Some reflections on John 16

His dis­ci­ples said, “Ah, now you are speak­ing plainly and not using fig­u­ra­tive speech!”– John 16:29

Yay for clar­ity! You can find the full­text of John 16 here. Apolo­gies for the slight ram­bling­ness of this post. It gains clar­ity towards the end… twas some­what shaped off a Skype con­ver­sa­tion that I haven’t the time nor energy to prop­erly edit at this point :)

John 8:14 is pretty funny in its por­trayal of the sheer incor­rect­ness of the Phar­isees’ asser­tion of the pas­sage prior: It’s like… you can’t speak truth because you’re speak­ing truth about your­self (!!)… and then, fast­for­ward back to 16:30  –  “We know that you know all things and don’t need any­one to ques­tion you; this is why we believe that you came from God” – then, in verse 31, Jesus — “oh, so NOW you get it…”

Verse 32 — “But, seri­ously… yeah, right. Even if you say you do you’re all about to piss­bolt… Oh, that’s now, btw.”

33 — “but I’ve said this stuff so that”… You’ll know after the res­ur­rec­tion what’s going on… The res­ur­rec­tion is the act that will make sense of all of this; there will be no fig­ures of speech because it’s a con­crete demon­stra­tion of what the Christ is achiev­ing — “over­com­ing the world” and bring­ing peace for those who are in him — kinda like way the Father is with Him even when all oth­ers desert

Verse 23 is con­fus­ing… “You won’t ask me any­thing” vs. “My father will give you what­ever you ask in my name”… are they both talk­ing about prayer or is the first talk­ing about information/knowing stuff about Christ’s iden­tity and rela­tion­ship to the Father and the sec­ond talk­ing about prayer?’

Per­haps its about the per­fect suf­fi­ciency of the cross — read­ing 22 AND 23 together:

(Para­phrase of Jesus:) You will be sor­row­ful til I’m back, and then I basi­cally won life (lit­er­ally! haha) and you have a joy that can’t be taken away from you and what you’re ask­ing the Father will be asked in my name!

You’re not try­ing to ask it directly of Him (the Father) any­more. You won’t need to, because you have the Spirit of Christ once Jesus has con­quered death and returned to His Father. What I think that means, in the con­text of the “Spirit of truth” from ear­lier in the pas­sage, is that the things you ASK for are asked as Jesus would (i.e. you’re not stand­ing alone before the father with an impaired rela­tion­ship ask­ing things for your­self once Jesus has con­quered and we’ve received the spirit of truth that speaks what He hears from the Father and Son. Our hearts will desire dif­fer­ent things, and we’ll have a com­plete joy that can’t be taken from us in Christ.

We don’t get the Spirit so we can ask for crap, but so that He can declare what he hears (from the Father) — AND — in verse 14 – 15, His pur­pose is to glo­rify the son, who is King over every­thing that is the Father’s; the Spirit will declare the things of Jesus to his peo­ple. So, ask­ing of the Father “in my name” is about ask­ing to receive joy in full…

“I am not say­ing that I will ask the Father on your behalf” — Does this mean Jesus ISN’T an inter­me­di­ary (as in Hebrews 7:25)? And Romans 8:26 says that the Holy Spirit inter­cedes for us when we don’t know what or how to pray. But this pas­sage (John 16) says that the Holy Spirit will speak only what He hears from the Father and Son: there­fore, His inter­ces­sory prayer for us will nec­es­sar­ily take the shape of prayer for things that God desires. And that should be our prayer always.

Christ needn’t ask the Father on our behalf because His act of death and resurrection/victory OVER death means that our sins have been paid for if we trust in Jesus and call him our Lord. When our sins are paid for, we can be in rela­tion­ship with God the Father and pray to Him; the High Priest that Hebrews 7 talks about is pre­sent­ing us blame­lessly in unblem­ished rela­tion­ship again with God, so we can approach Him. When Christ’s per­fect sac­ri­fice was made, we are able to and should do as the writer of Hebrews says we should in chap­ter 10 of that let­ter: Where there is for­give­ness of sins and law­less­ness, there is no longer any offer­ing for sin. There­fore… let us draw near with a true heart in full assur­ance of faith, with our hearts sprin­kled clean from an evil con­science and our bod­ies washed with pure water.

