informational meeting follow-up

07.20.2009 07:31 PM | core values, gatherings, theology, information, leadership | permalink
we had a great time last night at the informational meeting. we met several new people and there seemed to be a lot of growing interest and excitement with everybody. i think i'm most excited about the diversity of people and especially the significant number of people who are currently disinterested/disconnected from church and are now finding something in which they connect.

if you were there last night, you might remember me saying that i created a nice, pretty keynote presentation that went along with my shpill. you might also remember me saying that much to my chagrin, vino's doesn't have a connector for a computer... so, 15 minutes before my presentation, i had a very momentary freakout....but fortunately moved on pretty quickly. :)

so, i thought i would post my presentation here. you don't get all the fancy transitions and the crazy bells and whistles, but you do get the cold hard facts. you can view the presentation here or you can download a pdf of the presentation by clicking here.

also, everyone in attendance got a little visual booklet that abstractly followed along with my presentation. to get the full impact, it's best to have it in your hand and follow along, but if you want to subconsciously channel vino's backroom and me talking, you can download the booklet by clicking here.

be looking out soon for an announcement about next month's shindig!

comments (1)

faith |||amp; culture: the question of art |||amp; accuracy

06.30.2009 08:40 PM | art, culture, core values | permalink
we've explored the intersection of faith and culture here before, specifically in the realm of the arts. this time, though, i'd like to begin by posing a question:

must/should art be accurate?

must art be "correct"? must it be definitional in nature? must it be factual?

i came across a group called B.A.S.I.C. (brothers and sisters in christ) who are based in ireland. whereas i've yet to learn a lot about this group, i certainly connected with their "who we are" statement, proclaiming,

BASIC, founded in 1993, is an Irish-based network of women and men (lay, religious, priests) who feel called to play an active part in building up a Church Community which is freed from the sin of sexism and healed from the divisions between men and women.
BASIC believes in a Church which affirms, proclaims, lives out and makes visible sacramentally God's creation of women and men as equal partners and the Good News of their reconciliation and unity in Christ.

great stuff (which are certainly values that are shared at eikon). what often strikes me about groups/ministries who are committed to fostering biblical gender equality is that a thorough review of jesus' life and teachings paired with ancient hebraic history is necessary. what then flowed from this quest was a survey of related common cultural misunderstandings. one they identified is that, often, leonardo's the last supper is often used as ammunition against their cause, with people stating, "well, there were no women present at the last supper!"

BASIC, as a part of their journey in affirming and advocating gender equality, decided to use art as a mode of educating. they discovered that leonardo's depiction was far from accurate, omitting the following:

women, yet the Passover had to be eaten by whole families including women

children, yet the laws of Passover require children to ask questions so that they can learn the meaning of the Passover meal from their parents

the disciples who prepared the meal during the day

so, BASIC commissioned a new version of the last supper by polish artist bohdan piasecki in which the last supper was depicted in a distinctly jewish context (supposedly biblically accurate). here's what piasecki created (unfortunately this is the best quality i could find online):



in this, you'll find everything that was "missing" in leonardo's depiction: women, children, distinctly jewish surroundings, the "correct" passover food, etc.

while i certainly find this depiction to be amazing in its accuracy and i truly appreciate the educational aspect of this piece of art, it doesn't lead me to leave completely leave behind leonardo's version.

first, leonardo's piece, of course, is amazing. there's something to be said for good art. while that's a whole separate conversation in itself, good art trumps "true"-but-bad art—art, music, writing, film, whatever—any day. i'm certainly not suggesting that piasecki's piece is "bad" by any means (in fact i very much like it), but i simply throw this idea out there because it's worth mentioning.

more to the point, i think art is primarily representational of much more than "just the facts, ma'am." art is feeling. it's emotion. it's one's experiences. it's a point-of-view. it's contextual. it's changing.

leonardo's piece isn't "accurate" but it tells us something about who leonardo was, the setting in which he created the piece and the culture in which he lived. leonardo's piece has survived not only because of the information it gives us, but because of the work itself.

last year, the ever-controversial photographer david lachapelle created a collection called jesus is my homeboy in which he represented the life of jesus in the context of very modern scenarios. in this collection, among many other scenes, lachapelle offered his own take on the last supper:



of the three depictions, obviously, lachapelle's version is the least "accurate" in the literal sense of the word. clearly, lachapelle wasn't trying to be accurate.

what lachapelle did do, though, was create an evocative and stirring depiction of the last supper that is, quite frankly, my favorite of the three.

i love the diversity (in spite of only males being represented) and a sense of the sordid company that jesus often kept. there's also a sense of exploration that engages the viewer. i want to look at this depiction over and over and each time i could find something new. it's also something that evokes a different story based on what mood you are in when you approach the piece. i can see excitement or confusion or mystery or curiosity or claustrophobia or suspicion or scandal or social engagement. it certainly isn't accurate, but it makes it no less "true."

so, ultimately, my answer is "no." art doesn't have to be accurate. art evokes something much more truthful than the truth. it presents a reality deeper than reality. accuracy doesn't make or break a piece of art.

so, must/should art be accurate? what do you think?
comments (6)

eikon: not just a bunch of dudes

05.31.2009 09:51 PM | core values, theology, leadership | permalink
how's that for a blog post title??... :)

soon and very soon, i plan on blogging a series of posts that will present our core values and some of the various theologies that are the underpinning in the shaping of this faith community. while i hope to do that in greater detail soon, i stumbled across an article that i thought was worth sharing and worth offering a couple brief thoughts.

