Expression

Still living up to my blog title, I'm a tad unnerved at how and what I wrote 5-6 years ago. Still, I'm grateful I haven't deleted any of it. While I don't wish to find myself in a p-trap or ask for a line these days, I do find myself enjoying the lines I've been thrown over the past years from friends, family, circumstances, etc.

I plan to use this blog to help me clarify my values, thoughts, and understandings. As a visual processor, I find that the writing process is possibly as great a teacher as the listening process. It's often that I come to understandings after my attempts to communicate that understanding. Case in point: after completing 3/4 of the last sentence, I decided that learning and understanding happens in a circular manner as I attempt to express it orally or literarily. I'm not sure how others internally process ideas and concepts of an abstract nature before they speak them, but perhaps with more practice I'll be able to combine the two processes so that my words have more potential for clarity to me before they are spoken.

To this end, I'll try to focus as much on structure and process as content. It should be a decent exercise of intentionality, clarity, and multi-tasking within one medium. Typically, paper-writing with a thesis (a point), structure, and direction takes multiple writings, revisions, and procrastinations. I'd also like to explore means to make the process more efficient, but my first inclination is that a consistent "doing" will be that means.  Time and consistency will tell.

I might even have to change the URL. Might.

La Musica

Let's talk about my now and former favorite artists: U2, Ben Harper, Radiohead, DMB, Live, Coldplay, Crowder, Fiona Apple, Jars o' Clay, RATM, and Audioslave. I define a "favorite artist" as someone whose album I'll buy not on its merits, but on my affinity for the band based on past experiences. I pre-ordered Ben Harper's new album Both sides of the Gun as a special edition 3-disc set that cost me $28 with shipping. Not a bargain. Why'd I do it? I like his past albums and bet that his new one would be consistently as good. Still, as much as I like it, I'm let down. I, for some reason, feel bad for not liking the album, because I want to like it because I want to like everything Ben Harper does. I like a few of the songs off the album, and for the first time, I skip the ones I don't like to get to the ones I do.

Herein lies my dilemma. Why am I suddenly perplexed by my newfound unwillingness to listen to an album of one of my favorite musical artists in its entirety and be mostly content? I will present a series of hypotheses in an attempt to answer this most crucial of dilemmas.

Could my newfound musical pickiness be due to the far-reaching effects of the iTunes monster and the a la carte digital media revolution it represents? Perhaps, but I don't think that covers it completely, because I still buy all my music on CDs. There are several reasons for this. First, I like to have the highest quality available and the ability to compress it to my, not iTunes', preferred bit-rate. I also enjoy listening to music in my car, and as it doesn't play mp3s, I'm stuck with CDs that are written in WAV (Redbook, CDA, whatever) format. If I chose to spend the same (or more since I buy from www.yourmusic.com) amount of money to download an album from iTunes, I'd have to burn that lower quality format to WAV, and, well, that just doesn't appeal to me. This is somewhat of a contradictory position, though, because I listen to music at 192kb/s in AAC format on my iPod and am generally pleased. I don't know, I guess I'm just quirky and high maintenance. Anyway, I'm pretty sure that I'm not yet so tainted by iTunes' far reaching influences as I will be in the future.

On to my next hypothesis. Maybe I'm growing tired of the same styles of music I've been listening to for the last umpteen (literally) years and want something new and fresh. My current favorites are MuteMath, Bloc Party, Counting Crows, Death Cab, and Copeland. Yes, I'm aware that these bands are not all "new," but simply represent new musical styles to me. I'm generally wanting to listen to these artists more than my usual favorites and look forward to their next (and previously unheard by me) albums. Conversely, there are a few of my favorite artists whose albums I'm more, or equally, excited to hear than my new kicks - Fiona Apple, Radiohead, and perhaps Audioslave - which leads me to my next hypothesis.

Maybe Ben's losing the inspiration he once had and, hence, his appeal to me. I mean, I'm all for his new politically charged album, but there's only so much one can take of emotionally charged words that are coupled with a two note vocal melody line that can only carry so much energy. Musically, Juan Nelson's bass lines are still tight and groovin', but Ben's melodies are lacking. I suppose this makes me appreciate his former work more, but I'd love to hear more of the songs that I can't stop singing a capella. I think that's my subjective criteria for a good vocal line - is it singable and emotive even when stripped of instruments? Some songs aren't, but the music is so good that it makes up for it. I just don't see Both Sides of the Gun as one of those albums...