We are able to draw near to God. Right now this is in the form of prayer to Him and for His pur­poses; that He might achieve them and use His peo­ple to this end in His ser­vice. We don’t need to pray in a church or tem­ple, we don’t need to burn incense or hear music to uplift us — though these things are not intrin­si­cally bad. We have free­dom as we are saved by Christ’s sac­ri­fice for us; we have a new Spirit which He has put in His peo­ple to allow them to draw near to God with­out imped­i­ment or con­stric­tion. We needn’t pray to Christ, because He has opened a new way to the Father for us, hav­ing ful­filled the law of the scrip­tures and mak­ing per­fect that which we (His peo­ple) could not.

God’s pres­ence used to dwell in the holi­est place of the Tem­ple; now, He dwells in the hearts of His peo­ple as Christ has made us His own.

When Jesus says “It is to your advan­tage that I go away”, he means it. If Christ hadn’t gone away from His fol­low­ers to the bru­tal Roman cross to pay for our sins, we would not have peace with God, and there’s no way He could say “I have over­come the world” with­out lying through his teeth unless He faced death and came out the other side, open­ing a new way to God for His people.

# by Josh Street on April 14th, 2008 Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
| No Comments »

What Josh Does at Youthworks

I’m employed by an organ­i­sa­tion (the one I referred to in my first post about this project, wherein I didn’t bother explain­ing exactly what was going on, but hoped it would be clear to those who already knew) that exists to — amongst other things — resource youth ministry.

One thing we’ve noticed (“we” is myself and a hand­ful of oth­ers with an inter­est in the web) over the past twelve months is an uptake in web usage by youth min­istries — for obvi­ous rea­sons: that’s where kids are spend­ing their time, and it’s a great com­mu­ni­ca­tion tool, and every­one else is doing it.

When I say every­one else is doing it, I actu­ally mean every­one else is try­ing to do it. Every­one has, for the last six to twelve months, been writ­ing the same appli­ca­tions, inte­grat­ing the same soft­ware, pay­ing for the same soft­ware, attempt­ing to train the same peo­ple, and gen­er­ally doing a lot of the same stuff, sep­a­rately. With no point of inter­sec­tion or shar­ing or intel­li­gent resource management.

This is under­stand­able: after­all, the web presents a rel­a­tively new front for churches in gen­eral, and whilst kids have been wast­ing time online for years, only with the rel­a­tively recent advent of social net­work­ing web­sites (I refer to it as ‘Soc­Net’ in these parts — no-one else seems to, but I like it, so what­ever) have the less computer-inclined began spend­ing sig­nif­i­cant amounts of time in front of a keyboard.

There’s also a bit of a catch-22 when it comes to build­ing these things. Peo­ple ask, what are the ben­e­fits? We’ve never had some­one come along to youth group because of our website! — well, no, you’re right. But you also don’t have a web­site, so that’s hardly fair, is it? Nine times out of ten peo­ple will not come along to church (gener­i­cally) because they’ve searched for a church in a par­tic­u­lar sub­urb in Google (though, speak­ing of that, I’ve got to do a bit of SEO work on the Matthias site — it’s not on the first page for a “Church in Padding­ton” query. Changed the title, it’ll be a while til that kicks in. We’ll see.)

They’ll come because a friend asked if they wanted to, or they were walk­ing past and heard peo­ple inside, saw them going in, and won­dered what it was all about.

But this is hardly exclu­sive to hav­ing a web­site. If they have those points of con­tact, a web­site is a great way to invis­i­bly inves­ti­gate fur­ther with­out need­ing to make them­selves uncom­fort­able. It’s easy to find these sorts of web­sites through search engines — you walked past a church and noted its name, you remem­ber the name of your friend’s church, etc.

The same goes for youth groups, obviously.

Peo­ple have just been start­ing to realise this, or at least think of it at all and decide “yeah, we could do that”. So, there’s the ratio­nale for it all. Most peo­ple with decent web­sites already may not have con­sid­ered ratio­nale in any great depth — they’ve got a good web­site because they know some­one who makes them, and vol­un­teered their time (maybe they’re a leader), throw­ing some­thing together with Xoops in an after­noon. It’s quick and dirty, but effective.

