My Rant

I am so aggravated and disgusted. I was at the store and an older gentleman stopped me as I was going down an aisle and said, "Can I tell you a joke? It won't take long." I politely smiled and said okay. He then proceeded to tell me a blonde joke. I rolled my eyes, smiled and moved on.

Talk about prejudice!!! I am ready to dye my hair! The only reason he stopped me was because of the color of my hair.

Typical blonde jokes are not funny to me, because they portray blondes as stupid. I don't know why a person tells blonde jokes to a blonde. If the blonde is as dumb as the joke portrays, they're not even going to get the joke. If they are intelligent enough to get the joke, they're not going to think it funny that the person is stereotyping them.

I am blonde. I am not stupid! So I've decided to change my hair color...

Alright, maybe I'll wait until PJ gets home before I do anything drastic...

Don't tell me a blonde joke right now...

Concerns - Part II

Like I said before, I have read the summary, but not the full document of the “Manifesto”. But I went to the “Talk about it” page to see what others had to say. Some of the comments from various people illustrate/define my concerns:

First, what some have said in support of the manifesto:

“Thank you so much for much wisdom of the Manifesto. I pray that hearts will lean towards more love/mercy then judgement(sic) and laws.”

“The relativism expressed, i.e. tolerance for diversity, and the notion of a open plaza for public discourse permitting the rational and the faithful to congregate is a powerful notion.”

“Glad to see secularism beginning to stem inside religious community.”

I hope those statements scare you the same way they scared me. Why is there a need for mercy if we are not first condemned by law and justice/judgment? Read Romans 6-8, especially 7:7-12. “What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! Indeed I would not have known what sin was except through the law…So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous, and good.” (I could go on, but I will stop.) So, secularism has found a place inside the religious community, eh? Well, it doesn’t fit in my Bible.

Now here are some comments in criticism of the “Manifesto”:

“Why were polarizing left leaning evangelicals like Brian McLaren (to call him an evangelical is charitable) and Jim Wallis asked to sign this, while prominent right leaning evangelicals left out of this process?”

(A very good question…Brian McLaren is a big spokesperson for the emerging church movement.)

“it tries too hard to appease the sophisticated unbeliever (many of whom identify themselves as Evangelical), and fails to draw the firm lines so sorely needed in church circles.”

“Holiness - not one mention about Holiness - which we are called to in Jesus Christ. The glaring issue with the Church today is there is no talk about Holiness or Sin - which the Gospels, and letters spent more time talking about than anything else.”

“I applaud the effort to "re-reform" the church - but this looks like more a change to meld with today's culture than no - as the manifesto states” [“than not”- is what is meant here]

“It seems to me that it is an impossible document. We don't want a naked square or a sacred one; we can't be liberal or fundamental; etc., etc., etc. The trick there is picking the middle ground. They appear to have left too much space and not enough at the same time.”

Some eye-opening objections there. Those all speak for themselves, but this next one is interesting. This person signed the Manifesto, but apparently has some reservations.

“However, I have some issues with this manifesto, and so I suppose, with Evangelicalism: 1. I think right belief is emphasized way too much. "Believing" in the Greek has connotations of trusting and faith, and intellectual belief is only a small part of it. Over-emphasizing belief is, I believe, a modernist, culture-based, reactionary distortion of Christianity. 2. The manifesto says Evangelicals want to respect all varieties of belief, Christian or non-Christian, and decries people who believe their way is the only way and try to coerce people to believe like them. Maybe Evangelicals don't want to coerce people, but in the beliefs section, the manifesto states strongly that Jesus is the only way to God. How can a person be so absolutely sure that she is right and still be open-minded and respectful? I tend to agree with Brian McLaren, who I paraphrase here, as saying "I am sure I am wrong about some of the things I believe most strongly." Wouldn't a little more skepticism be a healthy thing for Evangelicals, in order to be more open-minded and respectful? Moreover, you can grow a lot by being open to diverse opinions and recognizing that you may be wrong. Also, the belief that Jesus is the only way would tend to connote that non-Christians are going to hell. Is that what Evangelicals believe? If so, how is telling people they're going to hell if they don't believe like you spreading Good News and not coercing them?”

It sounds like this person has already aligned their thinking with the emerging church, but their criticism of the manifesto’s statements actually causes me to look more favorably upon it.

Well, now I need to read the document in its entirety, but what I have seen so far provides much food for thought. I welcome people's comments on this.

Concerns - Part I

I was challenged by a conversation with my sister at the beginning of the summer, which led me to examine closely the Evangelical Manifesto and some issues around it. I wanted to blog about these issues, but it needed time and research. I have begun, and am continuing, to research and think about these things, but I am going to get started here by talking about my concerns. I expect to make other posts related to all this, so this is not my final thought or conclusion. And if anyone wants to agree, disagree, or discuss these things, go ahead.