one of the things we want to have at the core of our values and dna, so to speak, at eikon is gender equality. quite frankly, we hope that equality across the board is highly valued, but it seems that, in the church, gender equality has historically been a great barrier. to cut straight to the point, we believe that men and women, because they are both made in the image of god, are equal in not only being but also in function. in other words, we believe women can be pastors and teachers and leaders and elders and have full functional equivalence of men.

so, we're not just a bunch of dudes. :)

not only do we believe it, but over the last several months, as we've begun to form the core leadership group for eikon, we've intentionally sought out women leaders who will be key decision-makers in our community. the bottom line is that there are just certain experiences and points-of-view that i will never be able to offer being a male. there are certain filters through which i view scripture and how i see god that are simply deficient as compared to a female perspective.

just last night, while having dinner with some new friends/potential leaders at eikon (keeping my fingers crossed...), we had a great conversation about the way we see and perceive god. in this case, our new friend—who is the mother of a 2-yr old child—spoke about growing up thinking god was angry with her and that he didn't love her because she wasn't good enough. what struck me was that she talked about how the experience of having a child and being a mother has changed the way she views god. her deep and unconditional love for her child has shown her—if we are truly children of god—that there's no way god could be angry with her. how could a god characterized by love and grace and sacrifice hate his child? her experience as a woman and a mother has filtered the way she perceives god and certainly, the way in which she leads and make decisions are a product of her unique perspective.

so, without going into too great of detail, i thought i would share those quick thoughts about our position on gender equality. the article that i referenced that spawned this post is from jim wallis' god's politics blog with guest blogger mimi haddad. haddad is president of christians for biblical equality, a great organization of "christian men and women who believe that the bible, properly interpreted, teaches the fundamental equality of men and women of all racial and ethnic groups, all economic classes, and all age groups." you can find more out about CBE here and you can read haddad's article here.

while the article isn't a thorough explanation of a biblical view of gender equality, i think it's a good introduction that can help to stir a dialogue and engage those who are unfamiliar with more egalitarian biblical concepts. for an even more in-depth analysis of biblical gender equality, i highly recommend rebecca merrill groothuis' good news for women: a biblical picture of gender quality (amazon link). i read this book 5 or 6 years ago and it greatly challenged me and put me on a path of biblical and cultural and relational discovery that has made me much more intentional about these issues and has made me place much more value on women's vital and necessary roles in communities of faith. (p.s. if you want to get a little sneak peek, i came across this on her website. it's a fairly significant chunk from the book to get an idea of the trajectory she takes throughout her work.)

we really look forward to the continued shaping of the leadership at eikon with both men and women who want to engage and lead others in the way of jesus—the ultimate example of a life characterized by equality.

in the end, of course, we want to be a community that isn't just a bunch of dudes. :)
comments

growing an organic community

05.04.2009 06:31 PM | culture, core values, theology, leadership | permalink


one of the ways i often describe the shaping of eikon is "organic." by this, i mean natural growth. growth that isn't forced or contrived. it's growth that allows things to grow in ways that aren't foreign to their environment.

to flesh this out a little more in real life terms, i view organic growth as non-"gimmick" growth. while we certainly plan on using various streams of branding and marketing, we don't want to turn to gimmicks that misrepresent the church and mislead people. i also use organic to work alongside the idea of being incarnational. in other words, jesus lived with the people he reached, looked like the people he reached, ate with the people he reached and engaged in the culture of the people he reached. of course, all this is in the context of being organic and natural—not in some contrived way. we don't want to force our way into some kind of foreign culture, but rather, we hope to assimilate in an organic way. additionally, i use the term organic to move away from the idea of program/attraction-driven models that solely rely on big events and impressive displays to attract people. again, we certainly hope to create spaces that draw people in and create opportunities for people to meet and interact, but we want to do this in the context of relationships and generative friendships. there are many, many more ways to define my use of the word organic, but these are a few that help to illustrate the point.

sometimes the word organic is misused or misunderstood by some people to mean "fly by night" or "whatever happens happens" or some other similar derivative. in fact, growing an organic community is a very strategic and thoughtful process that requires a significant amount of work and commitment. julie clawson, self-described "mom, writer, activist, dreamer", on her blog, one hand clapping, spent a little time thinking about this very issue of organic community. in talking about her and her daughter tending to their organic garden at their home, she stumbles upon some great analogies about growing an organic community. she writes:

...I am spending more and more time pulling the weeds that choke out the life of the food and attempting to do something about the bugs that are eating my food. I don’t want to dump toxins onto the land, but I really don’t want to be sharing my swiss chard with the critters either. So I’m experimenting with organic pesticides. Yesterday I made up a batch that was pretty much a mixture of pureed garlic and habanero peppers. I could barely stand being in the kitchen with the stuff my eyes stung so bad, so I hope the bugs have the same aversion to it. We shall see.