We’re try­ing to spend a small but not insignif­i­cant amount of money to equip peo­ple to do these sorts of thing, so it’s only sen­si­ble that some more time is spent con­sid­er­ing what on earth we’re try­ing to achieve. Hence the lengthy pre­lude to what it actu­ally does.

Now, the fea­tures. We have too many tar­get audi­ences for it to be an alto­gether com­fort­able project, but that’s half the fun of it. The prod­uct is being mar­keted to churches (who pay for it) through lead­ers (who want to use it) and for youth (who actu­ally aren’t the cen­tre of the uni­verse on this one, but we need to give them UX that says they are). Out­side of these three, there are also the friends of the youth already in the appli­ca­tion who are just check­ing out the youth group page.

Of course, it’s not quite that sim­ple. We’re also mar­ket­ing this to camps, high school scrip­ture groups/lunchtime bible groups, and maybe bands/events. Which is great and tech­ni­cally only a small step, but it does pretty hor­ri­ble things when you try and explain who’s pay­ing for what in a con­cise business-like fash­ion. If you’ve read this far, chances are you’re well aware that concise-ness has never been my strong point.

So, with these tar­gets in mind, we are (firstly) going to equip them with web­sites. Big woop. WordPress.com and Blog­ger eat your heart out. Cue yawns.

No, seri­ously. We’re going to give them (‘them’ being the var­i­ous enti­ties described above, not indi­vid­u­als so much — there’s no way I’m posi­tion­ing this against other Soc­Net sites because I reckon it’s too frag­mented to last… Face­book or Myspace or Bebo or.… yes.) web pages. Wel­come to 1999.

They’re going to have web pages with cal­en­dars they can chock full of the sched­ule for the term, though. So that’s exciting.

And everyone’s going to have their own user­name, so they can leave com­ments on the inevitable blog­ging ele­ment with iden­tity — this is won­der­ful for com­ment– and generic form-spam. Inci­den­tally, I read a few blogs that Wild St peo­ple are writ­ing and was really excited to see they’re actu­ally enthu­si­as­tic about doing it. There’s quite the bunch of them on Blog­ger these days, and it’s all com­pletely autonomous — so far as I know, no-one has pushed them to start doing it. I was so proud of their keen­ness and inno­va­tion for build­ing up com­mu­nity and spread­ing the gospel! Another aside, my copy hasn’t arrived yet but I believe there’s some­thing about blog­ging in The Brief­ing for Decem­ber (it’s not on their web­site yet, either). My copy arrived today, and I dis­cov­ered the cur­rent issue is in their web­store, just not on the main site. It’s The Brief­ing #339, if you’d care to read it.

Any­way. Blogs will fea­ture. Cal­en­dars will fea­ture. All the stuff you’d rea­son­ably expect to be able to do with a CMS tool these days will fea­ture. Blogs, cal­en­dars, gal­leries, con­tact forms, sta­tic pages. Yay. So that’s the bor­ing stuff that we’ve just got to do the grunt-work for at some point (I’m sure it can be fun, but, just between you and me, I’m not really look­ing for­ward to the cou­ple of weeks we have to spend on that bit).

Now, for inter­est­ing and inno­v­a­tive fea­tures — because, let’s face it, the above is hardly enough to con­vince any­one to switch their exist­ing web­site (if indeed they have one) across to a hosted plat­form for a nom­i­nal (to be deter­mined, but prob­a­bly only payable by church groups, and not for camps/events on account of these being once-off) monthly fee.

Con­tact tools. Yummy. We’re going to give them mail­ers that make it easy to send a mes­sage to, say, all the kids in year 10. Or just guys. Or girls in year 8. Or only to your co-leaders (we’ll have a resource area where they can share files — Word doc­u­ments, PDFs, slide shows — on the site, too: that’s some of the fun CMS stuff). But email’s been done before. Everyone’s used email. Admit­tedly, some­times you just wish there’s a bet­ter way to store and man­age lists of peo­ple, and this tool will cer­tainly do that, but it’s a lit­tle bor­ing still.

