Challenges produce creative leaders as much as necessity is the mother of invention. When problems hem us in, leaders are forced to think of possibilities outside the box. When processes are multiplied in boring and ineffective repetitions, we start experimenting with better and more efficient ways of producing or living.

Some very lucky people stumble onto creative solutions in the debris of failures and mistakes. Roentagen was searching for the reason why his photographic plates were being ruined when he discovered radiation in the process. Spencer Silver, a scientist at 3M accidentally developed a “low tack,” reusable pressure sensitive adhesive while in search for super glue. This mistake was not well received by others for five years until a colleague, Art Fry, used the adhesive to bookmark his hymnbook. Discovering this effective use, 3M then marketed the adhesive, now known as “Post-it” pads to great success.

Some psychologists posit that early experiences predispose people to be interested in a certain range of problems. Physicists like Viktor Weisskopf, Max Planck, Werner Heisenbery, and Hans Bethe claim that what inspired them to seek to understand the movement of atoms and stars was the exhilaration they felt at the sight of mountains and the night sky. Curiosity is the indispensible ingredient for creativity. Its nature is not only intellectual but rooted in deep feelings borne out of experiences that require some resolution or a new way of understanding. This appears to point to curious people as the likely candidates for creative leadership.

A deep understanding of a domain is necessary if we want to transform it. It is not possible to be creative without learning what others know; yet creativity arises only when there is dissatisfaction with the knowledge. The Russian composer, Igor Stravinski, understood the fundamentals of classical music intimately, but moved dissonantly away from what was accepted to new and creative contours of music. When he debuted his now famous ballet score, The Rite of Spring in 1913, his dissonant, pulsating and unpredictable music was so offensive that his Parisian audience drowned out the orchestra with their hisses and heckles. Yet, Stravinski’s creative music inspired many twentieth century composers with his radical use of rhythm. Curiosity has to be coupled with discipline for any significant creative contributions to be made. Leaders I know to be creative are absorbed by a domain that they effortlessly navigate and re-interpret the fundamental blocks of the chosen discipline in insightful ways that create previously unthinkable new dimensions.

Howard Gardner, in his study of the major creative geniuses of the twentieth century indicates a proficiency in an ironic blend of convergent and divergent thinking. Convergent thinking is the rational ability at analysis and the cognitive agility to solve problems that have only one correct answer. Divergent thinking is the flexibility that throws up a range of possibilities to resolve a dilemma. It is a creative ability at perceiving unusual associations and to swirl around different perspectives to arrive at an ingenious solution. It is not surprising then, that many creative leaders tend to exude a mischievous playfulness that belies a disciplined and inquiring disposition.

Historically dark epochs, like wars, are the crucibles of creativity. Some have argued that the outstanding breakaways from classical literary, musical, and artistic styles in the twentieth century were an indirect reaction to the disillusionment people felt at the inability of Western civilization to avoid World War I. It is no coincidence that Einstein’s theory of relativity, Freud’s theory of the unconscious, Eliot’s free form poetry, Stravinski’s twelve-tone music, Martha Graham’s abstract choreography, Picasso’s deformed figures, James Joyce’s stream of consciousness prose were all created – and accepted by the public – in the same period in which empires collapsed and belief systems rejected old certainties. It is not surprising then that many creative leaders are tortured in their souls, seared in their memories and scarred in their experience.

Robert Sternberg asserts that creativity is a form of leadership that propels a field forward and influences others, hence his “propulsion model.” In his model, he identifies eight types of creative leaders:

Replicators are those who maintain the status quo. The larger proportion of leaders in human enterprises is in this category.
Redefiners are those who tweak and put a new spin on existing leadership or innovation. This is true in tightly controlled organizations, or in companies with a long history or tradition, where it is difficult to break out of entrenched molds.
Forward Incrementors move the organization further in the direction it was going. Software companies that release improved versions of their existing programs is a sterling example.
Advanced Forward Incrementors refer to those who push the envelope in a field, going further than others are ready to go. The earlier example of Stravinski’s music is a case in point.
Redirectors introduce new and more effective ways of achieving established goals. Henry Ford, in introducing the constant-motion assembly line to manufacture the Model T, is a classic example of a redirector.
Regressive Redirectors or Reconstructors reinvent a previously successful product like Coca Cola’s decision to revive Classic Coke or fashion designers going back to narrow neck ties for men.
Reinitiators who initiate a fresh start for an organization or field that has seen better days.
Synthesizers integrate best ideas from different industries to produce something that meets present needs. The electronic book is a great product that is gaining popularity. It assembles the best ideas from unrelated industries to create something new.