All that to say, organic gardening is work. Growing my own food and doing so in sustainable ways that doesn’t harm the environment or my kids takes works. It reminded me of...how all too often we speak of organic leadership or organization as if it is this nebulous unstructured thing. People who despise brands or hierarchy will suggest organic systems instead. But...organic gardening is hard - it takes a lot of deliberate effort. No organic gardener is going to go in without a plan, without knowing when to plant. They aren’t going to let pests or weeds take over the garden if they care about actually producing food. It’s just that as they go about their work they do so in loving, careful, and considerate fashion without imposing unnatural elements onto the garden. Understanding that work...really helps me understand more the spiritual metaphor of what an organic community should be like.

i think she presents a beautiful metaphor. while i'm not a gardener, i can really appreciate this palpable analogy that really expresses the care and love needed to grow organically. to produce something as natural as possible, it takes diligence and care and an informed plan. we hope to be a similar kind of gardener—as julie describes—at eikon.

one of the beautiful pieces of julie's story is that she tends to the garden in community. specifically, she and her daughter oversee the garden. we hope to do the same at eikon. i (ryan) don't want to reign over eikon as some kind of dictatorial gardener, but someone who cares for the growth alongside others. we don't want to build needless hierarchies or divisive systems, but rather hope to come alongside people as co-laborers and co-sojourners. certainly, we'll have leaders (which i'll begin to talk about very soon), but we hope to build the leadership team (as we've already been doing for quite some time) in an equally organic way. so, we want you to begin to think about whether or not you think you have a part in this thing called eikon. as we grow organically, we need people to partner with us to help in the work of gardening.
comments

questions for eikon?: follow-up

05.01.2009 02:23 PM | core values, theology, information, leadership | permalink


several weeks ago, i posted this entry in an attempt to offer people an open invitation to ask some of the questions they may have about this thing we're calling eikon church. in the past several months, more and more great questions have been flowing in and the blog post was an extension of that reality.

in the blogosphere, it's often difficult to entice people to leave comments. understandably, it "commits" you to an exchange that some people aren't interested in pursuing. after that particular post, we had a lot of email questions and many more from just personal interactions. one brave soul, though, chose to leave some questions in a comment. :)

so, i thought i would answer these in this public forum (whereas other email/personal questions were answered in the same manner). here goes:

1. Is Eikon in any way inspired by Rick McKinley's Imago Dei Church in Portland (also home to Donald Miller)?

the simple answer is no. here, though, is a more sufficient response.

i am certainly familiar with imago dei and similarly familiar with rick mckinley (founding pastor of imago dei). further, one of my favorite books of all-time if donald miller's blue like jazz. so, i am somewhat versed in what they do.

the reason i say no, though, is that while i'm familiar with them and like many of the things they do, it wouldn't be an accurate response to say that i have specifically modeled or been inspired by their community of faith. it's probably safe to say that we are theologically different from them in various ways (although not any major differences) and probably have some differing theological roots.

by all means, i do consider them to be a great community of faith and would recommend them to friends in the portland area. one of the things i absolutely love about them is their commitment to and emphasis on the arts—visual arts, writing, filmmaking, songwriting, etc. i hope and plan to have a similar emphasis and hope to—much like they do—build networks of artists and writers and filmmakers and craftsmen and the like.

so, while the answer is emphatically no, i certainly like many of the ways they've organized their community.

2. Is Eikon actually a church, or more of a community movement toward God?

in some ways, this question is a bit of a catch 22. what i mean by that is that semantics seem to get in the way for many people (although it certainly may not for the person asking these questions). for some, the word church has negative connotations. certainly, i interchange the words church and community of faith often. i think the term community of faith elicits much more fruitful and biblical connotations, but i don't have a problem with the word church.

with that said, in the broad and most generally connotated sense of the word, yes, eikon is a church. "officially", it is eikon church. we certainly hope that—much more than just a bunch of people who sit in a building once a week and call it a church—there is a community and network and movement of people throughout little rock that follow and know jesus. i have little interest in creating an organization, but i am driven and called and motivated to engage our surrounding culture with values that reflect jesus.

more to the point, we will have a building where we meet regularly (hopefully more often than just sunday). we will have leaders (which i'll talk more about very soon). we will have various ministries in which we engage as a community. we will do all the things that are "traditionally" associated with "church." BUT, we hope to do it an a bit of an alternative manner. we think that we in the american church need to be honest and admit that we have mistakenly prioritized and de-emphasized some things that are central to a community that claims to follow jesus. ultimately, we hope to do church and a be a community in a way that directly reflects jesus and trims away some of the non-essentials.

3. How does Eikon work in light of (or shadow of, as you may prefer) the 1st Century New Testament Church, acts, etc.?

that's a pretty big question for a blog post answer, but let me see if i can distill that down a little. :)

i think the best place to go is—as you pointed out—the book of acts. specifically, acts 2 sheds some great light on the way the church can and should look.

They committed themselves to the teaching of the apostles, the life together, the common meal, and the prayers.

Everyone around was in awe—all those wonders and signs done through the apostles! And all the believers lived in a wonderful harmony, holding everything in common. They sold whatever they owned and pooled their resources so that each person's need was met.