So we decided it’d be a good idea to throw SMS into the mix. It’s not just a gim­mick: again, this is in response to what peo­ple are already doing. The only dif­fer­ence is it’s paid on a shared account (used by the lead­ers — the youth kids won’t have access to these tools, for fairly obvi­ous rea­sons) and inte­grates the same con­tact man­age­ment fea­tures as the mailer app. We’re hop­ing con­ve­nience will draw peo­ple across to this tool. Use sce­nar­ios are basi­cally just that you’d use this tool to inform peo­ple of what’s going on this week at youth group, or remind­ing them that the group is on bring­ing sup­per this month, etcetera. The orig­i­nat­ing num­ber will be that of a sin­gle leader, or it could even be that of that person’s own leader.

For exam­ple, one mes­sage is sent to all kids by the group co-ordinator, but that mes­sage is altered depend­ing on who the indi­vid­ual recipient’s bible study leader is, so that it appears to orig­i­nate from them. Obvi­ously com­mon sense would say that you wouldn’t do that with­out con­sul­ta­tion, so we’d prob­a­bly have a check box in the leader’s “my account” page that would say “Allow mes­sages from other senders to orig­i­nate from my mobile num­ber”, or some­thing to that affect.

Beyond con­tact tools, we want to take advan­tage of the fact that this is a service-based prod­uct and entirely a hosted solu­tion. Part of the rea­son we’re strongly pur­su­ing that is it gives an oppor­tu­nity to equip and direct in a way that decen­tralised sites can’t be. So, a few things we’re think­ing of doing are cen­tralised offer­ings like weekly newslet­ters (sent to lead­ers two days in advance so they’ve got an oppor­tu­nity to see it first) and global blog prop­er­ties that give reviews, cur­rent affairs com­men­tary, etc.

That’s the end of the uni­ver­sal fea­tures that are great for kids and lead­ers alike, but there’s lots more for lead­ers. As I’ve already said, we want this to be self-funding. Part of this is sell­ing elec­tronic ver­sions of dead-tree prod­ucts, as DRM’d PDFs, or as unen­cum­bered PDFs with watermarks/obviously time-sensitive adver­tis­ing (so vio­la­tion of copy­right is glar­ingly obvi­ous). The other part is (for me at least) far more excit­ing, and that’s reselling user generated/contributed con­tent (UGC) under an iStockPhoto-esque model (Basi­cally, profit sharing).

This isn’t just about words on a page — I want to get plenty of video stuff hap­pen­ing, too, because (espe­cially in reformed evan­gel­i­cal Anglican/Baptist/Presbyterian, etc. churches) that doesn’t get nearly enough of a work out as is. It’s a really effec­tive tool for sup­port­ing preaching/bible stud­ies, and it’s been largely over­looked until prob­a­bly early this year (I had my first con­ver­sa­tion with some­one about video resources for small group bible stud­ies as late as July or August this year, I think! They had used a Matthias Media resource which I haven’t encoun­tered, and thought it really helpful).

Pric­ing mod­els for all that are still a lit­tle up in the air, but, from a consumer’s point of view, it’s def­i­nitely going to be afford­able. The project will ulti­mately sit on a server main­tained gratis and depend largely on vol­un­teer labour to admin­is­ter con­tent. The only “costs” are those to the estab­lished Youth­works pub­lish­ing divi­sion, but hope­fully we can tran­si­tion the way they do their high-school level con­tent effec­tively, so they’re com­mis­sion­ing con­tent for the web and sell­ing it there. Some­thing that’s really excit­ing is the pos­si­bil­ity that, instead of com­mis­sion­ing con­tent, it’s pos­si­ble to pur­chase it directly and already cre­ated from a pool of resources on the website.

There’s def­i­nitely a work­able model here, somewhere.

Prayer is greatly wel­comed for:

  • wis­dom try­ing to fig­ure that model out
  • energy and resources to make it hap­pen (in what­ever form)
  • adop­tion and enthu­si­asm from youth lead­ers and kids
  • effec­tive­ness in web strat­egy as we attempt to use it as an evan­ge­lis­tic out­reach tool, and a tool for the growth of exist­ing ministry
  • and, hand-in-hand with that last point, that God’s will be done and if He wills it, that growth would be given!

Greenhouses still need light

I was doing some research today and came across this spec­tac­u­larly bad green­house infor­ma­tion resource from the Aus­tralian Green­house Office (part of our Commonwealth’s Depart­ment of the Envi­ron­ment and Her­itage). It (mostly sen­si­bly) advo­cates ways to save energy in the expen­sive “install energy-efficient light­ing” bit, but then pro­ceeds to soundly shoot itself in the foot under “Use lights efficiently”.

