Karma? Part 2 of 3

(Continued from yesterday)

Yesterday we concluded that there is no second chance after death for karma to work, and even if there are millions of chances it would be futile to achieve perfection on your own because the standard is beyond human capability. Today we continue with some fundamental questions that I found karma to be unsatisfactory:

* Buddhism is atheistic in that it does not believe in a personal God who is righteous and punishes the wicked to enforce justice. Instead, it believes in impersonal karma. An impersonal force, by definition, does not have a moral standard. How is it that karma evaluates everyone’s good and evil deeds and metes out rewards and punishment accordingly? Where does morality come from?
* The law of karma claims, without proof, a person’s karma determines which of 6 domains or realms he is reborn into: god, demigod, human, animal, hungry ghost, and hell. Who sets the criteria? What good can someone in a lower domain, say hell, possibly do to merit rebirth into a higher domain?
* For a person to improve, he needs to remember the lessons learned from his mistakes. Yet people do not remember what good or bad they have done in alleged previous lives. Most people don’t have past life recalls at all. Even the few who do have only a vague notion that somehow they have lived as another person before. No evidence has ever been presented that an individual had existed in a previous non-human domain. All these point to myths and legends, not fact.
* Karma claims that the previous life’s actions determine this life’s quality. Let’s regress to the first life. How did karma operate then, since there is no prior life? This is a question on the origin of evil. Buddhism believes in dualism. How did karma get out of balance? One cannot argue that the universe is eternal and has no beginning, because science had established that the universe has a beginning and also an end.
* Karma is anti-compassion and selfish. A person suffers in this life because he has done something bad in the previous life’s to deserve it. He has to pay off his bad karma. If you help him, his karmic debt does not get paid off and he has to be reborn again to suffer some more. It may increase your own good karma, but should you build yourself up at the expense of the sufferer? This all sounds very anti-social to me, and contradicts Buddhism’s teaching of compassion.

I have other questions, but I just find karma to be lacking in evidence and inadequate philosophically. So back to yesterday’s premise #2 – You reap what you sow – that should be biblical, right? The answer is both yes and no. The devil is in the details. Yes, a man reaps what he sows (Ga 6:7), that’s simple cause and effect, but both the sowing (trouble or righteousness) and the reaping refer to this life, not the next. The Bible is very clear that “people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment” (Heb 9:27). The afterlife is either eternal blessing in heaven, or eternal suffering in hell. There is no repeated cycle to refine you until you are good enough to enter nirvana. So much for man’s vain attempt to save himself without needing to face his Creator to hold him accountable.

(To be continued)

Karma? Part 1 of 3

Yesterday we started on reincarnation. Today we examine the rationale behind it, and why karma is not the fair way some people think it is. First, let’s define what we mean. Karma is the force generated by the sum total of a person’s actions, whether good or bad. If you have done well in this life, you will be rewarded in the next life by being reborn as a god, a demigod, or as another human being; but if you have done evil, then you will be punished by being reborn as an animal, a hungry ghost, or in hell. However, in Buddhism these realms are not permanent. You can be reborn again after you served your punishment, used up your negative karma, and paid your dues. How you live in one life will determine the quality of your next life, or putting it in another way, you reap in your next life what you sow in this life. If you fail this time, just do better the next time around, as there is a second chance. In fact, there are many chances, and an endless cycle of birth, death and rebirth, until the soul finally reaches nirvana or heaven.

On the surface this seems fair and very attractive:
1. A person is responsible for his own actions;
2. You reap what you sow;
3. You work your way to heaven, by your own efforts, not dependent on anyone else; and
4. There are many chances.

Some even claim that 1 and 2 are consistent with the Bible, which teaches that:
* Deut 24:16 Parents are not to be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their parents; each will die for their own sin. (Also 2 Kings 14:6; 2 Chron 25:4)
* Job 4:8 As I have observed, those who plow evil and those who sow trouble reap it.
* Prov 11:18 A wicked person earns deceptive wages, but the one who sows righteousness reaps a sure reward.
* Ga 6:7 Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows.

