Just a few days left in 2009, are you ready for the new year? I am, for once. I learned that it is time to close the book on some issues in my life. I chose to do so today. There are certain things that I settled today in order to go into 2010 with a clean slate. I have nothing to prove to anyone, and I am letting go of all these past hurts, lies, challenges etc. I am certainly not who I used to be. If you are one that I may have offended this year in any way, I am sorry. I am learning to control this critical spirit that has so easily attached itself to me- finally! I am no longer listening to and believing the lies. I have learned that sometimes you have to go back to what you thought was the most difficult place to start, to take care of unfinished business. I have nothing hindering me any more and can go into this new year not in my strength but His, not by my power, but His.
I can only encourage you to do the same thing. Close the book on the nay-sayers, close the book on those who have taken you for granted. Close the book on those who don't encourage you to go forward. Get settled in your spirit who you are and whose you are. Associate with the people who say "I see God in you, I see destiny in you." Get closer to those who celebrate you instead of those who are killing you. You are either going forward or you're going backwards. There is no standing still in the Kingdom. The Kingdom is always advancing. I say advance with it, don't regress from it.
I have looked for the perfect church and never found it. I have looked for the body of Christ to be who I wanted them to be and could not accept them in their imperfections. Why not, Christ does. What I considered to be a personal strength, turned out to be a major weakness. My perfectionist spirit sent me down a slippery slope that I did not think I could climb back out of.
Well, I am climbing. Going forward. I have learned a lot the past two months in being away from CFAN, how I was wrong in many ways for the most part. I came back today with my imperfect self to my imperfect church and learned to view it from the eyes of God, and not mine. Life will not always go the way I think it should. Church won't, my kids won't, my marriage won't, my job won't, but one thing is for sure, God will take me down the path that I am supposed to be going down; the rest is just life. I guess that just makes me human.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Friday, November 6, 2009
Where is my God?
This is a writing I found in my drawer that Kristin Goosen wrote in January of 2009. I thought it was worth the post and the thoughts I hope it brings to many. I will type it exactly as she wrote it.
Where is my God? We've turned sentences into doctrines and doctrines into sentences. We've let the faithful fall at the advancement of our pride. Where is my God? We've let our services become a social party painted with excellence and reputation. Where is my God? Where is the Jesus of the twelve disciples. Where is the church in Acts. Get rich or go home, get right or get out. Where is the love. Our walls are painted and our carpets are clean but our altars are empty. Our bookstore is full and our cafe is stocked, but our hearts are empty. We've diluted worship and forced prayer. We've reduced His glory to a feeling, and the anointing to a goosebump. Again, where is my God?
Where is my God? We've turned sentences into doctrines and doctrines into sentences. We've let the faithful fall at the advancement of our pride. Where is my God? We've let our services become a social party painted with excellence and reputation. Where is my God? Where is the Jesus of the twelve disciples. Where is the church in Acts. Get rich or go home, get right or get out. Where is the love. Our walls are painted and our carpets are clean but our altars are empty. Our bookstore is full and our cafe is stocked, but our hearts are empty. We've diluted worship and forced prayer. We've reduced His glory to a feeling, and the anointing to a goosebump. Again, where is my God?
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Leadership
This is a paper (journal) I turned in for my Leadership class at school. It is just a sample of my writing.
As this class progresses, I find myself digging deeper into the whole concept or process (as the book references) of leadership. I am looking up articles on the internet, searching through my old books on leadership, and absorbing all that is said in the classroom. It makes me wonder if everyone doesn’t have all sorts of different factors inside them that if combined properly would consist of leadership in some way, shape, or form. Is there really a leader in all of us in some area of our lives?
Our church has been so “vision”, and “purpose” focused for several years now. We are being taught that there is a leader in all of us, and all we need to do is discover our gifts and talents to determine which area we should be leading. They have even gone as far as having you form what is called a “lead team” based on the team leadership model, where you raise up six or so people under you in your particular area. For instance, if you are the praise and worship leader, you would find people with that gift or talent, have them join your team, and you mentor, train, and teach so that in your absence they can lead. The goal behind it is, when you are not there, you should have people under you to do such a great job that your absence is not necessarily missed. We are taught that you become a great leader when you become unnecessary. This is all well and good, however is everyone actually meant to lead? What about when circumstances change? Everyone’s roles eventually change. Are the followers prepared for this change to suddenly take on the role of the leader when they have been the follower for so long?
