My first Tiny Bible Bit video

Last week I posted my first video on Tiny Bible Bits.

In reality, it was a devotion I did for the young adults at church, but I also posted it on my other page.

Truthfully?

The message was decent.
The execution was horid.

After doing so many talks in person, I butchered this one on film.

I... Spoke... Soo... Slowly.

I know why.

Usually, when you speak in public, you need to slow your pace down. 

On this occasion, I overcompensated.

And, on camera, the same pace just seemed silly.

So, if you want to watch the video then you're more than welcome to. I think it sends out a pretty good message about the time we are in and the time we are going to enter into.

But, be warned.

It's not my best work.

But, as someone on the young adult church group commented, it did display my strong bookcase game.

Killing the cloak of anonymity

With social distancing restricting people meeting, like many churches, our groups have all gone online.

One of the new initiatives the young adults at church have started is posting an online devotional by one of the members once a week. 

Now, doing a short thought about a bible passage isn’t anything new to me. On Facebook, through Tiny Bible Bits, I’ve been posting a spiel three times a week for years - since October 2011 - equalling roughly 1300 posts.

But, of the 867 people who like the page, only 82 are my friends on Facebook. I assume that many of those 82 remember that I am the author. To the rest of the people, some who interact quite faithfully, I’m a mystery.

They will know a few details about me. 

They will know I’m a Christian.
They will know I’m Australian. 
They will probably know that I’m married and have kids.
They will have picked up that I’ve worked at churches in the past.

But, they couldn’t recognise me in the street.

In a few weeks that may change.

I’m currently wrestling with the option of posting the short video I’ll be making for church.

In reality, it’s not that scary.

But, it will dissolve some of the anonymity I currently have.

People will now know my face.
They will know the sound of my voice, speech impediment and all.

I don’t know if that will be a good thing.

Because, in part, i don’t consider my Tiny Bible Bits as a personal sermonette. It is not about me. 

Due to social media, I am currently just mysterious words on Facebook. 

I wonder, if I change from written content to video - and it will only be a one off - how that will change the dynamics of the post?

Why everything must keep touching on the corona

I’m sick of hearing about the ‘rona.

Maybe you are also.

I’m sick of writing about the ‘rona.

Yet, here I am doing it again.

For weeks, every Tiny Bible Bit has been linked to the virus or connected to lockdown.

Frankly, for me, my world hasn’t changed that much.

Sure, my eldest isn’t at school, but my ex is at home from work and, for the last fortnight, Hanna would have been on school holidays anyway.

Work wise, I’m busier than normal, being given additional work/tasks. In this way I’m very fortunate.

My study, which has always been done via distance, has only had a workload increased because I’m now doing a full-time study schedule.

While it’s inconvenient that my gym is shut, it’s not that bad and my church/small group interactions have now moved online.

So, why am I continually stuck in this coronavirus content loop?

Because this is the context the world is in. And, like it or not, this is the world that faith is currently being lived out.

It would be inappropriate and insensitive to ignore it.
It would be foolish to not learn the lessons from it.
It would be silly to produce nothing, depriving yourself of the reminiscing of, what is, a historical time.

While it seems that everything we produce at the moment, even incidentally, will connect with the pandemic, we must remain mindful that for some - many even - wading through our unprecedented predicament is a weight they need help bearing.

Everyone is not as fortunate as me.

And, frankly, not doing vocational ministry at this moment isn’t something I’m regretting.

Remember the percentage of your life calendar

If you live into your mid-eighties, which is approximately life expectancy, then you’d live for around 1000 months.

Today I heard someone on a podcast, when talking about a significant event, mention the place it fell within their life calendar.

I like the concept of having a life calendar.

I’m a fan because this viewpoint can give you important perspective.

For example, your years of schooling - 13 years - on your life calendar, take up 8 weeks of an annual life calendar.

A university degree encases around 3 weeks.

In light of current world events, when viewed upon the framework of an annual life calendar, we are in the midst of a bad week.

When it comes to calamities, how would we view them if we transferred our problems to a life calendar perspective?

Do we, in our current life, think that our life will be irreversibly damaged due to one bad week?

Do we imagine that things will never improve?

Do we, in the middle of a busy month of life, think that their won’t be rest or a payoff at the end?

When we remember that current events, which seem large at the time, are relatively small when viewed against our life calendar then this perspective can help us get through and see that there’s a lot more living to do on the other side.

Where should we place our sins?

With Easter being here, I figure that now would be a good time to post about sin and the cross.

