Category: Of Random Interest

Group Text Messaging

7001 New Messages?
For a few years, Face­book was one of the best ways to con­nect with col­lege stu­dents. Not any more. It’s still use­ful, but not near­ly as use­ful as it used to be. The nov­el­ty has worn off and so stu­dents aren’t as respon­sive on it.

So like Steve Lutz I’ve been think­ing about text mes­sag­ing late­ly. My younger stu­dents (frosh and sopho­mores) seem to be much more like­ly to have unlim­it­ed tex­ting plans than my upper­class­men and grad stu­dents.

In the past I’ve just texted peo­ple indi­vid­u­al­ly, but now I’m exper­i­ment­ing with group text mes­sag­ing ser­vices.

I con­sid­ered using Twit­ter and telling peo­ple to sub­scribe via text. A few prob­lems:
a) Col­lege stu­dents don’t use twit­ter.
b) It cen­tral­izes the com­mu­ni­ca­tion too much.
c) I don’t feel con­fi­dent in twit­ter’s reli­a­bil­i­ty.
d) The verb “tweet”.

So I’ve been look­ing into oth­er ser­vices. So far I’m drawn to txtBlaster. The thing I like best is that I can dep­u­tize as many of the sub­scribers as I want and allow them to text the entire group, so I can make this a stu­dent-dri­ven thing. It’s a free (ad-sup­port­ed) ser­vice. They claim to screen their ads care­ful­ly and to tar­get them based on the type of group you set up. So far so good on that front.

Do you have
a) any thoughts on using text mes­sag­ing effec­tive­ly as a min­istry tool?
b) anoth­er ser­vice to rec­om­mend (such as TextMarks or txtSig­nal or even the maligned Twit­ter)?

P.S. If you want to see txtBlaster in action, feel free to text xas­tan­ford to 25278. I’ll be play­ing around with it for the next few days.

Every Ph.D. Has A Little Crazy Inside

Straight Jacket GuyPh.D. stands for doc­tor of phi­los­o­phy. Doc­tor is from the Latin doc­tor which means ‘teacher’. Phi­los­o­phy is from the Greek (the verb phileo ‘I love’ plus the noun sophia ‘wis­dom’). From an ety­mo­log­i­cal stand­point, a doc­tor of phi­los­o­phy is one who teach­es oth­ers to love wis­dom.

But ety­mol­o­gy is often a mis­lead­ing guide to real­i­ty. Just ask a but­ter­fly or a pineap­ple.

There’s an old joke that Ph.D. stands for per­ma­nent head dam­age. Humor usu­al­ly has more truth buried inside it than ety­mol­o­gy. I am con­vinced that most Ph.D.s have a lit­tle crazy in them.

You see, to earn a Ph.D. one must con­vince not only one­self but also a com­mit­tee that you are one of the world’s lead­ing experts about one nar­row slice of real­i­ty. Ide­al­ly, you con­vince the com­mit­tee that you know more about this very nar­row prob­lem than any­one else who has ever lived.

And here’s where the crazy comes in: this idea that you are unique­ly qual­i­fied to hold a cer­tain opin­ion in a very eso­teric area becomes a habit which creeps into oth­er areas of your life. You con­vince your­self that you are right and the world is wrong about some­thing quite triv­ial. Every­one does this to a degree, but there is one impor­tant dif­fer­ence: the Ph.D. believes some­thing absolute­ly crazy.

At this point you are think­ing to your­self, “Glen, I know sev­er­al Ph.D. hold­ers. They’re nice, nor­mal peo­ple.”

Yes. They are. They are also insane about some­thing unex­pect­ed. They have learned through expe­ri­ence to keep their crazi­ness well-masked. You have to dig down deep.

Talk with your friend long enough and you will like­ly dis­cov­er that they raise ham­sters for food. Or that they have a plan for which stores to loot in which order after the next major nat­ur­al dis­as­ter, and actu­al­ly have a shop­ping list secret­ed about their per­son at all times for just such an even­tu­al­i­ty. Or that they believe in flood­ing preschools with mar­i­jua­na smoke to keep the kids calm. Or that they keep a bazooka in the trunk of their car.

And that’s just the way it is. Some things come with acces­sories — Bar­bie dolls are one and Ph.D.s are anoth­er. You just have to learn to live with it. This is why I have a much high­er tol­er­ance for eccen­tric beliefs in out­side speak­ers for my min­istry if they have a doc­tor­ate. I expect the crazy. I actu­al­ly wel­come the crazy — it keeps things inter­est­ing.

