Interesting week. I'm prepared to chime in on a few different topics this week, but I figured I would start with a discussion on maturity.
To get the topic started, why don't you look at Donald Miller's post: I Know how Old You Are. If you're too lazy to click over, the main point that Donald seems to be making is that the vast majority of his criticisms come from young angry white male twenty year olds. And Don relates it to a discussion of maturity.
What made Don's post stick with me was something that happened to me last week - I received a verbal warning from my supervisor. I don't want to examine the content of the warning presently (perhaps later this week), but I do want to examine the possibilities I have for response.
The first response, the angry white twenty-year-old male response is:
"Well, that's unfair. Most of that is beyond my control. It's certainly not my fault; if other people took a second to listen to my side of it, then they would understand."
This would probably not be an unfounded response. I'm sure I could respond line-by-line from everything my supervisor said and justify and explain every single one of my actions that led to the warning. And I think, bottom line, this response comes from a place of fear; a moment where I (or whomever) is thinking only about protecting myself and my 'territory.'
So while that wouldn't be an unfounded response, it certainly wouldn't be a mature one. So let's look at the second response:
"You know what, you're right. I handled these situations poorly, and my response cost something, whether that's in relationships or reputation. I own that, and need to find ways to improve my ability to act and react appropriately."
Now, this post is not to set about and pat myself on the back for my response. I'm fairly confident that I responded in both immature and mature ways (and even if I didn't do so in the actual meeting, I did so in my head). This post is to help remind me to continue growing in that regard.
I look back at my life, and I see situations that have arisen where a response was called for. And there are far too many situations where the response I made was the immature and defensive response; one that wasn't made with growth in mind. I have made many responses in my life based on a fear of even looking bad; I have often entered into situations like the one I did this week with the sole thought of 'how do I come out of this intact? How do I not let this overthrow the status quo? How do I make it clear that this isn't my fault?'
What should I learn from this experience? What does this tell me about who I have been? What does this reveal about who I am? How does this impact who I want to be? These are much better questions to ask in this sort of situation.
In another way of looking at it, immaturity is about protecting my territory, and making sure I don't have to move. It's a turtle that just hides when ever any situation appears dangerous. A better, more mature response, is that of a whale - never staying in the same place, never settling, never retreating, never panicking.
I hope this makes sense and isn't just me rambling. Tell me what you think in the comments below.
Oh, and check back later this week for: NFL week 11 picks, further discussion of the warning, a discussion about being hip, and who knows what else.
Grace and Peace
Showing posts with label Random Thoughts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Random Thoughts. Show all posts
Monday, November 15, 2010
Monday, September 13, 2010
Random Thoughts: Invitations
A quick thought from Sabbath group last night…
I was reflecting with two of the guys about the difference between commands and invitations. Scott, who works for a sports club and frequently teaches afterschool programs, was talking about the noticeable difference in the behavior of his students when saying “Don’t do this” as opposed to “Hey, how about we do this?” The invitation seemed to work better. It’s anecdotal, of course, but you can probably also think of ways in which you see that played out in your own life.
We started reflecting on how our view of God through the years has changed in this regard as well. In the culture we grew up in, there seemed to be a message of “don’t” that was being told to us. People told us that God didn’t want us to drink, or smoke, or have sex, or swear. There wasn’t a message of “we invite you to do this” but rather a “if you do this, we will punish you.”As we’ve grown older, we’ve started to experience less of God telling us what not to do and more of God inviting us to grow with him.
This isn’t to say that there are certain decisions that are poor decisions. I think most of the reasons that the church communicated to us like that when we were younger were good reasons. They did have a good heart, but just poor execution. I think our challenge now is how to accept and forgive those mistakes, and move on, to create a world that is less about the don’t and more about an invitation to live together, in a beautiful mess.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Random Thoughts: Ironic Word Plays
Just yesterday I realized I don't know the difference between the words "drama" and "melodrama."
Is melodrama just a (dramatic?) version of drama? If so, is that ironic?
Alanis Morrissette wrote a song called "Ironic" which did not provide examples of Irony. Is that Ironic? And if it is, does that make the song correctly titled, which means it's not ironic? I'm confused.
I believe Alanis is from Canada. I'm not really researching this at this point, so let's just pretend she is, even if she isn't. In fact, let's just scrap this whole point, because (ironically) I have no idea why being Canadian mattered. (It's ironic because it isn't ironic).
Ironically, this entire post has no point. It sprang from a mental discussion of the difference between being melodramatic and dramatic. Random thoughts, indeed.
Friday, July 16, 2010
Random Thoughts: Being Known
It’s very difficult for me. I score a 3 on the enneagram test, which means that I tend to wear a face when I’m with people. I tend to wear whatever face is going to be most well received. This means that I make a very good salesman or performer.
This also means that it’s very hard for me to let down those masks. It’s hard for me to let people see who I really am and what really matters to me; I think in some ways this is a result of my parents. My experiences growing up taught me that if I communicated what did matter to me, then I would learn that it didn’t matter to the person I was communicating with.
So it scares me when people know me before I want them to. My wife does this all the time. It use to terrify me when we were dating – she would say something flippantly, and it would cut to through every façade and mask I had built.
