Wednesday, December 12, 2012

God the Parent

Disclosure: I'm going to talk about parenting again. Tune in or tune out, as your level of boredom with the topic deems appropriate.  :)
 

----

Grace means receiving a blessing you don't deserve. Mercy is being spared from punishment you do deserve.   Easy enough, right?

Unfortunately, children are born ignorant of what they deserve. 

Consider this: God spent 2,000 years hammering his Law into the children of Israel, making sure they understood He was fearsome, holy, and demanding of perfection, before surprising them with undeserved gifts.  Again, that's 2,000 years outlining His ridiculously-high expectations...

The preacher at church said on Sunday, "The Jews of the Old Testament believed God was hovering above them, just waiting to crack down." And I sat in the pew thinking, "That's because He was!"

Surely you remember the story of Lot's wife: Pillar of salt, anyone? All she did was turn around! And Moses, the actual bearer of the Law--a man who spoke with God like a friend--was barred from the Promised Land because of his sin.

Where were God's grace and mercy in these situations?

----
The Israelites were very much like ignorant kids when God first began speaking through the prophets.  They had no idea what passed for "good behavior" and "bad behavior," until their Heavenly Parent explained it to them.  And, when they got out of line, God needed to correct them immediately and painfully, for the message to stick.

"That will not be tolerated!...I am a Holy God!" "Purge the evil from among you, and be holy like me."

For this reason, I intentionally act like a very "Mean Mommy" now that Cami is testing her limits.

This is NOT the time to display grace or mercy--when she doesn't understand enough to appreciate it. This is the stage of life where Cami learns what she deserves, before I can bless her with something different. I cannot let her believe disobedience will be tolerated.

Only a lazy parent jumps straight to sympathy, kindness, and forgiveness, because they are easier than being tough.

God didn't do this. He loved the children of Israel dearly, and yet He punished them with famines, desert-wandering, boils, snakes, and even death, as their actions required. He was jealous, angry, no-nonsense and "MEAN," while His babies were learning their place.

He continues parenting the same way today.

Unless a person understands what he/she deserves, God's grace and mercy will not have the intended impact.

Now, if you'll excuse me, my daughter is pulling the cat's hair again. She deserves to sit in the "Naughty Spot," so that's what she is going to get...

Monday, December 10, 2012

Good Girl

You know the morning has been difficult when a bowl of corn puffs brings Mommy to tears...

----
Cami did NOT sleep long enough last night. And, when she flat refused to eat her yogurt at breakfast, I knew we were gearing for a long, stressful battle.

Cami: Cereal!
Me: You must eat your yogurt first.
(The yogurt already had her vitamin supplement mixed in.)
Cami: *Wailing* NO!!! Cereal!
Me:  You can have cereal after the yogurt. But you eat this first.  (*tries to offer a bite*)
Cami:  *Big, fat tears* NO!!!
Me: Okay, no yogurt, no cereal.
(Cami becomes hysterical and starts screaming.)
Me:  If you're going to scream, I have to put you back to bed. Do you want to go to bed?
Cami:  NO!
Me: Then stop screaming...
(Cami stops for a couple seconds and then loses control again. Mommy tries to distract her with the choice to get down and play with toys, but Cami keeps saying "Cereal!")
Me: Okay, let's go cry in bed for a little while.

Cami spent about ten minutes crying in her room. When I got her out, she was more subdued. So we decided to argue our cases before Daddy. 

Me:  Tell Daddy you were crying.
Cami: Cry.
Daddy: Why did you cry?
Me: (prompting) What did you want?
Cami: Cereal!
Me: She wants cereal, but I told her she has to eat yogurt first.
Cami: No!
Me: See?
Daddy: Oh, Cami, you have to listen to your mommy. Are you hungry?
Cami: Hungry.
Daddy: Okay. Eat your yogurt and then you can have cereal.

Mommy and Cami went to the kitchen to try again...and, much to my dismay, there was an exact repeat of the first conversation.
----
Cami loooooooves yogurt. There was no reason to fight with me, except she wanted our morning to follow her terms. Toddlers are just beginning to understand their will is different from their parents'--and that's why power-struggles and temper-fits abound at this stage...

But, once again, when I watch my sweet, stubborn daughter as she grapples for control, I see a tiny version of myself...

All of us have authority figures over us, and the one I most commonly challenge is my husband. I could come up with a thousand reasons I shouldn't have to submit to his decisions. And I have been known to throw one ugly tantrum if he continues with his plan instead of mine.

Thankfully, my husband is learning to let me "go cry in my room," metaphorically speaking, when I get unreasonable. I cannot be in control all the time. It's good for all of us to learn that lesson.

My mother jokingly referred to me as a "mean Mommy" yesterday, when Cami had a melt-down over a sucker stick I threw away. We realize it's not really "mean" for an adult to assert themselves over an ignorant child. It's good for that kid to learn who's in charge...
----

The third time was a charm, and after about two hours of conflict, Cami announced, "Yogurt." I asked, "You're ready to eat the yogurt now?" and she said, "Eat it."

She did. Every bite.

I cheered and squeezed her and kissed her little face and said, "I'm very proud of you for making a good decision!...
...and NOW you can have cereal!"

While she was enjoying her corn puffs, she looked up at me, smiling, and said, "Good girl!"
How could I not tear up? Cami is actually a sinful girl, who wants to be in charge. But she's learning she can (and does) feel proud when she overcomes this to do good things.

Thursday, December 6, 2012

Young People, Get Married ONLY if You're Crazy

Having just moved to a new city, I've lost track of how many contracts Luke and I have signed.

The bank, internet provider, electric company, and even the kid who installed our dishwasher all expect our name on the dotted line, as proof we will uphold our end of the bargain.

We've gotten good at navigating the fine print. If I stop paying my phone bill, I realize I'll be put in collections--and probably refused service in the future. But, if the phone company screws up and overcharges me, then I can demand a refund and switch providers, even though I agreed to my contract for a year. If they break the deal first, I'm not bound by it anymore.

Our justice system declares that the dirty, rotten, lying party must absorb the consequences, but the innocent party goes free. It's a fine system.

But, today, I want to remind the church that marriage is not a contract. And if you plan to attach exceptions and loopholes to your vows, please just don't get married.

-----

Marriage is a Covenant.
It is a pledge before loved ones and God Himself that you will be faithful to your spouse until death separates you. You will forsake all others, and the two of you will become ONE FLESH.

This seems straight-forward, blunt, and down-right scary...unless you've been reading Christian literature lately. Thankfully, modern pastors calm us down with the assurance: there are many ways to get out of your promise.