So if you are my friend and are in pur­suit of a Ph.D., know that I love you and that I won’t be dis­tressed when you turn crazy in a few years.

And if you already have your Ph.D., just remem­ber that I know. Some­where deep in the recess­es of your brain is an idea. I don’t know what it is. I don’t even know what it’s about. But I know it is so insane that your fam­i­ly has tried to slip phar­ma­ceu­ti­cals into your meals on more than one occa­sion, which is why you only eat foods that are translu­cent. Which is crazy.

Where Should Prospective Ministers Go To College?

question markC. Michael Pat­ton over at Parch­ment and Pen (one of my favorite blogs), recent­ly offered some thoughts on enter­ing min­istry. He made a state­ment that has always seemed like com­mon sense to me, but that I know many peo­ple find objec­tion­able:

If pos­si­ble, go to a sec­u­lar uni­ver­si­ty for under­grad and an Evan­gel­i­cal sem­i­nary for your mas­ters. You need expo­sure to both.

I’ve long been mys­ti­fied that as a mat­ter of course we iso­late prospec­tive min­is­ters from their cul­ture for 4 years (more if they go to sem­i­nary after­wards). Sure­ly there’s a case to be made for tak­ing our prospec­tive young min­is­ters and forc­ing them to solid­i­fy their own faith and also min­is­ter to their peers in a sec­u­lar set­ting. Let them prove that they can be both faith­ful and fruit­ful before they invest time and mon­ey in edu­ca­tion that is use­less out­side of min­istry.

I’m sure a Bible col­lege is the ide­al route for some peo­ple, but it seems to me that we should high­light sec­u­lar schools as a viable option. It’s cer­tain­ly borne good fruit for the Pen­te­costal move­ment and the impact in the larg­er evan­gel­i­cal world is even more impres­sive (Tim Keller, any­one?).

I sup­pose the most com­mon objec­tion is that sec­u­lar col­leges are harm­ful to faith, but that’s just not true. And even if it was, I don’t think it would mat­ter that much. If some­one who is plan­ning to enter min­istry can’t han­dle Intro to Soci­ol­o­gy or the cam­pus beer­fest, then I real­ly don’t want them preach­ing the gospel. They’re a time bomb wait­ing to explode and take oth­ers with them.

But some­one who can thrive spir­i­tu­al­ly at a sec­u­lar uni­ver­si­ty and make a dif­fer­ence for Christ on cam­pus… give that per­son a robust the­o­log­i­cal edu­ca­tion and then turn them loose in the pul­pit!

Evaluating Sermons

I eval­u­ate a lot of ser­mons. I don’t just mean that I lis­ten to ser­mons and decide whether I like them or not — every­one who goes to church does that. I mean that I pro­fes­sion­al­ly eval­u­ate ser­mons and give for­mal feed­back to the preach­er. Some I eval­u­ate in my role as a min­istry train­er and oth­ers I eval­u­ate in my role on a preach­ing team (before one of us preach­es we preach the ser­mon to each oth­er and get feed­back on how to strength­en it).

So I’ve thought about this a lot. Most ser­mon eval­u­a­tion forms you find on the inter­net and at sem­i­nar­ies are not very help­ful because they mea­sure too many things.

These were the top hits when I googled for “ser­mon eval­u­a­tion forms”
Calvin Sem­i­nary’s (30 ques­tions)
The Ortho­dox Pres­by­ter­ian Church’s Form for Min­istry Interns (41 ques­tions)
Reformed Bap­tist Sem­i­nary’s (35 ques­tions).

Do all the things these long forms ask about mat­ter? A lit­tle. But using that to eval­u­ate a ser­mon is like eval­u­at­ing your church’s state­ment of faith based on its gram­mar. It sort of miss­es the point. Of course you want a state­ment of faith that is gram­mat­i­cal, but if its con­tent is sketchy then every moment spent improv­ing its gram­mar is wast­ed time. Sin­ful­ly wast­ed time.

In the same way, focus­ing on the super­fi­cials of a ser­mon when the under­ly­ing con­tent is bogus is ridicu­lous. I real­ize that’s not the intent of these forms, but that is what they encour­age.

So this is the form I use:

Point­ers (what should I change?)

Keep­ers (what was so good I should be sure not to take it out)?