And I took some of that thought process, how terrifying it can be to be known, and started to apply it to God. God had to risk everything that He had, in a sense, to love us. For an omnipotent being, the only possible loss is that of rejection by another being with will. And for an omniscient being, God must have known it would happen. But God still chose to risk and love us anyway.
For me, that means that I must choose to risk and love anyway. It’s easy enough when it comes to my wife (well, most days anyway). But it’s more difficult when it comes to the people who have hurt me in the past – friends, enemies, family. Perhaps especially family.
So that’s my challenge, to you, for today. Look at your life – who is it most risky to love? Who has the most potential to let you down? How will you love them anyway?
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Random Thoughts - 14
Maybe growing up has to do with learning how to cook your own turkey.
(THATS WHAT SHE SAID)
Carrying on, I'm cooking a 20 pound turkey this week. 20 pounds of turkey, according to the USDA, should feed about 20 people. That means, according to my calculation, that me, my wife, and my wifes friend must eat 7 shares of turkey a piece.
But I'm thinking about how strange it is that I'm cooking a turkey. After all, my dad does that. And here I am, about to cook it in four days.
And here's the crazy thing - I sort of know how to. And I don't mean just "throw it in the oven," but real tips - like rubbing herbs between the skin and the meat, and cooking the turkey upside down, and in a bag.
I think I picked it up by osmosis from my dad. I used to watch him and help him on Thanksgiving, and now I know how to cook a turkey.
So here's the takeaway - I picked up information/facts/truth from a relationship, not in the context of a lesson or teaching.
Maybe the best way to learn about God is the same way - in the context of a relationship, being close and watching Him. I grow more and more doubts about learning about God in a classroom setting where God doesn't seem to be moving very much.
Now watch me set the turkey on fire and invalidate this whole post.
(THATS WHAT SHE SAID)
Carrying on, I'm cooking a 20 pound turkey this week. 20 pounds of turkey, according to the USDA, should feed about 20 people. That means, according to my calculation, that me, my wife, and my wifes friend must eat 7 shares of turkey a piece.
But I'm thinking about how strange it is that I'm cooking a turkey. After all, my dad does that. And here I am, about to cook it in four days.
And here's the crazy thing - I sort of know how to. And I don't mean just "throw it in the oven," but real tips - like rubbing herbs between the skin and the meat, and cooking the turkey upside down, and in a bag.
I think I picked it up by osmosis from my dad. I used to watch him and help him on Thanksgiving, and now I know how to cook a turkey.
So here's the takeaway - I picked up information/facts/truth from a relationship, not in the context of a lesson or teaching.
Maybe the best way to learn about God is the same way - in the context of a relationship, being close and watching Him. I grow more and more doubts about learning about God in a classroom setting where God doesn't seem to be moving very much.
Now watch me set the turkey on fire and invalidate this whole post.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Random Thoughts - 13
Here's a curious question:
Why do I seem to do fine with new posts on this blog when I'm not expecting to do any,
But when I write out a plan or an idea, my posts immediately drop in content/quality?
For your review:
September: 31 posts.
October 01: Post reviewing 31 posts, promising even more for October
October: 10 posts.
Same pattern in 2008.
It's weird. Maybe it has to do with this idea that I recently read - our brains need spontaneity, in order to stimulate the correct brain side. The book (Intuitive Leadership, review coming soon?) talked about how in any creative endeavor, more time and more effort do not equal more of a succesful endeavor. You can't force creativity, you can only nurture it.
If you can't "solve" your creative puzzle, go read a book / play football / watch simpsons. Then come back and be amazed.
Why do I seem to do fine with new posts on this blog when I'm not expecting to do any,
But when I write out a plan or an idea, my posts immediately drop in content/quality?
For your review:
September: 31 posts.
October 01: Post reviewing 31 posts, promising even more for October
October: 10 posts.
Same pattern in 2008.
It's weird. Maybe it has to do with this idea that I recently read - our brains need spontaneity, in order to stimulate the correct brain side. The book (Intuitive Leadership, review coming soon?) talked about how in any creative endeavor, more time and more effort do not equal more of a succesful endeavor. You can't force creativity, you can only nurture it.
If you can't "solve" your creative puzzle, go read a book / play football / watch simpsons. Then come back and be amazed.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Random Thoughts - 12
First, a disclaimer. These are not my thoughts, but my impressions and ideas from sitting in on one of Jess's grad classes.
On the categories of Faith, Hope, and Love:
Faith is primarily a category of the past; a category of memory. It is remembering the redemptive work that has been done in our past.
Hope is primarily a category of the future and the yin/yang of Faith. It is, in one sense, a memory of the future. Remembering the redemptive work that will be done in our future. (My brain hurts.)
And Love is a category of the present. If God is love, and God has no past nor future, then this makes sense to me. Love is choosing to be in this moment of suffering of heartbreak of loss of joy of peace of LOVE.
On the categories of Faith, Hope, and Love:
Faith is primarily a category of the past; a category of memory. It is remembering the redemptive work that has been done in our past.