Every leader’s dream is to stimulate creativity in the organization so Gordian knots can be broken and problems resolved. Richard Woodman makes three proposals that leaders can implement to create an environment friendly to creativity. Firstly, he proposes that because “creative behavior… is an interaction of person and situation… norms supporting open sharing of information… (and) risk-taking behavior will enhance creativity… Creativity is reduced by rigid norms that create high conformity.”

Secondly, he suggests that leaders enlist as diverse a team as possible and build participative structures in the organization. He contends that homogenous composition, autocratic leadership and rigid structures tend to suppress creativity.

Finally, he proposes matrix, networking, collateral or parallel structures instead of bureaucratic or mechanistic systems to increase the probability of organizational creativity.

What seems to be the fundamental requirement in increasing the creative amperage in an organization is the wisdom to balance behaviors and motivations of stakeholders. Every leader needs to discern between diversity and self serving individualism, restrictive homogeneity and serving a common vision, corporate success or self promotion. What is most critically required in leadership that will enhance creativity in the organization is wisdom. There is no better place to secure this wisdom than to heed the Wisdom writer, “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom; all who follow his precepts have good understanding…”(Ps 110:10) We can find the means to resolve the most intractable difficulties from the Original Creator who alone brings something out of nothing.

Peter Chao is the Founder-President of Eagles Communications.

The New International Version of the Bible has been referenced.

References:
Chamberlin, Jamie. 2003. “Considering Creativity: Inspiring the Masses through Creative Leadership”. Monitor on Psychology Vol. 34, No. 10: 50.
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. New York: HarperCollins, 1996.
Gardner, Howard. Creating Minds. New York: BasicBooks, 1993.
Woodman, Richard W. 1995. “Managing Creativity.” In Creative Action in Organizations, ed. Cameron M. Ford and Dennis A. Gioia, 60-65.Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Handling conflict in an organization or church is part of a leader’s responsibility. As fallen human beings, we are not inclined to submit to authority and are offended when we disagree with others.

In Philippians 4, Paul addresses the theme of unity and deals with a conflict situation in the Church of Philippi. An argument has occurred between two leading members of the church and it is apparently affecting the life of the whole congregation. These verses do not reveal all the details. But we can infer a number of things from Philippians 4:2-3: “I implore Euodia and I implore Syntyche to be of the same mind in the Lord. And I urge you also, true companion, help these women who labored with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the Book of Life.”

The two women were key leaders. Verse 3 tells us that they worked alongside Paul and carried some responsibility for the mission of the Gospel. They were members of the same team and fellow leaders. The mention of a third party in the person of Clement probably affirms this situation, as he is most likely a well-known person (a respected leader as well as a partner with Paul) in the congregation. He could be a mediator for them or he could have also been involved in the dispute in a secondary way. The fact that Paul mentions the two women by name shows their personal standing in the community. It also demonstrates that Paul believes that their disagreement, even if it is a minor issue, is no small matter as it affects everybody else!

Notice Paul’s tact in saying the words “I implore” to both women respectively. This shows his neutrality in the matter. He is not siding with any one party but pleading equally with both. It also shows his respect for both leaders in question. We can learn much from the way Paul handled that problem.

Ironically, the name Euodia means “fragrance” and Syntyche means “good fortune.” Do we wonder why very few people chose those names? The names may have good meanings but the women certainly did not live up to them. This is the only time we read about them. It is not a good legacy to be remembered as a quarrelsome pair. They were probably women with strong personalities. Could it be that their dispute was in fact over something quite trivial?

What was Paul’s admonition? Even though we may not be able to know what the two women were disputing about, we know that Paul’s exhortation is simple: Agree with each other in the Lord. In other words, true to the thrust of this epistle, he wants them to practice putting the interests of the other ahead of one’s own. This would be a right way to solve their dispute. The phrase “in the Lord” is added to prove that such agreement may not be possible from human effort. If there is any genuine agreement based on humility and the putting of others first, it is because of the work of God in our lives. In the end, it is the Lord who motivates surprising human behaviors like that of reconciliation between bitter parties.

