Web 2.0 and Relationships 2.0

Web 2.0 and Relationships 2.0

In the Internet world, the term Web 2.0 gained prominence in a piece Tim O’Reilly wrote on September 30, 2005. Though some argue that the term lacks precision and that the technology has been in place since at least 1995, Web 2.0 people frequently use the term to mean a new, more connected way the web is being used. It especially highlights applications that focus on web-based communities and social networking.

Web 2.0

Web 2.0 includes things such as blogs and vlogs (video blogs) linked together via sites such as Google Blogs or My Space or YouTube. Note here the 2.0 aspect—people have been writing web logs or online journals for some time. But now they are linked, interconnected. The same with YouTube for connecting videos. In a similar way, individual, isolated articles now are linked together through RSS feeds so that if you want to know about, for instance, John McCain’s campaign, you can automatically receive a plethora of diverse articles from around the county—getting a community view of him rather than a one-sided, slanted view.

Another Web 2.0 innovation includes sites such as Facebook which is an online community that proves the old adage of six degrees of separation. In other words, everyone is connected to everyone else via the friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend.

In fact, I joined Facebook three days ago when my nineteen-year-old daughter urged me to move into the 21st century. In less than 72 hours, I now have over 175 Facebook friends—these are people I actually know—who still want to be my friends! But that’s another story.

Relationships 2.0

My point is to help us “old folks” to understand not only Web 2.0 but what I call Relationships 2.0. Consistently I hear folks from my generation making comments that indicate cluelessness about how relationships work for the 2.0 generation.

For instance, a friend said, “I was on a college campus and people were alone on their cell phones talking, text messaging, and all that. Doesn’t anyone relate anymore?” Whose definition of relating was my friend using?

Other friends have said, “Kids are on the computer all alone all day. They never build any relationships.” Of course, those kids on the computer are likely playing online role-playing video games with friends across the street and across the country, or world. They are likely simultaneously chatting via any number of Web 2.0 social networking sites. And at the same time they are probably leaving “Wall” messages on Facebook profile pages of their friends.

Even when people hear this explanation, they still often say, “But that’s not relating. In the old day, you related face-to-face.”

Well, let’s talk about that. In the old day, you related face-to-face with a few people who lived close to you. Depending how many days you go back, like 100 years or so, travel issues meant that you had few opportunities for face-to-face interaction beyond your family or a few close neighbors. Now some people will jump on that and say, “Well see, at least they did have a few close relationships. As I’ll mention in a moment, that’s possible in the Web 2.0 world also. Additionally, let’s not kid ourselves. Not every person 100 years ago had idyllic relationships. There were lonely, hurting, hurtful, and mean people “back in the day” also.

Post-Modern or Pre-Modern?

People act like Relationships 2.0 are a post-modern invention. In reality, they are more pre-modern. Think about Martin Luther. I did my dissertation on his letters of spiritual counsel. He wrote over 3,000 letters of pastoral care, and received 1,000s back. This was not “face-to-face” relating, but it was deep, intimate, caring relating, nonetheless.

People today assume that you can’t relate via email, text messaging, or online chat. I disagree. Just as Luther could intimately connect with 100s of people through letter writing in his day, so it is possible that we can deeply connect with scores of people today through chat, email, text messaging, linked blogs, social networking sites, and the like.

Now, I’m not saying that every young person today has a network of healthy relationships. Of course, neither did every young person 100 years ago. Neither does every “old person” now.

My point is not to talk about bad, good, better, or best forms of relating. My point is to help my fellow “old folks” to lighten up. We’re never going to connect with the Web 2.0 Generation if we criticize and avoid their ways of relating.

Connecting with the Connected Generation: High Tech and High Touch

For me, rather than rip on it, I’m joining it. I’m a diehard Web 2.0 and Relationship 2.0 person. That doesn’t mean I’ve given up attending my small group in person, doesn’t mean I’ve given up attending church, doesn’t mean we’ve quit hosting parties at our house. I/we continue to do all of those face-to-face relationships.

But, I certainly email endlessly (still working on the text messaging, but I’ll get there). I do some free online chat counseling. I have my fair share of RSS feeds. Obviously, I post blogs on Google and link to hundreds of sites on my web site. As of this week, I’m on Facebook and loving it. I visit YouTube frequently. You get the idea.

