Being a teacher has taught me to want to be the type of student that teachers love to have in their class. After experiencing the receiving end of a students attention and effort, I've begun to see what my high school teachers and my college professors really want(ed) for and from me.
Now I try to come to a class attentively listening for the mission the professor wants me to accomplish. Previously, I'd almost thought of myself as a leech or a sponge sucking up the professor's knowledge and experience and having to complete the course work to get a good grade. Now I feel like the task of "being a student" exists in a different dimiension than before. A teacher who so badly desires their student to understand their point, be impacted by the coursewok, and truly understand its importance is rewarded and encouraged by the apparent effort of a student to do so.
After being in their shoes, I understand how it feels. After setting a mission in front of my students that I saw was so important and would truly impact their lives, I was so encouraged by those who responded. I want to be a student that encourages her professor. Not to get a good grade, not to be liked or favored, but to truly give back to them what they're giving to me, and to catch the vision they so desire for me to see.
On a practical level, working to fulfill that mission oftentimes means going beyond the course work. In order to accomplish this, a student must understand how the course work accomplishes the mission. Giving a little extra effort and doing something that's not required but that furthers the teacher's mission for you as a student confirms that you understand the mission and have caught the vision. It communicates that the teacher has succeeded.
Aug 27, 2010
Aug 19, 2010
Old-Earth vs. Young-Earth: "Oh Look, There's an Elephant in the Room"
Young-Earth Creationism and Old-Earth Creationism have battled themselves out inside my head ever since I was in eighth grade. My science teacher in my physical science class stood up and wrote something to the effect of "God created the world 14.1 billion years ago" on the white board, turned around, and proceeded to lecture for two hours on arguments for OE Creationism. That experience scarred me for life. I dare say I'm better for it, but it did leave a mark. That mark is a constant reminder of the day that I finally figured out that there was an elephant in the room.
Up to that point, I never even knew that that the controversy existed. The Creation/Evolution controversy was all that I knew about the debate concerning earth's origins and development. There really is a debate within the debate.
And then, as if the situation wasn't complicated enough already, I come to find that there is debate about the importance of the debate within the debate. There are those who believe that it doesn't matter how long it took God to create the world. The fact that He did it is satisfactory, and it sufficiently fulfills doctrinal necessity. Then, there are those who believe that OE creationism is complete heresy. Not taking Genesis 1-2 literally destroys the innerrancy of the Bible, the foundation of the gospels, and the basis for morality and salvation.
All of this controversy sometimes makes me wish that Genesis 1:1 was the only portion of Genesis 1-2 that existed. After reading Genesis 1:1 part of me wants to shut the book and call it a day. However, such an action is rather foolish considering the fact that God wrote Genesis 1-2 into the Bible for a reason. I don't know why, but I'm not one to make that call.
From a layman's perspective, it says "day". That's just what it says. When I say "day", I mean a 24-hour day. When I hear the word "day", I think of a 24-hour day. And then I read things like this and this, and I have to concede that they have a very good point.
All I can do is look at what the Bible says, always keeping in mind what my worldview teacher so rightfully drilled into my head during class. "Where revelation stops, I stop." I end up reading through Genesis 1-2 asking a ton of questions. "Wait, so this means...and that there....but what if.... and how can.... if that then...." I reach the end of Genesis 1-2 a bit befuddled and not quite sure which end is up. Then I have to wonder, "If it really mattered as much as some say, why isn't it more clear?"
What makes me incredibly uncomfortable is when, in the midst of my internal struggle, someone comes along and tells me that "the authority of the Scripture, the character of God, the doctrine of death, and the very foundation of the gospel" depend on a specific exegesis of this passage. God knew how controversial this would be. I can't help but wonder why God would base His entire plan for the salvation of mankind on a certain (and very controversial) passage at the beginning of the Pentateuch. Hanging your proverbial hat on Genesis 1-2 feels like dangerous business.
So, those are my ideas about the elephant in the room. My conclusion at this point? I've employed the tactic used many a time by actors on a stage. I've built a "fourth-wall" in front of the elephant. I don't think it matters. However, I'm still very ready to listen.
Up to that point, I never even knew that that the controversy existed. The Creation/Evolution controversy was all that I knew about the debate concerning earth's origins and development. There really is a debate within the debate.
And then, as if the situation wasn't complicated enough already, I come to find that there is debate about the importance of the debate within the debate. There are those who believe that it doesn't matter how long it took God to create the world. The fact that He did it is satisfactory, and it sufficiently fulfills doctrinal necessity. Then, there are those who believe that OE creationism is complete heresy. Not taking Genesis 1-2 literally destroys the innerrancy of the Bible, the foundation of the gospels, and the basis for morality and salvation.