Why do we say that we are placing our sin “at the foot” of the cross?

Surely, we should be putting our sin UPON the cross.
Or UPON Jesus.

Theologically, this is far more accurate.

As a metaphor, we can come forward to the front to leave things at the base of the cross, but this, in most cases can be just as well represented by attaching it to the cross.

I know, it’s not the most pressing matter in a Coronavirus world, but I’d always wondered why we stick with placing things at the foot of the cross when, in reality, this isn’t where they belong.

Who is the blackest sheep?

Who is the black sheep of the family???

When we usually refer to the pariah of a family it normally has something to do with a long-standing disagreement, moral failing or extended douchery.

But I wonder, when one member of a family has a different spiritual position to everyone else, who suffers most?

Is it the believer or the atheist?

Is it harder to be an atheist in a Christian household or a lone believer in a family of atheists or agnostics?

Who is treated more like the black sheep?

Who misses out more?

I suspect, frankly, it may be the atheist amongst believers.

They are, or could be, excluded from major religious gatherings, which happen to also coincide with the secular holiday periods.

They, potentially, will feel judged - Especially if they publicly left the faith.

For those who are children of ministers, their actions will, by some, be a reflection upon the parent as a family leader and spiritual guide.

It doesn’t really happen in the reverse way. This was my experience.

Families aren’t really judged if their child, cults aside, become religious.

Holidays look and feel much the same if these’s only one religious observant person.

In a time when we may be too quick to play the “persecution card,” I wonder if a “persecuted” believer considers what it may look like being in the opposite position?

Do you think about the REAL future of the tomb?

I was always under the impression that Jesus was placed in the tomb OF Joseph of Arimathea. According to the gospels of Matthew, Mark and John, I am wrong.

It turns out that Jesus arranged to receive the body of Jesus from the cross and placed him in a tomb which he arranged.

there’s nothing to indicate that Jesus was placed in the tomb labelled J Arimathea.

Nonetheless, I wonder what happened to the tomb after the resurrection of Jesus.

Was it used again?

Depending what you think of first-century burial rituals, after a while the bones from the tomb would be relocated into a collective family burial site.

Thus, it was routine for tombs to be recycled.

So, does this mean that the tomb that Joseph arranged was reused?

I ask because, on occasions, we elevate the nature of the physical tomb.

It is eternally empty...
The stone is always rolled away...

Romantically, we sing out these words.

But, chances are, they are incorrect.

Sure, it isn’t the most important theological point, but I wonder what it says about the way we mythicise biblical events.

Can celebrating the past show our one-ness?

Ephesians 4:3-6 - Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirt through the bond of peace. There is one baby and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

One.

I wonder, in light of this passage, how should this shape the way Christian denominations treat each other’s practices.

I can think of numerous practical reasons churches have split. When I say this, I’m not referring to elements of belief - even though these will affect our practices - but the activities we do and the way we do them,

Baptism.
Communion.
Church governance.

These are the trinity of division.

We have split over the age and method of baptism.
We have split over the frequency, elements and significance of communion.
We have split over the eligibility, authority and longevity of leadership.

But, we are meant to be one.

So, do we show this in our practice?

Do we acknowledge the faith practices of other denominations? 
Or do we belittle them?

Do we insist that things are done “our way?”
Do we insist that they are done the “right way?”

I’ve been baptised, confirmed and married - twice.

Each of these things in my past can be challenged, even discredited, by those of different denominations.

I wonder, what message the church would send about the overriding unity we have in Christ if we openly acknowledge, celebrate even (!), the meaningful steps of someone’s faith journey in the past, just done within the tent of another denomination?

Are you with me? Do I really want you to answer?

I haven’t been at a church where the preacher regularly asks the congregation for affirmation that they are “with them.”

I am now.

I wonder how sincere the question is.

In the past, I think I’ve only used the enquiry when trying to describe a concept I’m probably doing a rubbish job of communication, like the Trinity. 

But now, every sermon I hear is punctuation with the question “Are you with me?”

I wonder, what if I’m not?
What if the congregation isn’t?

Would the preacher be prepared to describe the point again? 
Could they explain it in a different or simpler way? 
If they could do the later, why would they not have done that the first time?

Furthermore, how many people would need to respond no for a redo to be instigated?

Then again, that’s the danger of putting the question out there from the pulpit...

Why you should send the words of your prayer

I’ll share with you the biggest lie that christians tell each other... 

I’ll pray for you.

