This is not my typical blog post but something that has been on my mind for a while.
I find it interesting when I hear people (particularly older people but not always) wax poetic about how kids now don't know how to communicate or relate in the real world. They look at texting, and Facebook, twitter, and other forms of social media with disdain and feel that the nature and quality of communication and relationships has taken a precipitous downward shift.
My thought is that, perhaps, it is them that does not understand the "language" of modern communication and relationship.
Some contend that we need to have "real" relationships not virtual ones. We need to speak real words not texted abbreviations that are bastardized versions of our languages.
While it goes without saying that some relationships need to be in person and some face to face communication is irreplaceable, we need to consider the value of technology in the evolution of communication and relationships.
For the very few challenges created by technology, the advantages that come from a small planet with more communication platforms is immeasurable.
Practically speaking, things like Facebook allow people, like myself, to stay connected to friends and family from my home town over 2000 miles away. With traditional methods of communication, I would not be able to connect with friends and family as quickly and easily (or so inexpensively).
I work in areas of sex trafficking prevention and I am able to connect and network with people from all over the world in real time. I am able to share stories and create awareness. I am able to build relationships - real relationships. Different but real.
In a recent personal crisis I went through, it was relationships with people that I had online, that were able to sustain me in the beginning.
People who support various causes or suffer from illnesses are able to find others that share their passion or their problems.
Think of what technology like Skype has done to revolutionize communication for military families.
For you to look at young people, who have texting as a resource for communication and judge that "they don't know how to communicate in the real world," is a judgment best not passed. They could just as easily contend that you don't know how to communicate and relate in today's world.
New communication methods are neither good nor bad. There can be good communication via text and bad communication via text just like some more traditional or conventional methods of communication.
Throughout time things change, cultures change and evolve. Technology allows for things not even imagined in other times. We need to embrace the good in the technology and understand how things like social media can create opportunities for communications, education, and awareness that would not have been possible before.
It is possible through Facebook for my daughter to maintain a friendship with someone from North Carolina that she no longer has physical access to. A relationship that in times past would likely have faded away.
Because of technology, it is possible for children in remote areas to connect with people. Because of facebook and social media platforms provided by technology, potential for learning, communication, and relationships in today's world are unprecedented.
It may not look like the way you did it. But, it is truly amazing and we should embrace it as such.
There are inherent dangers with access - but that is our chance to engage deeper in our new world. To become a part. To communicate. To relate.
Next time you hear someone rant in judgement over a young person who is texting, or relating to people on social media, patiently remind them of the advantages of such platforms that help to make the world a much better place.
Saturday, January 14, 2012
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Missions needs to change...
I had the chance to listen to two aspiring missionaries last weekend. I love their heart and their passion but their choice scares me.
I know I am in the minority in evangelical circles (happily a growing minority) that really struggles with the concept of Western missionaries going to other countries to "spread the gospel."
I have had the good fortune of visiting many countries in the world. In my last job, I traveled throughout Africa, India, Russia, Haiti, Guatemala, etc. While I was doing this work, I read the book When Helping Hurts. The book has become a guidebook for me in my thoughts and philosophy about overseas missions.
Before I jump too deeply into my thoughts, I want to say that I do think that there are some situations that would merit Westerners going overseas. I'm not sure I could outline what I believe those situations are but I think it is important to leave the door open for any possibility.
All too often, we enter missions settings with a flawed mindset. We go prepared to give. Give our "brand" of faith, our mindset, our lifestyle, our values. I would contend for a situation in which we go to understand. What is the culture I am entering? How do they approach things like work, family, faith, etc?
If I go with an intent to understand, I am more able to learn how my faith or philosophy may be relevant to them. As a person of faith, my mission is not to make people more like me - it is to make people more like Him. Unfortunately, all too often, we have created God in our image and we end up exporting Western Christian philosophy and dogma as opposed to true Christianity.
I'll give you a quick story to try to illustrate the concept. I met with a prominent Chicago-based attorney who had worked for two years to pull together a project for a soy bean farm in Western Uganda. This project would provide sustainable jobs, income, and a "better" future for the people in the community.
My first question to him was, "What type of community buy-in do you have?" He had NONE. I asked who would run the farm. He assumed someone in the community would step up. I asked who would work at the farm. He assumed people in the community would. Afterall, he said, if you are 16 and unemployed in this community you need to have opportunities and money. I asked what someone in that community would do with money. He looked at me with a blank stare.
If you are a subsistance farmer, meeting all of your needs and you have the freedom and ability to do whatever you want and still meet your needs, why would you want a job? He had never considered that concept. He assumed that the concept of "opportunity' for a rural African would be the same as that for an American. Hmmm.