Perhaps we as leaders can draw out some practical implications in handling conflict. Firstly, conflict is a part of life and we do not need to see it negatively. Not every conflict can be resolved or even needs to be resolved (we can agree to disagree). Both parties can still move on and not be imprisoned by seemingly unresolved conflict. Can we see conflict situations as opportunities to learn wisdom and obedience? In this light, God can use conflict for our good.

Having said that, we should all seek to make peace. How do we achieve this when we face conflict with others?

Look Within
We should start with self-examination. Take responsibility for your own action and your part in the conflict. Remember that when we point a finger at someone, the other four are pointing back at us. Is it a difference of style or a wrong attitude or a prejudice that is causing the conflict in the first place? Remember that some fights are just not worth fighting about. Always look beyond actions to the intentions. Are you or is the other person intending to be difficult? Perhaps his character needs some refining. Perhaps you need to be more understanding.

Look Ahead
The next thing we can do is to look ahead to see what can be done to resolve the conflict. Can you take the first step? Matthew 5:24 suggests that we should make the first move. It takes humility but someone has to be more humble if we want to resolve a difference! Acts of kindness will generate reciprocity of kindness. Sometimes this step may mean constructive confrontation (Mt 18:15). Talk it out in a calm but firm way, without blaming or shaming. If both sides can see each other’s point of view, we can make progress. However, if you are actually looking forward to the confrontation, you are poised to kill, so beware. If you want respect, you must first show respect.

Look Around
It is always good to call on others to help mediate a conflict if the two of you are not able to do it properly. The church is the place where we can settle our differences in the spirit of Christ. Get a third party who is uninvolved and well respected. Paul did not take sides but dealt fairly with the two contentious women in the church. Nowadays, apart from pastors, we have trained counselors and mediators who can help. With such professionals around, leaders should not be stumbling and groping in darkness during a conflict situation.

Look Upwards
Our attitude should be submission to God and our aim should always be peace with others, even unbelievers (Rom 12:17-18; 1 Cor 10:31-11:1). Forgive and forget is how God has dealt with us. Can we not do likewise with others who have offended us?

Indeed, being leaders requires us to set an example in the Christ-like way we handle conflict situations as well as helping fellow leaders to resolve their differences. It is a tall order but we can surely learn from Paul in the above case.

Michael Tan is the Executive Vice-President of Eagles Communications. He likes to preach, write, play the guitar, and manage his staff!

The New King James Version of the Bible has been referenced.

When things go wrong, our instinctive reaction is fear. The late Princeton psychologist Hadley Cantril¹ pointed out that social panic occurs when large groups of people cannot discern reliable sources of advice from unreliable ones. The economic meltdown in the past months stirred a fear that rippled the world. As pundits gave contradictory opinions, our technological sophistication intensified our fears by enabling people to check on their investments every few minutes. And, when the anticipatory meets the retrospective, fear turns into panic. We become anticipatory when we think something terrible is going to happen. We sink into the retrospective when we regret that we did not act earlier. That is how swimmers who are pulled to sea by a rip current instinctively swim to shore against the current, and end up exhausting themselves and drowning. In bad times, only a clear voice of authority and assurance can calm nerves so we can respond appropriately and constructively.

The apostle Peter was writing to Christians scattered across Asia Minor who were living in perilous times. Their lives were threatened because of their faith. Christians were living in a society ignorant of God, which misunderstood believers and despised Christian practices. The apostle warns that the Devil “prowls around like a roaring lion.”² In such seasons of fear and confusion there was a need for leadership that was reliable. Peter writes, “I have a special concern for you church leaders…that you care for God’s flock with all the diligence of a shepherd.“³

Leaders with authority can be discerned by their behavior and motivation. Firstly, Peter indicates that trusted leaders are willing to serve; they are not compelled by others or circumstances: “Not because you have to, but because you want to please God.“⁴ Compulsion is a sign we are enslaved by the form but oblivious to the substance. Some leaders are compelled by a sense of duty. They perform their tasks grudgingly and their sulky demeanor does not inspire participation from others. Their faithfulness is held hostage by perfunctory obligation that is blind to purpose and meaning. Frequently, they do the least to comply with the minimum of requirements. They would never go “the extra mile” or give extended attention and care.

