Mistrust is one of the most common dangers that organizations face whether it is mistrust of leaders or mistrust of others on the team. It is like a cancer in the organization and by its very nature, when not addressed it becomes larger rather than smaller as the attitudes rub off on other members. In addition, where mistrust flourishes, good ministry diminishes because the emotional energy needed to deal with mistrust issues takes away from healthy energy that could be focused in productive ways. Mistrust is always a lose/lose proposition.
What causes mistrust? It is not what one usually thinks. Often it starts with a perception about another person and rather than going to that person to determine whether the perception is accurate, which means taking responsibility, it is easier to simply believe that the perception is correct and allow that to color their attitude toward that individual. And, as that "perception" is shared as truth with others, the cancer spreads.
Then there are people who intentionally plant seeds of mistrust toward those they don't like or a leadership philosophy they take umbrage to. In both of these cases, the conversations that take place are behind the scenes, often couched in spiritual language (we are ministries after all). Because the conversation is not out in the open, you see the impact of the cancer but it is often difficult to pin point who is responsible.
In both these scenarios, others get sucked into the mistrust when they unwisely take up the offenses of others. So here you have people who have no first hand knowledge of issues that are shared with them, or even their veracity but they pick up the offense and make it theirs. This is not only unbiblical but it is harder to fix because there was no offense, real or perceived, committed that involves them. How do you solve mistrust issues where one has not done anything to cause it?
Healthy organizations and leaders always walk toward the barking dog when it comes to attitudes of mistrust because of the terrible damage it has in the organization. In fact, the longer one ignores pockets of mistrust, the more damage to the organization. Just as we would not think of ignoring a diagnosis of cancer, we cannot think of ignoring a diagnosis of mistrust.
Pockets of mistrust usually have a common source so one of your strategies is to watch and listen and seek to determine who is behind the distrustful attitudes and who has simply taken up that attitude and made theirs. Given time and attention, you can usually identify the source of the problem.
When one knows the source, enter into a defining dialogue with that individual putting the elephants on the table and indicating that unless the mistrust can be resolved it will not work for them to be a part of your organization. Dialogue about the real or imagined offenses that the individual has and seek resolution. Part of that resolution is that in the future when there are issues they must go to the one they have an issue with and seek to resolve it rather than going to others and talking. What mistrust makers need to know is that their behavior is not compatible with the ethos of your organization so you are going to hold them accountable for how they deal with issues they have. Every time there is a violation of that agreement, a direct discussion takes place.
What about others who have taken up offenses? In our organization we go to every one of them that we know, and in dialogue seek to get to the bottom of the issue. Usually their information is either incomplete or not accurate and their assumptions are not correct. After all, these are not their issues, they have simply taken up the offense of others. Once issues have been clarified and questions answered we ask that in the future they don't take up the offenses of others and always go to the person involved first and try to resolve their real or perceived issues. Because we know how damaging attitudes of mistrust are we will not ignore them ever.
Not everyone wants to be accountable for attitudes or be held to biblical standards of conflict resolution. Where we cannot make progress on resolving trust issues we will take the step of indicating that unless it is resolved, the individual cannot stay with the organization. That calls the question since no one can be productive in a ministry organization where there is a lack of trust in leaders or others. In these cases, some choose to leave and some choose to resolve their attitudes. What is not acceptable is living with mistrust because of its high and negative cost.
Leaders who don't have the courage to deal with pockets of mistrust in an upfront way see the health of their organization or team deteriorate. It is a cancer and needs to be dealt with.
Monday, August 1, 2011
Your church has a financial challenge
As we live through year three of an incredibly difficult financial environment a good number of churches are feeling significant pain as giving is not keeping up with budgets. In many cases, there is reluctance to tell the congregation exactly what the situation is and try to solve the problem internally via spending cuts and even lay offs.
Perhaps the reluctance to be transparent with the congregation is that we don't want to look like we have not managed the situation well. Yet it is the congregation who are the stakeholders of the ministry and simply laying it out to them often results in many people stepping up to meet the need. Remember that in the typical evangelical church, forty to sixty percent of all giving goes outside the local church so these situations are rarely money problems even in a down economy.
One church I know had a 1.5 million dollar shortfall that absolutely needed to be met. Over a period of five weeks they simply laid the facts out to the congregation and thus far they have seen nearly a million dollars of that need met. And, the leaders were praised for their humble transparency.