Truth be told, you probably won’t. 

Life is busy.
You have your own problems.

Forgetting to pray for someone isn’t an act or malice. Usually, it’s merely due to forgetfulness or as an avenue to show care for someone else, but commit a short timeframe.

Frankly, we can and should do better. 

One effective way to convey the concern we have for others and show someone we are actually praying for them is the following...

Show them the words.

Send them the prayer you pray.
Let them know what specifically you prayed for.

Aside from showing the person that you’ve actually kept your word, this can also be a source of encouragement for the immediate timeframe and, by the physical keepsake, an encouragement for the future.

When the person holds the words you pray, these can be really impactful.

How do you respond to the statuesque response?

A sermon which doesn’t have any application is one of the four easy steps to give a bad sermon. One great way to land the sermon plane is to provide a time of response.

I’m always intrigued when there’s a response time with two options, but only one with a physical action.

Once the options are explained - say to pray/reflect quietly in your chair or stand/come down the from of the church - what happens if no one accepts the later choice?

I’m intrigued because, in theory, no one moving should be a perfectly fine response.

But, this reaction usually results in a desperate reiteration of the options and a prompt that they can now make a physical response.

Again, in theory, this makes perfect sense.

Maybe people were confused by the initial instructions.
Perhaps they were waiting to be allowed to move.

Nonetheless, it gets awkward when, in these statuesque response times, the leader gets progressively more desperate or disappointed.

The one thing a leader can use to sooth their ego is the rationalisation that everyone in attendance is just an introvert...

A church must have a plan to send well

I sometimes feel that this blog could be titled “Ramblings about Youth and Young Adult Ministry Drop Out Points.” I write about them a lot.

Some drop out points are initiated by life change alone.

No underlying animosity.
No awkwardness.

In fact, some drop out points should be celebrated like getting married or the birth of a child.

In light of this, every young adult ministry must have a strategy for these transitions. 

In short, they must have an aim to send well.

If it’s sending them to another church, be it down the road or the one that their new spouse already attends...
If it’s sending them abroad to study...
If it’s releasing them from some of their ministry commitments due to full-time work or a fresh newborn...

Send them well.

Bless them.
Pray for them.
Celebrate them.
Tell them that they will always be welcomed back, even if only for a visit.

Is there a pastoral mid-life crisis?

After a minister has been preaching for a decade, usually in his/her 40’s, they’ve hit many of the “high notes” of the scriptures.

They’ve preached through all the gospels.
They’ve preached through their favourite books.
They’ve preached through the major books.
They’ve preached about the major characters.

In a church which follows the lectionary, they have completed three cycles.
In a church which follows the liturgical calendar, they have mined all they can out of the seasons of Lent and Advent (themes, characters, symbols).

What do they do next?

Potentially, the minister falls into the pastoral mid-life crisis.

They attempt to be creative with the worship space.
They try to take a “fresh” approach to familiar bible passages.
They experiment with innovative technology.

One of the causes of the chronological mid-life crisis is boredom. 

Does a long term minister inevitably face the same thing? 

Should the code be the minister’s middle name?

There’s a lot of things at a church which require codes. 

Security systems.
Access doors.
Computers.
Door locks.

It’s not unusual that the code on some of these devices will be set by a minister.

But, I wonder about the wisdom of a minister setting the code to something with personal significance for them.

It doesn’t matter if it’s their birthday, middle name or childhood pet.

What happens if the church is then stuck with this code?

As nice as it may be for the minister to type “fluffy123” to gain access to the church computer, reminiscing about the kitten they had as an eight year old, I expect that the charm will be lost on the next minister.

Sure, most passwords can be easily reset, but for some things, like security systems, it may not be such an easy process.

Furthermore, should a new minister be expected to reset passwords in order to not remember the first mobile number of their predecessor?

I admit, this isn’t the biggest transgression going around in Christendom, but these personal encodings may well expose shortsightedness because a minister wanted to be cute or memorable.

Surely a mixture of the suburb, church name, postcode or last digits of the phone number are better, longer-lasting, options for churches.

Can you judge worship moves like a dance floor?

After many years of trolling nightclubs, alongside wisdom ”discovered” through reading magazines, I’ve learned that it’s generally accepted that the degree of proficiency someone shows on the dance floor is matched in the bedroom.

The better the rhythm on the dance floor, the better the rhythm between the sheets.

I wonder, can a similar comparison be made in worship?

