gospel.
First, Jesus has initiated the kingdom of God. God reigns. A new way of being human is presented -- a way of peace and love and mercy and humility. God's reign means the hurting and broken will be brought into the loving embrace of the king.
And yet, the way of that king was a way of sacrifice. The people of the initiated kingdom are people so awakened by the love and delight of king that they move sacrificially to alert others.
It's a beautiful thing that on the cross -- the place of devastation and despair, pain and misery -- we find a place for our grief as well. There we find hope, and meaning, for our grief. There we find counsel, and the tenderness of the king.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)