1. If you are physically/emotionally/verbally abused, you can seek a divorce.

2. If your spouse is unfaithful, you're free to go. (And, let's not forget Jesus says just looking at someone lustfully is akin to adultery.)

3. Finally, if your Life Partner is an unbeliever who walks away from you, then he/she stops being your Life Partner.

In these cases, one flesh becomes two again, I guess.

That's the Contract of Marriage, sold in today's Church, and it is sweet! The Church Marriage provides you with a teammate, love, guilt-free sex, and a clear conscience...plus NO RISK! 

There's no reason to worry about whether the person you marry is solid and faithful. If he/she isn't, you're off the hook! Just pick another person, roll the dice, and try again.

I'm not sure why the disciples were horrified by Jesus' description of the union. When He explained God's intentions for marriage, they said "If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it's better not to marry!"   Actually, guys, it's not so bad. If your spouse messes up, the deal is off.

Easy.
----

Unfortunately, I didn't know about the Contract of Marriage when I wed my husband 4 1/2 years ago. Instead I stuck myself with a God-Witnessed Covenant.

Now it doesn't matter what Luke does, I must be faithful to him.   That's what I promised.

If he renounces his faith and walks away, I'll be sad and lonely as a single woman. But I will be faithful to my word.

If he begins harming me physically, I will be shocked and devastated. (And I am free to separate myself from the situation.--1 Cor. 7:10,11)  But I will not run to another man for comfort.

And even if Luke finds a younger, hotter woman--and leaves me in order to "marry" her--I will honor my vows.  It won't matter that 90% of church leaders would encourage me to "move on" and find a new husband; nor would it matter that the laws of the land allow this. May God cut me in two before I violate His spiritual law of Covenants.

----
I ask you, unmarried readers, to consider carefully before "signing up" for a spouse. What happens to your soul is far more serious than an agreement filled with contingencies.

It cannot be undone. 

Therefore, I ask that I be kept accountable, should the unthinkable happen and I find myself abandoned and hurting.  I know my rationalization hamster would scurry to justify being selfish, especially since that selfishness would be encouraged by pastors and fellow Christians saying, "You deserve another shot. It's not your fault your ex-husband rebelled! Would God punish you for his sin? Luke broke the contract!"

But don't let me fall for that, dear reader.
I swear: I will not be romantically involved with another man unless Luke dies...exactly as I swore on June 14, 2008. 

I know that's totally crazy. But I'm crazy-serious about Covenants.

And I implore you, young people, do not get married unless you are equally so.

----
This was posted after being read and approved by my Life Partner, Luke.  :)
For an even more hard-hitting perspective, check out this blog
For a very thorough examination on the Scriptures regarding divorce/remarriage, see Theologian John Piper's "position paper" here.

Thursday, November 15, 2012

S.S. Enlightenment

As I mentioned in yesterday's post, I'm a big fan of Athol Kay's Captain/First-Officer model to explain the roles of husband and wife in a Christian marriage. (Language Warning: the post contains the S-word, "submission"...and a couple truly "colorful" expressions.)

Today, I thought it would be fun to imagine an aircraft being flown by a more "progressive" (egalitarian) flight crew...

-----

(We are aboard S.S. Enlightenment, a starship located somewhere in the Whirlpool Galaxy and cruising at just under 3 light-years per hour...)

Captain: Check fuel pressure, please.

First-Officer: (quick sigh) Yes, sir.

Captain: In five minutes, we will reduce speed to Idle, and then have Maintenance double-check our thrusters are clear before going into Warp.

First-Officer: This would be a triple-check, sir. (rolling eyes)

Captain: Is that so? Something tells me you're unhappy about that...

First-Officer: With permission to speak freely, sir, reducing to Idle adds 4 hours to our trip. And we've already been put behind schedule after stopping in Andromeda to take pictures of the billboard.

Captain: (chuckles to self) "Rent this space."

First-Officer: (dead pan) Hilarious. But, you are aware we will be turned away from the docking bay if we don't make it to base on time.

Captain: I am also aware we will not make it to base at all, if space particles clog our thrusters and the entire ship goes down in flames...  Thank you for weighing in, co-Pilot, but I would rather be safe than sorry.

First-Officer:  Okay...but.  Um...

Captain: Is there something else?

First-Officer: (trying for delicacy) It's just, well...you did it again.

Captain: Did what?

First-Officer: You asked for my input and then totally disregarded it. Plus, you referred to my lesser-rank. That's a shame technique, I think. 

Captain: Sincere apologies, co-Pi--er--I mean, Other Captain. Like I've told you before, your presence is valuable...and I'd hate to make you feel less powerful than I am.

First-Officer: You say that. But your actions speak louder than words. When it comes to how you run this ship, it's like my feelings don't matter.

(looooong pause) 

Captain:  ....Oh, uh, my turn again. Well, if I've done something to upset you, I truly am sorry. And even though I don't always remember to thank you, it's a real privilege to sail the Cosmos with you.

First-Officer: I appreciate that, sir.

Captain:  I mean it! You're making me a better Captain, by showing me how to be nice. Anytime you want to discuss your feelings, just let me know.

First-Officer: Aw, shucks, sir.

Captain: Now, I believe our 5-minutes are almost up. So if you would kindly begin initiating speed reduction--

First-Officer:  Say WHAT?!  You literally just finished saying you are sorry for upsetting me. And now you're going to continue with the plan I said I didn't like?! That's exactly what I'm talking about--treating me like I'm worthless!

Captain: Sometimes I take your advice, Other Pilot. But I've been given command, and it's difficult to do my job when I have to justify every decision I make.

First-Officer:  You're not in the team mindset, Captain.  You act like a solo-rider on a one-man vessel sometimes. But, when you work on a ship with a crew, you have to value their input... you have to talk and talk and talk and talk until everybody agrees on the strategy, and then everyone can tackle problems together. There is unity and nobody feels inferior.

Captain: (scratches head) I guess I see what you're saying. My only question is...why call me Captain if I don't make any calls?

First-Officer: Again, thinking of yourself... It's not true leadership to flaunt titles and demand authority. Good leaders make plans that other people want to follow. And, right now, I don't want to follow your plan.

(One of the crewmen notices a red light flashing)

Captain:  Boy, when I stop and think about how much I've expected trust and loyalty...it's kind of embarrassing! I think you're right, Other Captain. I need to earn the respect of my crew. And since that won't be accomplished through a display of competency, like I once thought, I'm going to be a good leader by letting a more qualified person handle it.

First-Officer: (startled) Wait. No, you can't mean--

Captain: That's right, co-Pilot.There is no one I trust more than you to steer the ship in my absence.

(Smoke has begun rising from a control board. Crewmen are punching buttons, scurrying for water, and trying to get the attention of the quarreling pilots.)

