What would you say to 16,000 people?

A few weeks ago I heard about a little online project called The Listserve. Email mailing lists are one of the older forms of internet communication; everybody signs up to get the distribution, and when a post goes out, everybody gets it.

The idea of The Listserve is this: once the list hit 10,000 subscribers, the list moderators would pick one person per day to get to send a message to that list. A message about whatever the lucky person wants. The constraints: 400 words. No links or images. Just good old text.

I was intrigued. I signed up.

The Listserve hit 10,000 subscribers a couple of weeks ago and the messages started coming. They’ve been entertaining, but mostly on the self-helpy. encouragey, lifehackey side of things. Still, while dozens of unread emails get deleted from my inbox every day, the one from The Listserve always gets read.

Yesterday I got an unexpected email: “You’ve been selected”. I have until mid-day on Sunday to write 400 words that will be sent out to, at last check, more than 16,000 email inboxes. No pressure!

So what would you write if you could send an email to 16,000 people?

Leonard the Lonely Astronaut

My friend Andy Osenga has a new record available to purchase (download or physical CD) today over on the Rabbit Room store.

Leonard the Lonely Astronaut is quite a concept. Leonard is off on a solo intergalactic space flight, and while he’s traversing the galaxy he’s writing songs. We build a rocket ship set for Andy to record this thing in. It was awesome. The record has turned out awesome as well.

Ten bucks gets you the mp3 downloads today. Don’t wait long, though, because in a few days it’s going back into the AO vault until its official release in the fall.

Leonard the Lonely Astronaut is rated A for AWESOME. No space rocks were harmed in the making of this blog post. This author did not receive any compensation for writing this post other than the satisfaction of plugging a friend’s record. In fact, this author is still waiting for the t-shirt that is coming with the Kickstarter pledge. Pictures to follow.

Some thoughts on Matt Chandler's move to lead Acts 29

So, it’s official: Matt Chandler will be taking over as president of the Acts 29 church planting network, moving the A29 headquarters from Seattle to Dallas. Pastor Matt will be taking over from Mark Driscoll, the fiery pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle, who helped found the network over a decade ago. While others have served as president of Acts 29 at various times over the past 10 years, it is still Driscoll (and, to a lesser extent, Darrin Patrick of The Journey in St. Louis) who primarily comes to mind when you say Acts 29.

The move from Driscoll to Chandler is a significant one, for several reasons:

  1. Strong enough to bring about change. In an evangelical ecosystem already dominated by leaders with strong personalities, Matt Chandler comes in to this leadership position as an already-established “brand”, separate from Acts 29. His story is fairly well known within evangelical circles, reluctantly accepting the pastorate of a dying Baptist church in the Dallas area only to turn it into a thriving multi-campus megachurch. More recently, his diagnosis of brain cancer and the following struggle through surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy have been the subject of many a blog post and tweet over the last two and a half years. In short, Matt’s standing within the evangelical community is strong and distinct enough from Mark Driscoll’s that Matt has a reasonable chance of effecting real change where it’s needed, rather than just existing in Driscoll’s shadow.

  2. Leaders set the culture. While Chandler’s theology is close in line with that of Driscoll and the Acts 29 network, culturally the lanky Texan will provide a sharp contrast to the Seattle spark plug. Over the past decade, young Acts 29 church planters have picked up not only Driscoll’s theology but also his personal style. There seems to be a contractual obligation for Acts 29 pastors to love Mixed Martial Arts, tattoos, beer, and alternative music styles. Now, I don’t know whether Chandler is a fan of MMA or not… but that just illustrates my point. If Pastor Matt can help separate the cultural stylism from the heart of Acts 29 ministry, it will be a very good thing.

  3. Some distance from the controversy. There have been a couple of widely-discussed controversies in the past few months concerning Mars Hill Church in general, and Mark Driscoll’s leadership strategies in particular. I don’t want to comment on them here other than to say that it appears less than coincidental that the Acts 29 move comes on the heels of those issues. Maybe this move will help provide some distance and perspective for Acts 29 pastors who may be finding themselves uncomfortably trying to deal with these controversies.

  4. Room for Pastor Mark to refresh and grow. Whether you love him or hate him, you’ve got to acknowledge that Mark Driscoll has been one busy dude over the past 10 years. Taking a church from zero to thousands, writing a gazillion books, teaching all over the evangelical conference circuit, and founding and growing a church planting network of 400+ churches, all while trying to also be a good husband and father to a growing family is enough to run anyone ragged. Add to it the stress from being a flashpoint for some contentious cultural issues (Don Miller named him “Mark the cussing pastor” for a real reason, after all), and maybe it’s time for Pastor Mark to back it off just a bit and recharge. Bringing in Pastor Matt to fill a prominent role could help that happen.