Are they the same? Definitely not! Let’s work our way backwards and look at #4 first. The law of karma requires many reincarnations for a person to improve and earn his way to heaven. But if there is no reincarnation, as there is no solid evidence for it (refer yesterday’s post), and therefore no second chance after death, then the foundation for karma is destroyed. Karma becomes only a figment of one’s imagination, a delusion without basis. Indeed there are many chances, but all in this life, not the next. But let’s play along and see where the other premises lead.

#3 assumes that by gradually improving from one life time to another, one can work their way up to nirvana. This is attractive to many people, as it appeals to their pride. They want to be master of the own fate, and not dependent on God’s grace. Basically they don’t want to be accountable to anyone, except themselves. But can man work their way to heaven gradually? Most certainly not! They would have as much success as trying to jump to the moon gradually. The standard is simply too high. You see heaven is perfect, without any sin, so the criteria for entry is perfection. But nobody is perfect. Not even if you try your very best in a million life times. Just as one pin is enough to burst a balloon, one sin is all it takes to disqualify us from heaven. Man can dream to make it on their own by lowering the entry standard, and by over-estimating their achievements, but then it would not be the real heaven, only a make-believe heaven they fabricated to suit their own thinking.

Actually I have many logical and philosophical problems with karma, but we’ll leave that for tomorrow.

(To be continued)

Reincarnation?

Q. You believe in resurrection but we believe in reincarnation. Our system is more fair than yours as each person is rewarded or punished in the next life based on what he has done in this life. So no need to talk to me about Jesus.

A. Many people believe that you have your faith and I have mine. What’s true to you may not be true to me. Both are equally valid. Or we may be saying the same thing in different words, so don’t bother me. That is a classical error in post-modern thinking, a relativistic fallacy. In arithmetic, 1 + 1 = 2. It does not equal 0, or 3, or any other number. When you give $5 to buy a $2 snack, try to convince the storekeeper to give you $4 change because that’s “true” to you. No one will buy that logic. Why apply it to spiritual matters of eternal significance?

Everyone is entitled to his/her own beliefs, but the important thing is “Is what you believe in TRUE?” Because if it’s not, then you may believe with the utmost sincerity, but it will still lead you astray because it is false. In the same way some believe in reincarnation because it seemed fair to them, but is it true?

Before we look into its validity, let’s define what we mean. Reincarnation, or the transmigration of the soul, is the belief in successive rebirth of the soul or spirit, after biological death, into a new life in a new body that may be human, animal or spirit, depending on the moral quality of the previous life’s actions. What evidence is there to prove it? Proponents claim that déjà vu, or the feeling that one has experienced something before, is the recall of past life memories. Often the recall is drawn out under hypnosis. Supporters view recall by young children that they have lived before as especially significant, on the assumption that they would be less tainted.

But a claim is not proof. First of all, the memory could be false. In psychology, false memory refers to the recollection of an event, or the details of an event, that did not occur. Some memories could be implanted by hypnosis using the power of suggestion. Others are ideas or stories people have heard when they were young and impressionable, and later retrieved from their memory bank but with the source wrongly attributed to a past life. This is especially likely when most of the cases occur in cultures which believe in reincarnation. As to the past life memories of children, a more plausible explanation is that the memories are suggested by evil spirits. Demons are fallen angels and they have been around a long time. They know past events and people, and can inject such ideas in people’s minds, including children’s.

Furthermore, notwithstanding reincarnation’s assertion that the rebirth of the soul could be in an animal body or as a spirit depending on the karma, none of the cases cited involved such entities. No evidence, not even false memories, had been produced for such claims. No pigs, dogs or any other animals. No disembodied spirits either. Published cases invariably describe alleged past lives as another human being, typically in a historical or cultural context the person had heard or read about, or known to the hypnotist. Now I am a simple guy, and in matters of logic or problem-solving, I adopt Occam’s razor i.e. the simplest solution is usually the correct one. So why believe a proposition comprising of multiple past lives across species when there is no concrete evidence supporting it?

