Category Archives: Leadership

Complexity in Esther

Posted on by
Reply

As you interpret Esther as a biblical character, let me encourage you to embrace complexity. Good narratives focus on dynamic characters, and scripture is replete with complex, multi-layered narratives. Rather than thinking in black and white, I’d encourage you to think in terms of layers. In short, characters can have layers of strength, layers of weakness, and layers in between.

(Note: I am not saying to reject binaries or absolutes; what I am saying is that literature invites us into deep, holistic, and rich readings—especially in regards to characters.)

Thus, rather than labelling Esther as “good” or “bad”—or “faithful” vs. “unfaithful”—we see displayed in Esther the full human condition. As many have mentioned previously, Esther was not perfect, and as New Testament readers, we know that “all fall short” of perfection. Perhaps some of her early actions could have been rejected, similar to how Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego took a stand in the face of danger. It’s often pointed out that she could be more brave or more faithful.  

That being said, we need to be very careful about if/how we label her. Ultimately, it’s not our job to “judge” Esther, and really, her spiritual status is not the main point of the story. (In other words, people can have different views of Esther and still reach the same conclusions about the overall narrative.) Esther is complex, like all of us are, so labelling her as “all good” or “all bad” isn’t very helpful. Perhaps she willingly went along at times, but perhaps not; she could have hated her actions and the situation. To be frank, the narrative leaves some of that unknown, but just as you and I are “mixed bags”—within our collection of good gems we have some stones—so does Esther demonstrate the complexity of the human condition.

I point this out because we do not want to demonize Esther, as if she were a horrible Jew. As presented in the story, she is certainly not a villain, but a victim. She is held prisoner and has very few choices in front of her. (As my wife points out, Esther is portrayed as a “passive” character early in the narrative, while the men are the primary actors.) Again, she could have rejected the king, but very few would ever make that choice, given an impending death sentence. Especially due to the power imbalance—a king over a servant—it should be clear that she was objectified and used by the king. (A parallel is how King David misused his power over Bathsheba; he did not romance her, but abused her, prior to killing her husband.) Even though Esther is eventually “blessed,” the ends do not justify the means—so we can acknowledge that both victimization and elevation occur. 

Thus, when the text says that the King was “pleased,” it does not mean that Esther fully embraced the role. Nothing in the text suggests that Esther enjoyed being in that position, so we don’t want to see Esther as “sinning” or being unfaithful in that situation. Even the preparation ahead of time does not mean she fully embraced the role, since she likely felt surrounded and stuck. Again, some aspects are unknown, but the silence raises a crucial point: it would be presumptive to say Esther sinned when the king took her, since as most ethicists would point out, immorality involves (unforced) personal will—not legitimate, threatening coercion from another, especially not by a person of power. (Note: Ethicists debate how much will is needed in the face of such coercion, such in as the infamous Patty Hearst case, so that could be debated.)

To state the issue more directly: In cases of sexual abuse, as well as potential cases being investigated, outsiders should focus on facts. We must be extremely cautious when assessing inner thoughts and motives of victims, since horrifically, it’s far too common for people to blame or shame victims. We should not presume anything. To use the parallel example of Bathsheba, rather than guess at her motives and blame or shame her, since the data is extremely limited, the focus should be on David’s atrocious behavior. Due to the incredible imbalance of power, regardless of anyone else’s actions, David wildly abused his position.

Literature commonly features “flawed protagonists,” since no one is perfect. Thus, regardless of the fine details (such as her motive or inner thoughts), we can embrace Esther as a “hero”—especially since other biblical heroes (e.g., Moses, David, Peter, Paul) acted far, far worse. I hope we don’t get “lost in the weeds” when debating Esther as an individual, since the author’s main focus is the overall success of the Jews, as enabled by God. Most importantly, no matter how we interpret Esther as a character, and no matter how many outstanding questions remain, what is certain is that God is the ultimate hero in this story. 

RESPONSE to Defiant Churches

Posted on by
Reply

To Churches Defying Medical & Political Leaders,


Christians should be leading the way in terms of loving neighbors and exercising wisdom. Now that children and 30-50 year olds are known to be dying, there is no “safe” group per se. With that in mind, our witness can be damaged if we value ritual (even good rituals!) more than the innocent — as argued repeatedly in the OT prophetic texts. 


The argument often goes that retail stores being open and churches being closed does not make sense. Agreed. It’s ridiculous to have people crammed into a store. I’ve heard multiple stories of people being coughed on while shopping. The answer is not to carelessly fling open the doors, but to be cautious with both.  