If everyone at one point were a leader, then who would we be leading? A leader generally has followers. This takes me back to the chapters we have studied. I understand that the concept of person + situation + relationship = leadership, however it does not take into account the followers. I am coming to conclusion that we just can’t all be leaders. If we were all chiefs with no Indians there would be conflict of a catastrophic level!
Leadership has to be more than skills, traits, and style. To me, those are just factors, attributes, and personality. Leadership is not a method or a technique. I think it is more of an attitude or a mind-set. For example, in the situation portion of the leadership equation, a true leader would not let the environment influence him/her; a true leader would influence the environment. It is not the followers in the relationship portion that change the leader, it is the leader having an impact on the followers because of the leaders ability to see things differently. My point is that there is so much more than even the leadership equation has taught us.
Another problem I have is with the style approach to leadership. In the leadership grid, different styles of leading are broken down for us and the leader is then categorized into one or perhaps more of those styles, falling somewhere on that grid. My question regarding that study would be as follows: Was the study conducted with certain leaders in certain jobs, and if those same leaders were placed in different jobs, say a career change, would their style of leadership change?
I say this because again going back to my church experiences, I used to be what was considered Authority-Compliance. However, as I became a leader in the church, I was much more team oriented based on the training I underwent. So does that now put me in the opportunism category? If it does that for me, what about all the leaders that were a part of the study? Just wondering, and of course I will continue to research this area.
Finally I will give my opinion in the area of traits and skills. When it comes to traits, the whole being born a leader theory has some merit. The person who may have been born with certain character traits that we would call leadership traits is plausible, but that person must become a leader. With the question I proposed at the beginning of this paper, we all may indeed have certain factors or traits in us that mix together to formulate a leader. However, if the desire to lead is not there then those factors probably just lie dormant.
I also do not believe that there is a certain amount of skills that one can acquire that suddenly makes that person qualified to be a leader. I can earn my CPA and work for an accounting office but never become an accountant , or a manager, or even own my own business. I may be happy as can be doing a mundane job, and working for someone else with no desire for promotion whatsoever- and be the smartest one in the company thanks to college. Just because of my learned skills, I am not a leader. If I am not pursuing leadership, I can have all the skills in the world but the end result is that I will be a follower.
In conclusion, I will go back to what I stated earlier, the more I study, the more I am beginning to see that leadership is more of an attitude than anything else. I think the difference between leaders and their followers is attitude. I think a large portion of our lives follow our thought patterns. Our thoughts basically determine who we are. That is also scriptural, as the Bible states “as a man thinks in his heart, so is he.” (Proverbs 23:7). When we think differently, we become different. We can compile all the traits, skills, and styles together and still not make a good leader.
It was Winston Churchill that said “attitude is a little thing that makes a big difference.” In his contribution in saving England from Nazism, it was his inner conviction of what he thought about it that drove him to be a lone voice of warning. It started with a thought though. He developed and matured it from there and went on to become a great leader. This was not an overnight happening based on his traits, it was not based on his abilities, nor was his style determined in whether or not he was a good leader. Although all of those may have contributed in some way, without the proper attitude and mind-set, Churchill may not have gone as far as he did.
I look forward to the continual study of this subject as we go deeper into the book. As we get into the next three chapters, I may eat my words and change my opinion. I am not defining leadership by attitude alone, but I am simply stating we cannot rely strictly on the equation we learned these past few weeks. It goes much deeper.
As this class progresses, I find myself digging deeper into the whole concept or process (as the book references) of leadership. I am looking up articles on the internet, searching through my old books on leadership, and absorbing all that is said in the classroom. It makes me wonder if everyone doesn’t have all sorts of different factors inside them that if combined properly would consist of leadership in some way, shape, or form. Is there really a leader in all of us in some area of our lives?