Rather than losing credibility in being transparent, leaders gain credibility as they include the whole congregation in seeking to meet the need and solve the problem. At the very lease you don't know what people will do until you lay it out and ask.
If cuts must be made the key is not to compromise the central or core ministries of the church. In good times we add ancillary ministries that are nice to have but not core to what we must do. Those are the places where cuts should take place. In fact, the gift of financial challenges is that it forces us to determine what is central and core to who we are and focus on those things.
Perhaps the reluctance to be transparent with the congregation is that we don't want to look like we have not managed the situation well. Yet it is the congregation who are the stakeholders of the ministry and simply laying it out to them often results in many people stepping up to meet the need. Remember that in the typical evangelical church, forty to sixty percent of all giving goes outside the local church so these situations are rarely money problems even in a down economy.
One church I know had a 1.5 million dollar shortfall that absolutely needed to be met. Over a period of five weeks they simply laid the facts out to the congregation and thus far they have seen nearly a million dollars of that need met. And, the leaders were praised for their humble transparency.
Rather than losing credibility in being transparent, leaders gain credibility as they include the whole congregation in seeking to meet the need and solve the problem. At the very lease you don't know what people will do until you lay it out and ask.
If cuts must be made the key is not to compromise the central or core ministries of the church. In good times we add ancillary ministries that are nice to have but not core to what we must do. Those are the places where cuts should take place. In fact, the gift of financial challenges is that it forces us to determine what is central and core to who we are and focus on those things.
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Learning quotients
Standard questions I ask leaders are "What have you learned about leadership in the past year?" and "What are the most significant books you have read recently?" Or, "What dumb tax have you paid recently that you wish you didn't have to pay?"
The responses are interesting - I learn from them. How quickly the leaders can answer the question is also telling. Some have a hard time coming up with an answer while others can tell you immediately. The difference between the two usually has to do with whether one has a mindset of learning or not.
Life gives us amazing opportunities to grow emotionally, spiritually, relationally and in our areas of strength - if we are intentional about it. What works against us is the pace of life and the tendency to be so busy that we don't have time to reflect on the very things that could make us better leaders or better people. But it is reflection that gives us the greatest opportunities for growth as we intentionally ask ourselves questions about our lives and leadership. One of the reasons I blog is that it allows me opportunity to reflect on issues that I have observed or experienced. It is about learning and growth.
All of us need a strategy for personal growth. Since we learn and process differently there is no one way but there should be a way - practices that are built into our lives or schedules that allows us to grow from what we experience and observe. A helpful question to ask is "How do I best learn and grow?" The follow up question is "Is my life, schedule and practice congruent with how I best learn?" so that the growth curve never slows down.
For leaders, that growth quotient is critical since they need to be on the front end of those they lead. Leaders who are not intentional about growth often have a rude awakening when those they lead become disillusioned by their leadership. Our leadership capital is our ability to help those we lead maximize their gifts and effectively meet the mission of the organization. When we lost that capital our leadership is over.
Whether you are a leader or not, what is your strategy for growth and are you continuing to grow at the pace you once did? Sloth (a great word) in this area of life is both dangerous and unfortunate but it often sets in in our forties or fifties when we think we have learned what we need to learn and can simply rest on our past experience. If anything it is at this stage of life that intentionality in growth is the most important. No past experience can compensate for what we need to learn and where we need to grow today.
Take a moment and reflect on your learning quotient and strategy. It is the way of the "wise" in the book of Proverbs.
The responses are interesting - I learn from them. How quickly the leaders can answer the question is also telling. Some have a hard time coming up with an answer while others can tell you immediately. The difference between the two usually has to do with whether one has a mindset of learning or not.
Life gives us amazing opportunities to grow emotionally, spiritually, relationally and in our areas of strength - if we are intentional about it. What works against us is the pace of life and the tendency to be so busy that we don't have time to reflect on the very things that could make us better leaders or better people. But it is reflection that gives us the greatest opportunities for growth as we intentionally ask ourselves questions about our lives and leadership. One of the reasons I blog is that it allows me opportunity to reflect on issues that I have observed or experienced. It is about learning and growth.