Hope is primarily a category of the future and the yin/yang of Faith. It is, in one sense, a memory of the future. Remembering the redemptive work that will be done in our future. (My brain hurts.)
And Love is a category of the present. If God is love, and God has no past nor future, then this makes sense to me. Love is choosing to be in this moment of suffering of heartbreak of loss of joy of peace of LOVE.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Random Thoughts - 11
An Autobiography of Reading:
Bruce Coville
Bruce writes children's books, and I read them until I was 9 or 10. Loved them. Where else do you learn that aliens do indeed fart?
K.A. Applegate
Applegate was the author behind the Animorphs books, which I read until the series ended. They were a bridge to more adult books; the Animorphs dealt with some staggeringly adult themes; war and loss and ethics.
Christopher Pike
These were my real transition books. I remember reading one, and there was a swear word in the first chapter. I put the book away, terrified my parents would get mad at me. Eventually, I kept reading. I don't remember these books adding anything of value to my life, but they did prepare me for the next step.
Dean Koontz
Aah, the mindless thriller. Loved Dean Koontz. Still do, as a matter of fact. Something about his writing lets me just forget what it is I'm doing or what it is I'm worrying about. Some of his newer stuff has some good things to say against bioethics and stuff, so nowadays I don't see him as too much of a guilty pleasure.
Stephen King
And then we get to some of the heavyweights. King's books range from the terrifying to the thoughtful, and it was first through King that I learned that a story that stays with you is one that doesn't wrap up all the neat ends. I hate(d) that King would kill off certain characters, and I wanted to rewrite the story so that they lived. And then I realized how effective that was; I was so disturbed by the book that I found myself thinking about it long after I had read it. IT and The Stand are two of the best horror books I've ever read, and they have so much more to offer than just chills down your back.
COLLEGE
Funny enough, but I didn't read much of anything when I was in college. If I was reading, it was certainly for class, and not for the sake of reading.
Rob Bell
My first introduction into postmodernism, and I loved it. I fell too deep into it for a little while, and I needed to actually remember to read the Bible to make sure I wasn't just making crap up. Rob helped me to see postmodernity in a good light and how to balance it with the Bible.
Anne Lamott
I debated whether or not to put Donald Miller here, but I decided it would be more appropriate to go with Lamott. Lamott inspired Miller, afterall. And on my first reading of Blue Like Jazz, I didn't like it. I loved Bird by Bird (by Lamott) on the first read. I loved the realistic combined with the poetic, and the honest emotions. It helped inspire me to write Ashram, and ultimately to continue writing.
What's next?
Bruce Coville
Bruce writes children's books, and I read them until I was 9 or 10. Loved them. Where else do you learn that aliens do indeed fart?
K.A. Applegate
Applegate was the author behind the Animorphs books, which I read until the series ended. They were a bridge to more adult books; the Animorphs dealt with some staggeringly adult themes; war and loss and ethics.
Christopher Pike
These were my real transition books. I remember reading one, and there was a swear word in the first chapter. I put the book away, terrified my parents would get mad at me. Eventually, I kept reading. I don't remember these books adding anything of value to my life, but they did prepare me for the next step.
Dean Koontz
Aah, the mindless thriller. Loved Dean Koontz. Still do, as a matter of fact. Something about his writing lets me just forget what it is I'm doing or what it is I'm worrying about. Some of his newer stuff has some good things to say against bioethics and stuff, so nowadays I don't see him as too much of a guilty pleasure.
Stephen King
And then we get to some of the heavyweights. King's books range from the terrifying to the thoughtful, and it was first through King that I learned that a story that stays with you is one that doesn't wrap up all the neat ends. I hate(d) that King would kill off certain characters, and I wanted to rewrite the story so that they lived. And then I realized how effective that was; I was so disturbed by the book that I found myself thinking about it long after I had read it. IT and The Stand are two of the best horror books I've ever read, and they have so much more to offer than just chills down your back.
COLLEGE
Funny enough, but I didn't read much of anything when I was in college. If I was reading, it was certainly for class, and not for the sake of reading.
Rob Bell
My first introduction into postmodernism, and I loved it. I fell too deep into it for a little while, and I needed to actually remember to read the Bible to make sure I wasn't just making crap up. Rob helped me to see postmodernity in a good light and how to balance it with the Bible.
Anne Lamott
I debated whether or not to put Donald Miller here, but I decided it would be more appropriate to go with Lamott. Lamott inspired Miller, afterall. And on my first reading of Blue Like Jazz, I didn't like it. I loved Bird by Bird (by Lamott) on the first read. I loved the realistic combined with the poetic, and the honest emotions. It helped inspire me to write Ashram, and ultimately to continue writing.
What's next?
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Random Thoughts - 10
To him who is able to do immeasurably more...
To God be the glory...
Praise God from whom all blessings flow...
To the only God our Saviour be glory...
Forever and ever Amen...
Benedictions are a beautiful amazing thing.
And so I wonder what sort of benediction I'll use at my church someday.
I want to write something new and beautiful, and I want to honor the tradition of the old.
Here's my first stab:
To the God who is Life to all who believe,
To you we ascribe Glory and Honor and Power
May you teach every day to be more like you
until your Glory is achieved to the fullest.
