I has no idea what was cooking but I knew that He was up to something when this wee child was born in this dump where we ended up last night. It turned out to be a sleepless night. It's been a funny ride so far. First of all I had a hard time believing that my wife to be was expecting. I swear I never touched her! I know you won't beleive this but I swear I didn't and if it wasn't for this supertnatural intervention from above, I would have walked out of this relationship.
Then, we didn't get to choose a name for the child. We knew it was going to be a boy and were instructed to call him Jesus. It's a cool name, but it didn't appear on our own shortlist. We had something more fancy in mind.
I'm still mesmerized by the whole thing and have had to do some hard thinking the last couple of months. Foreknowledge does some bizar stuff with your mind. Imagine that you'd know about stuff that was going to happen that no one else in the world would be even the least aware of. You'd think it's cool but I tell you it messes with your mind.
I have no idea how this will all pan out but I know one thing. If this is the Jesus that was promised in the book, things will change. The angel told us that we had to call him Jesus for he would save his people from their sin.
That is huge!
Since I couldn't sleep last night - it was sort of an eventfull night, to use an understatement - and after my wife finally lost herself in the blessed oblivion of subconsciousness that come with sleep and the boy also decided to call it a night, I just sat there and stared at the boy trying to put one plus one together and really, it doesn't add up in my mind. Off the record: it's ridiculous! I'm sorry to say this but I want to be honest and will never go public with it. That's why I am determined to burn this journal in a couple of weeks time. (Note from the editor: Joseph never got to burn it. It got stolen a few weeks later when the family went on a Sunday afternoon picknick. Some goofs hid the journal, they though it somewhat sacred, in a place called Qumran where it was found just last week).
It's not just hard, but next to impossible to imagine that this wee boy is going to save his people from their sins. I can't see how he's going to pull that one off.
But, if it's true, then everything will change. To be honest, I want it to be true. The very thought of the biggest obstacle between me and God taken care off; wow!
I've got to go. There's noise in the dump. I'd better check it out; we can't let them boy go hungry and thirsty. You never know.
P.s. I love my wife! She did so well last night.
Taken from: "The lost journal of Joseph, the bloke who semi-fathered Jesus". The title is misleading since the journal was never lost. Nobody knew it existed and therefore nobody was looking for it.
26 December 2011
15 November 2011
All is never all
With Christ, God would give all things to the believer. As a free gift (Romans 8:32). Recently I came across an over simplistic interpretation. It wasn’t the first time. It seems that many evangelicals turned the simplification of Biblical notions into a hobby; "All things is All things" and any other interpretation would be an act of disbelief and doubt.
A new Bentley or a car that can’t break down? Perfect health? Sunshine when I want it? Less sleep? A house overlooking the sea with neighbors who live more than one kilometer away? A maintenance-free garden? The keenest spiritual insight that is humanly possible? A bicycle with tires that can’t go flat? We could go on. So we need to think. And think a bit more though there will always be a few that will hold on to “all things are all things.” Take it away from and their belief system collapses.
This kind of simplifications doesn’t promote the reality and communication of the Good News.
If the owner of the local supermarket surprised me by saying that I am the tenth visitor and as a reward I can take a sample of all things in his store than this “all” is confined to the shop inventory. If I then walk to the store next door and start taking samples from “all” that I find in that store, everyone understands that such action would be insane Context is everything.
For convenience sake (or just because one is lazy) this is the easiest step to skip in understanding scripture. It's tempting to take one verse and apply it metaphysically. Every idea in the Bible story is wrapped in a particular framework, the bigger framework of God’s big story and the framework of immediate surroundings. When Paul says that God in Christ gives us all things you are obliged to investigate the limits and boundaries in which the verse finds itself.
Romans 8 tells the story of all that Christ has done for us. The “all that Christ did” is the basis for our understanding of the “all” we receive in Him. Looking at it from this perspective suddenly adds all depth, meaning and relevance to the verse. Because it is "contained" we suddenly see. It is quite specific!
