,There is a verse in the Bible where Jesus is speaking; he says, "In this world there will be trouble, but take heart, I have overcome the world."
The "trouble" in our lives lately hasn't been dramatic. It's taken the form of long hours at a new job, illness (like the stomach flu and colds and ear infections), weird medication side-effects, a little boy with hip pain, no sleep, and confusion over health insurance, COBRA bills we don't owe (but are a pain), and a few shingles that blew off our roof. For the most part its normal life stuff just the hassles of making due. But we were getting tired, okay exhausted, and the kids were missing their dad.
This week we landed in an unexpected pocket of grace. Here's a list:
-Monday I went out to see a movie with friends.
-Baby slept through the night several nights in a row (a bit of grace you cannot fully appreciate unless you are outstandingly sleep deprived, like we were).
-Evening activities were canceled 2 nights this week, and we got to spend time together as a family.
-Thursday night I was having "issues" with making dinner, and hubby decided to rescue us all and take us out to eat. Just FYI Thursdays are kids night at CB & Potts. We got a yummy dinner and the kids got a personalized magic show and balloons shaped like a light saber (for the boys) and a teddy bear for M.
-Friday our weekend plans were cancelled. Saturday we decided to do something fun as a family. The kids decided we should take a drive into the mountains. All the kids were waiting in in Hubby's truck when I impulsively decided we should go to Estes Park overnight. Hubby agreed to my nutty plan. I spent 5 minutes throwing extra formula, and toothbrushes into a grocery bag and off we went. We got a cabin at the YMCA of the Rockies. We played games, did jig saw puzzles, made crafts (at the craft store), and went roller-skating. We had so much fun as a family. The kids thought it was fun to wear the same clothes 2 days in a row. And packing was a sinch.
Today, we start school again. Hubby is back to work, but we feel refreshed after our "pocket of grace".
Monday, March 31, 2008
Friday, March 28, 2008
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Humbled
It's 8:30, my kids are in bed and the dishes from dinner aren't cleaned up. I should be loading the dishwasher, but first I need to vent...
Today, I went to Target with 4 kids (mistake #1). I needed to exchange some shoes for my daughter and decided to let her help me pick them out (mistake #2). I forgot to set the guidelines pre shoe decision making time (fatal mistake ). To me the guidelines were intuitive, but apparently they were not to my six year old. These were my expectations:
A- The shoes must fit
B - They must be summer shoes to replace the ones we returned
C - They must not have glitter on every possible surface area, or have high heels. (and lest this sounds too harsh, I need to tell you that I bought said 6 year old tacky high heeled sandals at the ARC not two days prior.)
40 minutes after the shoe trying on began we were no where closer to a decision than when we started. My patience was wearing VERY thin. I told my daughter that I would give her 2 choices and 1 minute to decide. At the end of 1 minute no decision had been made. So per the "Love and Logic" parenting book I decided for my daughter.
Hysteria ensued. My 6 year old screamed and cried and begged and flopped on the ground. She threw a rug, and then started trying to throw punches. I literally had to hold her so she wouldn't hit me or knock shoes off the shelf. Old ladies raised their eyebrows. Teenage boys snickered. One 2 year old just stared in amazement. My daughter was completely and utterly out of control -it took a good 10 minutes to get her to settle down enough for me to even begin to get out of the store. By the grace of God, I was not embarrassed. And I am hard headed enough not to give in. I was, however, exhausted. Wrestling a 6 year old is harder than managing a 2 year old's temper tantrum.
Hubby said that if it were him our daughter would have gotten a spanking as soon as she got to the car. The idea crossed my mind, and it does have merit. But, in general, our daughter responds poorly to this type of discipline. So what did I do? I gave her a granola bar with M&Ms, and told her all the fun activities I had planned were henceforth cancelled so we could go home and she could rest. More crying. When we pulled into the garage M crawled up into my lap and I told her I loved her whether she was sweet or she acted like a brat at the store. As soon as M got to her room and her head hit the pillow she was asleep. I'm sure her fit exhausted her.
I know this seems like a lame punishment for a kid who was acting THAT bratty. But this child, in particular, falls apart when she is tired or hungry. And I actually felt kinda sorry for her. She was SO out of control; she could not get it together.
M woke up with a sweet spirit and eager to please. But I wonder sometimes if I'm missing something. What's wrong with my parenting that my daughter would act that way? I'd expect it from a 2 year-old, but 6? Of the two of us, I'm the less strict parent. I don't care if my kids go places with their shoes on the wrong feet. Hubby cannot stand it. I don't think I'm a push-over though. It's not as if throwing temper tantrums get my children what they want. Can it be as simple as giving a kid a snack and a nap, or have I encouraged future fit throwing? Stiff consequences change my boys' hearts. Usually, that's all they need to be repentant. M gets stubborn and passive aggressive. She almost always needs to be shown grace before she is repentant. Is that messed up? Is showing grace the same as coddling or is it one of the most powerful tools we have as parents to shape our children's hearts?