They followed a daily discipline of worship in the Temple followed by meals at home, every meal a celebration, exuberant and joyful, as they praised God. People in general liked what they saw. Every day their number grew as God added those who were saved.

here's what we see:

1) they placed emphasis on learning and theological discovery (committed themselves to the teaching of the apostles),

2) an important part of their community was life "beyond the four walls", so, in other words, they weren't completely "church"-focused/obsessed (the life together, the common meal, meals at home),

3) eagerness/willingness to engage in personal sacrifice in order to meet needs (they sold whatever they owned and pooled their resources so that each person's need was met),

4) spiritual engagement in community was vital (prayers, daily discipline of worship, praised god, celebration) and

5) assuming that these thousands of people described here have different starting points, worldviews and specific values, they were a community that were able to place friendships/mutual understanding above individual differences (all the believers lived in a wonderful harmony).

with all that said, we hope these traits are characteristic of eikon. naturally, we want to engage people in a way that is relevant and meaningful within the context of 21st century sensibilities, but i think the church described here in acts exhibits very broad and overarching characteristics that transcend time (much like most of the scenarios described throughout scripture).

so, whereas our context is, obviously, very different than the 1st century church, i hope that we will be able to learn from and exhibit the characteristics that shaped them.

4. How do you define Emergent?

wow, what a question...

well, i don't know if i do define emergent. :) if i've got to try, though, i generally "define" it much more as a conversation than a "way to do" church or a specific set of theologies. i think one of the beauties of the emergent conversation is that you see so many different expressions of church and faith involved. it transcends age, denomination and, again, specific theologies. that isn't to say that you don't see some connective streams and characteristics, but it isn't confined to simple, limiting definitions.

i sort of think of emergent as the indie music equivalent within the church/theological camps. of course, indie music began by exactly that: independent music. it was bands/artists that weren't signed to any major label (or any label, for that matter). indie music—in the last 10 years (or maybe more)—has shifted from a strict definition of "bands not signed to a label" into bands that exhibit certain qualities and characteristics. these qualities and characteristics, though, aren't easily definable categories. it's more of a feeling and a spirit. quite frankly, i can't really any verbalize what those specific things are, but i can certainly sense when a band is sort of indie in nature.

for example, i love jenny lewis (and rilo kiley, for that matter) and i would say she is an indie artist, despite the fact that she's signed to warner bros, a (very) major label (as is rilo kiley). she's clearly not truly "independent", but there's something about her lyrics and the delivery and the way she "does" music that gives off that indie vibe. now, you could certainly argue that she's not an indie artist, but so it goes with the term "emergent." who's emergent and who's not?

there's just a spirit and vibe and "energy" that connects people and churches under the umbrella term of "emergent." so, that may be the absolute most vague and unhelpful "definition", but that at least shared some of my thoughts. :)

-------------------------------------------------------

well, for those who have made it to the end and are not in a vegetative state due to my ramblings, i hope that serves to further the conversation and your ability to understand what this whole thing called eikon is all about. thanks for playing! :)

we'll be back very, very soon with some exciting information about our first ever collective gathering under the auspices of eikon. it should be a cool time and help to give you a more tangible grasp of what we're doing. check back soon for details.
comments (1)

faith |||amp; culture: barton damer: graphics and god

04.07.2009 08:08 PM | art, culture, core values, theology | permalink
last week, i wrote about the beautiful and often messy intersection of faith and culture regarding christ thile and the punch brothers. specifically, i looked at thile's faith journey shown in the trajectory of his lyrics.

here, i want to shift to another art form in which we find someone expressing their journey with christ in a beautifully creative and fresh way. barton damer is a motion graphics and print designer based in dallas, tx. he's the creative director at rt creative group which is responsible for such things as collide magazine, igniter media and echo conference. he blogs at www.alreadybeenchewed.net and you can also finding him hanging with his 3 children or skateboarding.

also, of course, you can find him producing some really amazing art that creates a pattern for the interplay between christ and art.

damer specializes in seemlessly blending the worlds of motion graphics and printed art. most of the time, it's difficult to differientiate between one of his 2-d pieces and a motion still. his ability to create a sense of movement and fluidity in a flat piece is incredible.


what's most incredible, though, is the way in which damer creates work that points back to a Creator without being explicitly "christian." now, damer—particularly with his work at igniter media—certainly does quite a bit of motion and graphics work that is made to be used in worship settings or in the context of the church, but the distinction is that it never feels cheap or reverts to the most mindless form of art (think thomas kinkade). rather, he creates beautiful and moving pieces of art that engage people and elicits response.

i think that's the kind of art christ followers should be creating. art that comes from a christ perspective doesn't have to cheapen itself by settling for the most literal interpretation or merely slapping the word "christian" in front of it. damer is able to convey beauty and depth even on something like a line of skateboard decks (which you see an example of below). it isn't like you suddenly look at one of his skateboards or t-shirts and say, "ooh, i think i want to accept jesus", but what it does is engage people with beauty and truth that expresses the nature of humans as created by the most gifted Creator.

so, here's to art that's goal is to move and engage people not in a one-sighted and cheapened way, but to show the beauty and work that's god's doing in the world.

here's a few more examples of his work. to check out everthing, go to www.bartondamer.com.


comments (1)

jesus vs. church

03.04.2009 07:47 AM | core values, theology | permalink
dave gibbons' new book, the monkey and the fish: liquid leadership for a third culture church, gives some much-needed global perspective into leadership in the church. gibbons serves as pastor of newsong church, a multi-cultural community in irvine, california and in the book, he talks about how to live out the values of jesus in an increasingly global culture.

in the book, he provides a chart that i think speaks so well to what we're trying to do with eikon. one of our guiding theologies is that the life, values and mission of jesus dictate the shape and flow of our community. it guides us in the way we lead, interact with each other, present the message of christ and engage the larger community of little rock. there's a way the church has done it (and that way has become the unfortunate and stereotypical standard) and then there's a way that looks more like jesus. gibbons' chart helps to illustrate this.

comments

so, what exactly is eikon trying to accomplish?