First-Officer: But you're not absent, sir! The Command Post appointed you Captain, and I would never dream of usurping that power...

Captain: Nonsense. Command has always said we're equally smart and equally valuable in our roles on this ship. (walking away) So why don't you take the wheel?

First-Officer: (spinning between desperation and anger) But...but...but, you can't abandon me this way!

Captain: If you need me, I'll be in my cabin, beating my Pong score.

(The ship shakes and cracks. Two, female crew members watch the Captain walk out the door and begin whispering to each other.)

First-Officer: (to the females)  See? I TOLD you he was lazy! (continues muttering to self) And how am I supposed to lead when he's left the ship in such bad shape?...

(The door closes, but the First-Officer gives the Captain one last piece of her mind.)

First-Officer: You're supposed to lead!!!! ...Just do it like I would!!!!!!

----
For more on the topic of power-hungry church ladies, see today's post on The Woman and the Dragon. The story is satirical (yay!), but the author swears the part about the Ladies' Bible Study is totally true...

Tuesday, November 13, 2012

The Manosphere

Essentially, there is no reason for me to post here ever again, because I've found another blogger who coherently says everything I've ever tried to express about biblical marriage, dominance/submission, Feminism (blech!), and our wayward, selfish culture. The author is a member of the manosphere--and since I doubt you are familiar with the term, I encourage you to keep reading.

 Long-time readers know I've ranted on a wide array of topics, from the tragedy of modern marriage to the evil S-word, Submission. From the thinly veiled insecurity of "comedian" Tina Fey, to the self-worship promoted by Eat, Pray, Love author Elizabeth Gilbert. From the importance of a father, to the necessity of sacrificial motherhood (and here), to the irritating celebration of out-of-wedlock births... and, all along, even I didn't know these things had something in common (besides calling out human selfishness).

All along, I belonged in the manosphere...

------

"Since the advent of the internet thousands of men have compared notes, shared stories, and made various philosophical, political, economic, and even scientific observations, resulting in the millions of pages of wisdom that compose The Manosphere today.  These millions of pages are slowly coalescing into theories, laws, and rules that make for an entertaining social 'science.'  But most importantly this body of work has provided...an explanation as to what has happened to society since the feminist revolution of the 70's..."

"There is no core or nucleus to The Manosphere...nor is there any "mission statement."  The blogs that compose that Manosphere range quite widely, including women authors...However, they all have one thing in common - they are here to help...by exposing the lies foisted upon you, me and everybody else for the past 50 years--primarily by feminists--about how men and women 'should be' instead of accepting how we actually are." --Captain Capitalism, manosphere blogger.

Now, pause for a warning. Much of the social/scientific theories being explored in the Manosphere are rooted in evolutionary biology--so, it's a "secular" movement. Many of the bloggers are vocal Atheists--and their language and subject matter is anything but holy.

But any Christian who truly recognizes the Shepherd's voice can't help but notice key places where manosphere bloggers have stumbled upon overarching Truth.

As Captain Capitalism says: "You will see a lot of anger, crass language, cursing, and vulgarity.  However, The Manosphere doesn't care about your feelings, your political motivations, your ulterior motives, or maintaining a status quo.  We are just concerned about one thing: Truth."  

Some bloggers will say "evolution has given men/women very different roles."  I say God did it. But, once you get passed that little discrepancy, the observations about gender roles, sex, parenting, and our messed-up society are pretty spot-on.

Who would think evolutionary psychologists and traditional Christians could find so much worldview overlap?

----
Anyway, if you're interested in "taking the Red Pill" and diving into the Manosphere, start with this link. And read the comments at the bottom. (That's how ideas get advanced in the 'sphere.) Several Christians explain how Post-Feminist principles have encouraged their faith.

Then, move to the blog I mentioned in the first paragraph: The Woman and the Dragon. It belongs to a married, Christian woman, who explains why it's not a sin for Christians to employ this tool, though it was developed by evolutionists...  (Note: Sunshinemary now blogs at THIS address.)

Dalrock, a married, Christian man, wrote an excellent post along those lines here: Why Christians Need Game.

Finally, check out Athol Kay's blog, if you don't mind that the language gets rough, especially in the comments. He's one of the leading voices on "married game," but He isn't a Christian. For that reason, it's interesting how perfectly his "Captain/First-Officer" model describes biblical marriage.

Monday, October 29, 2012

Turning Hell into Heaven

I've long believed selfishness is the root of all problems--but the very essence of Hell?
Well, yes. This makes sense, if you compare Scripture with what experience has taught us. Dr. Timothy Keller's writing on The Importance of Hell explains why he often says, "Everybody who's in Hell wants to be there."

"The desire of the sinful human heart is for independence. We want to choose and go our own way (Isaiah 53:6.)..."

Demanding our "own way" results in the many things I enjoy writing about--from marital arguments, to sexual promiscuity, to children who are willful and wayward from day one.  Selfishness plagues us all.
 

"As Jeremiah puts it, 'No one repents . . . each pursues his own course like a horse charging into battle. (8:6)' We want to get away from God--but, as we have seen, this is the very thing that is most destructive to us.  ...It destroys your ability to choose, love, and enjoy. Sin also brings blindness. The more you reject the truth about God, the more incapable you are of perceiving any truth about yourself or the world (Isaiah 29:9-10; Romans 1:21.)"

Thus, Dr. Keller defines Hell like this: "God actively giving us up to what we have freely chosen--to go our own way...to get away from him and his control...Even in this world it is clear that self-centeredness rather than God-centeredness makes you miserable and blind. The more self-centered, self-absorbed, self-pitying, and self-justifying people are, the more breakdowns occur, relationally, psychologically, and even physically. They also go deeper into denial about the source of their problems..."

Yeah, that sounds like Hell to me. 

"On the other hand, a soul that has decided to center its life on God and his glory moves toward increasing joy and wholeness. We can see both of these 'trajectories' even in this life. But if, as the Bible teaches, our souls will go on forever, then just imagine where these two kinds of souls will be in a billion years. Hell is simply one's freely chosen path going on forever. We wanted to get away from God."

----
Many times, I've heard people (both Christian and non) express doubt about whether God would "banish" His children to a jail-type place called "Hell," where they scrape the bars and beg for mercy. But, what if damnation doesn't look that way at all? Perhaps Hell isn't a concrete area full of literal fire and prisoners planning their escape.  Maybe it's a shapeless void--a lonely place--where the sinner's soul consumes itself just as it always has. And maybe the people there are even more blind than they were on earth, still denying the source of their problems and, by extension, still completely uninterested in the Holy Solution...

What do you think?

Thursday, October 18, 2012

Debate, 2212

Spin: Welcome to the Presidential Debate Coverage of 2212. I'm Spin Boughton, and this is my co-host...whom we all know as, "The Uterus."