Today, I went to Target with 4 kids (mistake #1). I needed to exchange some shoes for my daughter and decided to let her help me pick them out (mistake #2). I forgot to set the guidelines pre shoe decision making time (fatal mistake ). To me the guidelines were intuitive, but apparently they were not to my six year old. These were my expectations:
A- The shoes must fit
B - They must be summer shoes to replace the ones we returned
C - They must not have glitter on every possible surface area, or have high heels. (and lest this sounds too harsh, I need to tell you that I bought said 6 year old tacky high heeled sandals at the ARC not two days prior.)
40 minutes after the shoe trying on began we were no where closer to a decision than when we started. My patience was wearing VERY thin. I told my daughter that I would give her 2 choices and 1 minute to decide. At the end of 1 minute no decision had been made. So per the "Love and Logic" parenting book I decided for my daughter.
Hysteria ensued. My 6 year old screamed and cried and begged and flopped on the ground. She threw a rug, and then started trying to throw punches. I literally had to hold her so she wouldn't hit me or knock shoes off the shelf. Old ladies raised their eyebrows. Teenage boys snickered. One 2 year old just stared in amazement. My daughter was completely and utterly out of control -it took a good 10 minutes to get her to settle down enough for me to even begin to get out of the store. By the grace of God, I was not embarrassed. And I am hard headed enough not to give in. I was, however, exhausted. Wrestling a 6 year old is harder than managing a 2 year old's temper tantrum.
Hubby said that if it were him our daughter would have gotten a spanking as soon as she got to the car. The idea crossed my mind, and it does have merit. But, in general, our daughter responds poorly to this type of discipline. So what did I do? I gave her a granola bar with M&Ms, and told her all the fun activities I had planned were henceforth cancelled so we could go home and she could rest. More crying. When we pulled into the garage M crawled up into my lap and I told her I loved her whether she was sweet or she acted like a brat at the store. As soon as M got to her room and her head hit the pillow she was asleep. I'm sure her fit exhausted her.
I know this seems like a lame punishment for a kid who was acting THAT bratty. But this child, in particular, falls apart when she is tired or hungry. And I actually felt kinda sorry for her. She was SO out of control; she could not get it together.
M woke up with a sweet spirit and eager to please. But I wonder sometimes if I'm missing something. What's wrong with my parenting that my daughter would act that way? I'd expect it from a 2 year-old, but 6? Of the two of us, I'm the less strict parent. I don't care if my kids go places with their shoes on the wrong feet. Hubby cannot stand it. I don't think I'm a push-over though. It's not as if throwing temper tantrums get my children what they want. Can it be as simple as giving a kid a snack and a nap, or have I encouraged future fit throwing? Stiff consequences change my boys' hearts. Usually, that's all they need to be repentant. M gets stubborn and passive aggressive. She almost always needs to be shown grace before she is repentant. Is that messed up? Is showing grace the same as coddling or is it one of the most powerful tools we have as parents to shape our children's hearts?
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
School?
Oops...Manda and Ry forgot their V8.
The big kids are doing a bit of reading too!
"Are we sure the Living History Museum is fun?"
Newborn lamb, having a little snack.
Baby doing a little reading on farm animals.
Living History Museum...M meets a cow.Dirty Joke
Beware, those with delicate sensibilites lest I offend you with my crass post.
Yesterday, the kids spent most of the day in the backyard enjoying our spring-like weather. I was on the phone with a friend of mine when I looked out the window to see my oldest son weilding a garden tool like a light saber. It was a hoe. Naturally, I yelled out the window, "Do not play with the hoe. It's not safe". My friend, Julia, overheard (I was yelling, so it wasn't hard). She quipt, "Be sure to tell him that again at 15".
"Do not play with the hoe." Words to live by and true on so many levels. Never have I spoken more profound words - on accident."
While in the grocery store checkout line I noticed my four year old son checking out a woman on the a magazine cover. She was wearing ample cleavage, a preditory smile and not much else. It occured to me then that this over-sexualized world is going to be a cruel place for my boys to grow up in, especially at 14 or so, when there systems will be so flooded with testosterone that they will hardly be able to think strait.
In junior high and high school I played volleyball. We wore spankies. For those of you unfamiliar with spankies just picture a lycra version of granny underpants and you'll get the general idea. In high school our coach was a retired math teacher, and a lesbian with flamboyant taste. She ordered my sophmore team black spankies with neon splatter paint. They were not subtle; we were not happy. But it never occured to me the image that my team would make to onlooking teen-age boys. In volleyball, the recieving team leans forward (fannies in the air) to receive the served ball. A boy in the stands would see 6 cute little teen-age butts up in the air covered in splatter paint. Distracting to say the least.
Is it too much to hope that Muslim fashion will become trendy by the time my boys are teenagers?
But it's not just teenagers. There is a woman that we know who, for some reason or another, always chooses to wear boob shirts - always a bit of cleavage. I think her she's innocent; she's just is trying to look pretty. The other day I noticed my husband chose to stand next to her to talk to her instead of face her. A little weird maybe, if you didn't understand his intent. He was positioning himself in such a way so as not to look at the distracting bit of flesh somewhat South of her face. He was trying to treat her as a lady and a friend, but she wasn't making it easy. I'm sure she didn't even notice the bit of chivallry she was the recipient of, but I noticed, and I was proud of my husband.