The former ways of community building can remain. To them we can add new ways—Web 2.0 and Relationships 2.0 community building. Let’s be high tech and high touch.

Deep Teaching/Preaching and High School Wrestlers

If we listen to the so-called experts, we are forced to believe that “young people” (Gen Y, Post-Gens, teens/twenty-somethings) want absolutely nothing to do with content. All they want is experience.

I beg to differ.

Talking with my 18 and 21 year-old children, they consistently express the frustration that churches are dropping the content ball. “Dad, it’s all fluff.” “The pastor treats the congregation as if all they want is entertainment.” “Where do you go in Evangelical circles to find deep-thinking preaching and teaching related to life?”

Perhaps you think my kids are oddities.

Well, I also happen to coach public high school wrestlers. They don’t want experiences. They don’t want fluff. They don’t want to “just have fun or be entertained.” They want content--they want to know wrestling moves and do what it takes--the hard stuff, to learn those moves.

Wherever I go, “young people” are begging for content. For depth. For expertise. They are sick and tired of being told that truth does not matter to them.

They want to know, as I want to do, who these so-called experts are talking to.

Truth matters.

Content-starved teens and young adults crave truth-applied-to-life.

Whether it is college students or high school wrestlers, it is about time that we reject the silly notion that working with young people means finding some quickie ice breaker, preparing a five-minute “talk” (or worse yet, refusing to prepare and talking off the cuff).

It’s about time that we do the hard work of relating truth to life, which, of course, means believing that Truth exists and doing the hard work of finding the Truth and sharing the Truth--changeless Truth for changing times. Not fluffy experiences for supposed dim-witted young people.

Sorry, had to get that one off my chest . . .

Converging Streams, Mighty River

Converging Streams, Mighty River

Biblical counseling today is moving onto the right path. Perhaps a little history lesson (stay with me, history can be fasincation, honest; and I did say little") would be helpful.

One Anothering Spiritual Friendship

Long before our current debates about what makes biblical counseling "biblical," New Testament writers spoke about "one anothering." Every believer was to love one another, encourage one another, confront one another, disciple one another, etc.

Biblical counseling is nothing more, nothing lss, than biblical one anothering.

In the long stream of Church history, for centuries this one anothering became known as spiritual friendship. Not only did pastors and theologians provide spiritual friendship for lay people, but lay people provided it for pastors and theologians.

Various streams of spiritual friendship converged and merged into four mighty tributaries along two prominent rivers (to continued our river analogy):

*Soul Care: Comforting the Suffering

*Sustaining: Empathizing--"It's Normal to Hurt"
*Healing: Encouraging--"It's Possible to Hope"

*Spiritual Direction: Challenging the Sinning

*Reconciling: Exhorting--"It's Horrible to Sin/Wonderful to Be Forgiven"
*Guiding: Empowering--"It's Supernatural to Mature"

Other Flowing Rivers

Throughout Church history, Christians faced and interacted with non-Christian ways of people helping. At times, Christians rejected all such "worldly" ways of helping. At other times, they chose to use the language of the day, while keeping the biblical concepts. At still other times, they decided to merge certain principles from the world with principles from the Word. (This is an all-too-broad summary, but I did say a "little" history lesson.)

Beginning with modern secular psychology, many Christians leaders replaced historic one anothering with secular theory. (This is another very broad generalization. However, unlike the preceding 1850 years, history does demonstrate a major surrender of historic bibical counseling themes from 1850 to 1950, especially among American and European White Protestants.)

The Modern/Post-Modern Thread

Here's where the story gets really fascinating.

In the 1960s and 70s, several biblical counseling movements launched attempts to reclaim the mantle of people helping. Unfortunately, like many such movements that are a reaction against something, they tended to be unbalanced.

One such movement tended to focus predominantly on reconciling and guiding through confronting sin. It was biblical in that exhorting people to escape sin is biblical. However, what it gained on the truth side of one anothering, it lost on the love side.

Another such movement tended to focus on sustaining and healing through comforting the suffering. It was biblical in that encouraging suffering people is biblical. However, what it gained on the love side of one anothering, it lost on the truth side.

Counsel Wars

For the next half century, these two competing models did just that--they competed. Often, they did so with less civility than the on-looking secular world. To this day, these counsel wars continue . . . sadly.

Go to the Internet, read Blogs, type in certain names, and you will find each side claiming that the other side is filled with "psychoheretics."

