Vanguard Church - Bob Robinson: May 2007

5/31/2007

LeBron's Performance in Game 5 of the Eastern Conference Finals - Gotta Keep this as a Momento!

109

107

	1	2	3	4	OT	2OT	T
Cleveland	23	28	19	21	9	9	109
Detroit	29	23	18	21	9	7	107

May 31, 2007 Final - Double Over Time

CLEVELAND CAVALIERS
STARTERS	MIN	FGM-A	3PM-A	FTM-A	OREB	DREB	REB	AST	STL	BLK	TO	PF	PTS
LeBron James, SF	50	18-33	2-3	10-14	3	6	9	7	2	0	2	3	48
Drew Gooden, PF	28	3-10	0-0	1-2	3	3	6	1	1	0	1	6	7
Zydrunas Ilgauskas, C	39	6-9	0-0	4-6	1	7	8	2	0	2	1	6	16
Sasha Pavlovic, GF	42	2-10	1-3	1-2	3	6	9	1	0	0	3	4	6
Larry Hughes, SG	29	2-3	2-2	3-5	0	1	1	1	1	0	4	4	9
BENCH	MIN	FGM-A	3PM-A	FTM-A	OREB	DREB	REB	AST	STL	BLK	TO	PF	PTS
Anderson Varejao, FC	34	3-6	0-0	3-4	2	1	3	0	2	2	1	4	9
Donyell Marshall, F	15	0-1	0-1	0-0	0	3	3	0	0	1	0	1	0
Daniel Gibson, G	30	2-7	1-3	6-6	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	6	11
Damon Jones, PG	14	1-2	1-2	0-0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	3
Eric Snow, PG	8	0-1	0-1	0-0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0
Scot Pollard, C	0	0-0	0-0	0-0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0
Ira Newble, GF	DNP COACH'S DECISION
TOTALS		FGM-A	3PM-A	FTM-A	OREB	DREB	REB	AST	STL	BLK	TO	PF	PTS
		37-82	7-15	28-39	12	27	39	13	8	5	12	36	109
		45.1%	46.7%	71.8%	Team TO (pts off): 14 (19)

DETROIT PISTONS
STARTERS	MIN	FGM-A	3PM-A	FTM-A	OREB	DREB	REB	AST	STL	BLK	TO	PF	PTS
Tayshaun Prince, SF	50	4-13	1-2	1-2	4	5	9	3	1	0	4	4	10
Rasheed Wallace, PF	46	4-13	0-2	9-10	1	7	8	2	1	2	0	4	17
Chris Webber, FC	30	9-13	0-0	2-4	4	3	7	0	1	1	2	5	20
Richard Hamilton, SG	49	7-18	0-1	12-12	0	2	2	5	0	1	4	5	26
Chauncey Billups, PG	53	6-13	3-7	6-9	0	7	7	4	0	0	1	2	21
BENCH	MIN	FGM-A	3PM-A	FTM-A	OREB	DREB	REB	AST	STL	BLK	TO	PF	PTS
Antonio McDyess, PF	4	1-2	0-0	0-0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	1	2
Jason Maxiell, F	28	2-2	0-0	5-6	1	4	5	0	1	2	1	3	9
Lindsey Hunter, PG	14	1-5	0-1	0-0	1	3	4	2	1	1	0	1	2
Carlos Delfino, SG	8	0-1	0-1	0-0	0	0	0	2	1	0	1	0	0
Dale Davis, C	8	0-0	0-0	0-0	1	1	2	0	1	0	0	2	0
Nazr Mohammed, C	DNP COACH'S DECISION
Ronald Murray, SG	DNP COACH'S DECISION
TOTALS		FGM-A	3PM-A	FTM-A	OREB	DREB	REB	AST	STL	BLK	TO	PF	PTS
		34-80	4-14	35-43	12	33	45	18	7	7	13	27	107
		42.5%	28.6%	81.4%	Team TO (pts off): 14 (19)

Flagrant Fouls: 1 DETROIT ( A McDyess 1 )
Technicals: 1 CLEVELAND ( L James 1 )
Officials: Bennett Salvatore , Ron Garretson , Bob Delaney
Attendance: 22,076
Time: 03:35

5/30/2007

Our Theological Grid Determines Our Evangelism

Toward an Appreciative Inquiry Evangelism

The way we do evangelism is based on our theological grid.