My proposal is that Christians use this time to be more creative in both living and loving.  How can we connect and care in new ways? At certain times in history, Christians have led the way in creativity. May this be one of those times.  


We need not gather in groups of 50+ to worship; after all, there are many house and underground churches around the world, and Christianity has flourished. Insisting on large gatherings neglects how God often moves in other contexts.  


Sadly, as Americans, possibly we are too connected to our productions than to the gospel itself. Worship and Word (and sometimes sacraments, depending on church polity) can be practiced in smaller contexts/groups. Until we can safely meet again, let us gather together in spirit — knowing that it is ultimately Christ, not physical proximity, that unites us.

Humility that Helps

Posted on by
Reply

Bear with me on this one, as it’s an imagined scenario within an imagined scenario…

 

For years now, starting when I was in college, I’ve tried to understand Jesus’ teaching on foot washing. As you may know, the actual practice of foot washing is a distinctive feature of some churches (e.g., Church of God), which I had experienced back in college. The idea has always kind of baffled me.

 

Anyways, here’s the thought within a thought:

1. Today, I had a dream featuring my pal Dan, who in the dream was ministering to some international students. His goal was to teach them about foot washing.

2. In the dream, Dan was asking discussion questions, and one of the questions was this: “If you were to call home to your relatives to explain this Jesus story, the time of day would be different for them, so how might that affect your explanation to them?”

3. The implication is that if it were 6 AM when those relatives answer the phone call, talking about washing feet would not make sense to them, since their day would just be starting. In addition to translating to their language, you would contextualize for the location and time of day — e.g., not offering to wash their feet, but instead sending a gift card or money to make their day easier.

4. The application, then, is that the purpose of foot washing is to ease someone’s burdens and frustrations after a long day’s work. Jesus’ example is not meant to show you’re willing to do something filthy or to lessen your own value, but to encourage service towards others in the sense of easing someone’s daily work. In short, it’s not humility for humility’s sake, but humility that helps — specifically, serving in a way that eases someone’s load. In other words, we don’t serve in order to be spiritual (for our own sake), but we serve to help (for another’s sake).  Of course, such service might be dirty sometimes — such as tending after someone’s wound or taking out the trash — but that in itself is not the point; instead, the point is to ease weight and/or bring relief from the pressures of life.

 

“Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” – Jesus (Mt. 11:28)

6 Reasons Why Pete Carroll Made the Right Call

Posted on by
Reply

I’m not a football expert. My only play calling happens in Madden football, but here are six reasons why Pete Carroll made the right call:

1. During the 2014-15 season, Marshawn Lynch was only 1 for 5 in TD runs from the one yard line. Lynch was more likely to fail than succeed.

2. Seattle wasted a timeout early, which meant that they would have needed to pass at least once in that four-down sequence. Passing early in the sequence early could have surprised the defense.

3. Vince Wilfork, at 325 pounds and a five-time All Pro, made running up the gut risky. Failing on 2nd down run would force a timeout and a pass on 3rd down to stop the clock (to ensure the possibility of four downs). This would set up the defense on 3rd down to defend the pass.

4. Out of 109 passes from the 1-yard line in the 2014-15 season, there 66 touchdowns and only 1 interception (the one by Butler in the Super Bowl). Passing meant more than a 60% chance of success, compared to only 20% with Lynch running the ball.

5. A “wasted play” increased the chance of keeping Brady off the field. Because the Patriots did not take a timeout, the wasted play needed to be a pass because the Seahawks only had one timeout. Running out of time was still a concern.
6. A pick and slant is a very safe play; there is little risk of a sack and wasting more clock. Only a magical play could stop the Seahawks. Butler did what less than 1% of other players have done this season.

Criticizing Pete Carroll, in retrospect, only undermines the incredible play made by Malcolm Butler. Fewer plays are more impressive, and play call criticism distracts from an unforgettable moment in NFL history.

Stats source: http://espn.go.com/blog/statsinfo/post/_/id/102175/inside-seattles-decision-to-pass-from-the-1

Re: #deflategate

Posted on by
1

I’m struck that commentators still fail to add a disclaimer — distinguishing between news and speculation. The real story here is us — namely, the nature of poor news coverage and the desire to skewer someone as soon as possible.

Whether this was accidental, willful ignorance, or purposeful, we as the public simply don’t know. In any case, there are far more possibilities than commentators would have us think.
My guess, and only a guess, is simply that no one checked the air pressure at all — just like we don’t empirically test balls in other sports.