Uterus: (*winning smile*) It's a compliment, Spin. My uterus is the only thing that matters about me. And whichever candidate references it the most will get my vote. Bonus points if he says "vagina."

Spin:  Well, I definitely support a woman's right to choose... Anyway, as the viewers at home can see, the President and his Challenger are entering the auditorium at this moment. Let's quickly meet our Moderator for the evening. She is not only the Vice President of the National Association for the Preferential Treatment of Women (NAPTOW), but also--of course--the Mother of our President, Miss Moderator.

(Cut to auditorium)

Moderator: Hi, Sweetie!

President: That's 'Mr President' today, Mom.

(Cut to newsroom)

Uterus: We're honored to have such an accomplished lady among us today, especially one who has done so much for women. Or, as the Federal Committee of Nice Words prefers, "People without Y-Chromosomes."

Spin: Gotta be careful not to objectify people with generic descriptors, Uterus!

Uterus: Let's go to the floor.

(Cut to auditorium)

Moderator: Thank you for being here today, Swee--uh--Mr. President and Mr. Challenger. Let's begin with a question from college student Brian Wash, regarding education. You will respond first, Mr. President.

Brian: I want to know which of you plans to give me a degree for free?

Mr. President:  I will, Brian. I know it's important that every young person have the opportunity to learn about Greek letters and how to use any group of statistics as proof of racism. So, luckily for you, I plan to spend trillions of dollars to make sure you are rewarded with a diploma, regardless of your effort and character. Also, I believe that teachers play an indispensable role in making sure my party gets votes from the next generation, so I will throw a couple billion or trillion at them as well. The way I see it, you can never funnel too much money into the system. Remember: if your Federal Government does its job right, it can make up for the fact that your kids live in broken homes and spend an average of six hours a day on their iPhone107.     ...In short, Brian, don't worry. I gotchu.

Moderator: Okay, Mr. Challenger, it's your chance to attempt a better answer.

Challenger: Well, first of all, everything the President said is a lie. And second, my plan is waaaaaay better. I've arranged for the American people to get all the same goodies promised by the President--but we won't have to spend any money for it. Many people believe part of the value of higher education is figuring out a way to earn it for oneself. They will be happy to know I'm not giving degrees away for free. But people like Brian, who want free stuff, should note that I'll be giving away degrees for free. There has been some rumor that I'm interested in cutting funds to various programs which are important to the middle class, but this is just a bunch of stuff. The child-tax credit, free pizza on Sundays, and subsidies to have dead pets cloned will not be changing--except to be strengthened. But don't worry, Conservatives. I'm going to cut needless programs and not spend a dime.

Moderator: Back to you, Sweetie. You were saying something about progress and change, right?

Mr. President:  Progress. Change. Fairness....and Uteruses.  Vote for me.

Moderator: Let's move on to a question from Mrs. Bertha Clark in the front row, an undecided Domestic Engineer.

Bertha: Mr. President and Mr. Challenger, as the CEO of my house, I know how important it is to operate with a balanced budget. Our country, like any household, cannot continue to live beyond its means indefinitely.  Since the national debt has now reached 700 Trillion, what will you do to bring it down to zero?

Challenger: I'm glad you asked that, Bertha. I'm very excited about my plan for getting America's finances under control because I have succeeded in balancing budgets many times. However, if I get too specific, people will realize "teamwork" and "sacrifice" might demand something of them personally. And then they might pout, which totally puts a damper on a good campaign. So, I think it's best if I just talk vaguely about overcoming obstacles with my last few seconds. (*winning smile*) Believe me: through a team effort, we can get America back in the black.

Moderator: Please respond, Mr. President.

Mr. President:  Is he allowed to say black on the air?...
Look, everybody knows you can't balance a budget unless you either raise taxes or make extensive cuts. But my opponent refuses to tell you which he plans. This secrecy ought to concern you. On the other hand, just consider what he DOES admit--tackling the debt problem takes sacrifice.  That came from his very mouth! Thus, I promise I won't even TRY to balance the budget....

Challenger: Okay, let me give you a few specifics, then. My manager is going to have a cow, but let's be real...  I'm just not sure it's the federal government's job to fund Big Bird. Also, there is still a percentage of the population that believes the government shouldn't pay to help People without Y-Chromosomes abort their toddlers. And yes, I'm a radical. I believe a toddler has the right to live EVEN if the mother feels she is unable to care for it. Let's see....  Oh, and is it really necessary to deliver free groceries directly to the homes of every citizen?

Mr. President: --My opponent is out-of-touch--

Challenger: --Please don't interrupt me, Mr. Pres--

Mr. President: --He's out of touch with--

Challenger: --I wasn't through speak--

Mr. President: --He's a millionaire who obviously can't relate with the majority of society.

Challenger: Don't you make 7 figures too, Jack?

Moderator: Now, boys, play nice...

Challenger: Indeed, I apologize. Now, as I was saying--

Moderator: Wait, Mr. Challenger. It's the President's turn.

Challenger: I believe he interrupted me in the middle of my rebuttal.

Moderator: Even if it seems unfair, you have to trust me. Our time keepers are doing their job, and it's my baby's turn.

Mr. President: Thanks, Mom. Friends, you've heard my opponent say his plan includes a decision to STOP FEEDING YOU. He has displayed over and over that he doesn't get what matters to the poor and middle class. Look, I spoke with a single mom in Connecticut the other day, and she told me, "Mr. President, I depend upon the Groceries on Your Doorstep service. As a struggling mom of two, I don't have time to go to the store; I don't even know how to get there!"

Challenger: Oh, this is ridiculous. I'm not talking about starving single mothers and their kids. I'm just asking whether we need to grow, package, and deliver food to the doorstep of more than half our citizens. People used to shop for themselves with little trouble.

Mr. President: (sigh) You're always trying to bring back the policies of another era...

Moderator: That makes a nice segue to our final questioner, Daniel Miller, with some concerns about the future.

Daniel: Gentlemen, it is an exciting time to be alive. In just a couple months, it will be 2313, and it promises to be full of never-before-seen issues. With all that's *different* in our modern world, we need inventive policies to guide us. How will you prepare America for advancement?

Mr. President: Folks, history almost never repeats itself. Our best bet is to shoot in the dark toward a target I call "progress." Even if we miss and send the country into economic turmoil, at least we were thinking out of the box. Not only does my opponent hold the outdated notion that people "should" provide for themselves, but he thinks they actually can! But, after hearing personal testimonies coast to coast, I know better. And--rather than taking away programs that make life a little easier for strategic members of my voting block--I plan to expand programs like Groceries on Your Doorstep. America's working people have enough to battle without dealing with spoons that make their wrists ache. Thus I plan to launch the Groceries In Your Mouth plan.

