Have you ever had one of those days, when little things happen, irritating things that slow you down, take you away from your tasks, get in your way?
I've had one of those seasons.
In my last post, I detailed some of those things. Since then, my 22-year-old son, so frustrated with his love life, his inability so far to get a job, in an impulsive fit, tried to commit suicide by drinking a couple of bottles of wine and taking a bunch of Tylenols. He came very close to succeeding. He was online with someone, had mentioned what he had done, and when he stopped responding, the person online (in Chicago, IL) called our local EMS. When they found Boone, he was already jaundiced, which they said meant he was from 30 minutes to 2 hours away from death. Thank God for that online angel.
Now this isn't a little thing, but I feel guilty for complaining. I mean, Boone's alive! But the event -- his nearness to death, how close we came to losing him -- dealt me an emotional blow I'm not recovering from very quickly. And then I feel guilty because I'm so focused on how that has affected me. (I would focus on how it's affected Boone, but he won't let me.)
I can look at this spate of "bad luck" in several ways. First, I can just consider it bad luck. Just a matter of living life, of having children who are just now becoming adults and on their own to make their own mistakes, of living in a rough economy. But the sheer number of negative events makes me doubt that they are a result of normal bad luck.
Mike pointed out that all this stuff started happening right after I began tithing ten percent of the grocery budget to my church. I had asked Mike if he thought we could tithe our income, but he didn't feel we were able, so I'm just tithing what I have in my control. It's my way of saying, "I trust you, God. You have given us what we have; I can show my faith in you by giving back a tenth."
If there is some connection to the time that I began tithing, it could be from one of two possibilities.
It could be that Satan is attacking us because of my renewed faith, trying to separate me from my Lord. Or it could be as a friend put it, that God is winnowing us. However, I believe the Bible's promises, that I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me, and God will not test us more than we can bear.
All this is just making me more of a clinger! Either way, it's been an interesting time. I wonder what next?
Showing posts with label Christian. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Christian. Show all posts
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Less Rigidity
I've been haunted by one word in a comment on my blog: rigidity. Lest I be accused of taking out of context, here is the whole segment: "What I see is a world that is not Black and White, Christian and non-Christian, Conservative and Liberal. I want less ridgity and more tolerance, I want less hate and more love. I want more humility and less arrogance."
I see some reason in this. I hate labels because along with a label comes a whole constellation of attributions, that change according to the "eye of the beholder." But that's a topic for another blog.
I believe that one MAJOR problem with our government, if not our whole culture, is a lack of rigidity. A lack of absolute structure. It's like our life is being built on shifting sands.
Rigidity is necessary in many parts of our life.
I constructed a compost barrel, using a recycled 50-gallon plastic drum, some scrap pvc pipe, a metal pole, and some scrap lumber. Since I was trying things out, I just put it together enough to see if it worked. I used the lumber to make two stands to raise the barrel above the ground so that I could spin it. Two 2x4s put together weren't stable enough, so I added two "leaning" type supports to the upright posts, nailing them in. However, even that construct wasn't stable enough . . . I found when I tried to spin the half-full barrel. It all started to collapse; I tried to keep it up, but the weight of it all knocked me down in a pile of poles. The point is it wasn't rigid enough. Some things don't work without rigidity.
This lack of rigidity is very much like growing up with an alcoholic father. We had to guess at the rules, which could change from day to day. It all depended on his mood. When my little brother accidentally broke a mirror that had been placed leaning against a wall, we had no idea of whether it was punishable or not and how extreme the punishment would be. As it turned out, our father made me decide whether to punish my brother or not. I had to figure out what the father wanted, and if I guessed wrong, I would also be in trouble. I didn't want to, but I said Teddy should be punished. Our father accepted that and beat my little brother with the buckle end of a belt until his bare thighs bled.
I spent many of my years growing up in a somewhat functional family trying to guess what my parents (mom and step-dad) wanted, holding my breath, tip-toeing. Many, many times, I chose not to ask if I could go to a party because they might say no. I just didn't go.
For the people of a society to deal best with each other, there must be some rigid rules. Used to be, a promise was a promise. It was rigid. You shook hands; you could rely on its being accomplished, short of death or God's intervention. Then it was a signature on a contract. That's why you had to read the whole contract carefully (even the fine print) before signing it. Signing a contract meant you were obligated to accomplish that promise.