But the main reason I do not accept reincarnation is Scriptural – the Bible simply rejects such teaching to be false. This is not a case of your words against mine, because the Bible has been around for two thousand years, been subjected to scrutiny by skeptics throughout history, and had stood the test of time with flying colors. It is attested by history, archaeology, fulfilled prophecies, testimonies of changed lives, and had proven itself to be reliable and trustworthy. The Bible says:

* Heb 9:27 Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment – You only live once in this world. There is no endless chance.
* Lk 16:26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’ – The parable of the rich man and Lazarus teaches that there is no going back; the judgment is final.
* Jn 9:3 “Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” said Jesus, “but this happened so that the works of God might be displayed in him. – Jesus dismissed the disciples’ speculation that either the man or his parents sinned, causing him to be born blind. He rejected the notion of the man’s sins before his birth i.e. in a past life, because there is simply no prior life.

We will discuss karma in the next post, but my conclusion is that if you believe in reincarnation, you have believed a lie. Examine the evidence and choose who you trust, because your eternal well-being depends on it.

Public Relations 101

We learned a very useful skill in Leadership Matters Course (LMC) – public relations (PR). Formerly when I think of PR, my immediate association is that of slick advertisers telling people how great they are. This is a caricature and not the truth. PR is actually making sure that what we are is what people think we are. It is knowing yourself and your constituents, and being authentic in your relationships.

PR is very important in pioneer missionary work. Before a church can be planted, we need to know the needs of a community and how we can meet them to build bridges to share the gospel. We need to deploy our limited resources that are best suited in satisfying those needs. For all of these we need to employ PR skills in working with community leaders, which unfortunately do not form part of the formal training in a seminary. That’s why we’re so glad we were introduced to the subject. Let me summarize what we learned in LMC.

What we are is our distinctives, what set us apart from others. To help you discover your distinctives, you need to answer 4 questions:
1. What do I offer?
2. What do I want to be known for?
3. In what ways is what I offer different from what others offer?
4. What is my purpose?

For example, in my case I offer pastoral, evangelism and discipling skills, with a background of over 3 decades of business experience. I want to be known as a pastor who knows the Word and the market place, and how to connect the two. What I offer differs from others in the practical application of Scripture to the real world. My purpose is to build and multiply strong churches through building strong families.

The people are our stakeholders, those who can keep us in business, or put us out of business. They include the folks we are serving, our supporters, family members, governments, contacts etc. To help you identify all those in your sphere of influence who can make or break your ministry, and to determine their needs so you can connect with them, you need to ask questions in 4 areas:
1. Their needs – known, unknown and unspoken.
2. Their perceptions of you.
3. Who you should relate to?
4. How you can serve them better?

Once you’ve done your research and know both your distinctives and your stakeholders, you build relationships with them by finding a solution to their needs. Some relationships are new which you need to win, some are already established which you need to maintain, and some need to be strengthened as they are not deep enough. The last thing is to put together a plan of action, then implement it to solve their needs. PR is useful. I wish I had learned that earlier.

Those Boring Genealogies!

Q. I was reading 1 Chronicles and was bored to death! The first 9 chapters are all genealogies! What’s the point of giving us a list of names of people who died thousands of years ago?