02.22.2009 02:17 PM | core values, theology, leadership | permalink
that's a good question and i want to offer a fairly broad answer (we'll get to even more specifics in future posts).

any good organization—be it a business or a church—has some sort of statement that expresses what its about and what it's trying to accomplish. a mission statement serves as a unifying expression that puts everyone on the same page. so, we at eikon have a statement that hopes to do just that. as we certainly don't want some kind of stuffy formal statement, we think we have a statement that expresses the unique spirit of eikon while creating a common mission for our community. so, here it is:

engaging culture with christ in the context of the city.

with the mission statement, we want to incorporate several key concepts that help to focus and unify our community. first, we want to denote that there's a distinct culture present within our community. mainly, this culture is a young, emerging, creative community. by using the word culture, we're also making clear that we don't view culture—much like the type of thought that has been prevalent in the church for a very long time—as evil or something to stay away from, but rather; it's something we affirm and utilize. specifically, when we refer to culture, we are including music, art, film, the socially normal mode and rhythm of living, literature, social gathering places and other aspects of social and common culture.

one key distinction, though, is that we don't simply use culture for culture’s sake. the key comes in the fact that we want to view and engage culture through the a theological lens—through the lens of christ. that doesn't mean we walk around trying to see images of jesus and mary burned into pieces of toast or smoke clouds :), but it does mean that we see that god is present everywhere and has left his creative mark in all forms of culture—whether it's the "pretty" or even the "ugly" parts of culture. let me offer an example.

contemporary christian music has done very little—culturally and artistically speaking—to engage me (and many others) in a way that leads to theological growth and discovery. on the other hand, some of the most rich and theological songs i know are "secular" (for lack of a better word) songs. one of my favorites is everclear's why i don't believe in god (warning: for those with sensitive ears, this song does contain a cuss word...so consider yourself warned...). lyrically, everclear—who certainly don't profess to be followers of christ—have made such a profound and stark statement about god and religion and the church and culture. by engaging culture with christ, it means hearing a song like this and being able to connect with the ongoing story of god and not just see it as some sort of disconnected and unfortunate commentary by some disaffected rock band. there's a certain potential redemptive quality in hearing this that helps us to see the reality of the world around us and shows us how we can connect with it.

finally, our mission specifies that our community is conditioned by a specific context. namely, the context is the city. this may seem like a minor or obvious distinction, but it truly focuses and defines our mission. simply put, life in the context of the city is vastly different than the suburbs or small towns. the people and culture and rhythm of the city help to define whom we reach, how we reach them and what style of ministry is effective and relevant. as we've stated in a previous post, we love little rock and it's an important character in our story.

so, as the church starts to take more tangible shape, i want to invite you to be a part of this mission that's going on here in little rock. stay tuned for more updates as we begin to near the time of actually having gatherings and as more information unfolds.
comments

so, who is ryan |||amp; why is he starting a church?

02.03.2009 09:21 PM | core values, information, history, leadership | permalink
so, maybe you've been following along on here for the last week or two reading about this thing called eikon church and you're thinking to yourself, 'self, who is this guy ryan and why is he starting a church??'

fair question.

here goes.

let's start with the basics: i'm 28 years old and have been married for about 5 1/2 years to my incredible wife christen. we have two beautiful daughters, lucy (19 months) and olive (2 months) and hope to keep the baby train rolling... (we love and welcome chaos...). :) we live in midtown little rock (capitol view) and love being in the city and the lifestyle that goes with it (we're not really 'burbs kind of people...). (apparently i also love using parenthetical statements...) (and ellipses...)


(here's my "i'm-gonna-try-to-be-cool-and-stand-against-this-graffiti-wall-but-really-just-look-like-a-dork-in-the-end" picture...)

i'm a product of arkansas, spending most of my childhood and beyond in conway. i'm the middle son (yeah...middle child...) of a pastor (yeah...pastor's kid...), so i grew up seeing the good and bad of pastoring and the church (more on that some other time, i'm sure). as all good little conway boys do, i attended the university of central arkansas, where i met my wife and, as a bonus, actually managed to receive my degree in fine arts, emphasizing in graphic design. my wife and i are both graphic designers, whereas i currently work as an advertising art director at a great little rock-based publishing company and my wife does freelance graphic design and photography (which is her primary gig).

a couple years after college, we decided to ship off to lexington, kentucky to work on my master's degree at asbury seminary. the three and a half years spent at asbury (completing my 2-year degree...), as cliché as it might sound, were incredible and life-changing years. during that time, i was able to really analyze a lot of the things i believed and re-evaluate a lot of the "status quo" feelings i had about the church and how to "do" church. during that process of reshaping and rethinking my guiding theologies, god began leading me somewhere that i absolutely knew i would never go: home.

so, back we came to little rock to start a church. thus, the birth of the dream of this thing called eikon.

so why are you starting a church? doesn't little rock have too many churches already? can't you just go be a pastor at an established church? is it just because you want to be in control and do it your way? isn't this really a cover-up for a plot for world domination in which you're going to gather people in some kind of jesus jungle colony where you all wear matching jumpsuits & nikes and eventually drink some tainted grape juice or something?

again, all fair questions.

there's a couple primary reasons we're starting a church:

1. we think the quantity of churches in an area isn't necessarily indicative of the diversity inherent in those churches. don't get me wrong, we think there are some great churches that are reaching a lot of people in a lot of different ways here in little rock. in fact, we hope to incorporate bits and pieces of several churches into what we do at eikon. we think it's time for an alternative in little rock. simply put, generally speaking, we think a lot of the existing churches target and reach a large, but somewhat specific segment of little rock. the point is that while there are a lot of churches in little rock reaching a lot of people, we feel like there's a piece missing in terms of the people being reached. we think that piece is eikon.

by and large, we believe there's a young, creative, emerging community of people in little rock that don't really fit in in little rock churches. no doubt, there's a few churches that are reaching out to this group, but we don't see a place that is culturally and socially and theologically specific to that group. we're starting eikon church because we think little rock needs a church that reaches, specifically, this group.