The only way to serve willingly is out of gratitude. Peter’s stance is from being a “witness of Christ’s sufferings.”⁵ He must have recalled when the Lord’s eyes met his after he had betrayed Christ the third time before a slave girl.⁶ Despite the betrayal, Christ gave Peter a personal interview after His resurrection. Three times the Lord inquired, “Do you love me?”⁷ With his heart laid bare before Christ, Peter’s motivation to serve was in response to the restoring love and grace of the risen Lord. The grateful heart serves willingly, compelled only by love for Christ and His people.

Secondly, leaders earn their authority when they are not self serving but self giving: “Not calculating what you can get out of it (MSG) but eager to serve (NIV).”⁸ There are too many leaders who plunder their countries’ resources and manipulate people and situations for personal benefit. They ask, “What’s in it for me?” while pondering how to discharge their leadership responsibilities. There are pastors who look after only the wealthy in hope of fiscal reward and leaders who promote agendas for personal returns. They have a streak of meanness that overestimates their personal value and contribution on the balance sheet of human interaction. The refrain “I deserve more or better” is replayed continuously in the calculative mind of the self serving leader. The same calculator undervalues and discounts the worth of others and their contributions.

Peter’s exhortation describes the person who helps himself to a double portion of food before his guests have a chance to a first helping. It also points to a person who goes to the theater only when he can get a free ticket or to one who gets his family to pay for his vacation even when he can afford it. It is the host who waters the wine so the party would not cost him too much. Self serving leaders hoard the tangibles while paying lip service to the noble.

In contrast, the self giving leader is so desirous to meet the needs of her people that she is willing to make available all resources, including material ones to do so. She is motivated by a deep desire to bless others, and sees her personal resources as a trust from God rather than a stockpile for personal gratification or a hedge against rainy days. Self giving matures into self sacrifice, the ultimate example of which is modeled by Christ. When a leader is sacrificial, the motivation to follow her is exponentially higher.

Finally, Peter says the leader with authority does not bossily tell others what to do, but tenderly shows them the way.⁹ For some, prestige and power are more desirable than money. Milton’s Satan thought it better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven! The desire to be master and commander turns an insecure person into a tyrant and despot. Such a leader’s agenda is paramount and no consideration is given to others’ needs and welfare. He exploits people and manipulates situations to fulfill his purposes. He can even provide spiritual justification for his self aggrandizement. He directs people to do what he himself is unable or unwilling to do.

On the contrary, if a leader is exemplary and competent, she will have the authority to take risks in difficult times and others will make sacrifices to stand with her. The leader with authority leads from the front, shows the way forward, and blazes the trail so others may follow. Alexander the Great of Macedonia led his army to overcome numerically stronger forces, conquering the then known world in the eleven years after he ascended the Greek throne after his father, Philip II was assassinated. He felt he could not require his men to risk their lives unless he was willing to put his life on the line too. The sight of Alexander leading the charge so inspired his soldiers that no military force could withstand them.¹⁰

Leading by example necessitates transparency. Leaders who preserve a façade of strength and imperviousness only encourage hypocrisy. They hide and excuse their own weaknesses while demanding perfection from their followers in brutal and punishing ways. Instead, a leader honest about his struggles can be tender because of his experience with God’s grace. He can demonstrate what it means to drink from the fountain of grace, and give hope to followers facing challenges in their own lives. Ironically, people respect leaders who are honest about their struggles, and follow those whose intentions are transparent.

When things go wrong, there is confusion with the clamor of conflicting voices. But, only those who can speak with clarity, step out to pave the way, and risk their own resources and lives will have the authority to lead. Only leaders with authority will inspire confidence to overcome the challenges that threaten our well-being and all that is important to us.

1. Cantril, Hadley. 1906-1969. PhD Harvard University. Joined Princeton University in 1936; became Chair of Princeton’s Department of Psychology and founded Princeton’s Office of Public Opinion.
2. I Peter 5:8
3. I Peter 5:2 MSG
4. I Peter 5:2 MSG
5. I Peter 5:1
6. Luke 22:61
7. John 21:15-19
8. I Peter 5:2c MSG & NIV
9. I Peter 5:3 paraphrased from MSG
10. Tracy, Brian. “The Indispensable Quality.” Brian Tracy International. Nov 10, 2008.
http://www.briantracy.com/articles/default.aspx?topicid=11&dtd=20081110 (Accessed May 2009).