Moderator: I'm afraid we're just about out of time. Closing arguments, please!

Challenger: Right, um... Well, since I won't get the last word, I think it's important to reiterate that everything the President says is untrue.  But I also want to stress that anything you like about his economic plan will be included in mine, too. ...only, if you heard something that sounded fishy, that won't be included. Uh... I agree, we need to do more for those struggling in this country. Ease burdens. Agreed. Agreed. Move forward, etc.  And, of course, I have to mention Teamwork and Sacrifice one more time...unless those words make you uncomfortable. In which case, just remember my plan won't cost you anything.

Moderator:  Mr. President?

Mr. President:  Uterus.

(Cut to newsroom)

Spin: Well, that was certainly a lively exchange. My co-host and I will spend the next 3 hours analyzing the footage in a reasonable and unbiased fashion. But, I think it's pretty obvious who won. 

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Keeping my Mouth Closed

Since I started this blog, I've never missed an entire month of posting before.  Part of me will be irritated forever by the fact that August 2012 is missing from my blog archive! But, I needed to stop preaching about what God wants "all of us" to do, long enough to discover what He wanted from me.  

His theme the last few weeks has been: Close Your Mouth!

****
You've heard of the proverbial Negative Nancy?  Well, (*waves hand*) here I am. And I have more than 150 posts on this blog to condemn me.  Not everything I've shared has been doom and gloom. But my words are unpleasant often enough that I admitted recently: I Stink.

Then, I found an article which got me wondering, "Am I really helping myself and others here? Or am I just allowing my tongue to go unchecked?" When I say/write things in anger, am I preaching or venting...and what does the Bible say about it?

Suzanne Hadley Gosselin, author of this post, shares the following story:
 A couple weeks ago, I found myself in a depressing cycle. It started with dissatisfaction with a certain relationship... Disappointment led to anger, which led to grumpiness. Feeling the need to "process," I vented my frustration to my exercise buddy [which] caused my self-righteousness to rise and made me even grumpier. Over the next few days, I stewed over the situation and "vented" to several other people. [Eventually] I found myself not only being frustrated with the initial relationship but being critical of others as well. Soon it seemed as if everyone was letting me down. My dissatisfaction grew until I reached a breaking point... Instead of helping my situation, venting had blown it out of proportion.

I resonate with this example whole-hardheartedly.
At first, writing a piece with a negative spin feels relieving--as if I got something off my chest.  (Or, as I like to believe, I've "spoken the words of the Lord.")

But, once I start noticing what's wrong with the culture, the Church, the WORLD, it's hard to find anything good. 

Miss Gosselin closes with this paragraph:
I'm learning that as a fallen human being, my tendency is to complain. But my goal is to have the attitude of Christ, rich in contentment, love and humility. That will require keeping the vent closed. After all, Jesus has given so much for me. I really can't complain.

****
Thus, that's what I've been doing this month... learning to focus on the happy side of things instead of running to the computer with a list of problems needing fixed.  And, what do you know, removing the "vent" hasn't caused me to implode.  In fact, God has provided me with several extremely satisfying opportunities to use my gift of teaching, through my volunteer times at the pregnancy center.

Wow, that last sentence was so very consistent with new, positive frame of mind that I'm going to say it again:  I  loooove counseling young women at the pregnancy center. God has allowed me to interact with many girls who actually ask for my help. And the lift my spirit gets from being with them is starkly different from the sense of burden I often felt after unleashing Negative Nancy on this blog.

Now I understand better why Proverbs 10:19 says: "When words are many, sin is not absent. But he who holds his tongue is wise." If I can't be sure that every, single word is "helpful for building others up"and "benefits those who listen," I'd just as soon keep my mouth shut.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, July 29, 2012

Osteen vs. Washer

Just a video today, Kiddies.

Despite the title, this isn't about who wins some preaching competition. These are contrasting philosophies, both claiming to be Christian and fundamentally disagreeing.

 Some say Osteen and Washer simply use different packaging. But don't be fooled. Today's Christians must choose between the feel-goodies of "self esteem" and cold-water Truth.

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

Wills Clash, Tears Fall

My (15-month-old) daughter doesn't plan to sleep past 5:00am anymore. For over a week, she has woken well before the sun--disoriented and cranky--but demanding to get out of her bed.  (She actually signs "help.")

If she acts ill or we're staying in a strange place, I nurse her until she calms down.  But, I don't want to make a habit of early waking. 

So, I decided last night she needed to sleep 10 hours before she could get up; then I crossed my fingers she wouldn't test me.  She began fussing at 5:00, on the dot. 

At 6:00, while my toddler alternated between angry shrieks and pathetic wails, I updated my Facebook status:
 
"I'm sorry, Little One. But you haven't slept properly for almost ten days now, and there will be no bending to your demands this morning...
I tucked you back in and closed the nursery door--so you might think you're alone. But, I'm still here, listening to every sob.
Yours isn't the only broken heart.
(I feel there's a metaphor here somewhere.)"
----
Later today, (after baby gave in to a couple more hours of sleep) I found a blog post which nicely packages the metaphor to which I referred.    What Breaks God's Heart? Disobedient Children.   
I know we don't think of babies as "disobeying" when they cry. But, consider the author's definition.
Kids disobey when they believe themselves wiser than their parents.  They think their plan makes more sense than their mother's. They like their way better than their father's.  If the child's tears come from losing a battle-of-wills with Mom and Dad, it's disobedience...
But, it hurts Mom and Dad, too.  
We don't want to see our babies suffer. I would prefer to explain the physical necessity of rest to my baby and have her just trust me. But, she only learned to say her own name two days ago. She doesn't understand. 
As she cried, I told her, "it will be okay." 
I said, "You need to sleep."  
And I whispered "I love you." Multiple times.   
But she doesn't understand.    
Thus, I could do nothing but wait nearby, aware of (and hating) every tear...
...and to rejoice in the fact that someday she will know what I know.
(P.S.  Another excellent article: When God is Silent)

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

To Dunk or Not to Dunk?

When Luke and I first started dating, there were several doctrinal differences we needed to address.

Early on, a book by Charles Capps sparked a memorable argument.  Also, Luke's background in the pentecostal church demanded a frank discussion about the Word-Faith movement.

But, it was my church which placed a heavy emphasis on baptism.  For all my conservative upbringing, I've discovered those (like me) who "dunk" new converts actually represent the radical side of this particular Church controversy...

----
What does the Bible say about baptism? This author calls it the elephant in the room; but he goes on to discuss his views in a refreshingly simple way. I agree with him all around.