Many merely assumed that everything was okay. If that’s the case, then ethically, negligence has always been considered a lesser offense than conspiracy.

There was a safe assumption (because few honestly cared), and according to Brady, the balls were randomly selected out of a bag. This process was described by Drew Bledsoe (Brady’s predecessor and former rival) during an interview today, and there’d be no reason to stop this process of random selection. The QB reaches in a bag and selects the ones he likes; no NFL quarterback has an air pressure gauge in his back pocket to test each football. He assumes.

Again, that’s not to excuse anyone — merely to remind us that the media is not exactly known for being perfect. In the meantime, we might guess, but we should hold back judgment. Maybe my guess is way off, but at least I label it as a guess. We should demand that reporters do the same.

Brady & Belichick

Posted on by
Reply

Regarding Brady and Belichick, my thought is that they were “willfully ignorant.” That still leaves them culpable to some degree, of course, but it allows them to honestly say that “I did not know.” For some reason, the reporters did not push that point harder. The “process” of preparing the footballs was still quite vague, even at the end of the press conference.

Brady said he selected the footballs out of a grouping. Of course, he’s not testing PSI (no one would expect that), but if there were 20 footballs, he could easily select the 12.5, 12.0, 11.5, or 11.0 ones. He would “not know” in a sense; he just knew that he selected ones that felt right. After months, the ball boy would never need to be told; he would simply know that deflated ones made his boss happy. It would seem that strange number — 11 out of 12 — would confirm this. No one was explicitly told to deflate them, but by “defined chance,” Brady happened to select the lower PSI balls from the group.

Brady may have been honest during the press conference. After all, he played better in the second half with the inflated balls, so maybe he didn’t notice during the activity of the game. I would normally be suspicious, but if the referees did not notice, then the difference is pretty subtle. He may have planned his willful ignorance before the game, but really, no one pressed him about that.

I’m surprised the referees haven’t been grilled more. It’d probably be too risky to deflate them on the sidelines, so my guess is that the “football checker” was also negligent. But who could blame him? It’s such an unexpected thing to happen that he probably just checked them by hand.

That’s a lot of speculation, but willful ignorance is a way to “tell the truth” and “ignorantly” cross the line.

Snowfall upon the Heart

Posted on by
Reply

No one ever told me that my heart would feel this way.

Even the strongest Christians have their weak moments, but the sins of a friend can be depressing.  Indeed, many times, a friend’s sin weighs even more than our own sin.  We see evil from an outside perspective, and in small measure, we experience how God must feel.

It feels like heavy snow upon the heart.  You watch as a friend delights in the world and buries their life in sin.  You hope they will stop,  come around, and realize what they are doing.  You wonder what will happen next.  You wonder if they know God at all.  You pray that God will have mercy on another soul.

But rather than casting the sin out of our minds, acting as if it never happened, it is good to have heavy hearts.  Scripture tells us to restore sinners in a “spirit of gentleness,” as if we were surgeons operating on our own child.  When it comes to sin, we are dealing with something far more serious than we realize.

Furthermore, we can be susceptible to the same sins, so Scripture warns us to “keep watch on yourself” (Galatians 6:1).  When we are apathetic or brash towards other people’s sin, we disregard Scripture and endanger ourselves, so God reminds us to feel the weight and tread lightly.

As you think of a friend or a relative who has made some poor decisions, take a moment to intercede for them and pray for your own strength

 

photo credit: i k o via photopin cc

All Your Heart

Posted on by
Reply

It is important to apply Colossians 3:23 to all aspects of life. In that verse, Paul reminds us that “Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not men.” In other words, our work should be defined by maximum effort and the right motives.

Many of us miss the mark in one way or the other. Some people become accustomed to their situation, becoming overly comfortable, and slow down in their efforts. They may have good earthly reasons, such as a lack of pay or a mean boss, but they forget the ultimate purpose of their work. Other people work hard, but for the wrong reasons. They work to please men instead of the Lord, and in so doing, get distracted from the goal.

A.W. Tozer pointed out that we often live out of fear. We choose the easy route (fearing hard labor) or the common route (fearing opposition from others). In reality, the best choices in life are usually difficult and unpopular.