A. Genealogies may be boring, but they were written for our instruction:
 Rom 15:4 For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us,
 1 Co 10:11 Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction,
What do they teach? I can think of several things:

 God knows all about us. We may find genealogies dull, but God is interested in them enough to record everything down.
 God values families. Genealogies are family trees. God is interested not only in individuals, but families. Family trees establish continuity with the past, as well as legitimizing the present e.g. claims to the throne, eligibility to be priests.
 Genealogies provide background information. E.g. Joab is identified as son of Zeruiah. Usually the name of the father is given after “son of”, but in this case Zeruiah was David’s sister (1 Chron 2:16)!
 God is faithful and keeps His promises. Fulfillment of promises made to the forefathers can be traced to the descendants, when they meet the conditions.
 Despite men’s boastfulness, most lived mundane lives without anything worthy to mention from a divine perspective. Yet God can still use fallen and imperfect men to accomplish His purpose e.g. Abraham had children with Hagar when Sarai was sterile (1 Chron 1:29-31) , Judah fathered twins with his daughter-in-law (1 Chron 2:4), Caleb had concubines (1 Chron 2:46, 48) etc.
 Occasionally there are bright spots to give hope e.g. Jabez (1 Chron 4:9-10), the Reubenites, Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh (1 Chron 5:20b … they cried out to him during the battle. He answered their prayers, because they trusted in him.
 God is fair. Just as faith brings answered prayers above, wickedness brings judgment e.g. Er (1 Chron 2:3).

So even though it may be dry, persist and dig in the Word and you will find nuggets for your instruction.

Comments on Covenant to Pastor Homosexuals

Recently a brother sent me a copy of a declaration co-signed by 26 leading pastors and seminary principals in Hong Kong, on a commitment to pastoral care for homosexuals, http://raykliu.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/cosign.pdf
as well as an open letter by a well-known evangelist in response to the declaration.
http://raykliu.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/cosign-response.pdf
He asked whether I have any comments on both. I am a retired pastor and a missionary, not a scholar, but here are my comments:

Regarding the joint declaration by the church leaders, their intention to be inclusive is good, but in trying to emphasize the love of God to reach out to homosexuals I think they have given up too much on the holiness of God.
Rf http://raykliu.wordpress.com/2013/07/26/response-to-just-because-he-breathes/
As pointed out in the open letter, there was little mention on homosexuality being wrong and an abomination to God. The whole tone is conciliatory towards gays.

I hold homosexuality to be sin.
Refer http://raykliu.wordpress.com/2013/07/05/lesbian-marriage/
As to sexual orientation, the Bible is silent. The cosigners seem to accept the view that some gays are born that way and not something they have a choice in. By implication since God made them that way, it’s not their fault. I am not convinced of this view myself. But even if it is, my view is that gays are still responsible, as their orientation would be similar to every one’s sinful nature.
Refer http://raykliu.wordpress.com/2013/07/06/gay-struggle/
I can’t say because I’m born a sinner, therefore I must give in to sin. Similarly a gay person can’t say because I’m born gay; therefore I must give in to homosexuality.

Regarding the open letter, generally I find the analysis to be good, except the claim that since God can tolerate the Amorites 400 years (Gen 15:13-16) but has to judge the Sodomites immediately, therefore sodomy must be worse than the other sins. This is not the only possible explanation, because:
* Homosexuality is listed among other sins which equally damn a person from entering the kingdom of heaven;
* God may have given the Sodomites plenty of time already, but they still have not repented. They ran out of time; therefore judgment came.
Other than this I believe the critique to be fair and solidly based on the Bible.

Sales Lessons

Previously I compared two church models to the approach of two tree service contractors. I want to add a few comments based on our dealings with another contractor, but on the subject of “sales” strategy. I will first describe what happened and then draw some parallels to church practices.

Recently we bought a coupon that gave us 75% off on eaves trough cleaning. This is a fairly common “loss leader” that allows a company to up-sell their other products and services to make a profit. Since we plan to install gutter guards to keep our gutters leaf-free anyway, we don’t mind hearing out their sales pitch and quote.