This post sounds like I'm a prude. I'm not. It took me a long, long time to realize what a woman's body does to a heterosexual man. I probably don't get it still. I am a mommy bear when it comes to my children, and I have 2 boys. I know how easy it would be for my boys to get caught up in porn, or illicit sex. I know that it would eat at their souls and hold them captive. And I want more for them, and for my daughters.
I grew up in the church, when it was just becoming a "thing" to talk about abstinance. But I think I was a bit confused. Abstinence is not purity. Purity is something different. Purity is a wholeness, and innocence, and freedom. It is not being polluted by less than the best. That is what I want for my kids.
Apparently, there is a thing out there in high schools called "christian sex". I knew it under a different name: oral sex, or (excuse this) blow jobs. Somehow christian teens have distorted abstinence training into the avoidence of actual intercourse. That's just inane, and its not purity.
Purity sounds so Victorian, and old-fashioned. But I think people do not understand the binding and addictive nature of sex. This can be glue in a marriage - a good thing. But outside of commitment, people are broken and torn and held captive.
Okay, so call me a prude. But, "Do not play with the hoe" is only going to be one of many bits of advice I pass on to my kids about purity.
Yesterday, the kids spent most of the day in the backyard enjoying our spring-like weather. I was on the phone with a friend of mine when I looked out the window to see my oldest son weilding a garden tool like a light saber. It was a hoe. Naturally, I yelled out the window, "Do not play with the hoe. It's not safe". My friend, Julia, overheard (I was yelling, so it wasn't hard). She quipt, "Be sure to tell him that again at 15".
"Do not play with the hoe." Words to live by and true on so many levels. Never have I spoken more profound words - on accident."
While in the grocery store checkout line I noticed my four year old son checking out a woman on the a magazine cover. She was wearing ample cleavage, a preditory smile and not much else. It occured to me then that this over-sexualized world is going to be a cruel place for my boys to grow up in, especially at 14 or so, when there systems will be so flooded with testosterone that they will hardly be able to think strait.
In junior high and high school I played volleyball. We wore spankies. For those of you unfamiliar with spankies just picture a lycra version of granny underpants and you'll get the general idea. In high school our coach was a retired math teacher, and a lesbian with flamboyant taste. She ordered my sophmore team black spankies with neon splatter paint. They were not subtle; we were not happy. But it never occured to me the image that my team would make to onlooking teen-age boys. In volleyball, the recieving team leans forward (fannies in the air) to receive the served ball. A boy in the stands would see 6 cute little teen-age butts up in the air covered in splatter paint. Distracting to say the least.
Is it too much to hope that Muslim fashion will become trendy by the time my boys are teenagers?
But it's not just teenagers. There is a woman that we know who, for some reason or another, always chooses to wear boob shirts - always a bit of cleavage. I think her she's innocent; she's just is trying to look pretty. The other day I noticed my husband chose to stand next to her to talk to her instead of face her. A little weird maybe, if you didn't understand his intent. He was positioning himself in such a way so as not to look at the distracting bit of flesh somewhat South of her face. He was trying to treat her as a lady and a friend, but she wasn't making it easy. I'm sure she didn't even notice the bit of chivallry she was the recipient of, but I noticed, and I was proud of my husband.
This post sounds like I'm a prude. I'm not. It took me a long, long time to realize what a woman's body does to a heterosexual man. I probably don't get it still. I am a mommy bear when it comes to my children, and I have 2 boys. I know how easy it would be for my boys to get caught up in porn, or illicit sex. I know that it would eat at their souls and hold them captive. And I want more for them, and for my daughters.
I grew up in the church, when it was just becoming a "thing" to talk about abstinance. But I think I was a bit confused. Abstinence is not purity. Purity is something different. Purity is a wholeness, and innocence, and freedom. It is not being polluted by less than the best. That is what I want for my kids.
Apparently, there is a thing out there in high schools called "christian sex". I knew it under a different name: oral sex, or (excuse this) blow jobs. Somehow christian teens have distorted abstinence training into the avoidence of actual intercourse. That's just inane, and its not purity.
Purity sounds so Victorian, and old-fashioned. But I think people do not understand the binding and addictive nature of sex. This can be glue in a marriage - a good thing. But outside of commitment, people are broken and torn and held captive.
Okay, so call me a prude. But, "Do not play with the hoe" is only going to be one of many bits of advice I pass on to my kids about purity.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
On a Shelf
Jeanne Hougen decided to try her hand at oil painting a couple years ago. Lo and behold, she discovered she had a real talent. Her en plein air work is fabulous, but I have a soft spot for still lifes. When it gets too cold to do much painting outdoors Jeanne focuses on these. I'm glad she does, because they're some of my favorites.
