This book is an accessible and easy read. It’s filled with real-life stories of how to step out of one’s comfort zone to build real relationships with real people of all kinds: someone of a different ethnicity, a different economic class/ different pay grade, different political persuasion, different lifestyle, different religion. And interspersed with Biblical stories and guest authors chiming in too.

I know for me, if I only looked for people just like me to befriend, I’d be all alone. I’ve rarely ever found anyone who is like me. And that’s ok. It’s really a good thing to get to know people who are different. The Bible has something to say about people being made different anyways: having different gifts, different roles, different parts.

For those of us who find it challenging to step out of our comfort zone, it’s good to have a friendly voice come along, like this book, to show us how to get past our discomforts and to live out of faith and not out of fear. I know I can use the help. Thanks Eric.

The incident regarding Deadly Viper had set the online world ablaze, and very uncomfortable words of pain festered in the open space [cf. read this summary]. My prayer was that the key leaders at the core of the conflict would resolve it privately, walking through their respective pains together with each other. This direct conversations has since happened offline in private, and an appropriate resolution is in the works. A public statement has been issued. I commend all involved for giving of their time and energy to walk thru this via dolorosa.

There’s already quite a number of thoughtful reflections about this incident posted::

• Jonathan Brink, who linked to reflections from Dan Iwao, Todd Thomas, Marian Wang, Edward Gilbreath, Dave Ingland, LT Tom.
• Eugene Cho, Charles Lee, David Park, Shaun King, Glennis Shih, Skye Jethani, Rudy Carrasco, Drew Hyun, Ed Cyzewski, Daniel So, Jim Gray, DK Daniel Kim, Kathy Khang, and more…
• [update] more from David Swanson, Church Marketing Sucks, Ken Fong, Joel Hamernick, Benson Hines, Scott McClellan, Andrew Lee, Dave Diller, Jessica Pegis, Melody Hanson, Jonathan Tran, Bo Lim, Amy Moffett
• [update 11/19] Zondervan Statement Regarding Concerns Voiced About “Deadly Viper: Character Assassins” via @eugenecho‘s Zondervan Pulls Deadly Viper from Stores and the Deadly Viper website shut down by authors Mike Foster and Jud Wilhite; Dave Gibbons’ thoughts Zondervan Issues Apology for Publishing ‘Deadly Viper’ (CT Liveblog); open letter response from Eugene Cho, Ken Fong, Helen Lee, Kathy Khang, Soong-Chan Rah, Nikki Toyama-Szeto

I want to offer a few more ideas in debriefing, with which I’d anticipate some people would disagree with. Conflict in the open was a good thing for 3 reasons [cf. The Necessity of Open Disagreement by Stephen Shields] ::

• This shows us what conflict resolution can look like. Conflict is not a pretty thing. We’ve all seen how ugly it can get, how destructive it can be, how it can ruin relationships. By being in the open, via social media, we saw how the conflict surfaced and moved towards live offline discussions, apologies, forgiveness, working towards resolution. There is a better way through the conflict. After all, conflict simply is. And I for one am tired of overly-positive spin that’s all too common in evangelical circles; I think the younger generation can smell spin a mile away.
• We heard new voices open up their heart and soul. While I did not read every single comment in the initial blog posts, a wide range of voices from new names spoke up, both Asian and non-Asian. It is not easy for anyone to share their pains, particularly Asian Americans, for fear of being misunderstood, misrepresented, or shamed. Asians tend to be a little more (or a lot more) sensitive than non-Asians because of its shame-based culture. Social media empowers anyone and everyone to speak out. This helps us to empathize with the offended much more than signing a petition. (Now, not every Asian American finds this publication offensive, granted.)
• We’ve got a long way to go with racial sensitivities in the church. A loooong way. Conflict that arose up over a relatively minor incident, in the whole scheme of things, shows how little experience we collectively have to just start any discussion about faith and race. And, yeah, these issues are complicated and messy. They don’t sell books nor increase conference attendance nor make churches grow rapidly in size. It doesn’t fit neatly in the systematic theology section.

Now a personal confession. I knew about an earlier edition of this book back in September 2007. I did not get a copy of the book. I did not look out for the authors to review their book to find out how the Asian motifs were being used, in case it might come across racially insensitive. I did not bear the burden for my fellow Asians Americans (the sensitive ones, not the insensitive ones). For my part in this neglect, I am sorry. [No if and or buts.]

I think that discussing highly-emotionally charged issues in an asynchronous public forum like the online blogosphere is mostly ineffective. One party describes the pain of the impact from the (alleged) offense, while the other party tries to describe the original intent, all sincere and good. To quote Sam Chand, “The difference between reality and expectation is conflict.” Both sides have unmet expectations. Both sides have different perceptions of reality. Conflict ensues. It’s more than misunderstanding.

I’ll confess that I’m rather new to the impact of public communications by influential leaders. I prefer a world of open book open source unfiltered communications, and am learning to filter and edit based on readers’ response. But realizing that words mean things, and sometimes words can be mean things to the listener even though the speaker didn’t intend it.