Amen.
To God be the glory...
Praise God from whom all blessings flow...
To the only God our Saviour be glory...
Forever and ever Amen...
Benedictions are a beautiful amazing thing.
And so I wonder what sort of benediction I'll use at my church someday.
I want to write something new and beautiful, and I want to honor the tradition of the old.
Here's my first stab:
To the God who is Life to all who believe,
To you we ascribe Glory and Honor and Power
May you teach every day to be more like you
until your Glory is achieved to the fullest.
Amen.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Random Thoughts - 9
The NotePocalypse - Why I'm Choosing Obama and Why You Should To...
Ground Rules - I'm not writing anything without backing it up.I'm posting this on Facebook and on Blogspot, and the blogspot (andyszymas.blogspot.com) will have the links and sources. Facebook won't, because facebook notes don't have great ability to incorporate links. Please stick to the subjects I've mentioned here, because I want to reach some consensus on these issues before we start talking about anything else.
One last thing. If you say anything stupid, I'll still be your friend, but I'll just think you're stupid. I reserve the right to call anything stupid by the name "stupid."
So why am I writing this? Well, to be honest, I'm seeing a lot of facebook notes with a lot of blatant misinformation and misconceptions on both sides. There are some stupid democrats and some stupid republicans, and that frustrated me enough to finally come out of the political closet and let you all know publicly who I'm supporting. So I'm rereading some of the notes and addressing what they've said on some of the issues. So with all that said, to the issues:
Abortion. The standard thinking is that McCain is pro-life because he values the sanctity of human life, while Obama is pro-choice and wants to eat your babies. Let's examine that a bit closer. So how does McCain intend to be pro-life? Well, I searched quite a bit on the internet, and all I could really find was from McCain's own website. McCain says he would nominate justices in the model of John Roberts and Samuel Alito, two supreme court justices who are pro-life in belief. I find it interesting that McCain intends to nominate a justice in the vein of Roberts, who is one of the more conservative justices on the bench. Oops, guess McCain forgot to tell you that Roberts himself said he wouldn't overturn abortion. And of course, McCain has said he wouldn't make abortion his litmus test for nominating a judge. Also, McCain should mention he voted in favor for the two most liberal justices on the bench. And finally, let's not forget that he's been pretty flip floppy on this issue.
Obama? Yeah, he's pro-choice. But unlike McCain, Obama has a plan to reduce abortions. The 95/10 initiative calls for government policy and legislation to reduce abortions by 95% in 1o years. So Obama has an actual plan in place, and it's a plan he's been committed to for some time.
Vice President - One of the silliest arguments I read was that Palin would be okay for veep because she was governor of the largest state in the USA. Well, that's a pretty dumb argument. I'm calling that one stupid. Alaska is the 47th least populated state. It's has approximately twice as many people as the city of Charleston, SC. And lest you think I'm being biased, Delaware is the 45th least populated state. So clearly, if we're talking about the size of the body you've ruled, Palin and Biden are poor choices.
Change - Here's a direct quote from a facebook note: "Obama is "changing" for whatever the people and the media want you to see. McCain is an honorable man to the core...which is why he has not spoken or attacked sooner."
This is a great example of saying something that isn't true and hoping by saying it that it becomes true. Obama has been the straight man here; he hasn't flipped any of his policies or ideas for political gain. The most you can argue is that he left a church, after the pastor embarassed himself. Obama's policies and ideas and political beliefs are still the same. I already highlighted in the above Abortion section how McCain has flipflopped on Abortion, so I don't really see the need to cite any more sources. Obviously, McCain is doing the very thing that this quote is saying he doesn't do but Obama does do. Also, McCain's not speaking or attacking sooner? The first mention of a negative ad that I can find was released by McCain. Also, did you watch the second presidential debate? It was very honorable for McCain to blatantly misquote Obama about Pakistan. Check it out; search for Katie Hamm's question, and read Obama's response. Then read what McCain has to say.
I think that's about it for this round. I'm tempted to start a discussion about war theory, and whether Jesus would bomb countries that attacked him. I'm tempted to start talking about economics, but from what I've seen, there's plenty of finger pointing going around, and noone seems to agree on anything. Republicans say everything needs to be deregulated, and democrats say everything needs to be regulated. Since we have no one's word to take but their own, I find that debate meaningless. If you want some fodder for reading on the economic side, check this out - Scott Adams did a survey of Economists, polling them about politics.
Ground Rules - I'm not writing anything without backing it up.I'm posting this on Facebook and on Blogspot, and the blogspot (andyszymas.blogspot.com) will have the links and sources. Facebook won't, because facebook notes don't have great ability to incorporate links. Please stick to the subjects I've mentioned here, because I want to reach some consensus on these issues before we start talking about anything else.
One last thing. If you say anything stupid, I'll still be your friend, but I'll just think you're stupid. I reserve the right to call anything stupid by the name "stupid."