Peter Chao is the Founder-President of Eagles Communications.

The New International Version of the Bible has been referenced.

Several years ago I spent a couple of hours with a newly minted seminarian that our church was thinking about hiring. We talked about why he wanted to be involved in church ministry, about the dreams he cherished, of what he might do with his life and how he might serve God. Toward the end of the conversation he turned to me and said, “I just hope I’m able to last in the ministry as long as you have.” I was, at that time, in my mid-forties.

Sadly, we could not find a place on our staff for him. But I have often returned to that conversation in my mind. In particular, I think about what it is that enables people to last in church ministry, and I have a candidate for the number one commodity which I would not have guessed when I was starting out.

I think what most enables people to thrive in ministry is not their giftedness, although effective ministry always requires alignment around spiritual gifts. It is not education, although theologically reflective leaders are sorely needed nowadays. It is not resources or connections or IQ or support systems, although those are all good things. What makes an enduring and healthy ministry possible is hope.

It is an unforced consistent conviction that somehow God is at work in the midst of our efforts, and that therefore they are not in vain, and that therefore no barriers or obstacles have the power to nullify the significance of what we do. “Against all hope, Abraham in hope believed and so became the father of many nations…” (Rom 4:18)

We are four-leaf clover collectors. We wish on the evening star. We tell stories about genies coming out of a bottle to grant three wishes. We are all hopers. We are the creatures who cannot stop wishing. Where that came from I have no idea.

Why is hope so central? Neil Warren, the founder of eHarmony, spent much of his career counseling with and studying married couples. He once said that his primary goal was to help even deeply troubled couples get as little as ten percent improvement. Because, he said, once people see improvement, they gain hope. And hope is the indispensable fuel for all human action. When hope dies, motivation dies. There is no longer any reason to try anything. But once hope enters a marriage – or a church – anything is possible. I can delegate a lot of ministry tasks. But one item I cannot delegate is hope. People want to know if the leader possesses a sense of what Gordon MacDonald has called “vital optimism.” And that one I cannot delegate.

Hope Detection

So I have had to learn how to monitor some hope indicators, to give me a kind of early detection system so I know when hope begins to run low. One indicator is how I face the morning. Clinical researchers say that mornings are generally the times when anxiety and depression are most likely to run the strongest. There is a reason why the Scriptures say God’s mercies are “new every morning.” (Lam 3:23) When I find myself waking up feeling overwhelmed by the tasks to be done during the day, I know hope is running low. Another indicator is what I think of as recovery time. Nancy and I went off for a great two weeks vacation a few years ago, and when we returned I still felt like I had not even been gone. When a few weeks off do not recharge my batteries, I know hope is in short supply.

When my hope tank is full, I have energy for outside activities. When my hope stash is dwindling, taking on anything new feels like a drain. Also, I find that my emotional sensitivity in relationships tells me something. During one hope-depleted era, an elder asked to meet with me. She wanted to commend me for something. I had suspected the encounter was going to be painful; when it ended up being positive I was so relieved that I had to fight back tears. Even though I am a feeler, having tears that close to the surface is not a good sign.

Hope Management

I have also had to learn how to arrange my life so that I can keep filling up on hope. Partly this means I have to watch out for hope-killers. No encounter with another human being is purely neutral on an emotional level. Every conversation I have with someone else either fills me up with a little more hope, or drains a little of it away. This is especially true in an arena like church ministry, where “need” is part of our currency, and where evaluation is often public and relentless. So I will tell you about a few of the types that I have identified among the hope-challenged:

The Contrarian: This is the person who believes no idea is so sound that a hole cannot be poked in it. When he hears a suggestion, his reflexive response is to cite times in the past when similar ideas did not work, and further reasons why it would not work in the future. He may not be ill-intended, but…

The Alarmist: This person is deeply wired into the life of the congregation. She has become a kind of lightening rod for every concern. And wherever there is a troubled soul, she becomes a megaphone. The underlying subtext in a conversation is: “there’s real trouble going on around here. I don’t know what you’re going to do about it, but it’s a good thing I’ve uncovered it.”

The Critic: This is the person whose ministry is to evaluate your ministry. Usually it’s a self-appointed role.