They Deserve A Vote

Posted on by
Reply

Barak Obama’s shining moment in the State of the Union debate, and possibly the only memorable moment for the public, was his insistent call for a vote on gun legislation. His tactic —  repeating how those affected by gun violence “deserve a vote” — emerged out of necessity and sagacity. Here are two quick lessons that we can learn from the address:

Necessity. Polarization (whether in the workplace, home, or church) prohibits meaningful dialogue, and those who sincerely want change will seek to build consensus. While some will critique Obama’s mention of real-life victims for emotional effect, the point is that real-life issues require a response rather than no response at all.

Sagacity. Effective leadership calls people beyond where they, but never beyond what than they can handle. Our violent-ridden and blood-infatuated society does not want to deal with the deeper issues at hand, but certainly all reasonable people can agree to vote. After all, if you can’t vote, what are you afraid of?  Using subtly for effect, understatement attempts to move people toward a response.

Apart from politics, all of us can learn from the rhetoric used in Obama’s fifth State of the Union address.  Whether you are a leader, a parent, an overseer, or a preacher, the 2013 SOTU should remind us of the need for consensus and the brilliance of understatement.

 

 

Literate Leadership

Posted on by
Reply

Leaders should develop vision by “reading” three key areas:

Read situations.  Rather than ignoring the current situation, leaders should read the context.  Visions are not formed in a vacuum, apart from community, nor are visions cookie-cutters that can be applied to any situation.  It is essential to take into account the immediate context.  Vision not only looks to the future, but takes into account the present.

Read hearts.  Too many leaders die on the battlefield of their own ideas rather than taking into account the people they lead. An effective leader leads people towards change, but that change must start with reading people’s hearts, otherwise it might be change that people don’t really need.  Just as a heart surgeon asses the condition of a heart, so must church leaders asses a congregation before determining next steps.

Read people.  Church leaders must recognize that God’s Spirit is working within people’s hearts.  For that reason, vision should not be established by a single individual, such as a lead pastor.  Instead, leaders should value what God is already doing and trust that God will bring about the change.  To develop a vision, church leaders must ask questions, listen to people’s stories, determine strengths and weaknesses, and discover how God is already working within the community.

A Reminder About Quarreling (2 Tim. 2:14)

Posted on by
Reply

2 Tim 2:14
Keep reminding them of these things. Warn them before God against quarreling about words; it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen.

Pastors and church leaders are called to be spiritual “reminderers.” The goal of ministry is not to invent new ideas or new teachings. Instead, men and women need to be reminded what God had already communicated. And when it comes to quarreling, a reminder is what we need.

The reminder not to quarrel is presented before God Himself. God is the authority here, not man. The reason for not quarreling is not ultimately for ourselves, in other words, but because of God.

Quarreling matters to God because it is against His own character. Within the Trinity, the three persons do not argue but exist in perfect unity. Love and respect are made possible in the world because love and respect first existed within God. Rather than condemning or quarreling with us, God displayed His love to the world. (John 3:16-17)

The warning in 2 Timothy 2:14 is not to quarrel about words. This does not mean we should drop out of school, burn our dictionaries, or stop discussing important matters. The warning concerns trivial arguments that damage others. Because of the sin that so easily entangles us, even healthy debates can go astray and, sometimes within seconds, turn into worthless quarrels. As soon as we depart from loving communication in order to prove a point, we sin against others and against God.

In other words, as men and women, we often engage in arguments that do not help the people around us, but ruin them. We need reminders not to quarrel because if we are honest with ourselves we sometimes prioritize arguments over people. As followers of Christ, however, we are called to re-examine our motives, cease from pointless debates, and pursue peaceful and constructive conversations with one another.

10 Steps for Meeting Objectives

Posted on by
Reply

Useful tips for meeting objectives in any organization, including the local church:

1. Define purpose and mission.
2. Assess strengths and weaknesses.
3. Write specific and measurable objectives.
4. Work towards general agreement.
5. Maintain a reasonable work load.
6. Develop strategies for using resources.
7. Practice accountability.
8. Design long and short range plans.
9. Be willing to change.
10. Measure progress.

(adapted from Kenneth Gangel, Feeding and Leading)

Creativity & Leadership

Posted on by
Reply

“For the leader, creativity is essential. Life is constantly changing, but people always fear change. The leader is responsible to help them adapt and do something new. So, by increasing creativity, suffering or deprivation may feed the springs of leadership in a young soul.”