He had spent two years creating a elaborate plan for a soy bean farm and failed to consider whether or not it was something the community would even embrace. As the book When Helping Hurts suggests, there are millions of dollars of US funded farm equipment rusting away in Africa because no one bothered to consult the locals on whether or not they even wanted it.
Bring this concept full circle to the missionary experience, in most cases it is virtually impossible to take an outsider and have them truly understand the nuances of a culture that affect how they think, act, and believe. Not to mention the economic costs associated with supporting westerners in non-western cultures.
Despite our best notions, most mission efforts fail. Only 24% of missionarys "survive" the mission field. Most come back with destroyed relationships with God and family. In fact, the vast majority of Western support that is sent overseas does more long term harm than good. It creates a dependency culture and rather than creating sustainability it destroys it (unpopular for me to say - I know - but no less true).
A better plan would be to empower locals to reach each other. Perhaps Westerners could be part of a process of helping locals to educate their communities. But, that isn't as exciting as sending someone overseas...it's less romantic.
I am sure some of you reading this are shaking your head in disagreement - and that's ok. I encourage you to pick up When Helping Hurts - written by individuals with over 35 years of field missions experience and start looking at the reality. All that being said, if you "feel called" I would not tell you NOT to follow that calling. But, my hope is that you make sure you are clear on what you are being calling to do.
My hope is that the future of missions will be one that values outcome more than experience and that considers a broad range of what the long term implications will be of sending Westerners overseas. Either way, we are called to "go ye" we just need to figure out where and how.
Peace
I know I am in the minority in evangelical circles (happily a growing minority) that really struggles with the concept of Western missionaries going to other countries to "spread the gospel."
I have had the good fortune of visiting many countries in the world. In my last job, I traveled throughout Africa, India, Russia, Haiti, Guatemala, etc. While I was doing this work, I read the book When Helping Hurts. The book has become a guidebook for me in my thoughts and philosophy about overseas missions.
Before I jump too deeply into my thoughts, I want to say that I do think that there are some situations that would merit Westerners going overseas. I'm not sure I could outline what I believe those situations are but I think it is important to leave the door open for any possibility.
All too often, we enter missions settings with a flawed mindset. We go prepared to give. Give our "brand" of faith, our mindset, our lifestyle, our values. I would contend for a situation in which we go to understand. What is the culture I am entering? How do they approach things like work, family, faith, etc?
If I go with an intent to understand, I am more able to learn how my faith or philosophy may be relevant to them. As a person of faith, my mission is not to make people more like me - it is to make people more like Him. Unfortunately, all too often, we have created God in our image and we end up exporting Western Christian philosophy and dogma as opposed to true Christianity.
I'll give you a quick story to try to illustrate the concept. I met with a prominent Chicago-based attorney who had worked for two years to pull together a project for a soy bean farm in Western Uganda. This project would provide sustainable jobs, income, and a "better" future for the people in the community.
My first question to him was, "What type of community buy-in do you have?" He had NONE. I asked who would run the farm. He assumed someone in the community would step up. I asked who would work at the farm. He assumed people in the community would. Afterall, he said, if you are 16 and unemployed in this community you need to have opportunities and money. I asked what someone in that community would do with money. He looked at me with a blank stare.
If you are a subsistance farmer, meeting all of your needs and you have the freedom and ability to do whatever you want and still meet your needs, why would you want a job? He had never considered that concept. He assumed that the concept of "opportunity' for a rural African would be the same as that for an American. Hmmm.
He had spent two years creating a elaborate plan for a soy bean farm and failed to consider whether or not it was something the community would even embrace. As the book When Helping Hurts suggests, there are millions of dollars of US funded farm equipment rusting away in Africa because no one bothered to consult the locals on whether or not they even wanted it.
Bring this concept full circle to the missionary experience, in most cases it is virtually impossible to take an outsider and have them truly understand the nuances of a culture that affect how they think, act, and believe. Not to mention the economic costs associated with supporting westerners in non-western cultures.
Despite our best notions, most mission efforts fail. Only 24% of missionarys "survive" the mission field. Most come back with destroyed relationships with God and family. In fact, the vast majority of Western support that is sent overseas does more long term harm than good. It creates a dependency culture and rather than creating sustainability it destroys it (unpopular for me to say - I know - but no less true).
A better plan would be to empower locals to reach each other. Perhaps Westerners could be part of a process of helping locals to educate their communities. But, that isn't as exciting as sending someone overseas...it's less romantic.
I am sure some of you reading this are shaking your head in disagreement - and that's ok. I encourage you to pick up When Helping Hurts - written by individuals with over 35 years of field missions experience and start looking at the reality. All that being said, if you "feel called" I would not tell you NOT to follow that calling. But, my hope is that you make sure you are clear on what you are being calling to do.
My hope is that the future of missions will be one that values outcome more than experience and that considers a broad range of what the long term implications will be of sending Westerners overseas. Either way, we are called to "go ye" we just need to figure out where and how.