My last hypothesis, alluded to in my third hypothesis, is that my tastes are simply changing. I do tend to listen to more 94.9 The River (101.9 KINKFM in Portland, OR) when I must use the radio, and am beginning to appreciate some more relaxed musicians - Beth Orton, Over the Rhine, Tori Amos, and Van Morrison to name a few - while still enjoying my preferred genre of "anything with a tight groove." I suppose, as we get older and we wish for more peace and stability (both elusive thus far to me), those desires manifest in our musical tastes as well. In light of my take on Ben's new album, BSotG consists of two discs with two distinctive moods, both of which should be directly appealing to my different musical affinities. So, I'm left with the question, "Why aren't either particularly appealing?"

Satisfaction of my musical tastes are as elusive to me as a catchy figure of speech.
Will I continue to purchase albums from my "favorite" artists? Yes. Most likely. To quote a line from "the best movie you should never see," "I thought I made myself perfectly clear; if everything else falls through, maybe." Translated: who knows? Moreover, who cares?

I have plenty of other things to do right now.

Croatia

So, I've decided to take a summer internship in Croatia with Josiah Venture. I'm pretty excited, and the only fear I feel is related to raising enough support to afford this "venture." I'll be helping to put on English camps for youth, which just happens to be my language of choice. I'll be working with three other interns and the leaders - Niall McSheffrey and his wife. Niall proposed a potential sailing trip in the Adriatic for team bonding. I have no problems with that, I'll be honest.

Things are going well over here in Boise, ID, as we continue to try to reach our own youth for Christ. Our youth group numbers are down, but I think we're gaining momentum. I'm connecting with some different youth and have some opportunities that I haven't before. I'm pretty excited. Not sure what else is new over here...I'll write more when I find myself more interesting.

Whatever

I jumped into God's own toilet today and pulled the handle . So, while I'm here swirling downward, perhaps you're wondering how the view is? While not exactly scenic, at least it's clean and bright - well, until I hit the P-trap and get stuck. I'm really not that flexible, either, so I'm gonna need some help in a few minutes. Anybody up there have a plunger? Please don't send the snake, cause that's gonna hurt. Did I mention that I'm sensitive? Yeah, once I hit the sewers, this shit is gonna burn. I mean, I already feel like I'm covered in it, but I probably have no idea of what's coming.
Anyway, I'm running out of air now, so I better stop talking. Anyone ever found a way out of this place? If so, drop me a line.

Ken

BoiseBikeBums

I think BoiseBikeBums would be a great MTB club and everyone should join. I should be its president, and it should cater specifically to those who range from "suck bad" to "mediocre" and, most importantly, who revile exposed spandex and all forms of posing. Our goal should be to crash at least once per ride and then make it sound exactly as cool as it was. Any more = posing. Any less = reality.

President Ken

Pretension Part Deux

Yeah. That last line, wasn't it just so clever? Not really, but...Sorry. I just can't help myself. Someday, perhaps, I'll kick this dirty little habit...There's one similarity between Ken and the Bible: The Bible attempts to magnify its author and so does my blog.

Oh, apparently pretension is the same thing as pretentiousness according to www.dictionary.com

Peace out

Pretentiousness...if that's a word

So, I think I write with a pretentious style. I think my style comes from, well, me. I've been reading Donald Miller lately. His style is very postmodern: self-aware, straightforward, honest, conversational, somewhat raw. I like it, but it's not me...I think I'd like it to be me, though. Still, I have this inner drive to create things that are strategic, well-thought out, insightful, I don't really know how to express it... And not that Don doesn't write like that...a conversational writing style doesn't appeal to me unless it's strategically conversational. I want to be C.S. Lewis, George MacDonald, TS Eliot, Katherine Anne Porter, and and Ralph Waldo Emerson all wrapped up into one. They are my literary standard.

Not that I understand that standard, but neither do I understand God. I don't think he's my literary ideal, although perhaps I'm a little off there. He wrote the Bible, gave humankind the creative ability to come up with some pretty sweet literary forms, and made sure his book contained a variety of some pretty neat literary forms and construction. Some (I don't know who, but my MBC profs told me they and other people thought so over and over again) claim that the Bible is the best (or at least some of) literature ever written. Again, I'm in no place to give an opinion on what "the best literature" is, but it seems more complex than I can understand. So, I suppose I want to write like the biblical authors did, but my writing doesn't look like theirs. How can I try to aim so closely at something only to end up pulling arrows out of my feet? Ugh.