Update: I dis­cov­ered a resource on the same Green­house site that explains things much more accurately/clearly. Or maybe just more geek­ily. Any­way, I found it help­ful. Down the bot­tom of that page it’s basi­cally point by point the same just using dif­fer­ent words and being gen­er­ally less stu­pid. Now all they gotta do is amal­ga­mate resources/rewrite the “brief” copy.

“Buy and use com­pact flu­o­ros instead of incan­des­cent light­ing” (sen­si­ble) ver­sus “Mod­ern dim­mer con­trols reduce green­house gas emis­sions as they reduce light out­put. They also extend lamp life.” (ridicu­lous — and incom­pat­i­ble with CF lighting)

“Fit lower-wattage globes or com­pact flu­o­res­cents in bright lights, espe­cially down­lights and spot­lights; save up to 50% of green­house gas.“
Poten­tially ridicu­lous: As increas­ing num­bers of downlights/spots are using halo­gen bulbs, more are being installed to com­pen­sate for stu­pidly nar­row beams. This doesn’t have to be the case, but peo­ple seem to opt for nar­row beam lights for some rea­son. Replace one 80W@240V (3A) fix­ture with six 30° 50W@12V (1.5A) + trans­former power con­sump­tion (varies) — you’re really not sav­ing much. ALSO, there is no CF alter­na­tive to halo­gens so far as I know. There ARE some LED prod­ucts on the mar­ket, but they’re prob­a­bly a gar­ish blue (or at least a fair way from the 3000K tem­per­a­ture we gen­er­ally expect from domes­tic light­ing) and still cost upwards of $AU25/unit, ver­sus about $5 for a reg­u­lar halo­gen. The obvi­ous advan­tage here is that they don’t require reflec­tors and will thus auto­mat­i­cally have a wider cov­er­age, along with rub­bish total cost of own­er­ship stuff that no-one really cares enough about to pay attention.)

“Reflector-back lamps of lower wattage pro­vide more use­ful light in down­lights or spot­lights while gen­er­at­ing less green­house gas.“
Poten­tially ridicu­lous: what did I just say? Yes, this is help­ful, no, it’s not the best option. Think of it as reduc­ing the evils of halo­gens (except for where you need/don’t mind 270°+ ver­ti­cal light cov­er­age, which is sometimes).

“Low volt­age halo­gen lamps are not nec­es­sar­ily low energy lamps: each one gen­er­ates one kilo­gram of green­house gas every 15 hours – about the same as an ordi­nary 60-watt globe – although they do pro­duce more light.“
Poten­tially faulty maths I don’t know how they arrived at that fig­ure. But then again I’m an Eng­lish major so there we go. They must have really pumped the trans­former fig­ure, OR they’re talk­ing about the myth­i­cal 240V halo­gen — a crea­ture rarely found in the wild, but rumoured to exist. Hardly ever in use.

“Use light fit­tings which allow max­i­mum light to pass through – coloured glass often cuts light out­put by half, cre­at­ing a need for higher-wattage lamps.“
Good call. Com­pletely irrel­e­vant to domes­tic set­tings. Well, kinda. Unless they’re expect­ing peo­ple to rip apart their lamp-shades today. Maybe in twenty years when we’re out of fuel and are strug­gling to start a fire hud­dled in a cave… yeah, right.

“A 20-watt com­pact flu­o­res­cent pro­vides as much light as a 100-watt incan­des­cent.“
Sure. Which is all fun and games until you’ve been conned into pur­chas­ing them by above dis­in­for­ma­tion think­ing they’ll cope okay with your crappy vari­able pot dim­mer. Then, out go the incan­des­cents when Joe Con­sumer thinks they break too quickly.

“A 20-watt com­pact flu­o­res­cent pro­vides as much light as a 100-watt incan­des­cent.“
Yup.

“Timer con­trols and day­light or move­ment sen­sors are now avail­able to switch off lights auto­mat­i­cally.“
They sure can. Great for keep­ing your house dark, not so great for cut­ting emis­sions. Insert vague sta­tis­tics about the amount of unnec­es­sary power con­sumed by devices on standby in the aver­age domes­tic set­ting each year. Some small ben­e­fit might be realised, but you’d be bet­ter just cul­ti­vat­ing a habit of turn­ing off lights when leav­ing rooms.