So why am I writing this? Well, to be honest, I'm seeing a lot of facebook notes with a lot of blatant misinformation and misconceptions on both sides. There are some stupid democrats and some stupid republicans, and that frustrated me enough to finally come out of the political closet and let you all know publicly who I'm supporting. So I'm rereading some of the notes and addressing what they've said on some of the issues. So with all that said, to the issues:
Abortion. The standard thinking is that McCain is pro-life because he values the sanctity of human life, while Obama is pro-choice and wants to eat your babies. Let's examine that a bit closer. So how does McCain intend to be pro-life? Well, I searched quite a bit on the internet, and all I could really find was from McCain's own website. McCain says he would nominate justices in the model of John Roberts and Samuel Alito, two supreme court justices who are pro-life in belief. I find it interesting that McCain intends to nominate a justice in the vein of Roberts, who is one of the more conservative justices on the bench. Oops, guess McCain forgot to tell you that Roberts himself said he wouldn't overturn abortion. And of course, McCain has said he wouldn't make abortion his litmus test for nominating a judge. Also, McCain should mention he voted in favor for the two most liberal justices on the bench. And finally, let's not forget that he's been pretty flip floppy on this issue.
Obama? Yeah, he's pro-choice. But unlike McCain, Obama has a plan to reduce abortions. The 95/10 initiative calls for government policy and legislation to reduce abortions by 95% in 1o years. So Obama has an actual plan in place, and it's a plan he's been committed to for some time.
Vice President - One of the silliest arguments I read was that Palin would be okay for veep because she was governor of the largest state in the USA. Well, that's a pretty dumb argument. I'm calling that one stupid. Alaska is the 47th least populated state. It's has approximately twice as many people as the city of Charleston, SC. And lest you think I'm being biased, Delaware is the 45th least populated state. So clearly, if we're talking about the size of the body you've ruled, Palin and Biden are poor choices.
Change - Here's a direct quote from a facebook note: "Obama is "changing" for whatever the people and the media want you to see. McCain is an honorable man to the core...which is why he has not spoken or attacked sooner."
This is a great example of saying something that isn't true and hoping by saying it that it becomes true. Obama has been the straight man here; he hasn't flipped any of his policies or ideas for political gain. The most you can argue is that he left a church, after the pastor embarassed himself. Obama's policies and ideas and political beliefs are still the same. I already highlighted in the above Abortion section how McCain has flipflopped on Abortion, so I don't really see the need to cite any more sources. Obviously, McCain is doing the very thing that this quote is saying he doesn't do but Obama does do. Also, McCain's not speaking or attacking sooner? The first mention of a negative ad that I can find was released by McCain. Also, did you watch the second presidential debate? It was very honorable for McCain to blatantly misquote Obama about Pakistan. Check it out; search for Katie Hamm's question, and read Obama's response. Then read what McCain has to say.
I think that's about it for this round. I'm tempted to start a discussion about war theory, and whether Jesus would bomb countries that attacked him. I'm tempted to start talking about economics, but from what I've seen, there's plenty of finger pointing going around, and noone seems to agree on anything. Republicans say everything needs to be deregulated, and democrats say everything needs to be regulated. Since we have no one's word to take but their own, I find that debate meaningless. If you want some fodder for reading on the economic side, check this out - Scott Adams did a survey of Economists, polling them about politics.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Random Thoughts - 8
Article on CNN.com today: Expert's Ponder Link Between Creativity, Mood Disorders
Interesting.
Doesn't it certainly fall into a category of news that you could title - "Not so surprising?"
After all, think of the most boring and sane people you know. They're the accountants, the lawyers, the managers. They aren't creative, and you on any given day know how they will act. They don't have a flair for the dramatic.
Now think of those around you that are authors, actors, singers.
They're the weirdest people you'll ever meet.
Certainly, this is playing into stereotypes a bit. I'm a writer, but I don't think of myself as overtly dramatic. And I know a few worship leaders who are very low key people.
But what does this mean? How could you interpret this information? Is there a way, based on this knowledge, to unleash creativity?
I think so, and it's based partially on my own experience. You see, what the article suggests is that mood disorders and creativity are not causally related - one doesn't cause the other. But they both have a common link - reflection.
The article does a better job of explaining this than I could, but I think that's a key to being creative. What is it that is eating your mind? Taking your time? Where are all of your trains of thought being rerouted to?
Once you've figured it out, write it. Or sing it. Or paint it. That's what I've done - Ashram arose because of a single story that I could absolutely not get out of my head. Different poems I've written have been because of things that were stealing my mind. My current projects fall in line with things that I find myself thinking about when I'm daydreaming.
So use those reflections. And if you don't reflect, well, you've got other problems.
Interesting.
Doesn't it certainly fall into a category of news that you could title - "Not so surprising?"
After all, think of the most boring and sane people you know. They're the accountants, the lawyers, the managers. They aren't creative, and you on any given day know how they will act. They don't have a flair for the dramatic.
Now think of those around you that are authors, actors, singers.
They're the weirdest people you'll ever meet.
Certainly, this is playing into stereotypes a bit. I'm a writer, but I don't think of myself as overtly dramatic. And I know a few worship leaders who are very low key people.
But what does this mean? How could you interpret this information? Is there a way, based on this knowledge, to unleash creativity?