I suppose that's what happens when your real target is you...you hit it every time. But damn if it doesn't hurt. Bill keeps telling me to keep my eyes on Christ, but even now, I'm pulling a muscle patting myself on the back for the sweet metaphor/analogy/whatever I just made. Ugh.

I'm thinking about trying to write more, but I'm pretty much out of words, so, in an un-Ken-like fashion

Driven to Success

I just want to succeed.

I can't.

I fail all over.

I come so close and run out of gas or fall asleep and crash.

I may be bending fenders, but at least I never cross the center line.

I need to stop staring at my car - trying to admire shine and forget flaws.

I'm trying, but I just hit another guard rail while I was introspecting. Now I'm compelled to pull over and stare at my newly dented fender.

I'm so jealous of those who drive mint cars - hardly ever pulling over to stare at their dents.
I make fun of them, too, because they drive like they don't know their cars or dented! This, strangely, gives me a feeling of superiority even while I stare from inside a car with rust in its dents and no hood. Later, I know, they'll casually pull into a shop, pay cash, and drive off not bothering to check their rearview mirror.
They've been carefully saving their money in case of an "accident", as good drivers do, and pay a low premium because of their, in comparison to me, stellar driving records.

Usually, their dents are caused by drivers like me, and then they have the gall to offer to help pay for my damages, too, because I just spent my savings on a set of new blingin' rims & tires, which, by the way, I just curbed parking outside the church last week.

Sometimes, most of the time, I don't even pay attention to where I'm driving - perhaps that's a factor in my frequent collisions. Good drivers tell me the journey to the destination ought to be the focus, not the car. I tell them they've never driven a Porsche. Still, I'll never own a Porsche, and even though I'm speeding all the time as is, I'm still about 1500 miles behind their minivans.

The destination is hardly in sight. I'm tempted to turn my car around and drive back home, but that's a horrible view and I know I outgrew it long ago. Not to mention it's deserted, as the rest of the family left years ago.
I'd just be driving for the sake of driving, maybe even swallowing pop-philosophy that life finds value in the height of politeness we give to other drivers, the sheen of one's paint, the comfort of the interior, or perhaps gas mileage.

All the while, no destination, no reason is compelling to keep me in my POS car.

Why not just give up and walk? Hell, why walk? Why don't we just lie down? Maybe some others will lie down with us and we can go nowhere together. Doing nothing sucks unless you've got others who want to do the same thing.

Every person's pet peeve who's given up are those annoying drivers yelling at you to get out of the road - as if where they're going has any consequence anyway. Getting run over sucks, but what's worse is when someone drives up and asks you to get in their car.

Or, worst of all, a bus driver tells you you can't get really anywhere in a car but must board a bus. Apparently, only bus drivers know the route to "the destination." They've even promised they'd teach me how to interpret their little secret, ancient, treasure map that tells the way. Apparently the bus driver wrote it. That doesn't really inspire confidence. But wait, if he's driving, why would I need a map? And why did he offer to teach me cartography? Oh well...

Honestly, a 2-seater Porshe Boxster would be faster,allow me the freedom to go at my own pace, leave me free from nagging bgus-mates telling me when to sit, stand, & speak, allow for pit stops, and give independence in general. I've tried to avoid public transportation at all costs, being fairly successful up until now.

Still, these bus-riding fanatics say I can't follow or even interpret their "map" unless I'm on this bus thing, and even then they require a membership, a portion of my income, daily time with the driver, and some other stuff I didn't pay attention to. Uh, am I the only one who thinks this prescription might be for a disease I don't have (maybe even causing theirs and giving me the same...)? I snidely asked them if they wanted my firstborn, too. They said no, but their bus driver gave his for me. I was sarcastic, they weren't. What the heck is the son of a bus driver gonna do for me?

But, heck, I'm not doing anything anyway, so I might as well let them chauffer me around until I figure out what I want or at least how close I can get to the destination...any destination. Besides, at least gas and insurance are free, and as long as I'm not driving, no more fender benders!