Time will tell how this move affects both pastors, their churches, and the Acts 29 network as a whole. We should take the time today, though, to lift up both of these men, their families, and their churches in prayer, asking God’s blessing and protection on them as they serve.

15 Reasons to Show Grace

A couple of days ago I posted a link to Rachel Held Evans’ “15 Reasons I Left Church” on my Facebook wall, along with this comment:

While we may not agree with all of Rachel Held Evans’ reasons, or her conclusion, those of us who are church leaders should be aware that Rachel is not alone - there are undoubtedly people sitting in our pews thinking the same things.

To lay my cards on the table: I resonate with 7 or 8 of the 15 reasons that Rachel lists at my current church, and have been there with another couple of them at previous churches. On a few of the items I disagree with her doctrinally, and the frustrations I’ve had over some of these issues haven’t driven me to leave my church… but that may be because I’ve chosen to simply be quiet about some of the topics rather than being vocal and stirring the pot. So I was curious to see what sort of responses I’d get on FB, and I wasn’t disappointed.

The responses ran the gamut that I sort of expected; a couple friends identified with it quite strongly; a couple more felt the pain and frustration in her post but materially disagreed with most of the content or with how she said it; one graciously said that she “didn’t get it at all”, but that it was unhelpful whining. A college acquaintance reposted the link and got several responses from other college folks universally accusing Evans of whining and “making it all about her rather than about God”.

I’m not surprised by these reactions any more, but I am significantly saddened. Questioning is not sin, and wrestling with theological issues is a sign of healthy, involved, real faith, not a pointer toward apostasy. As Chaplain Mike over at InternetMonk.com so eloquently ranted a couple of weeks ago:

It is Islam that sets forth submission and unquestioning acceptance as the ultimate in piety — not Christianity nor our parent faith as expressed in the Hebrew Bible. The faith we follow is one of lively dialogue between the Creator and his creatures. We question, complain, express our anger, cry out in pain, and bargain with God. Sometimes, if you believe the Bible, God even changes his mind at our behest. Like Jacob, we refuse to let him go until he blesses us. Like Moses, we argue with God. Like the psalmists, we groan and hurl curses toward the heavens. On the other hand, preachers like [name redacted - that’s not the point] want us to get in line and behave. They rebuke our messiness, our humanness. They use the sovereignty of God to shut us up.

Maybe you wrestle with doubt and questions on a daily basis. Or maybe you’ve gone to the same church your whole life and never had the slightest inclination to doubt or argue with what is taught. Maybe you’re somewhere in between. No matter where you are on that spectrum, though, the first response has to be grace.

Grace allows us to disagree with a brother or sister but embrace them anyway. There is a time for teaching and correction, but for the hurting brother or sister, that time comes after love has been lavished and healing has begun.

Jesus didn’t rebuke the doubters; he encouraged them. Even Thomas, who after three years of following Jesus around really had more faith - even Thomas Jesus graciously called close and encouraged him to believe. The rebukes were reserved for those who thought they had it all together and were judging those who they thought didn’t. Judging by the reaction I’ve seen over the past few days, it’s time to go back and learn that lesson again.

Happy Birthday, Number Three!

Our third daughter, KP, turns three today. So big, so fast. So blessed to have her.

Happy Birthday, Addie G!

Our delightful middle daughter turns 6 today. Happy birthday, little lady! You’re an amazing blessing to your mom and me.

The people of God are like... a political advance team

After recently finishing N. T. Wright’s Simply Jesus, I’ve been thinking again on Wright’s view of the church’s work as inaugurating the Kingdom of God here on the earth. Even though we know it won’t come into perfection until Jesus’ return, Wright says, is no excuse that we shouldn’t start working on it now. I love this bit of reasoning from Wright’s Surprised by Hope:

What would you say to someone who said, rightly, that God would make them completely holy in the resurrection and that they would never reach this state of complete holiness until then - and who then went on to say, wrongly, that therefore there was no point in even trying to live a holy life until that time? You would press for some form of inaugurated eschatology. You would insist that the new life of the Spirit, in obedience to the lordship of Jesus Christ, should produce a radical transformation of behavior in the present life, anticipating the life to come…

…Apply the same to Romans 8! How do you answer someone who says, rightly, that the world will not be completely just and right until the new creation and who deduces, wrongly, that there is no point trying to bring justice to the world… until that time? [I]nsist on inaugurated eschatology, on a radical transformation of the way we behave as a worldwide community, anticipating the eventual time when God will be all in all even though we agree things won’t be complete until then.