I think so, and it's based partially on my own experience. You see, what the article suggests is that mood disorders and creativity are not causally related - one doesn't cause the other. But they both have a common link - reflection.
The article does a better job of explaining this than I could, but I think that's a key to being creative. What is it that is eating your mind? Taking your time? Where are all of your trains of thought being rerouted to?
Once you've figured it out, write it. Or sing it. Or paint it. That's what I've done - Ashram arose because of a single story that I could absolutely not get out of my head. Different poems I've written have been because of things that were stealing my mind. My current projects fall in line with things that I find myself thinking about when I'm daydreaming.
So use those reflections. And if you don't reflect, well, you've got other problems.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Random Thoughts - 7
This post follows a deep conversation i had with a friend yesterday. She was desperately trying to figure out how much a person's family background should matter in a relationship. If they come from a screwed up family, and screwed-up-ness runs in the genes, is it bad to avoid a significant relationship with that person?
As someone who comes from a screwed-up family, I have some interesting thoughts on the issue. Some of that stuff does run in the family. However, I believe we all have the ability to overcome those issues.
And that was the advice I offered her. Whoever this guy is, he can't control how his family is. It would be supremely unfair to judge someone based on factors they can't control (in fact, isn't that the basis of racism and sexism?). But, if this guy is handling the matters in a way that will lead him to be replicate the problems of his family, then that's an issue.
A person can't control their family. You don't choose your parents, or your genes.
But you do choose how to react.
As someone who comes from a screwed-up family, I have some interesting thoughts on the issue. Some of that stuff does run in the family. However, I believe we all have the ability to overcome those issues.
And that was the advice I offered her. Whoever this guy is, he can't control how his family is. It would be supremely unfair to judge someone based on factors they can't control (in fact, isn't that the basis of racism and sexism?). But, if this guy is handling the matters in a way that will lead him to be replicate the problems of his family, then that's an issue.
A person can't control their family. You don't choose your parents, or your genes.
But you do choose how to react.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Random Thoughts - 6
?Who is the church for?
That's a pretty normal question in church circles. In seminary circles especially. Different Pastors have different views. I read Mark Driscoll say that the church exists for the member's who aren't there yet. I hear Rob Bell say that the church is for the oppressed. I hear Greg Surratt say the church is for the development of fully devoted followers of Christ. I hear (this morning) that the Church should be involved in meeting the needs of it's followers. So what is the answer?
It usually boils down to whether a church exists for seekers or for followers or for outreach. Is the church there to' save' people, and bring in 'new' christians? Is the church there to disciple the already-there people? Is the church there to be the light of the world, to bring hope to the hopeless?
So let's ask the question. Who owns the church?
As I've been reflecting on this, the answer is this - the church is for all of them. But none of them own it.
It's certainly for the people who aren't there yet. It's definitely for the the people who are there. And it's for the people who would never have the opportunity to be there.
But it's not.
None of these groups have the corner on 'owning' the church.
God owns the church.
And the church exists for God.
The other people matter to the extent that they matter to God.
Just something to think about.
That's a pretty normal question in church circles. In seminary circles especially. Different Pastors have different views. I read Mark Driscoll say that the church exists for the member's who aren't there yet. I hear Rob Bell say that the church is for the oppressed. I hear Greg Surratt say the church is for the development of fully devoted followers of Christ. I hear (this morning) that the Church should be involved in meeting the needs of it's followers. So what is the answer?
It usually boils down to whether a church exists for seekers or for followers or for outreach. Is the church there to' save' people, and bring in 'new' christians? Is the church there to disciple the already-there people? Is the church there to be the light of the world, to bring hope to the hopeless?
So let's ask the question. Who owns the church?
As I've been reflecting on this, the answer is this - the church is for all of them. But none of them own it.
It's certainly for the people who aren't there yet. It's definitely for the the people who are there. And it's for the people who would never have the opportunity to be there.
But it's not.
None of these groups have the corner on 'owning' the church.
God owns the church.
And the church exists for God.
The other people matter to the extent that they matter to God.
Just something to think about.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Random Thoughts - 5
I recently had an experience unlike any other: My first kiss. It was unique (to me) for obvious reasons; I had never kissed anyone before. It was unique for a few other reasons.
I walked Jan to her car. I care about Jan deeply. I have told Jan I love her, and she has said the same to me. Jan is also not her real name, if you're wondering. Jan and I have a long and complicated relationship. I thought things were going to perhaps stabilize once I moved back to the area, and they did, for a week. We started to casually date, and I was actually playing cards with her parents the night I walked her to her car. As we got to her car, she dropped a bombshell.
"I don't want you as much as you want me. I'm not sure; don't know if I'll ever be sure. I think we should just be friends. I'm sorry. I wish that it was easier. I wish I could be sure. I want to want you more than I do. You're not the boy I dream about."
And I am dumbfounded, blindsided by the uncertainty. As I look into the stars, there is no proper response. So I said "Screw it." and then I kissed her.
So that was my first kiss. The rest of that particular story and relationship remains to be told, but I want to focus on just that story. Because as I have been reflecting and agonizing on this, I keep coming back to the Cross.