...to be continued

Songs

Just reading 2 Samuel 12:7-13 where Nathan is rebuking David. I was floored by God's response to David:

Nathan said to David, "You are the man! Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, 'I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you out of the hand of Saul. And I gave you your master's house and your master's wives into your arms and gave you the house of Israel and of Judah. And if this were too little, I would add to you as much more. Why have you despised the word of the LORD, to do what is evil in his sight? You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and have taken his wife to be your wife and have killed him with the sword of the Ammonites. Now therefore the sword shall never depart from your house, because you have despised me and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife.' Thus says the LORD, 'Behold, I will raise up evil against you out of your own house. And I will take your wives before your eyes and give them to your neighbor, and he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this sun. For you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel and before the sun.'"
David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the LORD." And Nathan said to David, "The LORD also has put away your sin; you shall not die. Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the LORD, the child who is born to you shall die." (ESV)

I still can't believe that God would bother to comfort David in the middle of a rebuke. How kind and compassionate is our LORD to his children even when we have "utterly scorned" him.

I owe You my life, LORD. Until I give it all, please take my heart as I offer it to you.

I was listening to some "Xian" music whilst reading this and as I wept before the LORD for his goodness and compassion toward me and my sin, I listened to the lyrics of the song. Of course, they were not as deep as what I just read, but thinking through my selection of "Xian" music, I can only think of a few songs as honest about our sin and God's grace in such an emotive way as this passage. Pedro strikes this tone often, but with a very jaded and cynical flair, possibly lacking the reverence the Lord deserves, possibly not. Rich Mullins strikes this tone well, but I don't care too much for his music...lyrics are still great. Ooh, there's always Over the Rhine, but I'm too enamored by their music and Karin's voice to truly listen to the lyrics so far. Hmm, oh yes, there it is - Jars of Clay's Who We Are Instead...that's the one. I just wish there were more Christian artists seeking to touch the deeper, harder, dirtier parts of Christianity where God meets us so honestly. Oh, wait, if you haven't heard of Beth Wacome Keck's album Amazed , you must listen to that - the epitome of honest music, bared down to it's essentials. You can find it here.

Current praise music is okay, but still does not compare to the depth of feeling the Bible leads us to. Even the Psalms included different forms of "praise", including laments and imprecatory prayers. Why must we be so limited in the Evangelical world? I wish I could write music as well as I can whine - you'd all be extremely blessed.

Reality

Does God allow us to understand tangible things so that we can understand the intangible? Is that why he set up relationships the way he did? Is that why creation and beauty elicit the responses they do? Is that why morality works the way it does? Not for the sake of us understanding the thing itself but for us to understand him and how to relate to him better? Are we, when we see "things," intended to move from them on to "non-things?" It seems Jesus was always doing this in parables and stories, analogies, miracles, words, everything. We are to take what we know to understand what we don't? This baffles me, but seems a fruitful bafflement.

Big-ness

This post was originally created as a reply to the post "Lost in Paris" on my brother's blog page back in May

I was just, well I have been for a while, pondering "big-ness" last night. We, at post-college group, were discussing the problem of evil - how and why it came about. I was floored to tears during the conversation as I tried, as Paul says in Romans 9:14-29, to question God as if he were a man. All my thoughts and judgments/evaluations of God's intentions for good or evil are from the perspective of one man sizing up another. I was hit that I recognize and evaluate God more as a human than as, well, YHWH. I don't really know how to see God as a not-human, but I'd sell my soul to learn.

Later that eveniing, as I was driving, I looked miles down the street to where the foothills rise up from the edge of Boise. It was a beautiful and intimidating sight - I found myself stricken with awe and asking why this was so. My first thought was that I am, and all of humanity (at least guys) are, impressed by "big-ness" (size matters?), but why should I be impressed by bigness? My logical conclusion was that I only revered bigness because God is the fulfillment of bigness and the one who planted that desire in me. Just as I would have no preference to call one object beautiful while calling another ugly, so I would have no reason to revere mountains over speed bumps unless God made me that way.

I became very thankful on that drive that God would choose to allow me to recognize what he made as awesome and beautiful. Still, I can't shake the feeling and desire to see the creator (and giver of our respect for greatness and beauty) as he must be even greater and more beautiful yet. How privileged we are to be made with the capacity to genuinely revere, love, and respond in awe to God the creator.