Theological Grid #1:
Every human being is thoroughly depraved. Each person is in rebellion against God, in enmity with God, and deserves the wrath of God. Everything he or she does is tainted by sin, and nothing he or she does pleases God. A person’s rightful destiny is Hell. This world is so fallen that it is destined to be destroyed. The only hope for each person is to realize his or her sinfulness and turn to God for forgiveness, believing in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins. When a person does this, he or she is assured to escape from this fallen world, be spared of Hell, and guaranteed a place in heaven with God.

Most of these theological assertions are true (though I think that this world is not destined for destruction but rather for renewal, and that the destiny of Christians is not to escape this world, but for God to renew the earth so that He will dwell here with us).

I’m not questioning these theological assertions as much as I am questioning their use in evangelism in our postmodern 21st Century culture. If we approach people with this theological grid guiding our methods, we inevitably feel compelled to explain to them this theological grid. We have called this “proclamation of the gospel.”

If we approach people with this theological grid, we will get certain results. Some will repent of their sins and confess that they need Jesus Christ as Savior. Others will see our religion as judgmental. Still others will react negatively and see our religion as disconnected with the real lives that they are trying to live. Ask yourself, How do I react when somebody confronts me with the worst of who I am and seeks to force me to admit it? What do I think of people who believe that their calling is to point out other people’s faults so that they can fix them?

The evangelism method that we've been using tells people they have problems. The “good news” we proclaim is based first on the “bad news” that they are a mess. Ask yourself, Is there a problem with only focusing on the problems?

Now, watch as we start with a different theological grid…
Theological Grid #2:
Every human being is created in the image of God. Each person is a special creation of God, unique in his or her potential contribution to the rest of God’s Creation. Each person is inter-relational, meant to be connected with God and with other people, for the good of the Creation. God’s greatest desire is to bring out the very best in each person. This very best is intrinsically connected with the work of Jesus Christ in reconciling each person in deep relationship with God and reconnecting each person to others in myriad networks of authentic relationships. God is in the process of redeeming all of Creation for his glory. A person’s best possible destiny is to live glorified on a renewed and redeemed earth. God is already at work in people’s lives to pull them into the potential he has for them in the context of redeemed relationships. In order for people to move into their glorious destiny, a major change must occur to the status quo of that person’s life and to the common assumptions this person has about how life works. The person needs to yield to God’s re-creation of him or her into somebody very new and very different. That re-creation is key to the transformation of the world.

I believe that all of these theological assertions are also true.

So, what if my evangelistic conversations were framed around exploring and discovering what God is already doing in this person? What if I started with asking appreciative questions that reframes the conversation so that we can approach the positive change that God wants to accomplish in a person?

What is your vision of what a better world would be?
What do you think is your unique contribution to the world, to your friendships, in your workplace, to your family?
When have you experienced being closer to what you think God wants you to be?
What do you envision as your purpose in God’s desires for the world?
What do you think is your current destiny, and what do you think God wants it to be?

More on Appreciative Inquiry Evangelism:

technorati tags: emerging church, missional, missional community, spiritual formation, postmodernity, evangelism

5/25/2007

Appreciative Inquiry – an Overview

Appreciative Inquiry was designed by David Cooperrider and Suresh Srivastva in 1980 at Case Western University. Cooperrider studied the Cleveland Clinic’s organizational behavior by focusing just on the life-centric factors contributing to the highly effective functioning of the Clinic when it was at its best. Instead of dealing primarily with problems and seeking solutions to these problems in the organizational life of this institution, the focus was on that which could be appreciated and life-giving. The Cleveland Clinic became the first large site where a conscious decision to use an inquiry focusing on life-giving factors formed the basis for an organizational analysis.