I like this line, because I think all of us can agree to start here: "Sometimes what we think makes sense needs to be less important to us than what scripture says - even if we think our way is better."

So, what do you make of all the scriptures referring to baptism, dear reader?

Thursday, June 14, 2012

Playing With Paint

The last time I goofed around with Paint, I illustrated my post about how sweet Luke was during the early stages of my pregnancy.


Here's what came of playtime today.  (Don't judge my graphic art skills!!!!)  :)


If this offends you (or if you're just plain confused), check out this post I wrote last December for an explanation. ("Christian Oppression")


...And here's the other way I suggested altering this chart...



Saturday, June 9, 2012

Miss Nagy Didn't Throw Away Her Childhood

I just read this piece by Stephen Crowder in which he defends people who marry young because Jennifer Nagy of the Huffington post argued "people shouldn't be allowed" to marry before age 25..

As a side note, I absolutely love Miss Nagy's conclusion..."Maybe there are 20-year-olds who get married and stay madly in love for their whole lives...  Maybe there is such a thing as fairies and unicorns, too."  

(It cracks me up because people have used this "powerful argument" with me. Check out the comments section here.  The 11th comment from the top is the pertinent one.)

(Other side note:  how do people who reason this way get paid to write?!  I'm over here, Big Magazine! Unicorns, unicorns, unicorns! See? Talent!)

Anyway,  I conclude Miss Nagy didn't "Throw away her childhood," the way Luke and I did--or the way any person must do before they get married.   But is 25 the special age? Do you agree with Nagy or with Crowder?

Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Come As You Are

Each week, I have the privileged of meeting with three or four young women individually, to discuss their relationships, spiritual lives, and future goals.   Unfortunately, after several months of these one-on-one interviews, I've noticed a discouraging pattern...

Probably 9 out of 10 will tell me they "believe in God and believe the Bible is true," and there's "nothing" they'd really like to change about their relationship with the Creator.  But, when I ask whether their premarital sex affects this faith, they make a speech like this:

"Oh, I've heard it's a sin. But nobody is perfect; I always ask God to forgive me afterward." 

I'll remind them: "When I asked if there's anything you'd like to change, you said 'no.'"

"I wasn't thinking about that," they'll say. "...The important thing is God loves me the way I am."

----

It upsets me just a little more every time I have this conversation, but I don't blame the girls solely.

Yes, they are using grace as a License to Sin, which Paul warned against (Romans 6:1,2) But I think the Church is responsible for the lax attitude toward breaking the Law. For years, we have over-emphasized "acceptance" and downplayed the importance of being holy.

Hasn't everybody in America heard that God is quick to forgive and expresses infinite mercy? Can't almost all of us quote John 3:16; God loved the world so much that whoever believes has permission to do whatever they want?   (Or something like that?)   :)

Of course everyone knows God likes and dislikes certain things. But we'd rather focus on how nice He is when we mess up. We like sharing the good news, "come as you are," as if our streets are lined with shame-filled sinners who've never heard it and keep flogging their own backs in penitence.

I'd love to concentrate on the happy message:  "Hey, poor pitiful souls, stop beating yourself up! God loves you already!" It feels good to reassure someone they don't have to feel guilty anymore.

But I've met very few who feel guilty.

In fact, when asked directly, our first thought tends to be, "I have nothing to change."

----
This week, I created a list of Scriptures which may ring less familiar than John 3:16.

For example, Revelation 3:16 says half-commitment to God makes Him want to vomit. He'd rather we disown him completely than use His name and keep living in sin.

Also, James 2:17 says, "Faith, when not accompanied by action, is dead." There must be fruit--some kind of evidence we've met Jesus...or our so-called faith is useless. And brace yourself for verse 19: "You believe there is one God? Good! Even the demons believe that!"

In the future, I'd like to share some of these truths with my Bible-believing clients because history shows they aren't hearing it elsewhere. For every spineless, rose-colored church organization that teaches nothing but "God loves you," there must be someone brave enough to share the other half of the truth: He loves you too much to let you wreck yourself with sin.

Yes, come as you are. But you cannot stay that way.

Monday, May 28, 2012

Or is it All About the "S"-Word?

Several months back, I wrote about the "F"-word, forgiveness, which I declared the most important aspect of a Christian's spirituality.  Forgiveness through Jesus is the difference between a lost soul and one bound for Heaven. So, in a nutshell, it's "All About the F-Word."

But, in my experience, non-Christians tend to be faaaaaaaar more interested in conversations about the "S"-word--known more commonly as "submission."

I believe few biblical commands are more misunderstood than submission--yet this doesn't stop folks from harboring strong negative opinions. The S-word should be a secondary discussion about family structure between people with a common faith and authority.

But, misinformation has created a confused, nation-wide debate about modern gender roles, featuring impassioned outsiders who, frankly, don't know what they're talking about.

Consider this post about the "Breakdown of the Evangelical Family," about self-professing Christians, Jon and Kate Gosselin, at the time they announced their divorce. Keep in mind, however, that the author draws a clear line between herself and "those church people."  Which is to say, she's NOT an Evangelical.

Here are some of my favorite parts:

"Kate...embodies many evangelical women who struggle between the role of homemaker that their churches assign them and of finding interesting and creative work in the world... Despite all her pretensions to tradition, [she] is actually a very contemporary woman with feminist inclinations–one who is figuring out that her theology is at odds with the way life works out."

"The Gosselin’s tensions demonstrate how unsuccessfully conservative religious groups have been dealing with gender–and how, when a woman like Kate Gosselin breaks with tradition in order to pursue what she loves...she gets both blamed and punished for problems in her relationships."

"But the conservative evangelical community shares some of that failure, too.  The religious world to which Jon and Kate belong never successfully navigated the gender changes of the last three decades, insisting that happiness can still be found in hierarchical roles of male superiority and female submission.  Having rejected feminist theology, evangelicals can’t really navigate contemporary marriage issues like those facing Jon and Kate."

------
In a sense, it's good to know the Bible's teaching on "submission" presents such a hang-up for some people.  But, it's frustrating how badly it's misconstrued. Isn't it?

As a faithful reader, you already know how I feel about feminism.   Also, I've talked extensively about true love being sacrificial--instead of asking "what's in it for me?"  Yet, in the name of "progress", today's women are encouraged to avoid sacrificing for their kids and embrace a more "modern" idea of marriage.


So, rather than rehash the same points I've made before, I open the floor to you, dear reader. How would you respond to the above author, or others who believe as she does?

(Addendum:  A friend just sent me this applicable link, Ten Things Submission is NOT.)

Monday, May 21, 2012

That's Unfair!

Sometimes the way other parents discipline their child makes me very uncomfortable. 