The "all things" in a metaphysical sense doesn’t do that for us and creates a lot of confusion and disappointment.
A wealthy Roman had a son who broke his heart and a slave who aroused his admiration. On his deathbed, the man decided to disinherit his son and to leave everything to the slave, Marcellus. He had his will written up and then told his son what he had done. "I've decided to leave everything to Marcellus," he said. "However, you may choose one thing for yourself from the estate." "Then I choose Marcellus!" replied the son.
That’s all.
A new Bentley or a car that can’t break down? Perfect health? Sunshine when I want it? Less sleep? A house overlooking the sea with neighbors who live more than one kilometer away? A maintenance-free garden? The keenest spiritual insight that is humanly possible? A bicycle with tires that can’t go flat? We could go on. So we need to think. And think a bit more though there will always be a few that will hold on to “all things are all things.” Take it away from and their belief system collapses.
This kind of simplifications doesn’t promote the reality and communication of the Good News.
If the owner of the local supermarket surprised me by saying that I am the tenth visitor and as a reward I can take a sample of all things in his store than this “all” is confined to the shop inventory. If I then walk to the store next door and start taking samples from “all” that I find in that store, everyone understands that such action would be insane Context is everything.
For convenience sake (or just because one is lazy) this is the easiest step to skip in understanding scripture. It's tempting to take one verse and apply it metaphysically. Every idea in the Bible story is wrapped in a particular framework, the bigger framework of God’s big story and the framework of immediate surroundings. When Paul says that God in Christ gives us all things you are obliged to investigate the limits and boundaries in which the verse finds itself.
Romans 8 tells the story of all that Christ has done for us. The “all that Christ did” is the basis for our understanding of the “all” we receive in Him. Looking at it from this perspective suddenly adds all depth, meaning and relevance to the verse. Because it is "contained" we suddenly see. It is quite specific!
The "all things" in a metaphysical sense doesn’t do that for us and creates a lot of confusion and disappointment.
A wealthy Roman had a son who broke his heart and a slave who aroused his admiration. On his deathbed, the man decided to disinherit his son and to leave everything to the slave, Marcellus. He had his will written up and then told his son what he had done. "I've decided to leave everything to Marcellus," he said. "However, you may choose one thing for yourself from the estate." "Then I choose Marcellus!" replied the son.
That’s all.
Caps with Food (STop Eating!)
Another unedited translation of my Dutch Blog. I was rolling with laughter trying to read it
Caps with food!
Or not? Who is right? The man with the belly hanging down to his knees as a result doktert weekly or extremely fit athlete who carefully chooses his diet and never dokert just on his 82nd death. One cost the state tons and hasteth toward the finish line in sight without ever getting while the other defends the honor of the country with their gymnastic exercises.Vark or not? That was about the discussion in Romans 14.Paul's answer, we now look askance at: you can eat what you want and we have to cut each other to condemn. The ruminants must varketers alone and omnivores have caps with looking down on rodents. However, if you offend my gnawing, I eat it at home. If my gevark (yes, I know now my knees touching my belly, but I do have fun) you objectionable, I love me. We are free to eat whatever we want but there is an issue where it enters into a transcendent principle: love.This love and appreciates the other and does not self-promotion.
How cute .... From whom would he have?This contradicts the prevailing view that the right of "authenticity" always prevails, I do my thing my way and if you do not like bad luck.It is also called verhuftering.On the train with a big schlemiel does with its leather jekkie, his ipod, iphone, iphone and other fruit derivatives and are possibly even larger if someone tries to make one of the four chairs schlemiel has claimed to requirements.Elegant behavior more inviting to the practice of transcendent love than loutish behavior. Verhuftering invites you to participate jerk. The sense of outrage is increasing and subtle leads to withdrawal, I live my life my way and you yours your way. But it has nothing to do with promoting the other, and everything just to protect the self.We live in an insane world.