I suppose it must be an effect of the fall that we can only know God partly now, and even then only enjoy as much of him as we know...I want to know him more thus to see him more rightly, respond more rightly, and have a better idea of what "Godliness" means. I also suppose most of my more embarrassing moments trying to be a Christian have come about as I've misinterpreted who God is and, consequently, act out my ignorance. I see it all around me as people ( act out very sincerely and annoyingly their idea of who God is: God is harsh, God is unforgiving, God holds grudges, God is vengeful, elitest, conceited, cold, distant, aloof, fixated on me, etc. I'm still guilty of these things, but I'm pretty sure the more I understand God for who he really is, the more I'll be able to please him, be useful to him, and respond as he created us to respond.

Until then, I'll enjoy viewing that part of his big-ness that I'm able to comprehend - excited for a glimpse beyond my field of vision. I'm content only in the fact that he created me to love who he is and hate what he's not.

The Higher Sacrifices

Malachi is a touching book that really shows the LORD's heart. He opens by introducing himself as LORD or YHWH, his personal name, and explaining that he loves his people. His priorities are first and foremost of reestablishing a love-relationship that Israel had left. In the next paragraph he appeals to the other (same?) side of his character by introducing himself as LORD of hosts (ESV). This name is a little more scary and holds a different kind of authority than YHWH alone, so we get the idea, aside from the obvious rebuke in the text that he is not pleased.

Acadamia aside, this book touched me on many levels, the biggest being the area of sacrifice for the LORD. In thinking upon the "application" of the book, I began to think about where I sacrifice for the LORD, or, rather, where I don't. My first thought was "What ought I give up for the LORD that is getting in the way of my relationship with him?"

After trying to semi-successfully find a suitable and moving answer, I realized I was asking the wrong question. I don't think the OT idea of sacrifice has much to do with giving up things you ought not have or habits you should stay away from. Instead, sacrifice invlolves giving up things that are actually good and right. My idea of sacrifice has been backwards, and I believe Evangelical Christianity may fall into the same trap. God is not asking for us to give up our worst so much as he is asking us to give him our best. This was a fundamental shift for me and quite the change of paradigm.

Os Guiness' book A Time For Truth looks at this conceptual distinction in a different light. In the realm of freedoms, Os says that there are two kinds - lower and higher freedoms. The "lower" freedoms are those things that we ought to be free from: murder, theft, racial/gender/religious persecution, etc. The higher freedoms are things we are free to: serving, loving, praising, helping, saving, choosing, etc. It is in this last category where I see the OT idea of sacrifice residing. I suppose sacrificing could belong in both realms, with the LORD preferring the latter, but I think the former category is where so many of us get hung up. The lower form of sacrificing, giving up a vice or not being a jerk to one's mate/friend is necessary and good, but it only sets the stage for the higher form of sacrifice.

What a shame that I(we) as a Christian and human in general get so focused on what I ought to stop doing or start doing to please the LORD that I never ponder how I can show my love to him even more by giving him my best, the most valuable, and thereby showing him that(if) I think he surpasses those. In all reality, the "if" is more accurate at this point. There are things I value more than God and would not want to give them up. I don't know if I should give them up wholesale or instead realize that I need to pursue the LORD further to see him as more valuable. Intellectually, he is obviously more valuable, but the problem is that my heart loves other things more.

George MacDonald puts it this way: "He looked around upon his congregation and trembling a little with a new excitement, he began, 'My hearers, I come before you this morning to say the first word of truth ever given me to utter. In my room, three days ago,' the curate went on, 'I was reading the strange story of a man who appeared in Palestine saying that he was the Son of God. And I came upon those words of his which I have just read to you. All at once my conscience awoke and asked me, 'Do you do the things he says to you?' And I thought to myself, 'Have I today done a single thing he said to me? When was the last time I did something I heard from him? Did I ever in all my life do one thing because he said to me, 'Do this?' 'And the answer was, 'No, never.'...He then proceeded to show that faith and obedience are one and the same spirit: what in the heart we call faith, in the will we call obedience. He showed that the Lord refused the so-called faith which found its vent at the lips in worshiping words and not at the limbs in obedient action. Some of his listeners immediately pronounced his notions bad theology, while others said to themselves that at least it was common sense" (35) Macdonald, George. Knowing the Heart of God: Where Obedience is the One Path to Drawing Intimately Close to Our Father. ed. Michael R. Phillips. Bethany House, Minneapolis: 1990.