Our church has been so “vision”, and “purpose” focused for several years now. We are being taught that there is a leader in all of us, and all we need to do is discover our gifts and talents to determine which area we should be leading. They have even gone as far as having you form what is called a “lead team” based on the team leadership model, where you raise up six or so people under you in your particular area. For instance, if you are the praise and worship leader, you would find people with that gift or talent, have them join your team, and you mentor, train, and teach so that in your absence they can lead. The goal behind it is, when you are not there, you should have people under you to do such a great job that your absence is not necessarily missed. We are taught that you become a great leader when you become unnecessary. This is all well and good, however is everyone actually meant to lead? What about when circumstances change? Everyone’s roles eventually change. Are the followers prepared for this change to suddenly take on the role of the leader when they have been the follower for so long?
If everyone at one point were a leader, then who would we be leading? A leader generally has followers. This takes me back to the chapters we have studied. I understand that the concept of person + situation + relationship = leadership, however it does not take into account the followers. I am coming to conclusion that we just can’t all be leaders. If we were all chiefs with no Indians there would be conflict of a catastrophic level!
Leadership has to be more than skills, traits, and style. To me, those are just factors, attributes, and personality. Leadership is not a method or a technique. I think it is more of an attitude or a mind-set. For example, in the situation portion of the leadership equation, a true leader would not let the environment influence him/her; a true leader would influence the environment. It is not the followers in the relationship portion that change the leader, it is the leader having an impact on the followers because of the leaders ability to see things differently. My point is that there is so much more than even the leadership equation has taught us.
Another problem I have is with the style approach to leadership. In the leadership grid, different styles of leading are broken down for us and the leader is then categorized into one or perhaps more of those styles, falling somewhere on that grid. My question regarding that study would be as follows: Was the study conducted with certain leaders in certain jobs, and if those same leaders were placed in different jobs, say a career change, would their style of leadership change?
I say this because again going back to my church experiences, I used to be what was considered Authority-Compliance. However, as I became a leader in the church, I was much more team oriented based on the training I underwent. So does that now put me in the opportunism category? If it does that for me, what about all the leaders that were a part of the study? Just wondering, and of course I will continue to research this area.
Finally I will give my opinion in the area of traits and skills. When it comes to traits, the whole being born a leader theory has some merit. The person who may have been born with certain character traits that we would call leadership traits is plausible, but that person must become a leader. With the question I proposed at the beginning of this paper, we all may indeed have certain factors or traits in us that mix together to formulate a leader. However, if the desire to lead is not there then those factors probably just lie dormant.
I also do not believe that there is a certain amount of skills that one can acquire that suddenly makes that person qualified to be a leader. I can earn my CPA and work for an accounting office but never become an accountant , or a manager, or even own my own business. I may be happy as can be doing a mundane job, and working for someone else with no desire for promotion whatsoever- and be the smartest one in the company thanks to college. Just because of my learned skills, I am not a leader. If I am not pursuing leadership, I can have all the skills in the world but the end result is that I will be a follower.
In conclusion, I will go back to what I stated earlier, the more I study, the more I am beginning to see that leadership is more of an attitude than anything else. I think the difference between leaders and their followers is attitude. I think a large portion of our lives follow our thought patterns. Our thoughts basically determine who we are. That is also scriptural, as the Bible states “as a man thinks in his heart, so is he.” (Proverbs 23:7). When we think differently, we become different. We can compile all the traits, skills, and styles together and still not make a good leader.
It was Winston Churchill that said “attitude is a little thing that makes a big difference.” In his contribution in saving England from Nazism, it was his inner conviction of what he thought about it that drove him to be a lone voice of warning. It started with a thought though. He developed and matured it from there and went on to become a great leader. This was not an overnight happening based on his traits, it was not based on his abilities, nor was his style determined in whether or not he was a good leader. Although all of those may have contributed in some way, without the proper attitude and mind-set, Churchill may not have gone as far as he did.
I look forward to the continual study of this subject as we go deeper into the book. As we get into the next three chapters, I may eat my words and change my opinion. I am not defining leadership by attitude alone, but I am simply stating we cannot rely strictly on the equation we learned these past few weeks. It goes much deeper.