Leighton Ford (Transforming Leadership, 42)

Ten Commandments for Good Organization

Posted on by
Reply

Ten Commandments for Good Organization:

1. Definite and clean-cut responsibilities should be assigned to each worker.
2. Responsibilities should always be coupled with corresponding authority, so the task can be carried out.
3. No changes to the scope or responsibilities should be made until there is definite understanding on the part of all persons concerned.
4. No one person should be subject to orders from more than one supervisor.
5. Executives should not bypass an immediate supervisor to direct workers.
6. Critiques or criticisms should be made privately whenever possible.
7. No dispute should be considered too trivial to discuss.
8. Promotions, wages changes, and disciplinary action should be approved by an immediate supervisor.
9. No worker should be both an assistant and a critic to someone he/she is assisting.
10. Resources and facilities should be provided, so the worker can inspect and independently check his/her work.

(adapted from M.C. Rorty from the early 1930’s)

Explicit & Implicit Theology

Posted on by
Reply

When leading congregations, Christian leaders must be aware of both explicit and implicit theologies. What people believe determines how they act, and because of that, church members will continue to act according to the theologies that they hold. Without an awareness of both explicit and implicit theologies, church leaders can waste time, “spinning their wheels” on technical fixes to problems, while ignoring the deeper issues that are involved. Though it can take years, but church leaders need to address the explicit and implicit theologies of their congregants.

To begin with, explicit theology is what a church expressly believes. Explicit theology is usually easier to determine because of its public nature. What a church explicitly believes can be gathered from mission and value statements, doctrinal position papers, sermons, liturgy (including the hymnody), and various other items that express belief. While explicit theology is often accurate, it can sometimes be more of an expression of intent, meaning that not everyone may hold to the same ideal. Even still, explicit theology is usually the starting point for understanding what a congregation believes.

Implicit theology, on the other hand, is underneath the surface per se, and for that reason, it is much more difficult to determine. The term “implicit theology” refers to those beliefs that are held, but may not be fully expressed. Peter Cha, for example, illustrated how difficult it is to interpret implicit theology from merely what is visibly seen (i.e., artifacts), and that church leaders must take time to question what is unseen. In fact, congregants themselves may not even be aware of their underlying beliefs until they are explicitly pointed out. Implicit theology can include anything from “the pastor is the most spiritual man in our congregation” to “real worship means the raising of hands.” In most contexts, neither of the statements would be verbalized, but they can become part of the working assumptions of a congregation.

As Kevin Ford points out in Transforming Church, churches function best when their explicit theology matches their implicit theology and vice versa. If there is any discontinuity between the two, there will be underlying conflict. Such conflict should not be overlooked, but used as an opportunity to change either explicit or implicit theology, so that it better aligns with Scripture. To help encourage spiritual transformation, therefore, church leaders should be aware of both explicit theology and implicit theology, so that churches can be healthier and more apt to grow.

As church leaders help to develop local churches, they must look beyond mere technical fixes and focus on deeper adaptive change. In this effort, however, church leaders must take time to delve into the basic assumptions of a congregation, compare those assumptions with Scripture, and invest time in changing unbiblical assumptions. Simply changing the explicit theology (such as a doctrinal statement) will not change people’s hearts. Ministry needs to go deeper than what is espoused, so that heart issues, including what is assumed, can be sanctified for God’s glory.

Thoughts on Family Ministry

Posted on by
Reply

The family was designed by God to be a unique place, the most basic form of community, where much of our spiritual growth can occur.

Because God designed families, churches should support families and minister to them. In this effort, churches need to encourage families to live out their faith outside of Sunday morning. It is during the week, within the natural context of our home, where we make our daily decision to follow Christ.

At a formal level, midweek gatherings help parents, children, and youth to refocus on Christ. At the same time, there needs to be balance. Especially for young families, rather than “over programming” and having families over-commit (which can be counter-productive to spiritual growth), churches should support spiritual growth that can take place within the home. Extra help should be provided for young families who are just starting their journey.

We should never forget that churches need to be a “second family” for dozens, if not hundreds of people. Many do not have families, and others do not have healthy families. Because of this, it is important for the church to be sensitive to these needs and provide a safe place for orphans, singles, divorced, and widows. As the church loves as a family and ministers to those in need, the gospel is supported and enabled to spread (Acts 6).

Jesus Hasn’t Forgotten

Posted on by
Reply

If you’ve ever been hurt in your life, you know that the memory doesn’t go away. Whether someone hit you, betrayed you, neglected you, or somehow otherwise injured you, the memory can remain for years. It may even replay in your mind when triggered by a sound or image. Even when forgiving the other person, you do not forget how much it hurt.