I like how George makes it plain why we would obey (or, in my context, sacrifice. Or, in Guiness' context, practice the higher form of obedience). We obey or sacrifice live free or move or breathe because he said to. The heart of sacrifice, obedience and living free is a heart that is moved by the Lord. I long to move away from simply giving up to giving unto.

Assent

It has recently been brought to my attention that I am a modernist in post-modern clothing.
The illuminator did not intend to undress me as such, but instead was critiquing the skin of somebody else. Suddenly, I looked down and noticed that underneath my clothing, I looked much like that man.
It went down like this:
Perhaps you've heard of the book Wild at Heart by John Eldredge. I, also have heard of this book, but have never read it. I read a review of it, though, and thought very highly of the review - less so of the book.
You can catch the review here: http://www.perspectivesjournal.org/2004/10/review.php
Since I respect the views of some of those who have (at least I thought had) read the book, I sent them the link asking them if it was an accurate critique of the book. Following are some of their responses.

Mike:
"Sorry ken, I couldn’t even make it through their first point of refutation. That article helps me understand just how anti-modern I am. My stomach turned as whoever wrote the article said that much of what eldridge wrote was WRONG.And while I’m sure that they have good points of refutation, I just can’t read articles that come across with such a closed, concrete agenda. The truth is, I haven’t even read the book :-) However, this article makes me want to read the book, love it like a girl, play it like a guitar, and then go out to dinner with dean bob. And all I did was read the first couple of paragraphs. It is good to know that I still have a ton of maturing to do. One day I hope that I will stop reacting so strongly to the modernism of academia."

Bill:
"I have read the reviews and have seen differing opions. I highly recommend you read this book. As with all books you might not agree with all that is said. The overall content is good. You will enjoy in light of your theme in your read-thru."

Jeremy:
"I pretty much have the whole wild at heart thing nailed...I mean look at me. 100% adrenaline all the time. It's all go, go, go. I mean...that's what being a man is all about. What??? You haven't ridden a horse...pansy. Never braved the white waters with nothin between you and the jagged rocks than inflated rubber[Actually, that's what I do all summer, Jeremy. In your face girly-man!]? There's something inherently wrong with you then.
Seriously, I can say that I pretty much despise those kinds of books. Something seems totally forced about them. They don't speak to me at all...but hey, that's just me. We're starting the "Wild at Heart" Bible study...I dunno, something smells like the cheese I ate in France, but like I said...that's just me."

After reading Mike's reply, I was pretty downtrodden in my realization that I was, as I had with fear suspected, more modern than many of my peers and even those older than me. Still, after reading Bill's and my brother's evaluation of the book (to his credit, Bill is the only one of us who actually has read it), I'm now having doubts that one's acceptance of Wild at Heart is a reliable determiner of one's philosophical/cultural leanings. Bill, seemingly, should be steeped in modernism, but this, as in many other instances, is a clue as to his inability to be solidly labeled despite his age or place in life. He's more flexible, gracious, understanding, and accepting of cultural trends/developments at 59 years old than I am at 26. My brother tends to lean somewhere between modernity and post-modernity, tending to surprise me in both facets at times. But, Mike, well, let's just call Mike the pomo poster child.
At the end of all this, I'm not sure what makes a person modern or post-modern or anywhere in between.

I'm fairly certain of the tenets and oppositions of each philosophical stance. Epistemologically, it seems that post-moderns give much more value to experience than do modernists. Also, post-moderns seem to be much less trustworthy of "the" answer to anything, whereas "the" answer seems to be the modernists' holy grail. Ontologically, I believe a post-modernist would define being as determined by oneself and one's choices as one exists while being self-aware to the point of irony; conversely, the modernist may be more apt to define self and being in more concrete, static, and objective terms. This is the extent that I'm willing to stick my neck out, as I'm not even certain of what I've already typed. I'm pretty certain that no post-modernist would attempt a concrete definition of their paradigm, though, if you gather what I'm saying.

So, in my opinion, this blog could define me as either pomo or mo(?): I'm trying to define myself (modern?) while being unsure and looking for communal interaction coupled with an attempt to be more self-aware (pomo?). Ugh, defining myself is wearing me out.