2. we love little rock. and because we love little rock, we want more people to be engaged in a process of learning about and becoming more like christ. in order to do that, specifically, we think the aforementioned group of unreached people need something that looks like them, talks like them, engages culture like them and is for them.

we want eikon to be a community of faith that does church in a way that is specific to the rhythms of the city of little rock. we don't want to be a church from the 'burbs that plops down in the middle of the city and tries to be the church from the 'burbs. we want to engage the culture of the city of little rock with christ in way that leads people into community and relationship with each other and christ. because we love little rock, we want to create a community that honors christ in the rhythm and sensibilities of the city.

so, there ya go. maybe you've found out way more than you ever wanted to know about this goofy guy ryan or why he's starting some goofy thing called eikon. but, i hope this gives you a little more of a personal glimpse into what's going on with eikon and the heart of the guy who's getting the ball rolling.

one of the values at eikon is that ryan, as the pastor, isn't more valued than anyone else, but we thought it would be helpful to get an idea of who's primarily behind this whole church thing and where he's coming from.

so, check back soon and often for more updates from the happenings at eikon.
comments (2)

a theology of art and creation with rob bell

02.01.2009 05:29 PM | art, core values, theology | permalink
beyond the saints in scripture, there are quite a few theologians, pastors, artists and thinkers that have shaped the guiding theologies of eikon. one of those people—who could be described by all those words—is rob bell. if you aren't familiar with bell, he is the pastor and founder of mars hill church in grand rapids, michigan. he is also a very notable speaker and author and the main face of nooma, a series of incredible spiritual short films. he is at the same time the admired/despised/loved/hated/prophet/false prophet/messiah/antichrist voice of an emerging generation of leaders and christians.

bell sat down with patrol magazine for a conversation about faith and art. as always, bell has some deeply insightful and introspective commentary concerning these issues (particularly the brief discussion of the controversial sculpture my sweet lord by new york artist cosimo cavallaro).

at eikon, we hope to make art a central part of our expression of faith and worship. we believe, much bell expresses in the interview, that we're all creators and there's a sense of co-creation with god. that doesn't mean we're all amazing painters or sculptors, but we are all inherently creators who desire a sense of beauty and truth.

so, you can read it in its entirety here, but here's a segment that i thought was particularly salient:

(in response to the question, what is art?)

I would begin with the understanding that God has left the world unfinished, and so, in Genesis chapter 1, this creation poem is about trees that are created to have the ability to create more trees. So, to me an authentic spirituality begins with the premise that we co-create the world with God. The world is not done, and that all of action is essentially rooted in creativity. Any way in which you contribute to the ongoing creation of the world you are in fact, in some form or another being creative and so then I think the question from there becomes “what is art?”

And I would argue that art is simply the creating within the particular medium, free of any utilitarianism. So a business person creates for the purpose of making profit, a product, providing goods and services. Art, specifically like the fine arts, music, sculpture, dance, spoken word, is the manifestation of that creativity in a form that is free from any pragmatic needs. So this painting just exists, beauty is its highest goal, as opposed to food that actually feeds us. A degree of art and creativity is in food, but it has a larger function. To which song is just a song. It may convey truth, it may have lyrics that are rooted in some particular world-view a person is trying to further express.

I think we must have art because it reminds us that God is not always a pragmatist. Because our world wants to turn us into slaves, everything is about how hard you work so you can create something so you can buy something so you can make something, so you’re back in Egypt. That’s the defining story of the Bible: people who are enslaved in Egypt, and their whole use is that they are a machine and they’re used by pharaoh to build stuff. So to me we need the artist to remind ourselves that God is not always a pragmatist. I love this passage in Job where God is like, “HAVE YOU CONSIDERED THE STORK?” It’s beautiful poetry about a God who gets off on things just cause they are and that to me is central to any sort of living, breathing spirituality is going to be plenty of room for things that don’t have any purpose other than their own beauty, design and order.

good stuff.
comments

stockholm syndrome

01.26.2009 01:31 PM | core values, theology, history, leadership | permalink
one of my (ryan's) favorite artists is derek webb. there has been no other artist that has deeply impacted my theology as much as webb. as a natural byproduct, lyrically and theologically, he has shaped the vision for eikon in various ways (i would love to talk about this more in the future and already have a really incredible sermon series idea based on one of his albums that i've been fleshing out for quite some time).

i've been following him on twitter and he's spoken quite a bit about laying down tracks for his upcoming album, stockholm syndrome. when i heard the album title, i was very intrigued and it got me thinking about the possible lyrical direction of the album. i don't know where he's going (although i have a pretty good idea), but it made me think about an issue that is part of the motivation and vision for eikon church.