I have concerns about the Evangelical Manifesto. I went to their website and read the summary and have downloaded the full document. From reading the summary there are some good things and some not so good, but I will wait until I have read the full document before I raise any questions on it. In the meantime, some of the things on the Manifesto's website were eye-opening. So I will begin there.

The “Intro” to the manifesto has some disturbing aspects:

“An Evangelical Manifesto is an open declaration of who Evangelicals are and what they stand for. It has been drafted and published by a representative group of Evangelical leaders who do not claim to speak for all Evangelicals, but who invite all other Evangelicals to stand with them and help clarify what Evangelical means in light of “confusions within and the consternation without” the movement. As the Manifesto states, the signers are not out to attack or exclude anyone, but to rally and to call for reform.”

Stop here for a minute. It sounds okay so far, but why do they say “not out to…exclude anyone”? If it is indeed a “declaration of…what they stand for” how can it not be exclusive? It says it is intended to be read by anyone, but not everyone is going to agree with them. Alright, that may be a technicality, but there’s one other problem here. This sounds a lot like those who push for tolerance, acceptance and inclusion in the church, at the expense of sound doctrine and absolute truth. Let’s go on.

“As an open declaration, An Evangelical Manifesto addresses not only Evangelicals and other Christians but other American citizens and people of all other faiths in America, including those who say they have no faith. It therefore stands as an example of how different faith communities may address each other in public life, without any compromise of their own faith but with a clear commitment to the common good of the societies in which we all live together.”

Again - tolerance and being inclusive of everyone. It is a fine line to have such an open, non-offensive (if that is the intent) discussion without compromising your faith or lowering your standards. Also, the overall premise here is somewhat disturbing, because it sounds a lot like the dangerous, post-modernist “emerging church” movement, which promotes “dialogue” and dismisses absolute truth. (I will probably talk more about the emerging church movement, but if you’re not familiar with what it is, you can find a lot of articles just by Googling “emerging church”.)

“For those who are Evangelicals, the deepest purpose of the Manifesto is a serious call to reform—an urgent challenge to reaffirm Evangelical identity, to reform Evangelical behavior, to reposition Evangelicals in public life, and so rededicate ourselves to the high calling of being Evangelical followers of Jesus Christ.”

This is good, though I’m wondering what they mean by “reposition Evangelicals in public life”.
That's enough for now. I don’t want this post to be too long. I guess this can serve as my “introduction” of this topic.

Little bits

This is not good---I feel like my cold from three weeks ago is coming back. I have that raw-throat-feeling again!

We just returned from a quick trip to take PJ5 to the specialist we've been seeing since January. (Little Giant Steps: a Neurodevelopmental approach) They do re-evaluations every four months, which allows them to make changes to our program. Right now he's stuck in one area, but he seems quite happy to remain there and not move forward, so we're going to try something new to help push him out of his comfort zone.

Evaluations and tests are always hard. It's a stinging reminder of how far behind your child is, in spite of the little bits of progress you see.

PJ was very excited to get the parts he ordered for his classic Chevy (the '56, as we call it). I think I know what he will be doing this weekend!

Some, but not all

That is what our pediatrician said at our 2-year visit for NB. He has some symptoms of autism, but not all. She is not pushing for an official diagnosis, because it will not change the things we are already doing for him, to help his development. We are going to put him on the waiting list of a doctor in this area who specializes in autism. The list will probably be a year long (at least), and by that time we can see where he is and what direction we want to go in.
That's my update.

A New Repertoire

A few weeks ago I let PJ5 pick out a Veggietales CD to buy at the store. It's an "On the Road" album with traveling songs. We have been listening to it in the van at his insistence. So here are some of the surprising new songs I have heard him singing recently:

-Daisy, Daisy (A Bicycle Built for Two)
-Dinah Won't You Blow Your Horn
-Are We There Yet?
-Oh You Can't Get to Heaven (On Roller Skates)
-Happy Trails to You


(The words are sometimes recognizable, but the tune always is.)

Also

I'm very thankful for Puffs Plus!!

Today I am thankful for:

- cough drops

- afternoon naps

- paper plates

- a child's smile

- the fact that I don't live near the ocean

- President George W. Bush

- the fact that I live in a country where there is freedom of speech, and still a few people who report the truth instead of what the political party wants them to say

You're not allowed...

To be sick when you're a mother of toddlers.

But I can't stop the pounding in my head, the burning in my throat, or the nose....well, I won't get too graphic. I haven't slept well the last two nights. And there's not much opportunity to sleep during the day. My boys like to be close to me, but I'm trying to stay away so they don't get this cold. Since I don't have anything going on tomorrow morning, I'm taking some night-time "so you can rest" cold medicine. It usually works for me, although I sometimes have weird (or wierd) dreams. (How do you spell that word?) Anyway, that's what's going on around here.
~~~~~~~~~
NB is laughing in his crib to keep himself awake, and PJ said it sounds like "Woody Woodpecker".
:-)