I've known Jeanne forever - or at least since before I was married, and that feels like forever ago. She's a wife and a mom; she drives a mini-van and helps her kids with their science fair projects. She's normal. And that's the thing that is so inspiring to me. See, God gave Jeanne a gift, one that lay dormant for years. And if Jeanne's got a gift, maybe I do too.
I'm a better than average artist, but I've had absolutely ZERO training. None. I have no idea if I've got any real talent. But I've always loved to draw and paint. Someday I'd like to see if I could be any good.
I can carry a tune and read music, but I'm pretty positive I don't have any real talent there.
Writing is a different matter. I like to write. I used to be good, and I'm sure I could be better. But writing like any other craft is a skill that needs to be honed.
For me these things have been "put on the shelf". I'm busy homeschooling, and parenting and meeting with social workers. I'm the resident cook and chauffeur; I also do the toilets. There's not a lot of time left over for painting, or writing, and sadly, there is sometimes barely enough time left for showering (though I do manage to squeeze that in with moderate regularity).
I'm happy with my life, and really I'm not talking about basic selfishness. But I do have a wistfulness, a desire to develop into the person I could become. I'm sure that someone with the wisdom of years would tell me that those parts of me that are "shelved" for now won't always be. My children will not always be so small and needy. I need to be sure not to miss the joy of this season in the longing for the next.
By the way, you should GOOGLE Jeanne Hougen and look at her art online. It'll be worth your time.
I've known Jeanne forever - or at least since before I was married, and that feels like forever ago. She's a wife and a mom; she drives a mini-van and helps her kids with their science fair projects. She's normal. And that's the thing that is so inspiring to me. See, God gave Jeanne a gift, one that lay dormant for years. And if Jeanne's got a gift, maybe I do too.
I'm a better than average artist, but I've had absolutely ZERO training. None. I have no idea if I've got any real talent. But I've always loved to draw and paint. Someday I'd like to see if I could be any good.
I can carry a tune and read music, but I'm pretty positive I don't have any real talent there.
Writing is a different matter. I like to write. I used to be good, and I'm sure I could be better. But writing like any other craft is a skill that needs to be honed.
For me these things have been "put on the shelf". I'm busy homeschooling, and parenting and meeting with social workers. I'm the resident cook and chauffeur; I also do the toilets. There's not a lot of time left over for painting, or writing, and sadly, there is sometimes barely enough time left for showering (though I do manage to squeeze that in with moderate regularity).
I'm happy with my life, and really I'm not talking about basic selfishness. But I do have a wistfulness, a desire to develop into the person I could become. I'm sure that someone with the wisdom of years would tell me that those parts of me that are "shelved" for now won't always be. My children will not always be so small and needy. I need to be sure not to miss the joy of this season in the longing for the next.
By the way, you should GOOGLE Jeanne Hougen and look at her art online. It'll be worth your time.
Friday, March 21, 2008
Paul to Ephesus
I'm supposed to be reading through Ephesians with my Mom's group. So far its been a kinda pathetic attempt at Bible Study (sorry girls, but its true). But every once and awhile I get back to it on my own. Today, I was reading one of my favorite passages in Ephesians 3. I'll share it with you, but you'll have to stick with the apparent run on sentences.
"I pray that out of his glorious riches he may strengthen you with power through his Spirit in your inner being, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith. and I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, may have power together with all the saints, to grasp howwide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ, and to know this love that surpasses knowledge - that you may be filled to the measureof all the fullness of God."
Here are a few things that caught my attention as I read:
-"so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith". What does that look like exactly? Well, when I first met Hubby I was downright twitterpaited. My thoughts were never far from him. And since becoming a mother every decision I make comes back to how it will affect my children. I guess if Christ is dwelling in my heart that means that he's always on my mind and my decisions are influenced by who He is in my life.
-I love the image that "being rooted and established in love" creates in my mind. For me, this is what I want my kid's childhood to be about. I want them to have the security, and nurturing they need to provide a strong foundation for life. From reading this passage it sounds like we need to be "rooted and established" before we can really understand the love that Christ has for us. Before we can get lost in the vastness of His love we need to be set in a secure foundation of love.
Speaking of little children... there are three curled up on my bed right now. I best be going. But before I do I need to tell you a sweet thing my boys did this morning. It's M's birthday today. The boys got up before her, and woke her up singing their rendition of Happy Birthday. It was cute!
Gotta run.
"I pray that out of his glorious riches he may strengthen you with power through his Spirit in your inner being, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith. and I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, may have power together with all the saints, to grasp howwide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ, and to know this love that surpasses knowledge - that you may be filled to the measureof all the fullness of God."
Here are a few things that caught my attention as I read:
-"so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith". What does that look like exactly? Well, when I first met Hubby I was downright twitterpaited. My thoughts were never far from him. And since becoming a mother every decision I make comes back to how it will affect my children. I guess if Christ is dwelling in my heart that means that he's always on my mind and my decisions are influenced by who He is in my life.