if you don't know, stockholm syndrome refers to a psychological phenomenon that describes the behavior of kidnap victims, who, over time, become sympathetic to their captors. the name comes from a botched bank robbery in 1973 (in stockholm, naturally) in which, after 6 days of captivity, several victims resisted rescue attempts, refused to testify against their captors, raised money for their legal defense, and then one actually became engaged (!!) to one of her captors. it's quite the bizarre phenomenon, but has been documented semi-regularly since that time (including, famously, the case of patty hearst in 1974).

the idea is that it begins as a defense mechanism out of fear. in order to avoid invoking anger or violence from their captors, victims become comfortable and endeared to the kidnappers. commonly, as well, the kidnappers will engage in small acts of kindness to further endear themselves to their victims. usually this process occurs over 3 or 4 days and as the stockholm case shows, can last for a lifetime.

through a theological and ecclesial lens, i can't help but to see the analogies within the church (the church universal, that is). i'm somewhat cautious about using the words "new" and "different" when describing what we're doing at eikon, simply for the fact that, in the grand scheme of things, we're not doing anything that is "new" or "different." we think what we're doing, more accurately, is a continuation and fulfillment of what's been going on for the last couple thousand years. what is "new" and "different," though, is found in the context of what, to a large degree, has been seen in the american church—in the american christian subcultural form of the church.

i think the church has fallen victim to the stockholm syndrome.

let me offer a couple quick qualifiers. first, this isn't just to point the finger at others. it's also to point the finger at myself because we all have some role to play. secondly, this isn't indicative of all churches. there are certainly a lot of great and biblical and christlike churches (even here in little rock), but it speaks to a much larger subsection. finally, this isn't intended to be an indictment of the church as a whole, but rather to point out an area we collectively need to work on. in our case, the way we're working on it is to create a new community of faith that begins with the kinds of values i'm talking about.

with that said, to draw some analogies, the church has been taken captive. our captors—exclusivity, theological and social elitism, a disregard for issues like justice and equality, suspicion of those who doubt and question the status quo, the us vs. them mentality, the false dichotomy of the sacred and the profane, a consumeristic jesus industry and subculture, the myth of salvation as a cure-all method, the rejection of intellect as a partner of faith, clergy abuse of power, a false power and priesthood dichotomy between clergy and "lay people," and the list could go on—have stunted the growth of the church and masked the beauty and redemptive nature of the story of god.

i won't spend a lot of time retracing the history of the church (i know you're all thankful...) :), but a look at just the last 25 to 30 years in the church reveals a lot about the captivity. the rise of fundamentalism and the religious right, i would argue, isn't representative of what the church in the new testament looked like. as these things rose in power, there tended to be a lot of the proverbial throwing the baby out with the bathwater. many of those involved with the emergence of these things sought to truly revive and "clean up" the church, but ended up taking things to the nth degree. instead of simply striking a healthy balance, for example, between the importance of faith over works, the church decided to create a tension between those two ideas where those who engage in the work of social justice (feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting those in prison...you know, the things that jesus talked specifically about...) were viewed with suspicion and thought to be unconcerned with "true" and "orthodox" christianity.

i would argue that what happened was that instead of the church standing up against these captors, the captors endeared themselves to the church by misusing scripture and using power to create a climate of fear of rejection and heresy. again, i don't believe that these captors were acting out of completely foul intentions, but it quickly spiraled into something wholly different than the church as found in scripture.

so, at eikon, one of the things we want to accomplish is not to simply reverse all of what's happened over the last 25 years in the church, but simply to strike a balance that i believe was present before the captivity. we want to do and be church in a way that looks like jesus.

it isn't necessarily "new" or "different", but something that creates an ancient-future context.

in christ, we're longer captives, but free people. thus, eikon will be a community that reclaims the freedom in which the church thrives and grows.
comments

values vs. goals

01.23.2009 08:19 PM | core values, theology, leadership | permalink
mark oestriecher's blog is near the top of my daily must-read blogs. marko is the president of youth specialties, a fellow emergent type and a great blogger.

yesterday on his blog, he talked about leading from values vs. goals, which spawned from a facebook group about his new book, youth ministry 3.0. in essence, he suggests—and i would heartily agree—that leading from values is "better" than leading from goals. i thought his discussion and illustrations spoke so perfectly about the way i want to lead eikon, so i thought i would share them here. (this gets a little ahead of myself in terms of what i've been planning for the blog, but i really thought it would be helpful to share this.)

to expand on his ideas, let me unpack these concepts. goal-driven leadership—often—is very static and detached. goals demand a plan of action that is executed until that goal is met, at which time another goal is stated and a new plan begins. there seems to be a never-ending cycle of management and oversight. it often requires micro-management and strict evaluation.

on the other hand, values-based leadership is much more organic in nature. values rely on relationships and care and nurture. values don't view the church and the people that comprise the church as data and scientific beings. people are the end and not just the means to an end.

marko offered a couple graphics, but i decided to pretty them up and do some consolidation. here's a visual of what we're talking about. (the visual on the right represents the leadership values at eikon.)