Caps with food!
Or not? Who is right? The man with the belly hanging down to his knees as a result doktert weekly or extremely fit athlete who carefully chooses his diet and never dokert just on his 82nd death. One cost the state tons and hasteth toward the finish line in sight without ever getting while the other defends the honor of the country with their gymnastic exercises.Vark or not? That was about the discussion in Romans 14.Paul's answer, we now look askance at: you can eat what you want and we have to cut each other to condemn. The ruminants must varketers alone and omnivores have caps with looking down on rodents. However, if you offend my gnawing, I eat it at home. If my gevark (yes, I know now my knees touching my belly, but I do have fun) you objectionable, I love me. We are free to eat whatever we want but there is an issue where it enters into a transcendent principle: love.This love and appreciates the other and does not self-promotion.
How cute .... From whom would he have?This contradicts the prevailing view that the right of "authenticity" always prevails, I do my thing my way and if you do not like bad luck.It is also called verhuftering.On the train with a big schlemiel does with its leather jekkie, his ipod, iphone, iphone and other fruit derivatives and are possibly even larger if someone tries to make one of the four chairs schlemiel has claimed to requirements.Elegant behavior more inviting to the practice of transcendent love than loutish behavior. Verhuftering invites you to participate jerk. The sense of outrage is increasing and subtle leads to withdrawal, I live my life my way and you yours your way. But it has nothing to do with promoting the other, and everything just to protect the self.We live in an insane world.
17 September 2011
About being right
Translated and edited Dutch Blog with the assistance of my friend Google
This morning I woke up and had to think about the fight between Paul and Barnabas.Then of course could not go back to sleep and at 05:15 I'm writing this blog in a disintegrating obscure hotel in Wigan (near Preston) whilst drinking my second cup of "complimentary" tea before packing my belongings and travel on to Liverpools John Lennon International Airport where a KLM aircraft from will transport me back to my home turf.
The feud between these two men came up earlier this week and the echo of a comment someone made sounded in the back of my mind: "I look forward to spending time with Paul and find out who, in retrospect, was right."
Suddenly it dawned on me that it's not about who was right! The Western man has the inherent need to divide things in right and wrong, good and bad, and finds it hard to deal with, or accept "gray". "Gray" stands for compromise, vague, ambiguity: "gray" is for wimps. However, in real life we seem to allow for quite some grey in our own lives. But that's another issue altogether.
The dominant Western culture of 'right and wrong' dictates the type of questions we ask.
The question of who was right, is in some sense irrelevant. Both Paul and Barnabas had legitimate reasons whether or not to take John Mark along on the second missionary journey. Paul struggled with the lack of persistence in JM's character while Baranabas took a more pastoral approach with some family loyalty thrown in the mix (JM was a relative).
Anyway, it's not a competition where both contestants score points where the one with the most legitimate arguments can go to the next round.
1) The big story of God has to be brought in the equation. He gets what he wants: two mission trips, instead of one. The boys, after a first missionary journey already established a rut. The striking silence (no intervention) of God helps us to pay better attention to that side of the mystery. The "nothing" of God in human dilemmas can easily lead to something bigger.
2) The extent of the responsibility that God has given to man to make up his own mind, to make decisions and live with the consequences of that decision is vast. Choosing between the two seemingly equal options does not necessarily mean that the one is better than the other. I'm not talking about foul mouthing another person. That's not a moral dilemma. One just doesn’t do that. . It's about the more delicate issues that even the with the finest discernment doesn't present a clear case. Two rather equal options will result in two distinct future stories. The choice is ours. It helps to draw out potential story lines and to choose the preferred one.
3) We are and remain human. As much as we try to live in peace and unity with one another, there comes a time when find ourselves diametrically opposed to the other. Can we go our separate ways and still remain friends? We do not have enough information to draw a clear conclusion but after the feud we no longer find P and B together. Brokenness will affect our relationships and the way we work together.