-I love the image that "being rooted and established in love" creates in my mind. For me, this is what I want my kid's childhood to be about. I want them to have the security, and nurturing they need to provide a strong foundation for life. From reading this passage it sounds like we need to be "rooted and established" before we can really understand the love that Christ has for us. Before we can get lost in the vastness of His love we need to be set in a secure foundation of love.
Speaking of little children... there are three curled up on my bed right now. I best be going. But before I do I need to tell you a sweet thing my boys did this morning. It's M's birthday today. The boys got up before her, and woke her up singing their rendition of Happy Birthday. It was cute!
Gotta run.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Shambles
So Hubby came home last night after I spent the day trying to deal with 4 kids and have the stomach flu. He said, "Ah...things are kinda in shambles around here." He knew I was sick, and he honestly wasn't being judgemental (he came home early to help), but I think he was a little surprised. I apparently do more than he knew. I know that he didn't think I sat around eating bon bons. But I don't think he realized that I was the one to put new toilet paper on the rolls, and wipe counters, and take out the kitchen trash. Or that I was the one who got the kids to put away their toys and make their beds.
Hubby got the kids fed, and in bed. He cleaned up the kitchen - kinda. But I've got a gigantic mess, and I still feel cruddy. This was my week to catch up on housework and paperwork, and alas, I am falling further behind. (yeah, I know, stop griping.)
In an attempt to see the situation in a "glass is half full" light I will say that the stomach flu is more efficient than any of the diets I ever attempted. Couple days of this and I'll be at my goal weight.
Hubby got the kids fed, and in bed. He cleaned up the kitchen - kinda. But I've got a gigantic mess, and I still feel cruddy. This was my week to catch up on housework and paperwork, and alas, I am falling further behind. (yeah, I know, stop griping.)
In an attempt to see the situation in a "glass is half full" light I will say that the stomach flu is more efficient than any of the diets I ever attempted. Couple days of this and I'll be at my goal weight.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Monday, March 17, 2008
My Doctor, My Friend
I should be being productive, but I've been cooking since 9:30AM and I hit a wall. I'm pooped, but my freezer is full of dinners that just need to be pulled out and warmed up. I hate these marathon cooking sessions, but it's a relief to not have to worry about what's for dinner for awhile. Also, I came home from Costco with 15lbs. of meat that needed to be "dealt" with.
A Costco membership is my latest attempt to get my grocery budget under control. I'll let you know how it goes. But basically, I've decided that its just plain expensive to feed a family of 6. Not to mention our dietary weirdness (gluten-free ain't cheap).
Forgive my randomness, but what I meant to blog about was my doctors appt. This morning I had to go to my new doctor to get a perscription refilled. When I called to make an appt. I said, "Just make an appt. with whomever. I don't know any of the doctors here." To which the receptionist replied, "I've got an appt. with Dr. Peterson."
"Hmm...would that be a Dr. Susan Peterson? Actually, I do know her..." Susan is a part of the little homechurch we were a part of.
Anyway today was my appt. Susan, aka Dr. Peterson, has only been working at the clinic by our house for 1 week. And I've only had this insurance for 2 weeks. I think its kinda miraculous I got an appt. with her. She was awsome, compassionate and competent. It was nice to have an established rapport with a new doctor; it was nice to feel understood. She even prayed with me at the end of our appt.
When we asked people to pray for Bub we specifically asked that we would be matched up with good Doctors. Our prayer was for Bub, but finding Susan seems like a little added blessing.
I haven't blogged in awhile, so I've got much to fill you in on (including a priceless hip-hop performance by our eldest son). But for now I've gotta run. My kids are not just hungry they are starving, that is if their whine and griping can be trusted.
A Costco membership is my latest attempt to get my grocery budget under control. I'll let you know how it goes. But basically, I've decided that its just plain expensive to feed a family of 6. Not to mention our dietary weirdness (gluten-free ain't cheap).
Forgive my randomness, but what I meant to blog about was my doctors appt. This morning I had to go to my new doctor to get a perscription refilled. When I called to make an appt. I said, "Just make an appt. with whomever. I don't know any of the doctors here." To which the receptionist replied, "I've got an appt. with Dr. Peterson."
"Hmm...would that be a Dr. Susan Peterson? Actually, I do know her..." Susan is a part of the little homechurch we were a part of.
Anyway today was my appt. Susan, aka Dr. Peterson, has only been working at the clinic by our house for 1 week. And I've only had this insurance for 2 weeks. I think its kinda miraculous I got an appt. with her. She was awsome, compassionate and competent. It was nice to have an established rapport with a new doctor; it was nice to feel understood. She even prayed with me at the end of our appt.
When we asked people to pray for Bub we specifically asked that we would be matched up with good Doctors. Our prayer was for Bub, but finding Susan seems like a little added blessing.
I haven't blogged in awhile, so I've got much to fill you in on (including a priceless hip-hop performance by our eldest son). But for now I've gotta run. My kids are not just hungry they are starving, that is if their whine and griping can be trusted.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Checkin' In
-Baby is getting 4 teeth. She is seriously CRABBY.
-M is messed up from the time change; she's tired, and seriously crabby.