marko's post produced a couple analogies that i thought were helpful. first, it's like the contrast of a factory and a garden. in a factory, an assembly line is intended for efficiency and focused solely on accomplishing the task at hand. if the assembly line worker were to pause for a conversation with a coworker or decide to step away for personal reasons, the goal cannot be met and the worker would be discarded for another more diligent worker. a garden, though, is cared for by the gardener. the gardener's job is to create a healthy environment for growth. the gardener can't guarantee the growth, but can be confident that in healthy and rich soil, seeds will open and produce fruit. further, gardens are unique to their environment because they aren't meticulously watched over as in the case of an assembly line product. to be bold, factories play god while gardeners trust god.

as a tie-in to our current political headlines, goal-based leadership is descriptive of john mccain's campaign, whereas values-based leadership was characteristic of barack obama's campaign. mccain was militaristic and mechanical and diligent. it's almost as if there were checkpoints along the way that had to be reached before going onto the next checkpoint. if a stumbling block was thrown in the path, the whole plan was confounded. on the other hand, obama led by overarching values that inspired people and rallied people together and created a movement. when something was thrown in obama's path, the campaign moved forward because the response (or lack thereof) was informed by a confidence in a set of values that were inherent since day 1 of the campaign.

so, in the coming weeks, i hope to roll out a series of posts detailing our core values. these are the guiding theologies that will determine the direction and flow of our community, so i hope it will continue to give you an idea of what this thing called eikon is all about.

check back soon for more!
comments (1)

why the goofy name eikon?

01.21.2009 06:38 PM | core values, information, leadership | permalink
ok, well, maybe we should back up and say that we hope you don't actually think the name eikon is goofy...maybe different...or unique...but not goofy... no doubt, i, ryan, can personally lay claim to the word goofy...but not eikon... :)

certainly, the name eikon (pronounced the same as icon) is unique. maybe you're wondering why we didn't choose a "standard", "churchy" sounding name. well, there's several reasons, but the main one is that we want a name that isn't just unique (although we do like that's it's unique and beautiful and engaging), but a name that represents our values. as the blog continues to develop, we'll get more into the specifics of our core values and guiding theologies, but i thought i would share some of the values that led to the goofy name eikon.

first, a quick look at the origins. the word eikon is greek and is found about 20 times in the new testament (the equivalent is found throughout the entirety of scripture, but as it's greek, it's unique to the new testament). here's the definition:

1. an image, figure, likeness
a. an image of the things (the heavenly things)
1. used of the moral likeness of renewed men to God
2. the image of the Son of God, into which true Christians are transformed, is likeness not only to the heavenly body, but also to the most holy and blessed state of mind, which Christ possesses
b. the image of one
1. one in whom the likeness of any one is seen
2. applied to man on account of his power of command
3. to Christ on account of his divine nature and absolute moral excellence

ok, so what does all that crap stuff mean?? here's a few insights and values:

1. at eikon, the concept of image is important. i don't mean image in the sense of image-obsessed or things that are inherently narcissistic. rather, it's the idea of what's visual and beautiful and sensory. we mean image in both the obvious and the very broad sense of the word.

in the obvious way, we mean that the arts are a central part of what we do and how we engage in community. be it the fine arts (painting, sculpture, etc) to film to graphic design to handmade arts and goods, the visual experience is a central experience at eikon. throughout scripture, there is such a rich visual thread of beauty and vivid detail. scripture is more than words on a page. we engage and enter scripture through the rich images that are evoked.

in the less—presumably—obvious way, the idea of image carries over into music and the written/spoken word and even the "art" of cordial dialogue. all these artforms evoke powerful and rich images that help us enter into community and into the story of god.

2. eikon speaks to being made in the image—the eikon—of god. one of our guiding values is the belief that every person is made in the image of god. the implication is that every person is equal in our community and valued and no person is greater than another. i, as the pastor, am not greater or more important or more valued than someone who walks in the door for the first time. everyone—regardless of color or age or background or sexual orientation or social status—is made to look like god. we aren't gods, but we are certainly made in his image. from this, we derive value and acceptance and dignity and so much more (which i'll get to on the blog in more detail down the road...).

3. as per the definition, eikon speaks to a certain transformation, specifically, it's the redemptive transformation into becoming more like christ. in this, we don't mean some kind of christian subculture jesus or some kind of social weirdo or some kind of bizarre other-wordliness, but rather, becoming people who are guided by grace and mercy and compassion and love and justice. the eikon of christ is a life defined by peace over retribution, acceptance over suspicion and grace over judgment.

this transformation isn't necessarily a single moment of change, but rather, a process of engaging in community,participating in an ongoing dialogue of discovery and humility and uncovering the story of god in scripture.

4. finally, somewhat tied to the the value of the centrality of the arts and being made in the image of god, eikon quite literally means statue or likeness. the point is that we value creation. i use that word in the broad sense of creativity and inventiveness and outside-the-box thinking. it's not just about being an artist who creates a work of art or a poet who writes or a film maker who produces something beautiful. it's about a community of people who don't settle for the status quo or the "way we've always done it." it's forging a new path that isn't about reinventing the wheel, but rather, about always seeking to know and engage christ and each other in ways that are fresh and inventive and authentic. being made in the image of god means being made in the image of a creator. therefore, in our own unique ways, we are all creative people who need and desire new and fresh ways of interacting with the world around us.

so, i hope that gives you a better idea of why we chose the goofy name eikon. :) we truly believe that it expresses the rhythm and nature of the community that's shaping here in little rock.

stick around the blog to learn more and more about this community in the coming weeks and months.
comments
next page >>