All of us need a strategy for personal growth. Since we learn and process differently there is no one way but there should be a way - practices that are built into our lives or schedules that allows us to grow from what we experience and observe. A helpful question to ask is "How do I best learn and grow?" The follow up question is "Is my life, schedule and practice congruent with how I best learn?" so that the growth curve never slows down.
For leaders, that growth quotient is critical since they need to be on the front end of those they lead. Leaders who are not intentional about growth often have a rude awakening when those they lead become disillusioned by their leadership. Our leadership capital is our ability to help those we lead maximize their gifts and effectively meet the mission of the organization. When we lost that capital our leadership is over.
Whether you are a leader or not, what is your strategy for growth and are you continuing to grow at the pace you once did? Sloth (a great word) in this area of life is both dangerous and unfortunate but it often sets in in our forties or fifties when we think we have learned what we need to learn and can simply rest on our past experience. If anything it is at this stage of life that intentionality in growth is the most important. No past experience can compensate for what we need to learn and where we need to grow today.
Take a moment and reflect on your learning quotient and strategy. It is the way of the "wise" in the book of Proverbs.
Saturday, July 30, 2011
When bad things happen
Things go wrong in any organization. Sometimes in a very messy way! The question is not whether things will go south but what we learn from them when we do. There are three common reactions to problems when they occur. Only one of them is truly helpful.
A common response when things go south is to quickly blame someone - after all, someone must be at fault. Actually, sometimes this is true and sometimes it is not. There are times when systems need to be fixed and it is not really a people problem. However, blame is not a very helpful response (unless you have an ongoing problem with an individual) because in assigning blame one tends to ignore other factors that may have contributed to the problem. Blaming allows one to ignore other critical factors that may be present. It is a convenient response because once blame has been assigned, one can move on without critical analysis.
A second response to things going south is to simply "move on." Here there is no real analysis of the factors involved which means that leaders don't need to take any responsibility for what occurred. This happens because leaders are either naive and believe that moving on is the best thing to do, or they don't want to look in the mirror and honestly evaluate the situation for lessons that could be learned. This is essentially a convenient non-response that simply hopes that by moving on the problem will not recur. It is also the reason that the problem will probably recur since important lessons are not learned.
A third and the most helpful response is to do an autopsy without blame. Here, leaders intentionally ask the kinds of questions that can help them understand why what happened happened and what they can learn from it. Questions like: What contributed to this situation?; What could we have done differently?; What do we need to do differently in the future?; What lessons can we learn so that we grow as an organization?; How do we process the constituency in an honest way?; - all evaluative questions designed to learn from the situation.
This is not about blame but about learning and growing. In fact, the lack of "blame" and the refusal to just "move on" gives leaders the opportunity to grow from the experience. Bad things will happen. The question is whether we will learn and grow from them or repeat them.
A common response when things go south is to quickly blame someone - after all, someone must be at fault. Actually, sometimes this is true and sometimes it is not. There are times when systems need to be fixed and it is not really a people problem. However, blame is not a very helpful response (unless you have an ongoing problem with an individual) because in assigning blame one tends to ignore other factors that may have contributed to the problem. Blaming allows one to ignore other critical factors that may be present. It is a convenient response because once blame has been assigned, one can move on without critical analysis.
A second response to things going south is to simply "move on." Here there is no real analysis of the factors involved which means that leaders don't need to take any responsibility for what occurred. This happens because leaders are either naive and believe that moving on is the best thing to do, or they don't want to look in the mirror and honestly evaluate the situation for lessons that could be learned. This is essentially a convenient non-response that simply hopes that by moving on the problem will not recur. It is also the reason that the problem will probably recur since important lessons are not learned.
A third and the most helpful response is to do an autopsy without blame. Here, leaders intentionally ask the kinds of questions that can help them understand why what happened happened and what they can learn from it. Questions like: What contributed to this situation?; What could we have done differently?; What do we need to do differently in the future?; What lessons can we learn so that we grow as an organization?; How do we process the constituency in an honest way?; - all evaluative questions designed to learn from the situation.
This is not about blame but about learning and growing. In fact, the lack of "blame" and the refusal to just "move on" gives leaders the opportunity to grow from the experience. Bad things will happen. The question is whether we will learn and grow from them or repeat them.