-I'm sick of dealing with 2 ornery daughters and trying to contain my own crabbiness.
-The boys, gratefully, are more even keeled than us girls.
-We went to the Littleton's Living History Museum this weekend and saw darling baby lambs.
-Bub saw a doctor, whom I loved, and found very helpful. We should hear back tomorrow the results of his bloodwork and x-ray.
-I have accumulated fines at the library AGAIN. Not really news I guess...
-I'm tired, my brain is going numb, signing off...
-M is messed up from the time change; she's tired, and seriously crabby.
-I'm sick of dealing with 2 ornery daughters and trying to contain my own crabbiness.
-The boys, gratefully, are more even keeled than us girls.
-We went to the Littleton's Living History Museum this weekend and saw darling baby lambs.
-Bub saw a doctor, whom I loved, and found very helpful. We should hear back tomorrow the results of his bloodwork and x-ray.
-I have accumulated fines at the library AGAIN. Not really news I guess...
-I'm tired, my brain is going numb, signing off...
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Sincerely Hate Politics, BUT...
I really don't enjoy politics. I know we live in one of the greatest republics ever, and our freedom was not free but I just find the politics of politics annoying. Recently an issue has struck close to home, and it might just lure me into some political activity. It seems that a judge in CA basically ruled homeschooling illegal for anyone but those who have a teaching liscence. It's a crazy ruling with some far reaching ramifications. It's crazy for a number reason, but the most outrageous flies under the radar. This ruling communicates a basic mistrust in a parent's ability to make good choices for his/her child. It says that a parent cannot and should not be allowed to be the sole influence on his child's education. I seriously doubt the states ability to make better choices for children than parents, but that's another blog.
Granted, there are some lousy homeschool parents out there. But in my estimation they are few and far between. Homeschooling is a tremendous investment and most people who commit to that lifestyle are pretty committed parents who are willing to do whatever it takes to equip their children. The vast majority of homeschool parents are reading up on curriculum, and learning strategies; they attend conferences, seminars and support groups. In short, their lifelong learning is more valuable than any teaching certificate to the education of a child. In fact, among homeschoolers it is commonly understood that traditional classroom experience has to be unlearned by certified teachers who choose to homeschool. The process is different. The timeline is different. And in most cases the emphasis is different; character development is a big deal to most homeschooling parents. But the issue of whether parents are qualified to teach their kids is secondary.
Parents are accountable for the behavior of their minor children. They must also have the right to PARENT their children. They must have the right to teach their children in accordance with their beliefs. There MAY be some responsibility of the state to make sure a child's basic needs are being met, but it is not the right or the responsibility of the government to raise children. God called parents to that task. Homeschool parents have taken their responsibility seriously, and generally their kids outshine public school kids in performance. What right does the government have to intervene?
Granted, there are some lousy homeschool parents out there. But in my estimation they are few and far between. Homeschooling is a tremendous investment and most people who commit to that lifestyle are pretty committed parents who are willing to do whatever it takes to equip their children. The vast majority of homeschool parents are reading up on curriculum, and learning strategies; they attend conferences, seminars and support groups. In short, their lifelong learning is more valuable than any teaching certificate to the education of a child. In fact, among homeschoolers it is commonly understood that traditional classroom experience has to be unlearned by certified teachers who choose to homeschool. The process is different. The timeline is different. And in most cases the emphasis is different; character development is a big deal to most homeschooling parents. But the issue of whether parents are qualified to teach their kids is secondary.
Parents are accountable for the behavior of their minor children. They must also have the right to PARENT their children. They must have the right to teach their children in accordance with their beliefs. There MAY be some responsibility of the state to make sure a child's basic needs are being met, but it is not the right or the responsibility of the government to raise children. God called parents to that task. Homeschool parents have taken their responsibility seriously, and generally their kids outshine public school kids in performance. What right does the government have to intervene?
Friday, March 7, 2008
School
Baby is attending the School of Hard Knocks. See the bruise on her noggen. I'm sure its the first of many as she gets more mobile and fiesty. 
Ah, weren't those math manipulatives supposed to be used to help you with addition? Oh, Well they make a pretty snazzy Leaning Tower of Pissa too. Plus, M can find Italy on the map now. 
All ready for Crazy Hair Day at OPTIONS.
The boys got in on the action too!
We've been trying to have fun with school lately. Here are a few of our projects. Below is a picture of M mixing egg whites with food coloring. We painted foccacia with the concoction because cooks in the middle ages would paint bread for feasts. Ever wonder where the term "upper crust" comes from? The highest ranking attendees in the feast would get the most beautifully painted peices of bread, hence you have the upper crust.
The boys got in on the action too!
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
The Evolution Debate
Last night at homeschool group we had a guest speaker. He addressed how we, as homeschoolers, can teach Creation with academic integrity. He is an old friend and the husband of one of our group's members; he is also a physicist and a gifted teacher.