That’s it — two ques­tions. I some­times do it on a 3x5 index card. Keep­ers on the front, point­ers on the back (a tip I got from Earl Creps).

And this is the grid I’m putting it through:
1) Was Christ pro­claimed clear­ly?
2) Was the ser­mon Bib­li­cal­ly sound?
3) Was it inter­est­ing?
4) Did it ask me to do some­thing appro­pri­ate in response?

I try to nev­er give them more than three point­ers and three keep­ers, and I try to be as spe­cif­ic as pos­si­ble.

There are lots of oth­er aspects of a ser­mon I could nit­pick, but if the per­son is preach­ing an inter­est­ing, Bib­li­cal­ly sound ser­mon that exalts Christ and chal­lenges me to obey Him then they’re doing fab­u­lous. Why would I nit­pick them at that point? To demor­al­ize them? To clone my habits (“at this point I would have told a joke — you should tell a joke”)?

Any­way, this post prob­a­bly was­n’t rel­e­vant to most of you. But for those of you who have to eval­u­ate preach­ing on a reg­u­lar basis, I hope I’ve giv­en you some food for thought.

And to those in my min­istry, now you know what I’m try­ing to do when I pre­pare a ser­mon: pro­claim the good news of Jesus in a way that is faith­ful to the Bib­li­cal text I’m work­ing with in an inter­est­ing way that chal­lenges you to whole­heart­ed­ly respond. From time to time, be sure to let me know how I’m doing. 🙂

Roku Rocks

Roku Box BackendFor Paula’s birth­day I bought her a lit­tle device called the Roku Dig­i­tal Video Play­er. Basi­cal­ly, it takes Net­flix stream­ing videos and dis­plays them on your tele­vi­sion.

This is very good for us since we don’t have any tele­vi­sion ser­vice. When we moved into our new place a year ago we decid­ed that our cable bill was 90% waste, so we can­celled it and we watch tele­vi­sion series on DVD through Net­flix or on the com­put­er now.

So I bought this Roku device which takes the 12,000 or so stream­ing videos avail­able on Net­flix (and the 40,000 or so avail­able on Ama­zon as pay-per-view) and lets you watch them on your nor­mal tele­vi­sion.

The Roku box is amaz­ing. It only does one thing and it does it well. The images are crisp, the audio is clear, and the inter­face is very easy to use. In my opin­ion, the videos dis­play much bet­ter than they ever did on my lap­top or our desk­top com­put­er.

If you use Net­flix and ever watch stream­ing videos, you should seri­ous­ly con­sid­er the Roku. It rocks.

And it costs less than a few months of cable — even when you com­bine it with your month­ly Net­flix bill.

Christianity, China, and College Students

I just read an inter­est­ing arti­cle

home alone 2 lost in new york movie

down­load fre­quen­cy dvd where down­load the pro­pos­al online

about Chris­tian­i­ty in Chi­na. The empha­sis of the piece is on the dom­i­nance of Reformed the­ol­o­gy in Chi­nese Chris­tian­i­ty, but I was struck by the com­ments on the role of uni­ver­si­ties in the revival.

And in Chi­na, the place where Calvin­ism is spread­ing fastest is the elite uni­ver­si­ties, fuelled by prodi­gies of learn­ing and trans­la­tion. Wang Xiaochao, a philoso­pher at one of the Bei­jing uni­ver­si­ties, has trans­lat­ed the two major works of St Augus­tine, the Con­fes­sions and the City of God, into Chi­nese direct­ly from Latin. Grad­u­al­ly all the major works of the first cen­turies of the Chris­t­ian tra­di­tion are being trans­lat­ed direct­ly from the orig­i­nal lan­guages into Chi­nese.

All of this is hap­pen­ing out­side the con­trol of the offi­cial body which is sup­posed to mon­i­tor and super­vise the church­es in Chi­na. Instead, it is the phi­los­o­phy depart­ments at the uni­ver­si­ties, or the lan­guage depart­ments and the depart­ments of lit­er­a­ture and west­ern civil­i­sa­tion that are the chan­nel.

“The [offi­cial­ly recog­nised] church­es are not hap­py with uni­ver­si­ties, because it is not with­in their con­trol. And their sem­i­nar­ies are not at the intel­lec­tu­al lev­el of the uni­ver­si­ties,” says Dr Tan. “Chi­nese Chris­tian­i­ty using Chi­nese to do Chris­t­ian think­ing has become a very inter­est­ing move­ment.”