Give the Gift
Who do you know who is in crisis, who is hurting, who is walking through life having come undone in some way? There are few gifts we can give that are more significant than that of simple encouragement. It costs us nothing except our time and willingness to hurt with those who hurt and it mirrors the character of God who will never leave us or forsake us: who constantly encourages and brings comfort to the hurting. He is called "the Father of compassion and the God of all comfort" (2 Corinthians 1:3).
Encouragement is not making things OK. Usually we cannot do that. It is coming alongside the hurting, praying for them, staying in touch, giving or sending words of healing and comfort and just being there for them. It is listening and entering into their pain. The word compassion actually comes from a Latin word that means "co-suffering." When we suffer Jesus suffers for us and with us. We can give the same gift to others.
Interestingly, Paul also says that God's comfort to us is designed to spill over to our comfort to others. "Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of compassion and the God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our troubles so we can comfort those in any trouble with the comfort we ourselves have received from God. For just as the sufferings of Christ flow over into our lives, so also through Christ our comfort overflows" (2 Corinthians 1:3-5).
God's comfort to us is intended to overflow to others - but that takes the attitude of Christ who selflessly comes alongside the hurting. There is a price: it is the price of entering into the hurt of others and co-suffering with them. But it is one of the greatest gifts we can give. When we encourage, we become Jesus to others. And, the more we encourage, the more our hearts become like the heart of Christ.
Encouragement is not making things OK. Usually we cannot do that. It is coming alongside the hurting, praying for them, staying in touch, giving or sending words of healing and comfort and just being there for them. It is listening and entering into their pain. The word compassion actually comes from a Latin word that means "co-suffering." When we suffer Jesus suffers for us and with us. We can give the same gift to others.
Interestingly, Paul also says that God's comfort to us is designed to spill over to our comfort to others. "Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of compassion and the God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our troubles so we can comfort those in any trouble with the comfort we ourselves have received from God. For just as the sufferings of Christ flow over into our lives, so also through Christ our comfort overflows" (2 Corinthians 1:3-5).
God's comfort to us is intended to overflow to others - but that takes the attitude of Christ who selflessly comes alongside the hurting. There is a price: it is the price of entering into the hurt of others and co-suffering with them. But it is one of the greatest gifts we can give. When we encourage, we become Jesus to others. And, the more we encourage, the more our hearts become like the heart of Christ.
Friday, July 29, 2011
Organizational Renewal or Decline
All organizations including businesses, ministries, missions and congregations have a predictable life cycle of missional growth, a plateau and then a slow slide into decline - unless there is direct and intentional intervention by leaders to renew the organization from within on a regular basis. All of us can name churches, for instance, that were once vibrant and missional but are not struggling to simply exist. In the business arena, General Motors is a great example of this life cycle and without the necessary renewal it ended up in bankruptcy. Denominations face the same laws of organizational life cycles as a recent report, for instance, of the Southern Baptist Convention indicates that they are facing the challenge of an aging organization now losing people and seeing fewer conversions.
If you are reading this and your organization does not face the challenge of plateau or decline, don't get too smug. No organization is exempt from this phenomenon unless there is direct intervention to prevent it.
There are several factors that contribute to plateau or decline in organizations. First, organizations that start out missional can over time slip into institutional where the institution becomes more important than the mission. Here are churches who never change their bylaws or governance structures (which become sacred) even when they are strangling the congregation from responding to the needs of a new day.
Second, they forget the rule that "what got you to here will not get you to there" and become change resistant. Resistance to change will guarantee decline because what worked in one day will not work in another. This is the trap many missions find themselves in, doing ministry like they did in the fifties when the whole ministry context has changed around them. As a rule, the longer an organization has gone without major change the greater their risk of sliding into irrelevancy. Risk adverse ministries will go into decline.
Third, there is a tendency to worship the past and wish that the future could look like the past. I can think of congregations that were considered cutting edge flagship congregations twenty years ago who are in serious decline today but leaders still remember the good old days and just assume that they can make them come back. It won't happen without major change.
Finally, decline comes when the missional commitments of the ministry get lost in preserving the institution. Survival mode is rarely missional. The focus is on survival rather than moving forward and taking territory for Jesus.
The only way to arrest this tendency toward decline is to continually renew the organization from within. This takes courageous leaders who care more about the effectiveness of their ministry than their own jobs because the only way to create ongoing renewal is to push the organization to take risks and get out of their comfort zone. Many will not like the discomfort of renewal. Here are some keys to such renewal.