The Cynic: It is a little-talked about but widely known reality that churches – and often church staff – tend to breed cynics. Sometimes, I expect, it is because those of us who lead, live with such a wide gap between our words and our souls. But cynicism is the gift of prophecy gone sour. Cynics sap our hope because they believe the worst without calling for the best.

The Hype Machine: This one surprised me. This is the larger than life character who loves to “build people up.” When I am with him he tells me wonderful things about me and what I can accomplish. And while our conversation lasts I find myself all pumped up. But I deflate quickly afterward. Because his words are not really built on truth (which is often painful), but on creating a “motivational experience” which is the emotional equivalent of Jolt cola – a quick energy buzz followed by a crash and burn.

And I know about all these categories; partly because I carry them around inside me. I need to listen to these voices, and learn from them, and love them. But I also need to limit my exposure to them. Especially when my hope gauge is under half full.

And I need to identify those who fill me with hope. I think of my friend Kent. Kent is a hope-giver to me because he does two things consistently. He always speaks truth to me. And he is always for me. I can tell him bad news on the ministry front and he is never rocked. I can tell him good news and he is never giddy. My world is a little more stable because he’s a part of it. I did not realize this for a long time, because Kent’s personality is not a salesman/motivator/Richard Simmons kind of guy. But one reason I am so grateful to him is he gives me hope.

Another part of hope management is something that comes only from being alone with God. There is a wonderful story about David, before he became king. He had lost his wife and family; he had lost his best friend, Jonathan; he had lost his position as Israel’s golden boy; he had lost his home and nation and was on the run from Saul. He did find a little community to lead: “all those who were in distress or in debt or discontented gathered around him, and he became their leader. About four hundred men were with him.” (1 Sam 22:2) You may have served that same congregation. Eventually that group was devastated by an enemy and they “wept aloud until they had no strength left to weep.” (1 Sam 30:4) The men decided that David’s leadership was the problem, and decided to stone him. And these were his followers! But then comes the great verse: “But David found strength in the LORD his God.” (1 Sam 30:6)

One of the most important practices I had to learn about is precisely that one: how to encourage myself in the Lord my God. I find that, on my own, sometimes all I will do when alone with God is to rehearse my own inadequacies and problems. So, as an act of discipline, sometimes I force myself to lay those aside. I read passages that speak to me of God’s love for me. I go to settings where the beauty of nature will remind me of the goodness of God. I listen to music that I love. I write down twenty blessings I’m grateful to God for. I think about what will matter a million years from now, until my current burdens lose their weight. I sleep. I listen. I re-focus from what I’m hoping for to who I’m hoping in.

I remember what a friend of mine, Lew Smedes, used to talk about. That one day every circumstance, every situation that we’re hoping for is going to wear out, going to give out, going to fall apart, melt down, go away. When that happens, the question then is about your deeper hope… about your foundational hope… it is about your fall back hope when all your other hopes are disappointed.

The whole testimony of the Scriptures points to this One Man – points to a God, not because He is able to give us this thing or that thing we were hoping for – because that’s always going to give out eventually – but to the One that we put our hope in.

Hope Investing

Leaders come in all shapes and sizes, in many assortments of gifts and experiences, with unimaginable varieties of backgrounds and stories. But they share one trait: they hope. Doris Kearns Goodwin writes of Franklin Roosevelt that many around him had brighter minds and deeper gifts, but the indispensable contribution he made was his sense of confidence that the American people could defeat the Great Depression or fascism or whatever it was that needed to be beaten. He had “a remarkable capacity to transmit this cheerful strength to others,” who then would return it ten-fold.

Part of my task, then, is to make sure I invest a great deal of time in those who will be hope-carriers. One of the dangers of church ministry is that we drift from hope-creation to complaint-management.

One of the men in our congregation is a wonderful thinker and writer about leadership named Gary Hamel. He met with our leadership team recently to talk about the challenges that face any organization. He said that change is accelerating so rapidly that any organization which hopes to thrive needs to generate (literally) thousands of ideas, out of which will come maybe a hundred worth thinking about, out of which will come maybe ten or so worth piloting, out of which will come one or two that pay off. And what’s needed to generate and sustain that kind of creativity is hope.

So your key task, he said to us, is to engage and enlarge and equip that army of people in your church who will become the pro-future, pro-change contingent. Identify them, talk with them, recruit them, develop them, celebrate with them, and thank them. And I asked myself after that meeting: How much time do I spend with complainer/critics; and how much with hopers/doers?