I know. It’s not right. It’s not PC. It’s fairly inappropriate. It’s not a question you ask out loud.

But, is it valid?

Does the way someone engages and moves in worship equate in a similar way someone moves on a dance floor?

In reality, no one will probably know. No one, most likely, would ever attain a valid sample size across various denominations and worship styles to accurately know.

But, the question does raise one query...

Do, in general, Pentecostals expect to have better sex than Anglicans/Baptist/Conservatives due to their more expressive worship style?

Is church growth the norm?

I grew up in the third largest Christian denomination in Australia.
I worked in the same denomination, for over a decade, across four churches.
Additionally, I’ve regularly attended three other churches over two denominations.

My first church had a children’s and youth ministry which grew for around a decade, but nothing which I would consider explosive.

I’ve never been in a church which has had sustained growth of their primary congregation.

I wonder, is this normal?

I suspect, for many western christians, the answer would be the affirmative.

No matter the publicity which megachurches receive, these are not the norm.

The norm is... stagnant. Maybe a slow decline.

I wonder what affect this has.

Does it affect the way modern Christians relate to the book of Acts?
Does it affect the way western Christians respond to churches which are growing?

The best name for a young adult ministry

Even though I’m no longer in vocational youth ministry I’m still a member of a number of youth ministry related Facebook groups. 

Usually they throw up the same topics every day. Game ideas. Sermon ideas. Funny videos. Requests for prayer (usually when someone is going to preach at “big church”). Advice about difficult situations.

One thing which I’ve noticed, with the group being quite America-centric, is a title occasionally used for young adult ministries... college and career.

I like it a lot.

I like that this title gives space and value to both options after high school.

This matters because, let’s face it, every young adult won’t go to university. Everyone shouldn’t.

All too often those who don’t go to uni are left out.

Hopefully, if you intentionally include those who are pursuing a career in the ministries name, then it will influence the things you do and speak about.

The one unfortunate thing is that we don’t call higher education in Australia college. 

I have no idea for a title, aside from calling it university and workers, which will have the same impact.

I’m guessing that university and underemployed isn’t an option...

The paid person must be the face of the controversy

Way back in 2010 I wrote a post explaining some of the advantages a ministry receives when it is headed up by a paid employee. 

One important thing I didn’t include was PROTECTION.

Alongside identity and accountability, when navigating decisions which may stir up controversy, the leader must be prepared to provide protection.

Because, with controversy comes confusion and/or pain.

And, if you’re prepared to accept money from a church to lead a ministry then you must be prepared to own the decisions of that ministry.

Even if they aren’t popular with everyone.
Especially if they are decided in partnership with volunteers.

A true leader will be prepared to wear the fallout of a controversial decision they were a part of or they indirectly oversaw. Better yet, they will stand in the place of those who are volunteers so they don’t need to face any blame or criticism.

No matter if it is within a church or community organisation, any body which runs on a base of volunteers, these unpaid people should feel valued enough by the employee (who is in a privileged position) to be protected by them.

For, with the pay check comes the heat of any controversy. 

They should be the face.
They should make the announcement.
They should answer questions.
They should be shouted at online.
They should stare down criticism.
They should hear and acknowledge any pain.

In part, this is why they are paid.

The two things you listen through

Are not your ears... SURPRISE!

The two things which will determines how much attention you pay to someone, especially if they are speaking to you in a setting like a sermon or lecture are your ass and your stomach.

These two have loud voices which will drown out and distract from the one entering through your ears.

Why?

Because if your not comfortable or are hungry, then you’ll stop listening.

Ideally, the person speaking or teaching will have stopped talking before your ass or stomach start to complain.

But, as most are painfully aware, this isn’t always the case.

So, this reality has three consequences for any speaker.

First, the speaker should be mindful of the space they are speaking in. How is the seating? How long could you comfortably be expected to sit?

Second, are you presenting immediately before a meal? Will a lack of sugar effect their levels of concentration?

Finally, this establishes the ideal time to speak. The first session after breakfast. This is the speaker’s prime position for this is where the asses and the stomachs will be their most ready to listen and least likely to distract. 

Standing to give immediate feedback

There’s a lot of ways to evaluate the effectiveness of a sermon. 

One little used way is almost immediately evident.

How did the congregation rise to their feet after the sermon?

We’re they energised?
We’re they stiff from sitting too long?

Depending upon the distance of time between the conclusion of the sermon and the start of the next song, the preacher can almost immediately gauge if they preacher for too long due to the amount of lethargy amongst the people.