The original point I was trying to make is that, at the very least, I don't think I am who I thought I was. This is both a scary and comforting thought all at once. It's scary because losing an idea of oneself when one is obsessed with knowing (statically) who one's self is (again, statically) confusing and often revealing to the point of disturbance. It's exciting because I'm tired of trying to hold on to false realities and photographs of some abstract personality while my true self sits just underneath. I also believe my uncovering, or derobing as it's been called, allows me to more genuinely interact with my Lord. So, like my friend Eric Keck alluded to, I do pray that more and more of my false layers will be peeled off as the Lord leads my friends to help me in those ways.

So, my conclusion at the end of my assessment of my post-or-not-modernity is: "I have less of a clue than when I began." Still, it (conscious incompetence) is a far better place to be than where I was (unconscious incompetence).

Steps to take:
Understand what modernism and post-modernism really are.
Understand not just what I do, but what I prefer.
Continue to be honest and open about those preferences.

That's all for now.

Moses

Careers.
These are tricky things, these choices.
For some of us, they are "downright" scary.

I'm not a terribly confident man, neither in my abilities nor my identity. The last year has done much to affirm and confirm that which always existed but I could not recognize, but there is much to be learned. Some would call this a strength, that I am teachable, always desiring to grow and learn from others' advice and actions - that I'm not content with being where I am, ever... Others, on the flip side, do not see my pursuit of "wholeness" as the main source of value; rather, they simply value wholeness for what it is. In that sense, I imagine I have little value in their eyes.

This would be a much easier statement to make if "they" were others and not myself, too. I tend to value the product rather more than the process, which, as all mature people tell me, is a bit backwards. This makes sense and lines up with Robert Kegan's (and Brian McLaren's, as I understand it) view of personal development in his book The Evolving Self. Kegan states that we are human beings and emphasizes "being" as a verb. In a sense, we are humans as we "be" and "become" human. We are always in a process of being, and growth never stops. Products, then, in the perspective of human development, are temporal and passing - less substantive, even, than processes. In addition, people are better defined as processes than products. We are always becoming, being, shifting - rarely ever is, am, or are.

In light of this reality, my self-evaluations based on the "am's," "is's," and "are's," are structurally inaccurate - answers stemming from the wrong questions: "Where am I?" "What do I stand for?" "What do I believe?" "What do I value?" and so on. Perhaps I should be asking, "Where am I going?" "What am I standing for?" "What am I believing?" "What am I valuing?" etc. These questions more accurately acknowledge the process rather than the product, and so line up more closely with the reality that is my experience.

I also believe that this is not only my experience, but God's view of me. I don't think I've ever read a biblical story where God or Jesus ask a person to be something concrete. This, perhaps, is one of the least understood truths in today's church. God asks Adam and Eve to not eat from a tree; he does not ask them to model spiritual perfection. God asks Abraham, the father of our faith, to leave his family and follow him; he does not ask him to change and be holy and then follow. God calls David a man after his own heart: he does not change his mind once he commits adultery. Jesus calls the disciples to "come and see" while following him; he never requires them to believe he is the Christ. God calls Paul and tells him go to the city; he tells Ananias that he "will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of [his] name" (ESV), but he does not tell him to be an genius apostle and model perfection.

This is not to say that God did not require things and "behaviors" from people, but he did it in the context of their ongoing relationship with him - in the midst of a process. Adam and Eve made the wrong choice and God provided a means for further relationship and growth: process. Abraham lied to kings about his wife, and God continued to bless him. David sinned against Bathsheba and Uriah, and God tells him how he will be punished and restored: process. Jesus' disciples spend three years with him and do not fully understand who he is and follow him until he is gone (I know, debatable about Peter's confession...) and God sends his Holy Spirit on them: process. God says Paul "will suffer," but God promises that he will show Paul the suffering instead of telling him to "be a sufferer."

For me, the only part of my life that is a product is what God has made me to be. Even then, God only relates to me as a "product" in how he positionally sees me, not in how he relates to me. I suppose the practical application of this is (sheesh, I feel like I need 3 alliterated bullet points now..."Pastor" Ken) how I see myself as I live in front of God. Today I saw a guy I know act rudely towards an incompetent staff person and I immediately judged him to be a jerk and a hypocrite as a Christian. About five minutes later, though, as he was explaining himself to me and why he had no patience for lying salespeople, I thought, "At least he's genuine when he's rude. Even if he is a screwed up human being, at least he's not posturing or feigning holiness and goodness (like I so often do)." What was frustrating to me turned into a refreshing time of insight and conviction as I longed to be as genuine- even in my sin. What might be a random story I think details how seeing ourselves as processes, humans who are being, can set us free from being tied to a mentality that tells us to be (statically, not dynamically) someone, instead of become someone. My friend, while not displaying total Christlike behavior, is not a slave in his mind to the fact that he did not model who he "ought to have been." Instead, I believe he sees his actions as a stream of being where the Lord will continue to interact with him and perfect him in His time.