The salesperson was also the owner of the company, so he was free to offer any deal he wants. We explained that we want to solve a problem of rain water splashing onto our neighbor’s property instead of flowing through the downspout and discharging onto our lawn. Based on his expertise, he recommended aligning the eaves trough so that the water flow naturally down slope, and re-routing the downspout so that the water discharge is fully onto our property. He then offered a 15% discount when we purchase the gutter guards, alignment and re-routing together, if we place the order that day, which we accepted.

The work was completed two weeks later, but the real test came two days after the installation, when there was a heavy downpour. The work substantially reduced the water overflowing the gutters and cascading to our neighbor’s side, but not completely.
When we called the owner about the continuance of the problem, he was very defensive and said “Didn’t you pay the technician in full? By paying him in full you agreed that the work was done to your full satisfaction!” We told him we were not accusing the technician of doing a poor job, only that it did not solve our problem. He saw the possibility of extra work and said he’ll send another technician to quote what else can be done.

The second technician came, and suggested:
1. Either installing one more downspout to divert part of the water away from the first one so that it won’t overflow, at a cost of several hundred dollars, or
2. Cutting back the shingle that was overhanging the eaves trough too much, which may have obstructed the water flow, for a couple of hundred dollars.
We asked him whether the company will guarantee (1) will solve our problem. They won’t. He then said that based on his experience (2) should solve our problem, but no guarantees. We were not prepared to spend a significant sum just for them to do trial and error, so we opted for (2).

God was merciful. As soon as the technician finished cutting back and re-sealing the shingle, it started to rain and the water continued to splash, which proved his “professional judgment” was wrong, before he left our home! After phoning his boss, they offered a third solution to connect the upper downspout directly to the lower one, so there won’t be any overflow and splashing, again for extra money. Since we don’t want an irate neighbor, we agreed to try this one last time. Will it work? We won’t know until the next thunderstorm, and are praying that it will so we can have one less worry while on short-term mission. Now onto some observations.

The salesperson used several sales techniques, some legitimate, others inappropriate for a church setting:
1. Discount incentive: There is nothing wrong with offering a volume discount when you buy more. Some churches offer discounted or even free tickets to special events to draw newcomers. While some people balk at churches using marketing, claiming it to be secular, it is actually ethically neutral.
2. Pressure tactics: He tied the expiry of the discount to when he leaves upon completion of the eaves trough cleaning. This time limit is common in commercial sales to exert pressure on the other party e.g. real estate offer to purchase and sign-backs typically expire by a certain time. But don’t ever try it in churches, especially when witnessing. Although the Lord did not want anyone to perish, He did not apply pressure on people to come to repentance (2 Pet 3:9). What gives you the right to do so? You would be misrepresenting Him, which an ambassador should never do. Don’t force people to make a decision for Christ. It will only backfire, leave a sour taste in their mouths, and give Christians a bad name.
3. Continuous up sell: Unlike salesmen who are trained to push high-value products, often Christians do not have this “sales mentality” and are not alert to outreach opportunities. While we should not be pushy, neither should we wait for opportunities to fall into our laps. However, be careful about promising benefits that Scripture never promised (e.g. prosperity, healing etc.), and pushing your own agenda. What the salesman wanted was successive orders to accumulate sales. What we wanted was a solution to our problem. Sometimes the two coincide, but in this case they didn’t. He got his quick sale, but at the cost of his reputation. Sometimes churches do things for short-term gain and their own convenience, without carefully examining the issue from their members’ perspective. Don’t be short-sighted and short-change your people. Treat them well or you’ll lose your most valuable asset.

One more thing. Don’t be too quick to defend yourself like that owner. Listen to what people are saying when they have complaints. While there will always be some who are not satisfied unless they have their way, many people are reasonable and have legitimate needs that your rules have not addressed. Focus on others and you will build your reputation. Justify yourself and you will destroy goodwill in a hurry. Reputation is a delicate thing. It takes a long time to build but can be demolished by just one mistake. Protect it carefully.