The analogy that’s been rattling around in my head in this election year is of the people of God as a political advance team. Say that you’re the supporter of a candidate that you know is ultimately going to win. Your work as part of the advance team is to get the word out - in hopes that others will join the team, and to get the groundwork done so that things are ready when the winner finally shows up. Then, when the new ruler is in place, the people that were on his side the whole time are the ones who are rewarded - with good things from the kingdom and with places of responsibility.

So, too, in many ways with the kingdom. We know who the ultimate ‘winner’ and coming ruler is. He has already conquered death and is the prototype of the new creation. But until He comes to set up his complete rule, we are here, spreading the word. Jesus is Lord. We’re doing as much ground work as He enables us to do. 1 Cor 15 says that ‘our works are not in vain in the Lord’. Those works have a purpose. And when Jesus finally does return, it’s not a stretch to the understanding that ruling and reigning with Christ may be something akin to the leadership positions and ambassadorships that come today to the early and long-time supporters of a new ruler.

So… get the word out. Get people on the team. Get the work started. Wait expectantly. Come soon, Lord Jesus.

Bullet Points for a Monday #4

I haven’t done one of these in a while, but was reminded just how much fun they are. So, without further ado…

  • I just got invited to join the Boar’s Head Tavern. More exciting than I’d like to admit.
  • Just ordered a little M-Audio MIDI controller keyboard to hook up to my Mac. Christmas money well spent! Time to start playing around with Garage Band.
  • I have to remind myself when blogging through Stringfellow that it’s not necessarily that I’m reading groundbreaking thoughts, but that I just haven’t read many liberal / Arminian theologians.
  • After a couple of years of not traveling much, my spring looks like it’s settling into a once-a-month travel groove. December: Florida. January: Seattle. February: Washington, DC. March: Wichita.
  • My not-quite-3-year-old daughter correctly used the phrase “That’s what I’m talkin’” tonight. I could not have been more proud. (We’ll get her to add the “about” one of these days.)
  • Excited to hear the news that I will be an uncle come July - first time on my side of the family! So excited for Andrew and Heather.
  • While I’m happy that this nifty daily Bible reading app I found for my phone might help me do the read-through-the-Bible-in-a-year thing, I feel shame that it’s taking my technology addiction to help encourage my soul addiction.
  • I could’ve posted each of these as Tweets or FB status updates, but somehow this was more satisfying.

Second-guessing God

Stringfellow is just full of good stuff. Still in Chapter Two of An Ethic for Christians an Other Aliens in a Strange Land, he says this about trying to understand God:

Biblical ethics do not pretend the social or political will of God; biblical politics do not implement “right” or “ultimate” answers. In this world, the judgment of God remains God’s own secret. … It is the inherent and redundant frustration of any pietistic social ethics that the ethical question is presented as a conundrum about the judgment of God in given circumstances. Human beings attempting to cope with that ethical question are certain to be dehumanized. The Bible does not pose any such riddles nor aspire to any such answers; instead, in biblical context, such queries are transposed, converted, rendered new. In the Bible, the ethical issue becomes simply: how can a person act humanly now? … Here the ethical question juxtaposes the witness of the holy nation - Jerusalem - to the other principalities, institutions and other nations - as to which Babylon is a parable. It asks: how can the Church of Jesus Christ celebrate human life in society now?

Stringfellow on Revelation

In the second chapter of William Stringfellow’s An Ethic for Christians and Other Aliens in a Strange Land, he continues to contrast the two cities mentioned in the latter half of Revelation: Babylon and Jerusalem. The Babylon of Revelation, he says, “is archetypical of all nations.” Those nations are principalities that, Stringfellow argues, by their very nature are anti-human; they serve themselves and work against that which is good. Jerusalem, on the other hand, is representative of Christians as “an embassy among the principalities” or as “a pioneer community”. (These phrases remind me instantly of N. T. Wright’s similar description of the Church in Surprised by Hope.)

But Revelation, says Stringfellow, cannot be read as a “predestinarian forecast”.

To view the Babylon material in Revelation as mechanistic prophecy - or to treat any part of the Bible in such a fashion - is an extreme distortion of the prophetic ministry….

A construction of Revelation as foreordination denies in its full implication that either principalities or persons are living beings with identities of their own and with capabilities of decision and movement respected by God. And, in the end, such superstitions demean the vocation which the Gospels attribute to Jesus Christ, rendering him a quaint automaton, rather than the Son, of God.

While my Calvinist friends will quibble with the thought that humans have “capabilities of decision and movement respected by God”, I find that last sentence to be a compelling thought - that the work of Jesus Christ redeeming the world is magnified if his work is redeeming free and willful men, and that if, as in the strong Calvinist view, the whole cosmic saga is already completely fixed in history, then Christ is, in a way, just one more player in a pre-defined role.