President Obama has changed that, just trashing contract law in bailouts of banks and automotive companies. The most egregious example is Obama's dictating to the secure bond holders of Chrysler what they had to take in the supposed bankruptcy (with new rules written by Obama, et al.) There are many more examples of Obama's lack of rigidity, from his immediate and almost complete reversal of all campaign promises, to his apparent disregard of the rule of law ("no one is above the law"), to his circumventing legal provisions for checks and balances by appointing czars. . . Kevin McCullough writes an insightful column on the issue: "Why Liberals Never Lie." Basically,, he says, they don't lie because they don't have a rigid standard. The truth morphs for them.
The children of this alcoholism -- entrepreneurs and investors -- are reacting just like I did. Not being sure how any potential contracts will be taken, they just don't even take a risk. OR, they are spending all their energy trying to get on Obama's good side so they won't be punished or so they can receive special perqs.
The law should be rigid and not malleable by individuals, who are ruled by emotions. That way, everyone knows what to expect. We don't have to spend our lives trying to guess what might work or whether a promise will be kept.
In addition, I think most individuals need to make rigid rules for themselves. Goals need to be rigid. If your goals continually move or you drop your "goal" for another, they aren't doing the job of goals. If you want to be an honest person, your rigid rule should be to tell the truth, and you should not allow yourself to wimp out on that rule by fudging -- like telling yourself that white lies are okay. This doesn't mean you absolutely can't break your rigid rules; but it does mean that you don't justify the breaking of them.
Present attitudes toward marriage is a part of this lack of rigidity. People take an oath, "til death do we part," and yet, when they get bored or run into some conflicts, that oath melts like butter on a Phoenix summer day. Commitment, I think, requires rigidity.
So what did my commenter mean by "rigidity"? In context, I think she's talking about the concept she has about Christians -- that they tend to apply their own rules to everyone else, and they are rigid about those rules. That they are not tolerant toward others. However, I'd have to pursue that discussion to know if that's what she really meant.
The bottom line is we need rigidity to some extent. I see no problem with knowing what the rules are and being rigid about them. I personally do not expect non-Christians to follow God's rules, though if they did, they might be healthier and happier! (I DO expect Christians to at least try to follow God's rules.) In other words, I do not see rigidity and tolerance as being mutually exclusive.
I see some reason in this. I hate labels because along with a label comes a whole constellation of attributions, that change according to the "eye of the beholder." But that's a topic for another blog.
I believe that one MAJOR problem with our government, if not our whole culture, is a lack of rigidity. A lack of absolute structure. It's like our life is being built on shifting sands.
Rigidity is necessary in many parts of our life.
I constructed a compost barrel, using a recycled 50-gallon plastic drum, some scrap pvc pipe, a metal pole, and some scrap lumber. Since I was trying things out, I just put it together enough to see if it worked. I used the lumber to make two stands to raise the barrel above the ground so that I could spin it. Two 2x4s put together weren't stable enough, so I added two "leaning" type supports to the upright posts, nailing them in. However, even that construct wasn't stable enough . . . I found when I tried to spin the half-full barrel. It all started to collapse; I tried to keep it up, but the weight of it all knocked me down in a pile of poles. The point is it wasn't rigid enough. Some things don't work without rigidity.
This lack of rigidity is very much like growing up with an alcoholic father. We had to guess at the rules, which could change from day to day. It all depended on his mood. When my little brother accidentally broke a mirror that had been placed leaning against a wall, we had no idea of whether it was punishable or not and how extreme the punishment would be. As it turned out, our father made me decide whether to punish my brother or not. I had to figure out what the father wanted, and if I guessed wrong, I would also be in trouble. I didn't want to, but I said Teddy should be punished. Our father accepted that and beat my little brother with the buckle end of a belt until his bare thighs bled.
I spent many of my years growing up in a somewhat functional family trying to guess what my parents (mom and step-dad) wanted, holding my breath, tip-toeing. Many, many times, I chose not to ask if I could go to a party because they might say no. I just didn't go.
For the people of a society to deal best with each other, there must be some rigid rules. Used to be, a promise was a promise. It was rigid. You shook hands; you could rely on its being accomplished, short of death or God's intervention. Then it was a signature on a contract. That's why you had to read the whole contract carefully (even the fine print) before signing it. Signing a contract meant you were obligated to accomplish that promise.
President Obama has changed that, just trashing contract law in bailouts of banks and automotive companies. The most egregious example is Obama's dictating to the secure bond holders of Chrysler what they had to take in the supposed bankruptcy (with new rules written by Obama, et al.) There are many more examples of Obama's lack of rigidity, from his immediate and almost complete reversal of all campaign promises, to his apparent disregard of the rule of law ("no one is above the law"), to his circumventing legal provisions for checks and balances by appointing czars. . . Kevin McCullough writes an insightful column on the issue: "Why Liberals Never Lie." Basically,, he says, they don't lie because they don't have a rigid standard. The truth morphs for them.