I’d be curious how other influential Asian American leaders like Eugene Cho, Dave Gibbons, Charles Lee, Ken Fong, would respond. My guess is that a direct conversation between Mike Foster and Soong-Chan Rah, in a safe private environment, will bring faster resolution than any further color commentary.

[update 11/4] Mike Foster and Jud Wilhite have issued a public statement that “some of our earlier messages … were mixed in with some defensiveness on our part. … we deeply regret anything we did to offend our Christian brothers and sisters in the Asian and Asian-American communities. … that is why are we reaching out this afternoon to hear the concerns and the best way to move forward together in a positive way that corrects past mistakes, respects individual viewpoints and, importantly, advances the ministry for everyone.”

I don’t think of myself as the consummate people person, whatever that means. I confess that my personal visceral reaction when I see a person with a big toothy smile is a tinge of suspicion, that they’re hiding something, have an agenda, or out of touch with reality of life that’s a mix of ups and downs.

So I put out the poll to get myself a reality check, because how I see myself is only a part of what’s real via self-awareness. To not be self-deluded, there’s also being open to what others see. And, there’s also what no one sees or knows — what only God knows.

It was strongly suggested for me to read John Maxwell’s Be a People Person: Effective Leadership Through Effective Relationships. I got the book out, again, to learn more of what I may have missed. Now, back to the issue at hand.

How do you describe what is a “people person” anyways? I think the label would have a wide range of perceptions and definitions, as does the labels introvert and extrovert. Extroverts recharge themselves by being with others, while introverts recharge by being alone.

The Myers-Briggs type indicator (MBTI) popularized the terms extraversion and introversion, describing them as follows [nb: and I crossed off the parts of the descriptions that _don't_ fit me]:

The first pair of psychological preferences is Extraversion and Introversion. Where do you put your attention and get your energy? Do you like to spend time in the outer world of people and things (Extraversion), or in your inner world of ideas and images (Introversion)?

Extraversion and Introversion as terms used by C. G. Jung explain different attitudes people use to direct their energy. These words have a meaning in psychology that is different from the way they are used in everyday language.

Everyone spends some time extraverting and some time introverting. Don’t confuse Introversion with shyness or reclusiveness. They are not related.

Take a minute to ask yourself which of the following descriptions seems more natural, effortless, and comfortable for you?

Extraversion (E)
I like getting my energy from active involvement in events and having a lot of different activities. I’m excited when I’m around people and I like to energize other people. I like moving into action and making things happen. I generally feel at home in the world. I often understand a problem better when I can talk out loud about it and hear what others have to say. …

Introversion (I)
I like getting my energy from dealing with the ideas, pictures, memories, and reactions that are inside my head, in my inner world. I often prefer doing things alone or with one or two people I feel comfortable with. I take time to reflect so that I have a clear idea of what I’ll be doing when I decide to act. Ideas are almost solid things for me. Sometimes I like the idea of something better than the real thing.

As you can see in my poll, 14 people rated me at 6.36. According to one online test I took, my score for extroversion was 7.9. So what could all this mean?

Here’s what might be going on, YMMV (your mileage may vary) ::

• People see me differently than how I see myself, because I (sometimes) choose unconventional ways of relating.
• Maybe a “people person” isn’t about being an extrovert, but more about relational skills to better lead and/or connect with other people.
• My highest intelligence being “interpersonal” could mean I do well connecting with lots of people via networking, but don’t have as much inner drive to make things happen or to make people feel good and motivated. So I’m not the class clown, like Rick Warren.
• I have described myself as loving the ideas that affect people. My Birkman scored in the blue quadrant, indicating my preference for a lower key style, indirect involvement, people-oriented, and idea-centered. Thus, I’m much better at using words than non-verbal actions.
• I use blogging (twittering, video chat) as a way for me to think out loud, get feedback, and connect with people, when I can’t be at more than one place offline.
• I do hate being alone in solitude, drives me nuts.
• I’m in desperate need of psychological help and re-assessment.

Got to connect with Mary Beth Stockdale on this wetoku video chat interview today. We talked about her experience in being a part of a community with the LifeChurch.tv online church, and how online relationships are just as real as their offline counterparts.

Tony Steward (LifeChurch.tv’s Online Community Pastor) recently wrote a great explanation for how online church offers real ministry and engagement in response to concerns about online church. I’m glad we can also hear about the value and impact of online community from a participant, too, in above video.

You can meet Mary Beth, Tony, and others in person at Cultivate Conference on October 27th in Chicago.

We have 5 senses: see, hear, touch, taste, smell. The online world allows us to see and hear one another. That’s 40%.

(Aside: I don’t think we want taste or smell. And, touch is one thing that’s hard to reproduce in any mediated way. And being a hugger myself, I do like touch, but can’t get that even from live & in-person people I’m around. And, when I’m in an Asian cultural context, that doesn’t help.)

There are 3 dimensions in the real world: height, width, depth. With web video technology, we can cover 2 of them, so that’s 66%.

Albert Mehrabian‘s describes that face-to-face communication consists of 7% words (verbal), 38% tone of voice, 55% body language. Web video technology transmits all of this, so that’s 100%.