All of this controversy sometimes makes me wish that Genesis 1:1 was the only portion of Genesis 1-2 that existed. After reading Genesis 1:1 part of me wants to shut the book and call it a day. However, such an action is rather foolish considering the fact that God wrote Genesis 1-2 into the Bible for a reason. I don't know why, but I'm not one to make that call.
From a layman's perspective, it says "day". That's just what it says. When I say "day", I mean a 24-hour day. When I hear the word "day", I think of a 24-hour day. And then I read things like this and this, and I have to concede that they have a very good point.
All I can do is look at what the Bible says, always keeping in mind what my worldview teacher so rightfully drilled into my head during class. "Where revelation stops, I stop." I end up reading through Genesis 1-2 asking a ton of questions. "Wait, so this means...and that there....but what if.... and how can.... if that then...." I reach the end of Genesis 1-2 a bit befuddled and not quite sure which end is up. Then I have to wonder, "If it really mattered as much as some say, why isn't it more clear?"
What makes me incredibly uncomfortable is when, in the midst of my internal struggle, someone comes along and tells me that "the authority of the Scripture, the character of God, the doctrine of death, and the very foundation of the gospel" depend on a specific exegesis of this passage. God knew how controversial this would be. I can't help but wonder why God would base His entire plan for the salvation of mankind on a certain (and very controversial) passage at the beginning of the Pentateuch. Hanging your proverbial hat on Genesis 1-2 feels like dangerous business.
So, those are my ideas about the elephant in the room. My conclusion at this point? I've employed the tactic used many a time by actors on a stage. I've built a "fourth-wall" in front of the elephant. I don't think it matters. However, I'm still very ready to listen.
Jul 22, 2010
Jul 21, 2010
Life at the Miller House
Life at the Miller House:
At random times throughout the day, people burst into song.
Inside jokes cracked left and right.
::knock knock:: ::opens door:: "Hey, Mom's calling you."
"I'm a WHALE!" - Sarah
"Lauren, could you come here?!" - "Coming!"
Morning meetings of giggling girls.
Cello practicing every day.
Sisters often make faces to make other sisters laugh.
The quiet hum of computers.
Flute practicing every day.
"Aundra?!" - "I think she has her headphones on, I'll get her."
Footsteps pounding down the hall and stairs after the dinner call.
Hugs.
A super hyper dog whenever anyone arrives home.
::someone sighs:: Someone else: "Yeah, I know, me too."
Violin practicing every day.
Laughter from the twins room.
Music suddenly blasts from speakers someone forgot to turn down.
"Virus database has been updated."
Hilarious conversations at the dinner table.
Finishing other sister's sentences.
"I'm gonna gut you in the punch! ....wait." - Aundra
Saying the same thing at the same time.
Sisters huddled around Sarah's computer screen.
Piano practicing every day.
High fives.
"Who's day is it to feed the dog?" - Dad
A psychotic fish who likes bubbles.
Baking cookies by memory.
Mickey-mouse pancakes.
Singing very loud with music while cleaning.
Morning chores.
Everyone hangin' out in the school room.
Sister visits in Lauren's room while she listens to an audio session.
"Special listening" playing in Megan's room.
Dash from the movie Incredibles said it so well...
"I love our family."
Jul 18, 2010
Jul 14, 2010
My Favorite Things #3
Staying up late working on important stuff while the rest of the house is asleep.
Jul 10, 2010
Worldview Class Withdrawals
I was cleaning my room this afternoon and happened upon this sheet of paper, which apparently served as a memory aid for one of my scripture memory assignments in worldview class. While I often "saved" (Ha ha...) this assignment until the last minute, I really do look back with fond memories of this weekly challenge.
I'm currently in the process of going back through the chapters of memory work from class and cementing it all. Hopefully the process will look end up looking more aesthetically pleasing than this random assortment of scribbles. However, truth be told: I really did have fun scribbling.
Jul 1, 2010
Jun 30, 2010
That Type of Friend
A friend can love you because of your strengths.
A friend can love you because of what you are to them.
A friend can love you because of how you make them laugh.
A friend can love you because of what you teach them.
But a deeper friendship is cultivated when...
They love you because of your strengths... and despite your weaknesses.
They love you because of what you are to them... and despite what you're not.
They love you because of how you make them laugh... and forgive you when you make them cry.
They love you because of what you teach them... but they know how to teach you as well.