This is a topic that have struggled with teaching to my children because I, frankly, find much of "Creation Science" irritating. I was delighted and relieved to hear his perspective. I have much to process so I'm going to try to blog my Reader's Digest version of in hopes of ironing out my own thoughts. But Michael has a website and you can read his perspective from the source at: http://bibleandscope.mesanetworks.net/.
Here goes:
There are many ways that people try to reconcile what the Bible says to the scientific theories on origins. They vary from the "Martha Stewardish"approach of keeping everything in its place (Bible=why; Science=How) to Biblical Fundamentalism, to Post-Modernism. Each attempt at reconciliation probably has something of value to consider, and is also most likely lacking and in error on some level. However, before you can teach about origins it worth evaluating where you stand.
Michael laid out a continuum of beliefs. On the one side is New Earth Creationism; it takes the Bible as absolute truth. On the other side of the continuum is the Naturalistic Evolutionary perspective that says creation is a myth and evolution is a fact. In the middle of these two Michael placed Intelligent Design. Had I been forced to peg myself on this continuum I would have placed myself in the Intelligent Design Camp.
Michael's perspective on Intelligent Design was thought provoking to me, and now I'm not quite sure where I fall. Michael said that, though Intelligent Design may have some merit in its ability to evoke conversation, He believes that it waters down both Religion and Science in such a way that it loses its value. Religion's value is that it can point us to a relationship with Jesus, the Creator. Intelligent Design doesn't point to the person of Christ. Science has value is its ability to describe the world and test hypotheses. Intelligent Design is not a testable theory. I have to grant Michael that without the person of Christ, Religion is of little/no value. Who cares about an intelligent designer if he is an abstraction that is incapable of relationship? I don't.
One of the unique ideas I was introduced to last night was the possibility that our assumptions are more important than the data when evaluating evidence. You cannot prove assumptions to be correct. You can prove assumptions to incorrect from a logical deduction, but you can never absolutely prove an assumption to be correct. Assumptions are made on faith. And everybody operates on a series of assumptions. For example, I believe there is a God. I came to assume that because I read it in the Bible and I find the Bible to be credible. But can I prove it? Nope.
Michael says that it is our assumptions (those unprovable beliefs) that make up our worldview and the best we can shoot for is a consistent worldview. As teachers of Creation to our children Michael encouraged us to really evaluate the assumptions we operate our lives under. These are critical to understand.
What happens when we, as teachers, find that our own beliefs have inconsistencies? Michael proposed that there there are 3 ways to handle that inconsistency with integrity. You can:
1 - find a way to reconcile the beliefs
2 - change what you believe, so it's consistent
3- or, finally, you can admit you don't know
He believes that as a teacher you end up being an advocate of Creation, and an advocate of Evolution, or an unbiased presenter of competing ideas. He says presenting a mature individual with competing ideas is a GOOD teaching strategy, but probably not appropriate for elementary school kids. I agree.
So how does Michael, an astrophysicist, reconcile what he sees in the natural world to what the Bible says. I was relieved to discover that he didn't didn't pull out some creation "science" as evidence for a young earth. In fact, Michael says that the age of the stars and the geologic records strongly suggest an old earth. He says it is not foolish to assume that evolutionary processes are at work if you start from the assumption that there is a natural order to the world. And because of that (and Christ) need to be very careful to treat people who believe in evolution with the respect they deserve.
So it goes back to assumptions. Michael assumes that the Bible is a true revelation of history; he finds it to be credible. He also assumes that the world follows a natural order (he is a scientist) and this natural order is a useful tool in describing and understanding the world. But that is not all that is at work. Michael also assumes that there is a God, YHWH, and there is a spiritual dimension to reality. Beyond atoms, and neutrons and protons and quarks is the very WORD of Jesus that holds the whole world together. And it its this assumption that makes the difference.
If you believe there is a spiritual reality at work in the world and you believe miracles are possible it is not so difficult to reconcile God's word to to the natural world. Michael says that, as a general rule, miracles that happen in the Bible are NOT provable by empirical (sp?) evidence after the they occur. In fact, if you were to examine the evidence after the fact the evidence would probably point to a naturalistic explanation. Miracles are for the people present. And the only way to know that miracles occur after the fact is by revelation, that is, believing the account of someone who was there and did witness the miracle happen.
As Michael sees it, the creation of the world lands firmly within the bounds of miracle territory. Creation happened outside of the basic laws of nature, and is therefore not discernible by investigation when you approach the problem with the assumption that the world only operates by natural laws.
Michael believes in a young earth creation consistent with the Bible's account. He believes that the earth was created with the appearance of age, and that age was not only possible, but necessary in the Earth's creation. He believes that natural evidence does suggest an ancient earth but it is only when we start with the correct assumptions that we will end up with accurate conclusions. He assumes that there is a God and he is YHWH, and the Bible is a true account of history.
My one hang up with Michael's perspective is that I think its probably possible to read the Genesis account accurately without destroying the possibility of an ancient Earth. Admittedly, he's probably better read on this, but from what I have read it is possible.
The breakfast dishes are still on the table...gotta run.