“Use light-coloured paint inside your house. Dark wall colours absorb light, increas­ing the amount of light­ing needed.“
Rev­o­lu­tion­ary. Sorry, I shouldn’t be so sar­cas­tic… this is a good point. I’m not sure whether the wall colours mag­i­cally absorb light or sim­ply fail to reflect it. Or if there’s even a dif­fer­ence between the two. I’m all out of smart-arse ammo on this point.

“Mod­ern dim­mer con­trols reduce green­house gas emis­sions as they reduce light out­put. They also extend lamp life.“
Debunked above. Stu­pid con­sumers aside, I think there’s prob­a­bly a decent-sized ques­tion of effi­ciency here, also. How about you just buy lower wattage globes to start with?

“Use desk lamps or stan­dard lamps where light is most needed, so less light­ing is required in the rest of the room.“
Huh? What, the desk lamps you can’t buy CF fit­tings for? Peo­ple use too-high wattage incan­des­cent globes (60W-ish) or still-too-high wattage halo­gens (20W), and then pro­ceed to have two or three on to com­pen­sate. I’ve seen it hap­pen. You can get some appro­pri­ate low-wattage fit­tings for this pur­pose (stan­dard flu­o­ros or, some­times, screw/bayonet CFs if the lamp sup­ports it) but I’m still doubt­ing the prac­ti­cal help­ful­ness of this one.

“Keep lamps and fit­tings clean: dirt build-up will reduce light out­put over time.“
Good call. Espe­cially with really high wattage fix­tures (the­atre lumi­naires can often do with a good wip­ing down!) Equally, this applies to win­dows. Seri­ously. If you’re stuck in an old, musty church build­ing and are hav­ing trou­ble see­ing, go clean a few stained-glass win­dows. You don’t notice the grime as read­ily as you would with clear win­dows, but it will def­i­nitely make a dif­fer­ence if they ever get hit by sun­light (and even if they don’t). Par­tic­u­larly this applies if you’re near any major roads.

“Use day­light instead of arti­fi­cial lights – but do not overdo it. Large win­dows and sky­lights add to sum­mer heat and win­ter cold.“
Yup. This ties in to my last point.

So, take gov­ern­ment fact sheets with a grain of salt. I don’t know whether the doc­u­ment was writ­ten by well-intentioned pub­lic ser­vants or mis­in­formed, wildly-optimistic hip­pies, but the fact remains it seems to miss a fair few key problems/misrepresents a hand­ful of things. And yes, I’ve prob­a­bly mis­rep­re­sented things, too… I can get away with it because I’m just an opin­ion­ated blogger/Arts stu­dent — they’re sup­pos­edly the author­ity. So if I’ve got any­thing wrong be gentle ;-)

Nearly edited

Every­thing transcoded okay, Cinel­erra even opened the file, I assumed OSS just couldn’t get a lock on the device because of another sound server, so I edited blind from tim­ings in other play­back. It even ren­dered fine. (Not, of course, in a for­mat every­thing could read).

Then I realised that there was, in fact, no sound in (what must be) the three-millionth transcoded file and so it defeated me, at last. I was so excited for five min­utes there that I’d be able to quickly do things the way I was plan­ning on doing them from the start, but it wasn’t to be. So now some­one will have to cue a file man­u­ally for play­back… but at least it won’t be off a DVD that’ll inevitably take an embarrasingly-long period of time to spin-up.

Time to re-read Philip­pi­ans 2:14 – 17 and shut up, I think.

14Do every­thing with­out com­plain­ing or argu­ing, 15so that you may become blame­less and pure, chil­dren of God with­out fault in a crooked and depraved gen­er­a­tion, in which you shine like stars in the uni­verse 16as you hold out the word of life — in order that I may boast on the day of Christ that I did not run or labor for noth­ing. 17But even if I am being poured out like a drink offer­ing on the sac­ri­fice and ser­vice com­ing from your faith, I am glad and rejoice with all of you.

Pray­ing for patience, energy.

# by Josh Street on June 4th, 2006 Tags: ,
| No Comments »