And

If [May Tan] goes to preach at an offi­cial church, she says, “There will be per­haps 1000 peo­ple and 95% of them are over 65. So it’s a sun­set church. But if I went to house church – there would be 1000 peo­ple; per­haps 20 of them in their 50s, and all the rest are young­sters. The old­er ones will all be pro­fes­sors at the uni­ver­si­ties. So these are the future of the church­es. They have reg­is­tered pas­tors, and no access to sem­i­nar­ies: But they have youth, and future, and mon­ey.”

And lat­er on

“Very soon”, said Dr Tan, “Chris­tians will become the major­i­ty of uni­ver­si­ty stu­dents… that could hap­pen.”

May it come to pass.matrix the divx down­load

College Ministry and Wolfram Alpha

Wol­fram Alpha is unique among search engines. It does­n’t find web­sites — it finds facts.

And I just real­ized that it has unex­pect­ed util­i­ty for those of us who think about col­lege min­istry.

For exam­ple, you can com­pare UC Berke­ley with UC Davis

free police acad­e­my 5 assign­ment mia­mi beach movie down­load

(or Har­vard with CBC).

Or you can get a sur­pris­ing amount of infor­ma­tion on UC Berke­ley.

Inter­est­ing stuff.machin­ist the divx down­loadhocus pocus dvdrip down­load

A Special Mother's Day Message From Mr. T

Mr. T pities the fool who does not know how to treat mama right.

Hap­py moth­er’s day, Mom and Mom-In-Law!

flo rida right round down­load

days of thun­der divx down­load watch har­ry pot­ter and the cham­ber of secrets in divx down­load the wait­ing room

rocky movie

Cool Video From Joel 2/Acts 2

I just saw a cool video of Joel’s prophe­cy (the one quot­ed by Peter in Acts 2) made by The Work of the Peo­ple. It’s def­i­nite­ly worth tak­ing a minute and thir­ty-nine sec­onds to watch.

I just saw a cool video of Joel’s prophe­cy (the one quot­ed by Peter in Acts 2) made by The Work of the Peo­ple

. It’s def­i­nite­ly worth tak­ing a minute and thir­ty-nine sec­onds to watch.

Texts: Joel 2:28–32, Acts 2:16–21 zel­norm recall don t look now divx

down­load for­ev­er strong free

Dorothy Sayers on Work

Around 15 years ago, I heard Eric Treuil quote Dorothy Say­ers to the effect that the car­pen­ter from Nazareth nev­er built any shod­dy tables. It was fab­u­lous. I’ve been think­ing about that obser­va­tion off and on ever since.

I recent­ly stum­bled upon it again, this time in its orig­i­nal form. It’s found in the essay “Why Work?” by Dorothy Say­ers which appeared in her book Creed or Chaos

and is also now avail­able online down­load fist­ful of dol­lars a divx .

Here’s one of my favorite pas­sages:

over her dead body divx The Church’s approach to an intel­li­gent car­pen­ter is usu­al­ly con­fined to exhort­ing him not to be drunk and dis­or­der­ly in his leisure hours, and to come to church on Sun­days. What the Church should be telling him is this: that the very first demand that his reli­gion makes upon him is that he should make good tables.

down­load moth­er of tears the third moth­er online

excel loan amor­ti­za­tion sched­ule pre­pay­ment

Church by all means, and decent forms of amuse­ment, cer­tain­ly – but what use is all that if in the very cen­ter of his life and occu­pa­tion he is insult­ing God with bad car­pen­try? No crooked table legs or ill-fit­ting draw­ers ever, I dare swear, came out of the carpenter’s shop at Nazareth. Nor, if they did, could any­one believe that they were made by the same hand that made Heav­en and earth. No piety in the work­er will com­pen­sate for work that is not true to itself; for any work that is untrue to its own tech­nique is a liv­ing lie.

…

[The Church] has lost all sense of the fact that the liv­ing and eter­nal truth is expressed in work only so far as that work is true in itself, to itself, to the stan­dards of its own tech­nique. She has for­got­ten that the sec­u­lar voca­tion is sacred. For­got­ten that a build­ing must be good archi­tec­ture before it can be a good church; that a paint­ing must be well paint­ed before it can be a good sacred pic­ture; that work must be good work before it can call itself God’s work. purse brite

The whole essay is well worth read­ing and I com­mend it to you.