Doesn't the story of the Cross seem to parallel this story a bit? I am certainly not comparing myself to Jesus, but I think I learned a bit about the love it must have taken to step out in faith. Let me illustrate it for you.
God and People have a long and complicated relationship. God has told People that he loved them, and People have responded in kind. But for whatever reason, People are never able to fully commit. Sin and Idolatry and Adultery keep coming in between them. God moves to the area in Jesus, and hopes for things to stabilize. But People still don't realize the love of God, and are desperately pushing Jesus away. In one last ditch effort, Jesus dies on the cross for the People who don't want him.
Maybe it's sacrilegious, but I wonder if Jesus saying "Screw it, I'll die anyway," is a stretch.
I walked Jan to her car. I care about Jan deeply. I have told Jan I love her, and she has said the same to me. Jan is also not her real name, if you're wondering. Jan and I have a long and complicated relationship. I thought things were going to perhaps stabilize once I moved back to the area, and they did, for a week. We started to casually date, and I was actually playing cards with her parents the night I walked her to her car. As we got to her car, she dropped a bombshell.
"I don't want you as much as you want me. I'm not sure; don't know if I'll ever be sure. I think we should just be friends. I'm sorry. I wish that it was easier. I wish I could be sure. I want to want you more than I do. You're not the boy I dream about."
And I am dumbfounded, blindsided by the uncertainty. As I look into the stars, there is no proper response. So I said "Screw it." and then I kissed her.
So that was my first kiss. The rest of that particular story and relationship remains to be told, but I want to focus on just that story. Because as I have been reflecting and agonizing on this, I keep coming back to the Cross.
Doesn't the story of the Cross seem to parallel this story a bit? I am certainly not comparing myself to Jesus, but I think I learned a bit about the love it must have taken to step out in faith. Let me illustrate it for you.
God and People have a long and complicated relationship. God has told People that he loved them, and People have responded in kind. But for whatever reason, People are never able to fully commit. Sin and Idolatry and Adultery keep coming in between them. God moves to the area in Jesus, and hopes for things to stabilize. But People still don't realize the love of God, and are desperately pushing Jesus away. In one last ditch effort, Jesus dies on the cross for the People who don't want him.
Maybe it's sacrilegious, but I wonder if Jesus saying "Screw it, I'll die anyway," is a stretch.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Random Thoughts - 4
Is it wrong to get my life together so aspects of my life I'm really enjoying aren't screwed up?
I don't know that that makes sense. Let me explain.
If I'm reading my bible, simply because I don't want to reap the consequences of not reading it. I'm worried that something bad could happen in the good stuff in my life that I really like, so I'm reading my bible on a regular basis. I dont want, in a sense, bad karma.
Is that a sin? Or a problem?
I know when I was a jr. high leader, we would encourage students to read the Bible just to read it, so it would be habit forming. But I wonder if a good habit formed for a bad reason is still a good habit.
There is the idea that good things done for the wrong reasons are wrong, which worries me. But I'm not sure what the correct answer is. Obviously, I shouldn't just stop reading my Bible because I'm worried about my motives. And if my motives are bad, then it's a problem.
Typing this out has helped me. What I need to do is get my motive's right. It's not an action/behavior problem. It's a motive problem.
I don't know that that makes sense. Let me explain.
If I'm reading my bible, simply because I don't want to reap the consequences of not reading it. I'm worried that something bad could happen in the good stuff in my life that I really like, so I'm reading my bible on a regular basis. I dont want, in a sense, bad karma.
Is that a sin? Or a problem?
I know when I was a jr. high leader, we would encourage students to read the Bible just to read it, so it would be habit forming. But I wonder if a good habit formed for a bad reason is still a good habit.
There is the idea that good things done for the wrong reasons are wrong, which worries me. But I'm not sure what the correct answer is. Obviously, I shouldn't just stop reading my Bible because I'm worried about my motives. And if my motives are bad, then it's a problem.
Typing this out has helped me. What I need to do is get my motive's right. It's not an action/behavior problem. It's a motive problem.
Saturday, April 12, 2008
Random Thoughts - 3
I think the way we see God a lot has to do with Paradigms.
It's clear that some people just relate to God in different ways. I relate differently than my roommate. Than my pastor friend. Than my best friend. Than my college buddy.
And I think it has to do with this idea of paradigm.
Because God is so much bigger than any one idea, but one idea sticks with us. God is father and shepherd and groom and lover and protector all at once. There are a billion names for God in the Bible. And I think we all have one that we relate to more than any other.
For example, I have a friend who thinks of God as her groom. And that has deep meaning for her. Personally, I struggle with that paradigm, because I don't like picturing myself as a bride.
For me, I see God most closely in the idea of community. The idea that God is a perfect, three-in-one community, that our community with God was broken in the fall, and that God has been striving to restore our community - through the work of Jesus.
That's my paradigm. Whats yours?
It's clear that some people just relate to God in different ways. I relate differently than my roommate. Than my pastor friend. Than my best friend. Than my college buddy.
And I think it has to do with this idea of paradigm.