One side accuses the other side of the psychoheresy of the failure to love the suffering. They call them "relational heretics." They say that their opponents fail the test of orthopraxy (biblical love).

Another side accuses the other side of the psychoheresy of the failure to confront the sinning. They call them "theological heretics." They say that their opponents fail the test of orthodoxy (biblical truth).

Converging Streams

Fortunately, the two side, at times, are merging and bringing the best of both worlds while losing the worse of the world.

Why is this happening now?

Mainly because history is in vogue once again among Christians. Protestant Christians in particular, who for nearly 500-years avoided history and traditon for fear (terror) that it might smack of "Romish Ritual and Human Tradition," are now recognizing that the Holy Spirit has a history.

Returning to the Bible and Church history, Protestants are unearthing the embedded stream of spiritual friendship with its twin tributaries of soul care and spiritual direction.

Once again, one anothering that values truth and love, that focuses on suffering and sinning, and that appreciates sustaining, healing, reconciling, and guiding is rising to the surface and winning the day.

How incredible!

In other words, biblical one anothering spiritual friendship is flowing again like a mighty river.

So What?

What does this have to do with you? I did, after all, call this Blog a history lesson. A few questions to ponder can help us to apply today's history lesson.

1. As you evaluate current models of people helping, ask, "Does this model exhibit all four streams (sustaining, healing, reconciling, and guiding)?"

2. As you think about the church where you are a member, ask, "Does it exhibit all four streams? If not, what could I do to help?"

3. As you reflect upon your own way of offering spiritual friendship, ask, "Do I exhibit all four streams?"

4. As you interact about current models of people helping, ask, "Am I interacting in a spirit of speaking the truth in love?"

Let's finally "get it right" by practicing orthopraxy and orthodoxy in our one anothering spiritual friendships by speaking the truth in love through biblical and historical soul care and spiritual direction.

Unveiling the "Secret of Jesus"

Unveiling the Secret

I've been asked frequently, "Bob, what do you think of Brian McLaren's latest book, 'The Secret of Jesus'?" Here's my response/review.

As an English major, genre is rightly extremely important to author Brian McLaren. Before interpreting any book, a reader must understand the book’s nature, purpose, and audience. Such is certainly true with “The Secret Message of Jesus.”

Once a reader understands McLaren’s intended audience and purpose with that audience, McLaren’s consistent emphasis on the “newness” of his interpretation begins to make more sense. Here’s his message (stop now if you don’t like the end of the story being ruined by a reviewer): Jesus was a revolutionary who spoke not only about life in heaven later, but also about life on earth now, and not only about individual life now, but about corporate life, societal life, national, political life.

Here’s the thing. I kept reading and thinking, “Yeah, so, how is that novel?” In the Evangelical circles in which I travel, this is simply not the “neo” or hidden message that McLaren makes it out to be. Yes, in these circles Jesus offering eternal life in heaven is an oft repeated refrain. However, equally vital in these circles is the fact that Jesus has a message for us today—a message about how we live together individually and corporately.

So, the secret message of Jesus is not nearly so secret even in the conservative Evangelical circles that McLaren is prone to critique. In fact, in the Eastern Orthodox Church, in Mainline Protestant Churches, in the Catholic Church, in Charismatic Churches, in African American Churches, and even in Conservative Protestant Churches, Jesus is often preached as a Revolutionary whose message mandates societal change now. The Gospel, in these groups, has both individual-salvific and a socio-political ramifications.

Undoubtedly, McLaren disagrees with my assessment, especially of Evangelicals, as the message of this book and most of his recent works makes plain. Perhaps that’s one reason why some Evangelicals feel a tad confused and even unfairly judged by McLaren. He doesn’t like their myopic, judgmental, exclusivistic ways (as he perceives them). However, it does feel a bit attacking to be called such, especially if you have, in fact, been trying to humbly live the beautiful, magical God life in all its fullness just as much as McLaren has. . . . Perhaps they haven’t missed the point quite as much as McLaren suggests. Perhaps, instead, they have pursued the point in mysterious, subtle ways in their homes, churches, neighborhoods, and places of employments—in ways that gentler eyes might see if they had eyes to see. . . .