First, there must be absolute clarity on the mission of the organization and what spells success. Declining ministries have inevitably lost their sense of clarity and unless a new and compelling clarity can be articulated renewal will not take place (see chapters two, three and four of Leading From The Sandbox). Can everyone in your organization clearly articulate a common compelling mission and vision? If not you are at risk!
Second, you can gauge your ability to renew by how change friendly your organization is because without regular and major change to meet the needs and opportunities of a new day decline is inevitable. Can you identify three to five significant changes that have taken place in your ministry in the past three years? If not, you are at risk!
Third, is there an openness and a strategy for getting new ideas on the table? This will usually happen when new people come on board and see what you don't see, or with younger staff members who are not stuck in the old ways of thinking. If you do not have an intentional strategy to bring new ideas and new people to the table, you are at risk! Long term employees will often work to guard the status quo which is comfortable for them rather than be initiators of new ideas which will stretch them.
Fourth, do you have the courage to move along leaders who are stuck in the past and who will not go with you into the future? Those who have quit growing and who guard the status quo are anchors to your ministry, holding it back. The mission is more important than job security. If you do not regularly evaluate leaders for their ability to lead the organization forward you are at risk! If you are the senior leader and realize that you have taken the ministry as far as you can, the best thing you can do is to step aside and let someone else lead into the future. Far from being a failure, you are opening the door to organizational renewal.
Fifth, are you annually driving a set of ministry initiatives that all can rally around, will help you achieve your mission better and keep improving the ministry results you are after? We call these the "game changers" that change the nature of the results in a significant way. If you cannot identify those annual game changers you are at risk!
The longer a ministry has been in existence, the more difficult it is to keep renewing it from within so that you don't move into the plateau and decline phase of life. In other words, leadership becomes more complex, not easier and the need for risk, new ideas, critical thinking and creating waves greater as the ministry matures. Take a moment and think about where your ministry is against some of these principles.
If you are reading this and your organization does not face the challenge of plateau or decline, don't get too smug. No organization is exempt from this phenomenon unless there is direct intervention to prevent it.
There are several factors that contribute to plateau or decline in organizations. First, organizations that start out missional can over time slip into institutional where the institution becomes more important than the mission. Here are churches who never change their bylaws or governance structures (which become sacred) even when they are strangling the congregation from responding to the needs of a new day.
Second, they forget the rule that "what got you to here will not get you to there" and become change resistant. Resistance to change will guarantee decline because what worked in one day will not work in another. This is the trap many missions find themselves in, doing ministry like they did in the fifties when the whole ministry context has changed around them. As a rule, the longer an organization has gone without major change the greater their risk of sliding into irrelevancy. Risk adverse ministries will go into decline.
Third, there is a tendency to worship the past and wish that the future could look like the past. I can think of congregations that were considered cutting edge flagship congregations twenty years ago who are in serious decline today but leaders still remember the good old days and just assume that they can make them come back. It won't happen without major change.
Finally, decline comes when the missional commitments of the ministry get lost in preserving the institution. Survival mode is rarely missional. The focus is on survival rather than moving forward and taking territory for Jesus.
The only way to arrest this tendency toward decline is to continually renew the organization from within. This takes courageous leaders who care more about the effectiveness of their ministry than their own jobs because the only way to create ongoing renewal is to push the organization to take risks and get out of their comfort zone. Many will not like the discomfort of renewal. Here are some keys to such renewal.
First, there must be absolute clarity on the mission of the organization and what spells success. Declining ministries have inevitably lost their sense of clarity and unless a new and compelling clarity can be articulated renewal will not take place (see chapters two, three and four of Leading From The Sandbox). Can everyone in your organization clearly articulate a common compelling mission and vision? If not you are at risk!
Second, you can gauge your ability to renew by how change friendly your organization is because without regular and major change to meet the needs and opportunities of a new day decline is inevitable. Can you identify three to five significant changes that have taken place in your ministry in the past three years? If not, you are at risk!
Third, is there an openness and a strategy for getting new ideas on the table? This will usually happen when new people come on board and see what you don't see, or with younger staff members who are not stuck in the old ways of thinking. If you do not have an intentional strategy to bring new ideas and new people to the table, you are at risk! Long term employees will often work to guard the status quo which is comfortable for them rather than be initiators of new ideas which will stretch them.