Friday, September 18, 2009
todays soapbox
"U.S. states whose residents have more conservative religious beliefs on average tend to have higher rates of teenagers giving birth, a new study suggests.
The relationship could be due to the fact that communities with such religious beliefs (a literal interpretation of the Bible, for instance) may frown upon contraception, researchers say. If that same culture isn't successfully discouraging teen sex, the pregnancy and birth rates rise."
This is a direct quote from Live Science. I think it is an inaccurate statement. I don't think parents sit there and tell there kids don't use condoms or don't get on the pill, because it's against our beliefs. I know I don't. Now don't get me wrong, I am not encouraging sex either. Read on.
I think it is sometimes the rules and regulations that the more stricter parents (christian) have based on our values that causes the "sheltered" kids to go and be rebellious. So many of these kids are pressured into sex christian or not and I dont think the christian kid that is about to have sex is thinking well I know this is wrong and I shouldnt be doing it but- I'm going to- and by God I will not use a condom cause my parents are against them.
Not so.
It's called peer pressure and it is a proven fact that kids with too many restrictions tend to be the more rebellious ones. What it boils down to is education and it starts at home.
It's like being on a diet; you restrict yourself from chocolate, but when you come off the diet you gorge on it, why- because you were told no before. It makes you want it more.
If we are educating our children on biblical principles of why we don't have sex ---not because the Bible says we shouldnt but because we have taught them how to love the Lord and when we love someone we have a tendency to do what pleases that person, then we probably would see that rate drop. Our problem is we are so busy laying down the law and pounding it into their heads.Then, it is human nature to rebel.
Fire and brimstone isn't always the best way to get a point across.
I used to be a fire and brimstone type preacher and to a point I still am in certain areas. I have a passion for holiness. However, Christ had a passion for love. It was love that brought Him here, and love that saved us. It was also love that He commanded us to walk in. We have fallen away from that type of preaching though. Could you imagine a world where love was the priority of everyone. If only we would take the Lord's teaching on love and live it! I don't think we would need blogs on teenage pregnancy in the Bible belt.
This is a direct quote from Live Science. I think it is an inaccurate statement. I don't think parents sit there and tell there kids don't use condoms or don't get on the pill, because it's against our beliefs. I know I don't. Now don't get me wrong, I am not encouraging sex either. Read on.
I think it is sometimes the rules and regulations that the more stricter parents (christian) have based on our values that causes the "sheltered" kids to go and be rebellious. So many of these kids are pressured into sex christian or not and I dont think the christian kid that is about to have sex is thinking well I know this is wrong and I shouldnt be doing it but- I'm going to- and by God I will not use a condom cause my parents are against them.
Not so.
It's called peer pressure and it is a proven fact that kids with too many restrictions tend to be the more rebellious ones. What it boils down to is education and it starts at home.
It's like being on a diet; you restrict yourself from chocolate, but when you come off the diet you gorge on it, why- because you were told no before. It makes you want it more.
If we are educating our children on biblical principles of why we don't have sex ---not because the Bible says we shouldnt but because we have taught them how to love the Lord and when we love someone we have a tendency to do what pleases that person, then we probably would see that rate drop. Our problem is we are so busy laying down the law and pounding it into their heads.Then, it is human nature to rebel.
Fire and brimstone isn't always the best way to get a point across.
I used to be a fire and brimstone type preacher and to a point I still am in certain areas. I have a passion for holiness. However, Christ had a passion for love. It was love that brought Him here, and love that saved us. It was also love that He commanded us to walk in. We have fallen away from that type of preaching though. Could you imagine a world where love was the priority of everyone. If only we would take the Lord's teaching on love and live it! I don't think we would need blogs on teenage pregnancy in the Bible belt.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
My first blog
Ok, so here goes! I am slowly learning how this blogging works, so bear with me. I will start a regular blog soon. Right now I need to finish this semester at school so I can have some time to breath. So much going on in my life that I really think this blogging will be a lot of fun, quite informative, educational, and yep I will probably step on some toes. No offense, I love you all, but the name of this ministry says it all. We'll see where I can go with all of this. Talk to you all soon. (you all...like I have any followers yet!!)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