Peace
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Tim Tebow
I can't believe I am actually going to blog on Tim Tebow but because sports is one of my bigger interests it has been on my mind lately.
OPENING DISCLAIMER: I like Tim Tebow as a person. If you read anything below that seems to discredit that, please refer back to this disclaimer.
I respect any passionate person who seems to live a life consistent with their ideals - unlike many people - I even respect people with whom I disagree provided they are consistent.
One of the biggest problems I have with the hype surrounding Tim, is that I believe it has the opposite effect that many evangelicals hope. Rather than strengthening the evangelical perception, I believe it only serves to discredit and undermine evangelicals further. Why? Keep reading...
No one questions Tim's intangible qualities of leadership. In that arena, he is an unparalleled all-star. For me, those are the qualities we should be highlighting. Unfortunately, over the past several weeks, evangelicals have ascribed a "miracle-like" status to Tim's come-from-behind victories. Those of you who know football, understand that in most cases those victories would have been more appropriately attributed to either the Denver Broncos defense, their kicker, or blatant mistakes made by opponents.
After suffering three consecutive losses, it is becoming more and more clear that perhaps Jesus is not a Denver Broncos fan - who knew? The Saturday Night Live skit did a better job of pointing out the lunacy of that concept than anything the church was willing to stand up and do. Now, all of the evangelicals who felt that God was doing "football miracles" through Tim Tebow are forced to scratch their heads, change the subject, or deny Tim.
Ultimately, this is not only unfair to Tim, but it points to something flawed in how we believe. While many American evangelicals are touting "miraculous" comebacks as the work of God, the real world is out there facing real tragedies, painful realities, poverty, etc. It is no wonder the evangelical church has lost its voice in the public forum. We've become a caricature of the life Jesus intended us to lead when he left the keys with us.
Instead of pointing to Tim and saying, what a great young man with great leadership qualities and a strong authentic faith, we turned him into a miracle worker - which he never was - and now every loss becomes another embarrassment. How could anyone live up to what has been placed on him?
If you are one of those people who pointed to Tim, you should keep pointing. Not because of a scoreboard, but because of his life off of the football field. If you are one of those people who never got it, don't worry about it. If you are one of those people who thought that the hoopla from the evangelicals was ridiculous, I agree with you.
I would ask that you cut the evangelicals a little slack though - because in reality - all anyone really wants is a hero and in many ways I do think Tim Tebow fits that bill.
Peace
OPENING DISCLAIMER: I like Tim Tebow as a person. If you read anything below that seems to discredit that, please refer back to this disclaimer.
I respect any passionate person who seems to live a life consistent with their ideals - unlike many people - I even respect people with whom I disagree provided they are consistent.
One of the biggest problems I have with the hype surrounding Tim, is that I believe it has the opposite effect that many evangelicals hope. Rather than strengthening the evangelical perception, I believe it only serves to discredit and undermine evangelicals further. Why? Keep reading...
No one questions Tim's intangible qualities of leadership. In that arena, he is an unparalleled all-star. For me, those are the qualities we should be highlighting. Unfortunately, over the past several weeks, evangelicals have ascribed a "miracle-like" status to Tim's come-from-behind victories. Those of you who know football, understand that in most cases those victories would have been more appropriately attributed to either the Denver Broncos defense, their kicker, or blatant mistakes made by opponents.
After suffering three consecutive losses, it is becoming more and more clear that perhaps Jesus is not a Denver Broncos fan - who knew? The Saturday Night Live skit did a better job of pointing out the lunacy of that concept than anything the church was willing to stand up and do. Now, all of the evangelicals who felt that God was doing "football miracles" through Tim Tebow are forced to scratch their heads, change the subject, or deny Tim.
Ultimately, this is not only unfair to Tim, but it points to something flawed in how we believe. While many American evangelicals are touting "miraculous" comebacks as the work of God, the real world is out there facing real tragedies, painful realities, poverty, etc. It is no wonder the evangelical church has lost its voice in the public forum. We've become a caricature of the life Jesus intended us to lead when he left the keys with us.
Instead of pointing to Tim and saying, what a great young man with great leadership qualities and a strong authentic faith, we turned him into a miracle worker - which he never was - and now every loss becomes another embarrassment. How could anyone live up to what has been placed on him?
If you are one of those people who pointed to Tim, you should keep pointing. Not because of a scoreboard, but because of his life off of the football field. If you are one of those people who never got it, don't worry about it. If you are one of those people who thought that the hoopla from the evangelicals was ridiculous, I agree with you.
I would ask that you cut the evangelicals a little slack though - because in reality - all anyone really wants is a hero and in many ways I do think Tim Tebow fits that bill.
Peace
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)