Fourth, do you have the courage to move along leaders who are stuck in the past and who will not go with you into the future? Those who have quit growing and who guard the status quo are anchors to your ministry, holding it back. The mission is more important than job security. If you do not regularly evaluate leaders for their ability to lead the organization forward you are at risk! If you are the senior leader and realize that you have taken the ministry as far as you can, the best thing you can do is to step aside and let someone else lead into the future. Far from being a failure, you are opening the door to organizational renewal.
Fifth, are you annually driving a set of ministry initiatives that all can rally around, will help you achieve your mission better and keep improving the ministry results you are after? We call these the "game changers" that change the nature of the results in a significant way. If you cannot identify those annual game changers you are at risk!
The longer a ministry has been in existence, the more difficult it is to keep renewing it from within so that you don't move into the plateau and decline phase of life. In other words, leadership becomes more complex, not easier and the need for risk, new ideas, critical thinking and creating waves greater as the ministry matures. Take a moment and think about where your ministry is against some of these principles.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Viewing People Like Jesus Views Them
What we really think about people is most often revealed in private conversations about them. And how we choose to think and talk about them spills out in our attitudes toward them, words we use with them and the level of honor we afford them. Thus our private thoughts and conversations impact our relationships. Jesus Himself said that what is in our heart is what comes out in our words. The connection is clear.
Think of how we unconsciously judge people we see by their appearance, weight, mannerisms or obvious social class. In every instance we are looking at a man, woman, or child who is made in the Image of God, has inestimable eternal value and is a potential son or daughter of the King of Kings. Where our evaluation is different from God's evaluation, we violate His heart.
When we call people names to one another - "that pinhead" - we judge them and develop attitudes toward them. When we see only the negative in people, we do the same. All of this is human (fallen) nature as we evaluate people by our standards and against our grid which usually makes us feel good by keeping ourselves near the top. What this is not is a reflection of God's character or His evaluation of people which is one of love and compassion.
There are times, when we judge actions of people which can be wrong, egregious, unhelpful and foolish. But judging actions is very different from labeling people. The former evaluates actions while the latter evaluates a whole person including their heart.
None of us is exempt from this challenge. But consider for a moment how lucky we are that God does not judge us the way we judge others. From his perspective we are sinful, rebellious, flawed and in every way deserving of death. Yet God so loved the world that He gave His one and only son that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world but to save the world through Him John 3 16-17)."
When our attitudes are condemnatory, they violate the attitude of God toward us. His goal with all people is that they would find Him, find eternal life and it stems from His great love for us that wants to see all saved and accepts the unacceptable - all of us from a divine perspective.
It is a challenge, but it will impact our ability to love like He loved and to lead people to the Lord who loves completely and purely.
Think of how we unconsciously judge people we see by their appearance, weight, mannerisms or obvious social class. In every instance we are looking at a man, woman, or child who is made in the Image of God, has inestimable eternal value and is a potential son or daughter of the King of Kings. Where our evaluation is different from God's evaluation, we violate His heart.
When we call people names to one another - "that pinhead" - we judge them and develop attitudes toward them. When we see only the negative in people, we do the same. All of this is human (fallen) nature as we evaluate people by our standards and against our grid which usually makes us feel good by keeping ourselves near the top. What this is not is a reflection of God's character or His evaluation of people which is one of love and compassion.
There are times, when we judge actions of people which can be wrong, egregious, unhelpful and foolish. But judging actions is very different from labeling people. The former evaluates actions while the latter evaluates a whole person including their heart.
None of us is exempt from this challenge. But consider for a moment how lucky we are that God does not judge us the way we judge others. From his perspective we are sinful, rebellious, flawed and in every way deserving of death. Yet God so loved the world that He gave His one and only son that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world but to save the world through Him John 3 16-17)."
When our attitudes are condemnatory, they violate the attitude of God toward us. His goal with all people is that they would find Him, find eternal life and it stems from His great love for us that wants to see all saved and accepts the unacceptable - all of us from a divine perspective.
It is a challenge, but it will impact our ability to love like He loved and to lead people to the Lord who loves completely and purely.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)