Where Hope Comes From

One of the ways you can divide up Bible stories is by their time frame. One kind of story is the forty-day story. These are usually “wait-around-and-learn-patience” stories. The Israelites hung around Mt Sinai forty days waiting for the ten commandments; Noah’s family was in the ark for forty days and nights of rain; Elijah spent forty days in the wilderness hiding out from Jezebel. Jesus began His ministry by spending forty days in the wilderness; after the resurrection He and the disciples spent another forty days waiting for His ascension and then the coming of the Holy Spirit. The focus in these stories is on the need for people to be faithful; to persevere. Forty-day stories are slow cooker stories.

But there is another kind of story: the three-day story. These are stories about crisis and urgency – microwave stories. The focus here is not on the need for a human response at all. Here the pressure is so crushing that God must show up to the rescue or it is curtains. Three-day stories are stories of desperate need and anticipation and hope hanging by a thread.

When a hero named Joseph was in prison, he said to Pharaoh’s cupbearer, “Within three days Pharaoh will lift up your head and restore you to your position…” (Gen 40:13)

When Israel was trapped in slavery, Moses asked Pharaoh, “Let us go a three days’ journey into the wilderness…” (Ex 3:18, ESV) When the Israelites arrive at Sinai, God says, “Go to the people and consecrate them today and tomorrow. Have them wash their clothes and be ready by the third day, because on that day the LORD will come down on Mount Sinai in the sight of all the people.” (Ex 19:10-11) And on the morning of the third day, it came to pass.

When Israel was threatened with genocide, a harem girl, Esther, decides that she will fast for three days. Then she will go to the King to seek deliverance for her people.

When Jonah is swallowed and is in the belly of the big fish, want to take a guess how many days he’s there? He’s there three days before he’s released. His prayer the whole time he is in that big fish is, “God, just let me go out the way I came in.” I think that is probably what his prayer was.

When Israel was afraid to go into the Promised Land, God said to Israel, “Don’t be afraid. Don’t be discouraged. Three days from now, you will cross the Jordan to possess the land the Lord has given you.”

The third day was used so frequently in this way that it became a kind of technical expression meaning a time to wait for deliverance.

Right now, things are messed up.

Right now, hope is being crushed.

Right now, hearts are disappointed.

But a better day is coming.

In the book of Hosea, the prophet says it like this, “Come, let us return to the Lord… After two days He will revive us; on the third day He will restore us, that we may live in His presence.” (Hosea 6:1-2)

When it comes to hope, what helps me most is to remember my Ultimate Hope. And my Ultimate Hope is about something far deeper even than the future of the congregation I serve. I can have confidence, but it is not based on convincing myself that the church where I work will “do well.” I don’t hope for some outcome or circumstance – not even for church growth or ministry expansion. I don’t hope for some thing at all, but for some One. I hope for the One who rose on the Third Day.

The Third Day is God’s day. The Third Day is the day when prisoners of Pharaoh get set free. The Third Day is the day the people come to the mountains and the mountains shake and rivers are parted and the people go into the Promised Land. The Third Day is the day when harem girls like Esther face down powerful, giant kings.

The Third Day is the day that prophets like Jonah are dropped off at seaside ports by giant fish. The Third Day is the day that idols like Dagon come tumbling down, and God starts coming home to His people. The Third Day is the day stones are rolled away.

The Third Day is the day a crucified carpenter came back to life. You never know what God is going to do, because God is “God of the Third Day.”

You never know what might happen on the Third Day. I cling to that. I put all my hope in a Third Day God.

John Ortberg is a Pastor at Menlo Park Presbyterian Church in California. He is passionate about “spiritual formation,” which is how people become more like Jesus. His teaching brings Scripture alive and invariably includes practical applications and warm humor. John is the author of many books, including If You Want to Walk on Water, You’ve Got to Get Out of the Boat and The Life You’ve Always Wanted: Spiritual Growth for Ordinary People, and his latest book, Faith & Doubt.

John Ortberg and his wife Nancy will be speaking for the first time in Singapore at the upcoming Eagles Leadership Conference 2009 in July. Check it out at www.leadership.com.sg/ELC_Upcoming.html.

The New International Version of the Bible has been referenced unless otherwise stated.