Cooperrider and Srivastva define Appreciative Inquiry (AI) as a strategy for intentional change that identifies the best of "what is" to pursue dreams and possibilities of "what could be.” This is done in the context of interactive collaborative relationships; a cooperative search for the strengths, passions and life-giving forces that are found within every system and that hold potential for inspired, positive change. This has become a revolutionary way of managing organizations and people. (See the incredible website from the Weatherhead School of Management at Case Western Reserve University.)

AI is a way of collecting and celebrating "good news stories" of a community; these stories serve to enhance cultural identity, spirit and vision. Through these positive stories, the inquiry moves that community to identifying the best and highest qualities in organizational systems, particular situations, and in other human beings. AI focuses on an appreciation for the "mystery of being" (a term coined by Christian philosopher Gabriel Marcel) and a "reverence for life" (a term borrowed directly from Albert Schweitzer).

As I've studied this new way of moving organizations toward positive change, I am reminded that the gospel is about positive change. The “good news” is the story of how God is redeeming his Creation, starting with the restoration of the image of God in humanity. The strength of Appreciative Inquiry is found in its determination to find that which gives life. The focus is on identifying potential and bringing out the best in people.

I’ve been in search of a new way of doing outreach that affirms the image of God in people, encouraging them to submit to God’s grace of restoring this imago Dei through Jesus Christ.

I have found that asking positive questions that draw out the best in people and then pointing people to the glorious destiny of creation that God intends opens and encourages gospel-centered conversations more than solely negative-based proclamation about sin and judgment.

Perhaps AI is a tool we can learn from toward this end.

More on Appreciative Inquiry Evangelism:

technorati tags: emerging church, missional, missional community, spiritual formation, postmodernity, evangelism

5/23/2007

Appreciative Inquiry Evangelism

The way we’ve been sharing the gospel with people is through the means of telling them they are sinners in need of a savior. While this is very true for all of us, it is not the best way, all the time, for sharing the gospel.

What if we reframe the gospel presentation around the fact that the gospel is “good news?” What if we approached people in a way that will open them up to the grace and love and hope found in Jesus Christ rather than immediately putting them on the defensive?

In the following posts, I am going to apply a new way of interacting with people (especially in the business world), called “Appreciative Inquiry,” to the task of evangelism. This paradigm shift has a lot of potential for evangelism.

Think about sharing the gospel with someone in a paradigm that embraces these two words:

Ap-pre’ci-ate, v., 1. valuing; the act of recognizing the best in people or the world around us; affirming past and present strengths, successes, and potentials; to perceive those things that give life (health, vitality, excellence) to living systems 2. to increase in value, e.g. the economy has appreciated in value. Synonyms: VALUING, PRIZING, ESTEEMING, and HONORING.
In-quire’, v., 1. the act of exploration and discovery. 2. To ask questions; to be open to seeing new potentials and possibilities. Synonyms: DISCOVERY, SEARCH, and SYSTEMATIC EXPLORATION, STUDY.

What if we saw people not primarily as sinners, but as image-bearers? How would our evangelism look different if we appreciated all people, affirming their past and present strengths and successes? What if we valued people as human beings first rather than as merely possible candidates to become Christians? What if instead of seeing people as inherently flawed that we saw them with inherent potential?

And…
What if our interaction with people helped them explore and discover those potentialities and possibilities that God wants to flourish in them? What if we could introduce them to the Redeemer of all things, Jesus Christ, who wants to restore us to our image-bearing glory? What if we framed the gospel around a desired destiny rather than a defeatist depravity?

In the coming month, I will be posting ideas as to how to apply Appreciative Inquiry to emerging church outreach. This “Appreciative Inquiry Evangelism” (AIE) can revolutionize the way we share the gospel in a postmodern culture.