In a similar way, Jesus did not get “amnesia” when He ascended into heaven. Jesus still remembers the mockery, the pain, and the sacrifice that he received for me and you. His forgiveness is so much greater because of the fact that he forgives despite the memory of how much he hurt. After all this time, his forgiveness never ends.

1 John 2:1 tells us that Jesus, despite being hurt, is our advocate: “If anyone does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense — Jesus Christ, the Righteous One.” He is sitting at the right hand of the Father, pleading for us. Rather than forgetting what happened, he continually reminds the Father of his own righteousness and his sacrifice for us.

This truth can free us to forgive one another. Even when we remember, we can still pray for those who hurt us and ask God to bless them. This is what it means to forgive — not ignoring the past, but loving others in the present.

How Technology Can Lead to Laziness

Posted on by
Reply

If you’ve ever wasted time with technology, take a few minutes to watch this video. Be sure to watch the whole video, though, because Josh makes some great points throughout. My hope is that this message will be helpful, as it already has for me.

(Thanks to Phil Gons for bringing to my attention.)

God-Honoring Worship

Posted on by
Reply

How can we honor God in our worship?

Although Exodus 20:22-26 is not frequently quoted in the context of worship, it provides some direction for us. In speaking to Moses, God gives the Israelites four instructions. They are simple and helpful, even for us today:

1. Do not worship anyone else beside me. (v.23)
2. It is absolutely necessary to worship me. (v.24)
3. Where I am worshiped, I will bless. (v.24b)
4. I deserve to be worshiped reverently. (v.26)

These instructions may seem familiar, but they serve as a helpful corrective for us. Does the worship in our lives meet those standards? If not, we should reconsider how we are worshiping God.

Taking this further, this passage also contains another kernel of truth that can set us free from egocentric worship. In these words to Moses, God expresses that He is the one who causes His name to be honored. As He says, “Wherever I cause my name to be honored, I will come to you and bless you.” (v.24b) Incredible!

What is so striking is that this is the opposite attitude of many of us today. We often think that we are the cause of worship — whether it be a talented worship leader, a great hymn that was written, a moving instrumental song, or a passionately singing congregation. Speaking on behalf of worship leaders, it is fair to say that we often feel a burden to “help” worship along. Even if we meet the 4 instructions listed above, this is one area where we often miss the mark — ironically, in the process of worshiping, taking credit for ourselves.

While there is truth in the fact that leaders need to lead, it would be wrong to overlook the powerful truth of this passage. Ultimately, it is not us who cause worship. Rather, it is God who causes His name to be honored. He is the first cause.

In other words, God is glorified for who He is, not because of what we bring. He is the one who inspires worship, and in that sense, our responsibility pales in comparison. Instead of causing, we should think of our responsibility as responding to His glory.

When we worship in a God honoring way, God will come near and bless us. Ultimately, because He is the one who inspires worship, He ends up blessing us because of who He is. What an amazing promise!

Ministry: Our Source of Competence

Posted on by
Reply

Every disciple of Christ is called to ministry; it is a calling for everyone. Our response to that call, however, usually involves either feelings of inadequacy or self-sufficiency:

(1) Some disciples feel inadequate to be serving on behalf of Christ. Whether because of limited education or lack of experience, these disciples often feel as if someone else could do a better job. They are constantly second guessing themselves.

(2) Other disciples feel fully prepared to be serving. Because of their training, experience, or resume, these disciples know what ministry is all about. They have learned some successful tools of ministry and know what they need to be successful.

We tend towards one extreme or the other, yet both are equally treacherous. In both cases, the minister subtly places confidence in himself. Success (or failure) is dependent on what a person knows or does.

Paul had a strikingly different view of ministry. Our confidence, wrote Paul, “is ours through Christ. Not that we are competent in ourselves to claim anything for ourselves, but our competence comes from God.” (2 Cor. 3:4-5) Unlike many, Paul never boasted about his talents or ministry accomplishments. He gave total credit to God.

Paul’s attitude, although foreign to our entrepreneurial culture, is realistic. We are nothing in ourselves, and we do not deserve to claim anything for ourselves. Our competence comes from God alone.

The idea that God “has made us competent” is more powerful than some of us may like to accept. It means that anyone — anyone — regardless of their background, can be a minister. Ministry has little to do with us, but everything to do with Him. Once we get over our own personal feelings, this powerful truth can elevate us to new heights in ministry.

So in response to His Word, may God grant us the humility that we need for effective ministry — that we would see ourselves as completely incompetent apart from Christ — and may He empower us with unspeakable confidence in Christ to accomplish more than we could ever imagine on our own.