Comments for Jen and Sean

Comment on The unRapture by mchesner

mchesner — Sun, 22 May 2011 15:45:42 +0000

You know from my own post that I am trying to take a humble and reasonable stand toward Mr. Camping. I am praying for he and for his followers.

But I think it *IS* important for Christians to speak out LOUDLY against him, and to have been quite clear in their condemnation early. Why? Because the absence of opposition is taken by non-Christians as agreement. And thus his failure would have tarred all of Christendom with the same brush. By coming out early and unambiguously as rejecting Camping, Christian leaders let even a hostile media know that he DID NOT speak for Christians. (Even as things are, a number of prominent “evangelistic” atheists are trying to use this to pull sheep away from the flock.)

And, I am not sure what your experience was, but my experience was that God *DID* use this false prophet for his own glory. I took part in multiple discussions with non-Christians about the gospel, because of this. And Franklin Graham was able to share the FULL GOSPEL on multiple programs because of it. Seems like God used it exactly the way you’d have hoped.

So, I think I’m seeing something very different from what you are. Perhaps it is an East Coast vs West Coast thing?

Comment on I love newspapers by quizwedge

quizwedge — Sat, 01 Jan 2011 00:20:49 +0000

I think you hit a big point when you talked about tabloid/entertainment journalism. Many of the real news stories just come from the AP who, I’ve heard, outsource the basic structure to cheap labor around the world. Newspapers don’t seem to have the desire or budget for real investigative reporting. If they reported real news that they had to do some real investigating for, I wonder if they would be doing better. Then again, the average attention span seems to be tilted towards the more puff pieces.

Comment on Our morning visitor by quizwedge

quizwedge — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 20:21:49 +0000

dang it, first comment and I mess it up. By her, I obviously mean your wife.

Comment on Our morning visitor by quizwedge

quizwedge — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 20:20:15 +0000

As a husband, you’re also supposed to provide for her and take care of her. So, I think you did the right thing and don’t need to rationalize. Other than that, I’m not sure where the line is either. Perhaps knowing where the line is becomes more a matter of listening for God’s prompting instead of a hard and fast line.

Comment on Netflix queue shuffler by Tweets that mention Jen and Sean » Blog Archive » Netflix queue shuffler -- Topsy.com

Sun, 18 Apr 2010 20:09:12 +0000

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Sean Dean and Sean Dean, Naed Productions. Naed Productions said: Updated the Netflix Queue Shuffler so that it automatically updates your queue after the shuffle. http://ow.ly/1zXBN [...]

Comment on Open Source Church by crchair

crchair — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:53:08 +0000

The churches that I see that do well are the ones that exhibit a “vision”. It doesn’t matter if these have power centralized or spread out. If the culture is one that believes that “vision” is important and works to develop and carry out that vision, then it is successful.

Comment on Open Source Church by Sean

Sean — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 18:31:41 +0000

I think you’re correct about Luther. I think that Calvin was generally the more negative example – see the way he ruled over Geneva also the idea of unconditional election trickles down to the idea of a leader that picks winners and losers.

Comment on Open Source Church by mchesner

mchesner — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 18:18:08 +0000

Which kind of leader do you think Luther was? I think he tried to be the good example above, but more often became the negative example above. Calvin, too.

Comment on Open Source Church by Sean

Sean — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 16:33:56 +0000

I don’t believe having a leader is a bad thing at all – in fact it’s necessary to the development of the OSchurch. What I’m saying is that when the leader ends up being the driving force rather than the guiding force things go awry. If we let Joel Osteen or Rick Warren drive where we’re going as a church then we’re missing out on the input of millions of people that could make the church that much better. But there is a place for them to guide and watch the boundaries of orthodoxy.

RE: Your twitter question (http://twitter.com/mchesner/status/6427995136)
The problem with discussing the emerging and community church movements is that they’re such broad terms. Some emerging churches are great examples of OSC – like Mars Hill Bible Church in Michigan. A great leader that directs but doesn’t drive the body, in fact he’s stepped back to keep from being the exclusive face of the body. While there are others – like the Mars Hill in Seattle that is driven exclusively by its charismatic leader. So really there’s nothing different about emerging churches than from any other church. It’s really a question of how the leadership applies itself to the body.

Comment on Open Source Church by mchesner

mchesner — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 12:43:24 +0000

The ultimate evidence for your “Open Source Church” ideal is the existence of scripture, Old and New Testament. While not all of humanity was literate, since the inception of Judaism and thru the inception of Christianity, any human being could learn the core stories and concepts behind either religion by simply learning how to read. And by translating the Bible into the common tongues, the Reformers put the power into the hands of masses.

I am not sure, however, that looking for a leader (i.e. Billy Graham) is contrary to “Open Source”. Linux has Linus Torvalds, for example, who helps to unify the major direction of the O/S and is useful in weeding out stupid debates over minutiae. That is the function that leaders like Graham and others have served over the years in Christianity, and it has similarly been successful.