How do they expect to teach self-control, "keep your hands to yourself," and fairness, when they inflict upon their kid a "punishment" they won't let him/her use?

Take, for example, "time-out."

It's disturbing how many (supposed) adults grab their small children by the wrists and stick them in a corner, to send the message a particular action is "wrong." Yet, they don't allow the child to put adults or other children in time-out!  

...It gets worse.

Some parents watch "grown-up" television shows and videos without their children; some stay up later than their kids--even when the child juts out that precious lip and sputters, "B-b-b-but, I want to stay up, too!" 

Inevitably, all children will ask at one time or another: "Whyyyyyyy can't I do __[blank]__ when you do it?"  And those bullying parents usually say: "I'm the adult; that's why."  How's that for being an example? Sounds like a power trip to me...

When you take a toy from your misbehaving child and put it on a high shelf, aren't you flaunting, "I'm bigger than you!" You imply Might Equals Right. And, you may ingrain a pattern of stealing into that impressionable child, since that's what you're modeling.

When you establish a child's bedtime, which you don't observe yourself, you're saying, "I know I'm telling you to go to bed--but I can stay up because I'm Mommy/Daddy. That rule only applies to you; not to me."

When you put Junior in a cage (the essence of time-out), just because you don't like his behavior, you're saying you only have respect for him when he follows your rules. And, gosh, that's so unfair!

What about the child's rights? How must the kids feel about receiving punishments? (I bet having toys stolen and freedom restricted makes them feel their parents have all the power...)  *shudder*

I say, "End inequality now!"--including the gap between parent and child. 

We wouldn't want a generation which believes different people receive different treatment...

Would we???

Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Listen to Your Heart


My sis-in-law brought this article to my attention today, specifically noting these words:

"Ask yourself, "Do I hate being with children?"
If the answer is yes, don't have one!

However, if the answer is, "Maybe [I do hate being with children], but I love the moral and social status associated with being a mom"—then have a kid or two, but make a lot of money first so you can hire a full-time, highly qualified concierge to keep you from spending too much time with them..."

I couldn't have written a crazier paragraph if I was being sarcastic. Yet, this author seems to be serious, stating it's important for moms to "avoid resentment" of daily tasks, at all costs.

She says: "...If you hate doing something, you absolutely must not do it."

And, apparently, using this "handy tool," a mom can justify almost anything--even giving birth for the "social status" and trying not to spend "too much time" with the kids. An outrageous conclusion like this one should be expected from a theory which elevates a woman's feelings to an unbiblical level.
----
I really hate exercise.

Regardless of the activity, moving and sweating makes me uncomfortable. And, since I hate the sensation of hot lungs and sore limbs, I conclude exercise isn't my thing.

Oh sure, experts say the pain associated with exercise actually benefits my body. But following advice when I really, truly hate the activity only leads to resentment. If I don't feel like exercising, I'm absolutely not going to do it.
----

The author wrote: "I wouldn't have discovered the danger of resentment until I took parenting advice that went against my nature—and lived to resent it. Strict religious practice and dietary restrictions sounded OK when I heard the justifications, but I wasn't listening to my heart."

Thus, she seems to say: when there's a conflict between a piece of advice and your nature, go with your nature. When the logic in your head argues with the feelings in your heart, go with your heart.

Feelings are king.

Unfortunately, the Bible says our natures are sinful and our hearts are "desperately wicked." My weak body crawls toward selfishness at every opportunity. Why would I keep asking for its opinion?!

Yes, the author is correct in saying mommies shouldn't feel obligated to follow certain programs, just to prove they're "Good Parents." Indeed, there are many ways to feed, dress, and comfort a child, and none is "better" than another.

But, if I plan to avoid the Mommy Competition by constantly asking "how does this make ME feel?" I'm still missing the mark. Whether I worry about impressing other parents or worry about myself, I put the focus on my feelings; and this never really satisfies the soul.

The only true solution (and ultimate purpose of life) is to discover: "How does GOD feel about this?"  And we must pursue His heart, even when it's a spiritual exercise we kind of hate...

 ----
Personally, I don't think God cares whether we use formula or breastmilk. The Eleventh Commandment isn't, "Thou Shalt Daily Use Your Baby Bjorn."

But God DOES expect us to realize healthy things rarely feel good at the time. And He expects us to serve others with reckless abandon--knowing our souls were created to sacrifice the way our bodies were created to move.

This never leads to resentment, until I lapse back into Me-Mode and give my feelings a power they shouldn't hold.  I grow narcissistic, unhappy and, yes, resentful, when I listen to my wickedly deceitful heart.

Thursday, May 10, 2012

Self-Limitation: Tale of a Not-So-Desperate Housewife


Last weekend, the McKinney's celebrated Cami-Jo's 1st birthday, along with a small group of cherished friends and family.  (Cami's birth story is here.)
----

By now, we've basically settled back into our everyday routine (i.e.  Eat, clean the highchair. Repeat.)  But, for a couple weeks, I became consumed with party details--and I had a blast! Sending invites, buying decorations, scrap-booking, and hunting for the perfect outfit to make Baby Girl look like a cupcake...  

I enjoyed the break from the norm immensely. And I would declare the entire event a raging success, if only I could silence the annoying question popping into my mind: "Do I come across as a Desperate Housewife?"

Be honest. When you see a mom who dresses her baby in lace, head-to-toe; a mom who takes a gazillion pictures and brags about all the things her kid can say (or sign); a mom who writes thank you notes within three days of the party, all composed in the baby's "voice;" you've got to think, "that lady has waaaaay too much time on her hands."

Moms like me tend to relish in little details, and sometimes we criticize ourselves (and each other) for going "too far." We've all felt pressure to brag about milestones or work toward "perfection," so we can validate all the work we do.

In honor of women who become overzealous about breastfeeding, Tina Fey coined the term "Teat Nazis." She explains this phenomenon occurs "when highly ambitious women experience deprivation from outside modes of achievement," and direct their ambitions toward their children instead. This seems to imply that a lack of "real-world" stimulation causes some moms to pursue not-so-important things with embarrassing enthusiasm.

Thus, I feel a tad self-conscious. I want to argue that Desperate Housewives (and Teat Nazis) do not exist. Except, I do experience deprivation from outside modes of achievement, and sometimes it shows!


Probably most stay-at-home mothers understand what I mean. Do your daily tasks truly showcase your full range of abilities? At the end of the day, do you feel exceedingly smart, accomplished, and intellectually stimulated?

I, for one, am capable of greater things than a flawless diaper change or pitch-perfect "Twinkle, Twinkle." There was a time my husband asked about my day and I had news more interesting than: "the laundry basket contained an even number of socks!"