This is a topic that have struggled with teaching to my children because I, frankly, find much of "Creation Science" irritating. I was delighted and relieved to hear his perspective. I have much to process so I'm going to try to blog my Reader's Digest version of in hopes of ironing out my own thoughts. But Michael has a website and you can read his perspective from the source at: http://bibleandscope.mesanetworks.net/.
Here goes:
There are many ways that people try to reconcile what the Bible says to the scientific theories on origins. They vary from the "Martha Stewardish"approach of keeping everything in its place (Bible=why; Science=How) to Biblical Fundamentalism, to Post-Modernism. Each attempt at reconciliation probably has something of value to consider, and is also most likely lacking and in error on some level. However, before you can teach about origins it worth evaluating where you stand.
Michael laid out a continuum of beliefs. On the one side is New Earth Creationism; it takes the Bible as absolute truth. On the other side of the continuum is the Naturalistic Evolutionary perspective that says creation is a myth and evolution is a fact. In the middle of these two Michael placed Intelligent Design. Had I been forced to peg myself on this continuum I would have placed myself in the Intelligent Design Camp.
Michael's perspective on Intelligent Design was thought provoking to me, and now I'm not quite sure where I fall. Michael said that, though Intelligent Design may have some merit in its ability to evoke conversation, He believes that it waters down both Religion and Science in such a way that it loses its value. Religion's value is that it can point us to a relationship with Jesus, the Creator. Intelligent Design doesn't point to the person of Christ. Science has value is its ability to describe the world and test hypotheses. Intelligent Design is not a testable theory. I have to grant Michael that without the person of Christ, Religion is of little/no value. Who cares about an intelligent designer if he is an abstraction that is incapable of relationship? I don't.
One of the unique ideas I was introduced to last night was the possibility that our assumptions are more important than the data when evaluating evidence. You cannot prove assumptions to be correct. You can prove assumptions to incorrect from a logical deduction, but you can never absolutely prove an assumption to be correct. Assumptions are made on faith. And everybody operates on a series of assumptions. For example, I believe there is a God. I came to assume that because I read it in the Bible and I find the Bible to be credible. But can I prove it? Nope.
Michael says that it is our assumptions (those unprovable beliefs) that make up our worldview and the best we can shoot for is a consistent worldview. As teachers of Creation to our children Michael encouraged us to really evaluate the assumptions we operate our lives under. These are critical to understand.
What happens when we, as teachers, find that our own beliefs have inconsistencies? Michael proposed that there there are 3 ways to handle that inconsistency with integrity. You can:
1 - find a way to reconcile the beliefs
2 - change what you believe, so it's consistent
3- or, finally, you can admit you don't know
He believes that as a teacher you end up being an advocate of Creation, and an advocate of Evolution, or an unbiased presenter of competing ideas. He says presenting a mature individual with competing ideas is a GOOD teaching strategy, but probably not appropriate for elementary school kids. I agree.
So how does Michael, an astrophysicist, reconcile what he sees in the natural world to what the Bible says. I was relieved to discover that he didn't didn't pull out some creation "science" as evidence for a young earth. In fact, Michael says that the age of the stars and the geologic records strongly suggest an old earth. He says it is not foolish to assume that evolutionary processes are at work if you start from the assumption that there is a natural order to the world. And because of that (and Christ) need to be very careful to treat people who believe in evolution with the respect they deserve.
So it goes back to assumptions. Michael assumes that the Bible is a true revelation of history; he finds it to be credible. He also assumes that the world follows a natural order (he is a scientist) and this natural order is a useful tool in describing and understanding the world. But that is not all that is at work. Michael also assumes that there is a God, YHWH, and there is a spiritual dimension to reality. Beyond atoms, and neutrons and protons and quarks is the very WORD of Jesus that holds the whole world together. And it its this assumption that makes the difference.
If you believe there is a spiritual reality at work in the world and you believe miracles are possible it is not so difficult to reconcile God's word to to the natural world. Michael says that, as a general rule, miracles that happen in the Bible are NOT provable by empirical (sp?) evidence after the they occur. In fact, if you were to examine the evidence after the fact the evidence would probably point to a naturalistic explanation. Miracles are for the people present. And the only way to know that miracles occur after the fact is by revelation, that is, believing the account of someone who was there and did witness the miracle happen.
As Michael sees it, the creation of the world lands firmly within the bounds of miracle territory. Creation happened outside of the basic laws of nature, and is therefore not discernible by investigation when you approach the problem with the assumption that the world only operates by natural laws.
Michael believes in a young earth creation consistent with the Bible's account. He believes that the earth was created with the appearance of age, and that age was not only possible, but necessary in the Earth's creation. He believes that natural evidence does suggest an ancient earth but it is only when we start with the correct assumptions that we will end up with accurate conclusions. He assumes that there is a God and he is YHWH, and the Bible is a true account of history.
My one hang up with Michael's perspective is that I think its probably possible to read the Genesis account accurately without destroying the possibility of an ancient Earth. Admittedly, he's probably better read on this, but from what I have read it is possible.
The breakfast dishes are still on the table...gotta run.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)