I long to live like all these men and women did and do. They understood, and understand, God's "expectations," that they must live with him and in him, not be him. God is he who makes us like Him - our job is to respond and love, fail and submit, live and become. Our confidence, since there isn't much of a product, must be in the process. Still, I'm becoming aware that my processes are mostly orchestrated by God, so, ideally, confidence resides in the Great Processor (GOD, not AMD...*ugh* lame)

Well, what does this have to do with careers?
I began this post out of a fear I felt while being presented with an opportunity to be (statically or dynamically?) a youth pastor in LaCenter, WA. I have been planning pretty firmly on pursuing a Master of Arts in Education while procuring a Secondary Teaching certificate with an emphasis on English and Literature. Then, out of the blue, my supervisor at the TimeZone youth center, Bill Trenckmann - a youth pastor himself, calls and tells me his friend who pastors a church in WA is going to be looking for a youth pastor. The opportunity, according to Bill, is ideal, and he recommends that I look into it if I'm interested. Immediately, my walls go up and I dismiss the idea out of disgust. I want to be a youth pastor like I want to sit on sharp sticks or punch myself in the crotch. No way. Still, after I hang up the phone and tell Bill I'll think about it, I can't stop daydreaming about the potential of the position: rural town, smaller church, a staff that has a heart for unity and true community, and a pastor that is focused on equipping and harmony rather than expectations and performance. I (well, my heart, really) can't stop thinking about this and getting excited about it - even as I get into bed. The next day, my heart still wants this, or at least the ideal of it.

A week later I talk to the pastor on the phone and once hanging up, get the feeling that I just talked to the genuine article - you know, the guy who is a pastor because he loves people and has vision for them vs. the guy who pastors because he loves progress and has a vision for results. I heard humility on the phone, as he expressed his willingness and desire to step down soon as churches don't grow (maturity-wise, not just number-wise) with pastors over 60. I heard his expectations, and they were only about the good of his people and their maturity and harmony. I heard his tough love for his people and how they needed to be without a youth pastor for a few months to find their own identity. I also heard myself screaming with fear as I tried to be honest with him while trying to make sure he knew I was incompetent.

I went home from that conversation full of fear and hoping that God would not ask me to be this youth pastor, because I did not have the character, wisdom, or fruits of the Spirit that it required. I told him, as I walked down the stairs to my bedroom, that he needed to change me before I would go to this job.
Right about then, I stopped walking and remembered Moses when God was in the "burning" bush. I remembered how God has always been asking us to follow him and do what he says while we are still incompetent. I remembered that God never makes us competent before he asks us to follow him. I remembered that I would only become as I followed.
My heart was set on being, in the static sense, ready to do the career I set out to do - be that a youth pastor or high school English teacher. God's heart, however, was set on me simply being as he asked me to follow him.

I think I'm ready to follow him even though I'm not ready. I think I'm finally ready to start being.

The Power of Pain

Piaget says, "Disequilibration is the engine of growth." I fully beleive him. I think the Lord does, too. How often does he use pain to get my attention when he would prefer pleasure. It's an irony that God's desire for us is to find pleasure in him, and when we cease finding pleasure in him, he allows us to find pain in "not him." It is just, but it is odd.
Some of us require different kinds of disequilibration to grow. I think of my friends as I write this. My desire (and most psychologists' philosophy of practice) is for them to not experience pain, but I find myself often knowing that I may have to watch them endure the pain for the sake of their growth. This is easier when I know they're seeking the Lord, because I have confidence that they will respond in time (his or theirs, however that works). I know for other of my friends, the pain will endure for longer. The pain for me is watching them go through the pain without the growth. I say this because our Lord is persistent and desires for us to find pleasure in him; he will not give up. He did not with the first Israel, and he does with the current Israel.