Gardening Lessons

Work around the house is never done. After we trimmed the trees and have a more sunny backyard, we had to plant flowers and shrubs to beautify the garden. In the past we did not tend the garden ourselves as both of us were working. Now that we’re retired, my wife picked up gardening as a hobby, while I got drafted as casual labor! No I don’t have tips on how to keep a beautiful garden, except that not all plants are suitable for each spot in the garden, because some required sun while others prefer shade. As well, different flowers bloom in different months, so you need to buy a variety to enjoy each one’s blossom throughout the summer. But I did learn a few things by comparing the pastoral ministry to gardening/farming, as Paul did in 2 Tim 2:6 The hardworking farmer should be the first to receive a share of the crops.

Farming is hard work! To buy potted plants at wholesale, we got up at 5 AM and went with our contractor to Ontario Food Terminal. The distributors were there even earlier to set up their merchandize, so the hours are long. The farmer ploughs, sows, waters, weeds, harvests, and sells his produce. Nowadays everything is mechanized, but formerly operations were manual and you don’t get weekends off. So is the pastoral ministry. Most members see their pastor only a few hours every Sunday, and may not be aware of the long hours spent in sermon preparation, evangelism, visitation, counseling, administration etc. It’s easy to chalk up 60-70 hours a week, 50-100% over the regular 35-40 hours work week.

We purchased 40 perennials (so we don’t have to do it every year!) and shrubs with our contractor’s trade discount at about 60% off retail price. It pays to have relationships! But the next step was back-breaking! Isa 28:24 When a farmer plows for planting, does he plow continually? Does he keep on breaking up and harrowing the soil? For each plant, I had to dig a hole for the whole root “ball”, in hard-to-break clay soil with lots of roots from neighboring trees and shrubs. Good thing the contractor had already turned the sod to make a small flower bed, but still we had to break down the clumps of grass roots ourselves using a shovel, which proved very tiring. Then we got down on our knees and placed each plant into the hole, and covered up the ball of roots again with top soil and peat moss by hand. Every muscle ached after two days of digging!

It’s the same with pastoring. Often it is strenuous, not the physical kind, but mental and emotional. Plus you get your hands dirty. Sometimes you would rather not hear the trouble people got themselves into by willfully disobeying God, and affecting those around them. But if you want to help them (if they are willing to seek help), you listen, discern, and counsel as the Spirit leads you.

I suppose you can compare sowing to evangelism, watering/fertilizing to feeding people with the Word of God, and weeding/applying insecticides to reproving wrong behavior. You do the best you can, but leave the results to God, just as farmers do. Jas 5:7 Be patient, then, brothers and sisters, until the Lord’s coming. See how the farmer waits for the land to yield its valuable crop, patiently waiting for the autumn and spring rains. It does not matter how hard the farmer labors, he has to rely on God to bring the rain. And no matter how hard the pastor works, he has to depend on God for the results. These are some of the things I was reminded of in our first gardening experience.

Pruning Lessons

I do not like cutting down trees. No, I’m not an environmentalist, I just thought that trees take decades to grow, and it does not make sense to cut them down to make room for some perennials. However, I do understand that trees need pruning to remain healthy and be fruitful:
• Jn 15:2 He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes so that it will be even more fruitful.
The dead or dying branches have to be cut so that they do not take away nutrients from the good ones. So we gave our trees a trim. In the same way, church programs that are no longer effective in reaching new folks or nurturing the faithful should be pruned, so that scarce resources can be redeployed. There should be no sacred cows in church.

When you hire a tree service contractor, do some comparison shopping. We got two quotes, both referrals who did good work at a reasonable price, but the first was over 4 times higher than the second! So shop around and talk to them to see who you are comfortable with. Similarly, you need to compare when you want to find a church home. People have different criteria. Some want excellent children’s or youth program, others want good music. But as a minimum look for churches that are both evangelical (holding orthodox Christian doctrines) with good preaching/teaching, and evangelistic (zeal for sharing the gospel) with a heart for missions. That’s not to say fellowship is not important; they are, but too much inward looking stifles the church’s reason for being, that of reaching out and making disciples of all nations.