So, what gives? Why the build up about a new, secret understanding of Jesus? “It’s the audience!” McLaren wants to reach a secular, educated, somewhat liberal audience that has been turned off by their image of Jesus either as an other-worldly Savior or a this-world Pharisaical Judge. McLaren wants to entice these folks to reconsider the stereotype of Jesus that has offended them. I applaud his efforts. And, I encourage readers and reviewers to read McLaren’s message in this light. Otherwise, you will likely be scratching your head with me wondering why this message seems much less secretive than McLaren stresses.

As for the message itself, as always Brian McLaren uses his English major writing skills quite well. “The Secret Message of Jesus” is a page-turner. Even though his message will not be novel to many who will end up reading this book, the author does present it in a captivating way.

As example of his fluid writing style, consider chapter 7 (“The Demonstration of the Message”). I have never read a more engaging, thought-provoking, and enlightening discussion of “miracles” (signs to signify and wonders to make us wonder) and their relationship to the kingdom, then I read in this chapter.

Chapter 18 (“The Borders of the Kingdom”) is another penetrating, helpful, insightful, and practical chapter. I won’t spoil this one for you, but if you’ve ever wondered about the exclusive message of the kingdom (“Repent!”), the inclusive message of the kingdom (“All you who are thirsty and sick, come and drink and be healed”), and how this seeming paradox relates, then read this chapter.

What, then, is this radical “kingdom now” message of Jesus? It has current application individually and societally. Individually, according to McLaren, it focuses on an “interactive relationship with God” through Christ. This is why, in McLaren’s eyes, Jesus spoke in parables. He wanted to use cryptic images to spark our imaginations and prompt our curiosity so that we would humbly engage God, and be engaged by God, in dialogue about how to live the God life.

Corporately, the message is a scandalous call to changing planet Earth now. CEOs cut their mega-salaries and hike the salaries of entry level workers. Corporations care more about product safety than profit margins. Politicians wonder more about how their policies impact world peace than how their sound bites affect poll numbers. Soccer moms care less about their daughters’ playing time and more about being a playful secret agent of the kingdom.

Hmm. In a sense, isn’t this Charles M. Sheldon’s “In His Steps”? We individually ask, “What would Jesus do?” Our individual responses light a candle that causes an epidemic of “passing it on” to others, eventually resulting in world-wide change as the kingdom reign of Christ becomes a practical reality.

One area that many will likely struggle with, both conservative Evangelicals and liberal seekers, is McLaren’s attempted descriptions of heaven. Since the “kingdom of heaven” for McLaren is this-worldly, he must address the obvious question, “What then of the future heaven, of future life?” In chapter five, McLaren briefly discusses the phrase “eternal life” making it about entering now into the abundant kingdom life that Jesus inaugurated. In chapter twenty, he focuses on the eternal, after-life heaven. He tells us what it is not: harps, clouds, ethereal, disembodied. This is vital. But, he does not really tell us what it is. If this is intended to entice seekers, based upon a multitude of conversations with intellectual seekers, I doubt that it will allure them.

For those interested in a thoroughly biblical, captivating, and motivational view of the after life, I highly recommend Randy Alcorn’s opus, “Heaven” (a one-word title, but a 500-page masterpiece). “Heaven” makes heaven, well, very earthy. Alcorn’s descriptions so powerfully portray the next life that they change the way we live this life. In fact, his application is similar to McLaren’s: live now for the least of these.

Whereas “Heaven” is Alcorn’s epic about the next world, “The Secret Message” is McLaren’s classic about this world. He says it best in chapter 9 (“You Can’t Keep a Secret”). “Jesus was master of making the music of life—not just with wood and string, tuners and frets, but with skin and bone, smile and laughter, shout and whisper, time and space, food and drink. He invited the disciples to learn to make beautiful life-music in his secret revolutionary kingdom-of-God way. He helped each of them learn the disciplines and skill of living in the kingdom of God” (p. 77). Much like Dallas Willard, McLaren is reminding us that kingdom-living then and now involves interacting with and imitating the life of Jesus. (For in-depth, theological, and practical discussions of kingdom living now, read Willard: “The Spirit of the Disciplines,” “The Divine Conspiracy,” and “Renovation of the Heart.”) Though possibly not quite so secretive as suggested, the message is well worth knowing, living, and sharing.

Yes, know, live, and share the message of the kingdom of God. It is, as McLaren poetically recounts, the dream of God, the revolution of God, the mission of God, the party of God, the network of God, and the dance of God. Who in their right mind would choose to evade such an invitation?