The children of this alcoholism -- entrepreneurs and investors -- are reacting just like I did. Not being sure how any potential contracts will be taken, they just don't even take a risk. OR, they are spending all their energy trying to get on Obama's good side so they won't be punished or so they can receive special perqs.
The law should be rigid and not malleable by individuals, who are ruled by emotions. That way, everyone knows what to expect. We don't have to spend our lives trying to guess what might work or whether a promise will be kept.
In addition, I think most individuals need to make rigid rules for themselves. Goals need to be rigid. If your goals continually move or you drop your "goal" for another, they aren't doing the job of goals. If you want to be an honest person, your rigid rule should be to tell the truth, and you should not allow yourself to wimp out on that rule by fudging -- like telling yourself that white lies are okay. This doesn't mean you absolutely can't break your rigid rules; but it does mean that you don't justify the breaking of them.
Present attitudes toward marriage is a part of this lack of rigidity. People take an oath, "til death do we part," and yet, when they get bored or run into some conflicts, that oath melts like butter on a Phoenix summer day. Commitment, I think, requires rigidity.
So what did my commenter mean by "rigidity"? In context, I think she's talking about the concept she has about Christians -- that they tend to apply their own rules to everyone else, and they are rigid about those rules. That they are not tolerant toward others. However, I'd have to pursue that discussion to know if that's what she really meant.
The bottom line is we need rigidity to some extent. I see no problem with knowing what the rules are and being rigid about them. I personally do not expect non-Christians to follow God's rules, though if they did, they might be healthier and happier! (I DO expect Christians to at least try to follow God's rules.) In other words, I do not see rigidity and tolerance as being mutually exclusive.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Machosauce
It was a couple of weeks before the presidential election. I was anxious, so desperate and fearing of what I could see happening to my country with the overwhelming support of Obama, seemingly because he was black, by both black and white people. And then . . . then I found AlfonZo Rachel. He's a black conservative Christian Republican from California and he spouted his wisdom on YouTube in a bouncy rapid-fire stacatto. The particular video I watched that night was "1 More B4 11 04."
I cried, and my anxiety drained away. I knew then that I wasn't alone! That God's children aren't separated into skin colors (and there are black people who know that). Then I started looking at all of Zo's videos. I went to his website: Machosauce Productions. I now have a t-shirt that has Machosauce Productions on it (it also says, "One Mighty Nation Under All Mighty God.") When people ask what's "machosauce," I can answer, "It's the blood of the manliest man who ever lived, Jesus Christ." And then I grin. "Even El Diablo won't touch it!" (Zo wisdom, y'all.)
What's strange is how much Zo and I have in common. I mean, other than being Christian conservative Republicans. We're both martial artists and science fiction nerds. He's been working on learning computer animation, so he put together a little video of "old-skool" Battlestar Galactica. Well, the procession music for my husband's and my wedding was from Battlestar Galactica!
Zo's been tapped for PJTV. I'm not sure what all he does there, other than the making of similar short videos that he's been making for YouTube, because I haven't subscribed to PJTV (yet). The quality of the videos and the sound is much better there, but his commentary is just as pithy. When you go to Machosauce Productions on YouTube, there's a link that sends you to PJTV, so you can see those, too.
I cried, and my anxiety drained away. I knew then that I wasn't alone! That God's children aren't separated into skin colors (and there are black people who know that). Then I started looking at all of Zo's videos. I went to his website: Machosauce Productions. I now have a t-shirt that has Machosauce Productions on it (it also says, "One Mighty Nation Under All Mighty God.") When people ask what's "machosauce," I can answer, "It's the blood of the manliest man who ever lived, Jesus Christ." And then I grin. "Even El Diablo won't touch it!" (Zo wisdom, y'all.)
What's strange is how much Zo and I have in common. I mean, other than being Christian conservative Republicans. We're both martial artists and science fiction nerds. He's been working on learning computer animation, so he put together a little video of "old-skool" Battlestar Galactica. Well, the procession music for my husband's and my wedding was from Battlestar Galactica!
Zo's been tapped for PJTV. I'm not sure what all he does there, other than the making of similar short videos that he's been making for YouTube, because I haven't subscribed to PJTV (yet). The quality of the videos and the sound is much better there, but his commentary is just as pithy. When you go to Machosauce Productions on YouTube, there's a link that sends you to PJTV, so you can see those, too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