In OM, we are faced daily with these dilemmas. On a small scale but also on a large scale where regardless of the possible future story any decisions will result in far-reaching consequences for the organization within and outside.
It occurred to me that the farther away we are from a story, the easier is to have opinions about it and to judge. One drawn in to the story, it's suddenly a lot less simple. Life is complex.
It's not easy to obey God when He speaks; to hear what he says when he doesn't speak requires highly trained hearts and ears. Even then, we mess up.
This morning I woke up and had to think about the fight between Paul and Barnabas.Then of course could not go back to sleep and at 05:15 I'm writing this blog in a disintegrating obscure hotel in Wigan (near Preston) whilst drinking my second cup of "complimentary" tea before packing my belongings and travel on to Liverpools John Lennon International Airport where a KLM aircraft from will transport me back to my home turf.
The feud between these two men came up earlier this week and the echo of a comment someone made sounded in the back of my mind: "I look forward to spending time with Paul and find out who, in retrospect, was right."
Suddenly it dawned on me that it's not about who was right! The Western man has the inherent need to divide things in right and wrong, good and bad, and finds it hard to deal with, or accept "gray". "Gray" stands for compromise, vague, ambiguity: "gray" is for wimps. However, in real life we seem to allow for quite some grey in our own lives. But that's another issue altogether.
The dominant Western culture of 'right and wrong' dictates the type of questions we ask.
The question of who was right, is in some sense irrelevant. Both Paul and Barnabas had legitimate reasons whether or not to take John Mark along on the second missionary journey. Paul struggled with the lack of persistence in JM's character while Baranabas took a more pastoral approach with some family loyalty thrown in the mix (JM was a relative).
Anyway, it's not a competition where both contestants score points where the one with the most legitimate arguments can go to the next round.
1) The big story of God has to be brought in the equation. He gets what he wants: two mission trips, instead of one. The boys, after a first missionary journey already established a rut. The striking silence (no intervention) of God helps us to pay better attention to that side of the mystery. The "nothing" of God in human dilemmas can easily lead to something bigger.
2) The extent of the responsibility that God has given to man to make up his own mind, to make decisions and live with the consequences of that decision is vast. Choosing between the two seemingly equal options does not necessarily mean that the one is better than the other. I'm not talking about foul mouthing another person. That's not a moral dilemma. One just doesn’t do that. . It's about the more delicate issues that even the with the finest discernment doesn't present a clear case. Two rather equal options will result in two distinct future stories. The choice is ours. It helps to draw out potential story lines and to choose the preferred one.
3) We are and remain human. As much as we try to live in peace and unity with one another, there comes a time when find ourselves diametrically opposed to the other. Can we go our separate ways and still remain friends? We do not have enough information to draw a clear conclusion but after the feud we no longer find P and B together. Brokenness will affect our relationships and the way we work together.
In OM, we are faced daily with these dilemmas. On a small scale but also on a large scale where regardless of the possible future story any decisions will result in far-reaching consequences for the organization within and outside.
It occurred to me that the farther away we are from a story, the easier is to have opinions about it and to judge. One drawn in to the story, it's suddenly a lot less simple. Life is complex.
It's not easy to obey God when He speaks; to hear what he says when he doesn't speak requires highly trained hearts and ears. Even then, we mess up.
14 September 2011
Fun: a non edited translation of my Dutch blog
I write an (almost) daily blog in Dutch. It's just too much time to do an English one as well but I thought, just to have some fun, to have Google translate today's Blog into English. So here it is. Not-edited. Wonder if it makes sense. It made me giggle and smile at times:
Yesterday a lamp bought for the floor lamp in "my" room. Did not. Somewhere a hitch.So, when I woke up this morning, showered, got dressed and then looked at my watch, assuming it was six o'clock, it appeared to be barely five hours. Back to bed is not an option because then my hair disheveled.