This type of friendship brings a transparent honesty to the relationship and acknowledges the other's abilities and gifts. The first type of friendship is exhausting for the subject because they have to be superman all the time, and it's not healthy for the bestower because they are content with being weak and dependent in the relationship. But the second type is one that allows for the cognizance of weakness and strength in both individuals, which prompts humility, consequently causing a sense of vulnerability and openness. This sense of vulnerability seems to be communicated almost subconsciously, as a silent agreement and realization between the two individuals.
I have a friend that I've known for a long time, and at one point I began to prize myself, my strengths, and my maturity level above his/hers. This brought frustration to my friend, and distanced our relationship for a short time until I realized what I had done. As soon as I apologized, hence restoring needed humility to my end of hte relationship, and began to conduct myself in a way that communicated a sense of openness and vulnerability, the friendship healed.
It requires strength, but acknowledgement of weakness. Purpose to be all you can, but realization of your shortcomings. Laughter, but a willingness to cry. Teachability, but also the commitment to provide instruction.
Lord God, help me be that type of friend.
Jun 29, 2010
Jun 18, 2010
Older Siblings and Strawberry Lemonade
Awesome older siblings are the best thing ever. You know they love you enough to let you get away with some things, but also love you enough to be reasonable. At the same time, they know when you’re pushing them too far, and respond accordingly, at the same that they’re very sharing. Even though I only have one older sibling, I think she’s the best one ever. At the same time that we have loads of fun, I do know my boundaries. Take the following example for instance:
Sarah’s talking.
Her water bottle, filled with strawberry lemonade, is sitting on the desk next to her.
I grab the water bottle, open it.
She doesn’t see me at first.
I take a sip and grin.
She looks over.
I sip some more.
She give me that older sister level one cut-it-out look.
I know it’s non-threatening.
I drink a little more.
She keeps talking.
I sip again.
She gives me that older sister level two cut-it-out look.
I grin and sip some more.
I know I’m dangerously close to physical threat now.
She finishes what she’s saying.
I grin and sip some more.
She gives me that older sister level three cut-it-out look.
I know that I won’t get away without a penalty because I’ve brought it this far.
I grin, sip some more, close the top, hand it back, and giggle deviously.
She whacks me on the head with the water bottle.
“Ah-ha-ha-ow!”
I knew the levels were progressing. And I knew not to drink the whole thing. I knew to hand it back at the point that would not evoke serious physical or psychological turmoil. And it was because she had set those levels, those guidelines, and those consequences in previous entanglements.
Also, there is a fine line between being seriously annoying, and being funnily annoying. This exchange was camped in the latter of the two arenas. She didn't really mind that I drank some of her lemonade, this also had been previously established in past situations. However, it would have been seriously annoying for me to drink the whole thing.
I know right where I am, what I’m allowed to do without being seriously annoying, but what’s still considered teasingly funny. However, teasingly funny has its levels, and even results in teasing consequences. I know where the line is, but testing it is sure a lot of fun, as long as it doesn’t cross the line into seriously annoying.
Besides, it was worth the strawberry lemonade.
Sarah’s talking.
Her water bottle, filled with strawberry lemonade, is sitting on the desk next to her.
I grab the water bottle, open it.
She doesn’t see me at first.
I take a sip and grin.
She looks over.
I sip some more.
She give me that older sister level one cut-it-out look.
I know it’s non-threatening.
I drink a little more.
She keeps talking.
I sip again.
She gives me that older sister level two cut-it-out look.
I grin and sip some more.
I know I’m dangerously close to physical threat now.
She finishes what she’s saying.
I grin and sip some more.
She gives me that older sister level three cut-it-out look.
I know that I won’t get away without a penalty because I’ve brought it this far.
I grin, sip some more, close the top, hand it back, and giggle deviously.
She whacks me on the head with the water bottle.
“Ah-ha-ha-ow!”
I knew the levels were progressing. And I knew not to drink the whole thing. I knew to hand it back at the point that would not evoke serious physical or psychological turmoil. And it was because she had set those levels, those guidelines, and those consequences in previous entanglements.
Also, there is a fine line between being seriously annoying, and being funnily annoying. This exchange was camped in the latter of the two arenas. She didn't really mind that I drank some of her lemonade, this also had been previously established in past situations. However, it would have been seriously annoying for me to drink the whole thing.
I know right where I am, what I’m allowed to do without being seriously annoying, but what’s still considered teasingly funny. However, teasingly funny has its levels, and even results in teasing consequences. I know where the line is, but testing it is sure a lot of fun, as long as it doesn’t cross the line into seriously annoying.
Besides, it was worth the strawberry lemonade.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)