The contractor we chose was very different from the one we used last time. The previous one sent in a crew of 6. They worked very efficiently, using all the right tools such as pole pruners for tall branches, lop-shears, hedge trimmers etc. They removed all the cut branches and ground them up into wood chips, and cleaned up everything afterwards. They did not talk to us while they worked, and were in and out within half an hour. They came to do a job and they did it, then they left.

The current one is a horticulturist and a landscaper. He came with two assistants, without many tools except chain saws, pruners, and a long ladder. However, he climbed onto each tree and trimmed it while retaining the shape of the crown, with an eye on not thinning out too much to maintain privacy. He discussed with us what we preferred, and even did extra by turning up the sod to make two small flower beds, and suggested what shrubs and perennials we should plant in each part of our garden based on whether it is in the shade or full sunlight. He did not have a grinder, so he cut up the branches into small logs which we can use in our fireplace, and also cleaned up afterwards.

Guess which one we referred to others? The latter of course! The former did it as a job; he aimed for high efficiently with fast turnaround so he can quickly move onto the next job. It was adequate, but lacked the relationship for repeat business. The latter is an arborist who knew his subject well. While he was small-scale, he made up for the deficiency by establishing rapport with his clients, offering extra service at a very modest price. We already referred him to five other family members and friends, and won’t hesitate to do so again.

Churches operate like the two contractors above. Some view ministry as a job or project. They have trained people, the latest equipment, and they aimed for efficiency and professionalism. However, they lacked heart and the human touch. Efficiency is important, but ministry is not a business, and cannot be evaluated using simply business measurements.

In contrast, other churches may not have the manpower and resources their bigger sisters have, but they majored in relationships and providing extra service which comes only after you know your constituents and their needs. Professionalism is still important, and there is no excuse for doing sloppy ministry in the name of love, but it’s relationships that attracts people in the first place, and relationships which keep them coming back so that you can nurture and develop them into disciples.

Which kind of church is yours? Unfortunately many churches aim for the first model because it shows well. As for me, I prefer the second as I believe in the long-run it is the most effective model for fulfilling the Great Commission. Needless to say you can’t be all things to all people, and some will not like it. But in the end it is only the Lord’s assessment that counts. Hope you go by what He says.

The Role of a Manager

An effective leader needs to be a good manager. The role of a manager is to achieve desired results through people by building them up and making them successful. All managers focus on results, the good ones build up their people. We achieve success through others, since we can’t do everything ourselves. People are our greatest assets.

There are 3 key strands to help us fulfill our role as a manager. First, in order for us to know whether we have achieved our target the results need to be measurable. The desired results need to answer the questions:
• What needs to be done?
• When does it have to be completed? and
• Why?

The desired results need to be specific, otherwise people might get confused, and realistic, or else they may be get discouraged and frustrated. We need to focus on two things:
• The “as is” – What is the situation now> and
• The “desired results” – What could be or should be?

Secondly, since the results are accomplished through people the manager needs to be relational. The relationship is like oil in machinery. Try driving a car without oil in the motor. It will burn your engine. Similarly without relationship you will destroy the whole structure.

Third, not only do you need relationship, to motivate the people the work needs to be meaningful. People need a sense of purpose. They need satisfaction. They like to make their lives count, and know that what they are doing adds value.

These 3 strands, relational, meaningful and measurable, can help you become a good manager. These principles are applicable across industries and business functions, with one exception. When we move into the realm of spiritual work, we are responsible for what we do, but the end results depend on God. We are responsible for the “verbs”, but not the “nouns”. For example, we may work hard in sharing the gospel, but the number who get saved is in God’s hands. We need to work as if everything depended on us, but pray as everything depended on God. Leave the results to Him. He is faithful.