Because God is so much bigger than any one idea, but one idea sticks with us. God is father and shepherd and groom and lover and protector all at once. There are a billion names for God in the Bible. And I think we all have one that we relate to more than any other.
For example, I have a friend who thinks of God as her groom. And that has deep meaning for her. Personally, I struggle with that paradigm, because I don't like picturing myself as a bride.
For me, I see God most closely in the idea of community. The idea that God is a perfect, three-in-one community, that our community with God was broken in the fall, and that God has been striving to restore our community - through the work of Jesus.
That's my paradigm. Whats yours?
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Random Thoughts - 2
This is one of those great big metathings happening in christianity right now. Who's right? The new Emergent church? The traditional Evangelical church? And let's not even talk about the fundamentalists!
Since everyone is clamoring for my take, here it is. I think that there isn't a right or a wrong. Someday, 20 years from now, we'll have synthesized the good from both into a better christianity. I think the Emergent church has... emerged... to show the Evangelical community what it is lacking. And because it is focused on what the Evangelicals are lacking, it is itself lacking.
Just like Paul and James. You wouldn't have a complete understanding of the relationship of Grace and Works without them. If Paul had never wrote, we would be stuck in a legalistic works driven world. Without James, we'd all be grace nuts and sinning left and right. They exist in tension, to create the room between where we can grow and move on.
Emergent theology has risen to create a tension in Evangelicals, to bring us to a more centered point of view. It's the very definition of synthesis.
So what does this mean for us? We move on to a point where we find the good in Emergent theologies and the good in Evangelical theologies. We don't bow down to theology, to ideas, but we use them to give us a better understanding of God and a better way to be church.
Since everyone is clamoring for my take, here it is. I think that there isn't a right or a wrong. Someday, 20 years from now, we'll have synthesized the good from both into a better christianity. I think the Emergent church has... emerged... to show the Evangelical community what it is lacking. And because it is focused on what the Evangelicals are lacking, it is itself lacking.
Just like Paul and James. You wouldn't have a complete understanding of the relationship of Grace and Works without them. If Paul had never wrote, we would be stuck in a legalistic works driven world. Without James, we'd all be grace nuts and sinning left and right. They exist in tension, to create the room between where we can grow and move on.
Emergent theology has risen to create a tension in Evangelicals, to bring us to a more centered point of view. It's the very definition of synthesis.
So what does this mean for us? We move on to a point where we find the good in Emergent theologies and the good in Evangelical theologies. We don't bow down to theology, to ideas, but we use them to give us a better understanding of God and a better way to be church.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Random Thoughts - 1
I'm decidedly against abortion, to clarify.
However, I don't think our government should be legislating morality. It doesn't work. I've reached a point where I'm pro-life, but not anti Roe vs Wade.
Does that make sense?
The fight to stop abortion cannot be won on a legal level. The main problem with abortion is decidedly an ethical decision, and ethical decisions are based on worldview questions, which the government should remain silent on.
When we, as the church, try to fight abortion on a legal level, we too often give up on the personal level. People can make ethical decisions, people can choose to abide by morality, a government cannnot.
And that is where I think it is flawed to try to overturn Roe vs Wade. The consequences would be radically different than most evangelical churches would like to admit - it wouldnt end abortion, just put it in the states hands. As evidenced by the massive amount of people who flocked to California for a legal gay marriage, people would still just go where abortions would be legal - in the majority of more liberal states.
And that's only the people who would attempt to abide by the law; that doesnt include those who would simply have illegal abortions.
So... I think it would be unwise to overturn Roe vs Wade. I would argue that you shouldn't allow it to be expanded - Partial Birth abortions should be outlawed.
My basic understanding is that overturning the law would not fix the problem. It would compound it. The solution is not the law - the solution is the effect that the church has in people's lives. If the church has so little effect on their members lives that they cannot stop their members from having sex willy nilly and abortions to cover it up, then how can we think the government can stop it?
However, I don't think our government should be legislating morality. It doesn't work. I've reached a point where I'm pro-life, but not anti Roe vs Wade.
Does that make sense?
The fight to stop abortion cannot be won on a legal level. The main problem with abortion is decidedly an ethical decision, and ethical decisions are based on worldview questions, which the government should remain silent on.
When we, as the church, try to fight abortion on a legal level, we too often give up on the personal level. People can make ethical decisions, people can choose to abide by morality, a government cannnot.
And that is where I think it is flawed to try to overturn Roe vs Wade. The consequences would be radically different than most evangelical churches would like to admit - it wouldnt end abortion, just put it in the states hands. As evidenced by the massive amount of people who flocked to California for a legal gay marriage, people would still just go where abortions would be legal - in the majority of more liberal states.
And that's only the people who would attempt to abide by the law; that doesnt include those who would simply have illegal abortions.
So... I think it would be unwise to overturn Roe vs Wade. I would argue that you shouldn't allow it to be expanded - Partial Birth abortions should be outlawed.
My basic understanding is that overturning the law would not fix the problem. It would compound it. The solution is not the law - the solution is the effect that the church has in people's lives. If the church has so little effect on their members lives that they cannot stop their members from having sex willy nilly and abortions to cover it up, then how can we think the government can stop it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)