Today the three day rally: International HR planning and Strategis. A little exciting because it is long ago that we as an international HR staff to the table.
1) The spiritual aspect is important. One as the Father and the Son are not only a star here. It is bitter necessity. Why?
The unity that Jesus is talking about (John 15) is the evidence for the existence of God and therefore both the most effective and inviting way for people to move to follow Jesus.
Since the latter the reason for our existence as an organization, we can not allow ourselves to get bogged down in bureaucracy, silo thinking and acting island. Just a good HR department personnel and state must ensure that effective internal design. If we can not, we can not expect others to do it.
2) The future is important. If an organization has more than fifty years is there are many practices and customs that define the status quo. Thus, an organization that adheres to rigid methodologies, structures and systems, its own great obstacle to growth, change and effectiveness are. Interpersonal dynamics often play a major and decisive role. That is unacceptable. We have to move. Subject to the past.
3) Joint is crucial. Why we do what we do and we should keep doing it? A possible and / or necessary future together sharply on the retina will be dealt with noise. Personal hobbies, mutual antagonism, and dagromerij unrealistic nostalgia, it's all part of the dynamic package put together by workers in a group. To get through a clear path forward generation is only possible if the individuals in these groups are capable of a higher purpose in mind. Therefore, it listed in '1 'are crystal clear on the retina.
Mr. Chairman to the task of navigating us through. Hence it quite a bit exciting.
Today the three day rally: International HR planning and Strategis. A little exciting because it is long ago that we as an international HR staff to the table.
1) The spiritual aspect is important. One as the Father and the Son are not only a star here. It is bitter necessity. Why?
The unity that Jesus is talking about (John 15) is the evidence for the existence of God and therefore both the most effective and inviting way for people to move to follow Jesus.
Since the latter the reason for our existence as an organization, we can not allow ourselves to get bogged down in bureaucracy, silo thinking and acting island. Just a good HR department personnel and state must ensure that effective internal design. If we can not, we can not expect others to do it.
2) The future is important. If an organization has more than fifty years is there are many practices and customs that define the status quo. Thus, an organization that adheres to rigid methodologies, structures and systems, its own great obstacle to growth, change and effectiveness are. Interpersonal dynamics often play a major and decisive role. That is unacceptable. We have to move. Subject to the past.
3) Joint is crucial. Why we do what we do and we should keep doing it? A possible and / or necessary future together sharply on the retina will be dealt with noise. Personal hobbies, mutual antagonism, and dagromerij unrealistic nostalgia, it's all part of the dynamic package put together by workers in a group. To get through a clear path forward generation is only possible if the individuals in these groups are capable of a higher purpose in mind. Therefore, it listed in '1 'are crystal clear on the retina.
Mr. Chairman to the task of navigating us through. Hence it quite a bit exciting.
13 September 2011
Case Study
I was going through the, now full, notebook, tearing out what can be binned. These notebooks are the sum of months of thoughts, minutes, ideas and "to do" lists that I never really got to do. I got to this particular page with the heading "Case Study" with at the bottom : "note to self: do something with this, idiot."
For the record, thius thing with the notebooks is my relatively effective MO.
The note dates back one year:
Married lady, 45 years old, has been with her company for more than 20 years. She and her husband changed field, culture and country and now have to learn a new language. Being recognised leaders before they now find themselves on the same level as the 20 year olds who just joined the company.
"I don't get the recognition that I think I deserve," she laments. "It's like starting all over again. All my experience and gained knowledge seems to be irrelevant and useless."
She continues,"Our Company, because of its flat leadership structure, has not many positions to be promoted to. My husband, who is on the level of a country leader, now leads the language learning program."
She finishes her lament and looks at you, expectantly. What does she want to hear? What does she need to hear?
Please talk to her for me. What would you say?
P.s. this lady is not with OM.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)