40% x 66% x 100% = 26.4%

I’m being facetious. Face-to-face relationship is one kind. Online relationships is another kind. One does not replace the other. Each have some values in common and some values that are different.

And, I think, having both relating face-to-face and online connection can enhance and allow relationships to be that much more fuller than just one kind to the exclusion of the other kind.

“How do you have intimate relationships?”

Sincere Inquiry was my response!

Not just general inquiries about the person, their background, family and careers.

Sincere inquiries that push the limits and boundaries of acquaintances. Questions that evoke emotions from one another. Questions that release shouts of passion from the deepest parts of one’s soul. Questions that take you to new territories in your relationship preventing you to return to the old worn out fields of superficially.

A sincerity that desires to know the created being in front of you and the purpose the Creator designed them. A sincerity where you lose yourself in them and you decrease with each sentence they share about themselves.

Intimate relationships begin not with available time but intentional sincere questions. We make time as we desire to do nothing more then inquire about the unique created being were engaged with.

My prayer is that you will have deeper intimate relationships this weekend as you spend time with family and friends this Thanksgiving.

Sabastian Huynh
conVerge Family Church
(Garden Grove, CA)
www.convergenow.net

• “The success of the iPhone has rendered the iPod irrelevant.” — Fast Company’s Agree or Disagree
• 1st internet campus baptism, at Flamingo Road anyways; could virtual communion be next?
• the beauty of the small church – a series by Les Puryear, now a booklet; lots of attention already given to large churches… introduction, most churches are small churches, the head, leadership, family, tradition, worship, ministry, a final word
• “… study shows that the fat in brisket is akin to olive oil.” Barbecue: the new health food
• comparing Tim Keller to Jason Bourne + look at Keller‘s preaching notes
• PlugRug.com – another Digg-clone for “the best ministry stuff on the web”; cf. icth.us, whatgod.org, GospelShout.com, FaithTag.com
• Men and women CAN be friends - read on…

I’m a huge advocate for cross-gender friendships, that men and women can be friends. But, I also know in the contexts I live and work in, I’m not as vocal about it as I’d like to be. Biggest value-add: un-objectifies women. I’ve not blogged volumes about it as my virtual friend Dan Brennan over at Faith Dance, and I really respect his thoughtful insights about how to navigate those sticky issues, especially in an oversexed society.

Compare and contrast the “10 commandments” for avoiding any hint of sexual immorality vs. this Eugene Peterson quote and follow-up reflections:

I’ve not lived cautiously. I have friendships with women. I touch them. I’ve been more careful in school than I was in the parish, where everyone knows me. It’s different now because someone can come to my office and we can have a deep talk and the next day I won’t know his or her name. That didn’t happen in a church setting. So I’m more careful now. But I’m not obsessive. These are my friends. Touch is a human thing, not just a sexual thing. It is dehumanizing to deny touch. Is sex a contagious disease? Sex is a danger, but money is a danger too. Do you refuse to take a salary because money is a danger?

And here’s the question, put forth by Dan Brennan,

Is it possible for cross-sex friendships to flourish in our church communities with more constructive meanings than the appearance of sexual immorality? You see if we are training church leaders with a socially constructed meaning of men and women with taken-for-granted conventional assumptions, I would argue that we may not be pursuing social justice at a fundamental relational level in our communities.

My answer is yes. Where, you ask? Well, that’s a tougher question. 1 qualifer: not everyone can do this.

1. While conferences, seminars, events, workshops provide an opportunity for networking, networking doesn’t actually happen 99% of the time, b/c that time is used to put a name to a face, and conversations skim the surface with small talk. Networking requires intentional + regular follow-up and conversations, both in-person and virtual (IM, phone, email, msg boards, chat rooms, IP telephony, etc.) The ol’ mediated “Say hello for me” doesn’t quite count.

2. Networking with people requires actual people who are connectors and/or facilitators to run the network, to keep it running, to keep it going. Technology can support the networking activity, but someone has to be traffic facilitator, coordinate some conversations + meetups. Just as a computer network [LAN] requires hubs and routers, so does human networks.

3. Extending and growing a network involves meeting new people and connecting with them. Through conversations, you broaden your horizons, learn new perspectives, meet great people, open up possibilities for synergy + collaboration + mutuality + combustible ideas.

4. Maintaining a personal “network” of a few close personal friends, a la friendster, doesn’t really tap into the power. That’s just bunkering down into a clique, comfort zone, a gang, a clan; not there’s anything wrong with that.

5. On a good day, I can get 5 meetups in 1 metro area, including travel time and brief interims to decompress or transition, if needed: breakfast, lunch, mid-afternoon tea at Starbucks, dinner, evening meetup. This is my trade secret, yours for the taking [attribution would be nice, but not required] for being my faithful blog reader.

6. If you know of a job or a company that would value my contribution in meeting up with people for simply the pure love of networking [and NOT making a sales pitch, or using people; just connecting with them, and building relationships], reply back to me with an intro, b/c that’d be a dream job for me!!

This blog entry courtesy of JetBlue, who gets it, offering free Wifi hotzone here in the (otherwise boring) lounge @ Long Beach.. JetBlue, you make me happier every time