This isn't bad. Except, when many of us feel that twinge of humiliation, when TV shows and former SNL cast members ridicule us for allowing our high-achievement personalities to cross paths with Mommyhood...

The world seems to say:
You're trying too hard! Well-dressed children and homemade meals are a sign of desperation! Deep down, you wish you could get away--hold down a real job. Wouldn't you be more satisfied outside the home--where accomplishments truly matter? You're selling yourself short, stifling yourself!

Due to this (real or imagined) message, there are times I won't update my Facebook status because I have nothing to say apart from Cami, and I don't want to sound pathetic. Isn't it sad when an educated woman thinks of nothing but her child all day? Doesn't the fact that she misses those "outside accomplishments" prove she's limiting herself?

Well, yes, in a way.

But remember this, fellow Domestic Engineers. Limiting oneself, for the sake of another, is the highest calling of all. Jesus said: "There is no greater love than to lay down one’s life..."  This doesn't just apply to literal, physical death. It's the essence of self-sacrifice in all forms.
 
I've already written about how Teri Hatcher doesn't understand sacrificial love. Perhaps Tina Fey doesn't, either. So, let me explain it again. I don't enjoy mopping, cooing, strolling, and Sesame-Streeting the same way I enjoyed going to school and working outside the home. But I've limited myself to these baby-things, for now, the way Christ limited Himself for me.

I laid down my former life, intentionally, as an act of love.

As a result, it's almost laughable that a major source of my excitement comes from a toddler's birthday. And, along with a few other "Desperate Housewives," I feel the urge to join clubs and bake cookies, and decorate my house...to spice things up when my job, inevitably, gets a tad boring.  Sometimes--while looking at pictures of bentos and squealing "I'd like to try that!"--it strikes me that I once aspired to more than playing with my kid's food...

But I don't want to spend another minute hiding that enthusiasm, out of fear of stereotypes or embarrassment...

Hollywood simply doesn't understand God's paradoxical system. Humility is exulted, sacrifice is rewarded, and self-limitation doesn't make me "desperate" at all...

Friday, April 20, 2012

Loaf of Trouble

Get out your pens, Ladies.
Today I'm sharing my recipe for making the perfect Loaf of Trouble:

Ingredients
-4-6 pieces of chicken, some stuffing, and breadcrumbs
-1 cup of Fatigue (the "Monthly Visitor" brand works best)
-1 small, cabinet-raiding child
-An over-worked husband, divided. (They separate like eggs: allow your husband very little sleep over several days, and you'll soon be left with just a shell.)
-Equal parts Over-sensitivity and Self-Interest
-Poor Judgement, to taste

Method
While turning the chicken, stuffing, and breadcrumbs into a meal, the chef should trip over the cabinet-raiding child several times, until mildly annoyed. (Note: if working near a recently-swept floor, pour breadcrumbs on it.)  Next, ask the conscious half of the husband to look after baby--save the rest for later. Place over heat.  Don't worry if husband doesn't require much heat before sweetly agreeing--as mine did yesterday. Move to last step.

Use liberal amounts of poor judgement to spread Self-Interest and Over-Sensitivity on top of the remaining (exhausted shell) portion of husband. 
Sample technique:
Wife: It would be great if you'd fix the fridge today.
Husband: I already know.
Wife: You seem grumpy.
Husband: I'm tired.
Wife: You're short-fused.
Husband: Maybe you're being too sensitive.
Wife: So, I just have to deal with it, because you're tired?
Husband:  Oh, here we go.
Wife: What's THAT supposed to mean?...

Continue pounding dough in this manner, until serving raw.

Variations:
Last night, Luke took my Loaf of Trouble and sweetened it with patience and kindness until it was unrecognizable. At 3:15am--which is wide-awake time for a third shift person--Luke woke me to apologize for his part in the baking. He said his backwards-schedule complicates things; he struggles with irritability during his "off-hours." But he also called this “an excuse” which was "too easy." 

Then he promised to work on communicating better--so that it’s harder for me to cook up Trouble in the future.

Luke wrote: “A duet is more beautiful when each singer works to make the other sound more beautiful, instead of fighting to be heard above the other.”   I couldn’t agree more. And I’m grateful for the way he reached out to me, though I was equally guilty of wrong. It’s easy to harmonize with someone like that…

In conclusion, it takes two people to bake a Loaf of Trouble; thus, it only takes one to sabotage it, and make a sweeter variation instead.   

Thanks, honey, for being that person this time around!   

Saturday, April 14, 2012

NO!

McBaby is almost a year now... and the word of the day is: No!

No eating kitty food. No biting Mommy's leg. No chewing on tissues. (Can you tell she's teething?) No pulling hair. No standing in your highchair. NO SCISSORS!  (Baby-proof fail.) 

At this point, she's only learning what the word means--and developing a sense of consequences. She hasn't yet used the classic kid-response to being told no: "why?" That phase has its challenges. But, in some ways, it will be easier when she knows there is a reason I slap her hand away from the light socket.

Hopefully my baby will appreciate the boundaries when she finally sees the whole picture.

This makes me wonder if God (the world's most infamous "killjoy") experiences delight--maybe even relief?--when one of His children finally "gets it." After centuries of Thou-Shalt-Nots and gaining a reputation as a mean, needlessly-authoritarian Father, do you think He celebrates when one of us recognizes His love?  Does He shed tears of happiness when we say, finally, "Thanks, Dad, for caring enough to save me from myself"? 

It's easier to understand all of God's "no-nos" if we believe they exist for our good--even if we don't comprehend the specifics about why. Certain things harm our souls due to spiritual laws, the same way gravity pulls on my baby if she crawls toward the stairs.

On this video, Dr. Timothy Keller parallels the spiritual and physical laws when he answers the question, "[Why] Do you believe there is only one God and only one way to approach him?" at roughly minute 11:40.

"If Jesus is who he says he was....and if he was our original Creator, then of course there would have to be just one way to God; our souls would need Him, or they would shrivel eternally just like my body needs food, or it would shrivel."  

So, when Jesus said "I am the Way," He wasn't just being intolerant. He said "no" to self-salvation and "no" to the idols we chisel for ourselves because we literally don't know how to care for ourselves.

He said "YES" to our restoration.

As a mother, I want to help Cami abide by both physical and spiritual rules--so I repeat no, no, no, no, waiting patiently for the day she understands the reason. (And begins saying "no" to herself.) In result, I'm saying "yes" to "avoiding electrocution" and "yes" to "breath that doesn't smell like IAMS."
And I thank God He cared enough to say "Yes" to the cross.

P.S. Friends, if you've never heard Timothy Keller answer questions from skeptics before, click on the above link. That's not a suggestion; that's an order!  :)