Revision
A co-worker in CO taught me something through simple word reading.
Revision = “re” + “vision”. To see again. To see anew. To see from a different perspective than previously.
I knew the definition, but the idea contained within the arrangements of syllables wasn’t forefront in my mind. Teaching the concept in essays and poetry became easier after sharing that nugget with my kids. Asking them to see their work again, in a new light, from a different perspective. An concept I will pass on again in a few hours.
Abortion.
Capital punishment.
Evolution.
Gay marriage.
Just War.
Politics.
I wonder how many things there are which require a revision of thinking; how many topics there are which need a set of fresh eyes applied to them by the same hearts; how many divisive conflicts argued from a well intentioned, but limited point of view- limited from both sides?
In creative writing revision comes from the heart of the writer expressing the vision of the inspiration, with sight towards an end product. However, often, very often, that vision changes - the inspiration takes a turn the more the author works with the piece, takes in input from others, or just sits, silently, thinking. The author sees it again, differently. And the pen is opened to new possibilities.
Antenna
On Keys And Conscious
“First, do no harm.” – Hippocratic Oath
It’s so hard sometimes to gently destroys someone’s illusion, even for their own good. Sometimes you just want to let someone remain in ignorance about something because it will be easier than addressing the problem. You can rationalize it away as not being the same as not taking the keys from a drunk. What is the harm in him thinking he’s correct, and what’s the problem allowing her to continue saying the same things, even when you know that they are both wrong? Other than having to live with the occasional discomfort.
“Never open a wound you can’t close.” – medical proverb.
But while people might have a right to think what they want, they are entitled to their own opinion, are we not also bound to correct them, deontologically bound, when we see that their error leads them to a place of pain, a place of discomfort, a place of intellectual or physical dissonance time and time again?I have a duty to tell you to give me your keys, even metaphorically.
But this means I must stick around long enough to make sure you get home.
What Job’s Friends Got Right
Job lost everything. Everything.
—————————-
I was asked yesterday as a writing activity to provide a list of the worse things that could happen in the coming week. I thought of my list, but couldn’t stop thinking about Job’s. They were the same:
Complete financial ruin. Family destroyed. Questioning the affection of my wife. Sickness not onto death or healing on a time table. Apparent abandonment of God without an apparent cause to point to. I’m sure he liked some of his livestock: I don’t know what I’d do if all of my kittens suddenly died. His list was my list.
Job could be a real man or an everyman. I don’t really care at the moment. He could be me.
—————————-
I’ve just started leading a Bible study on campus about Job. They picked it. I’m waiting for the knock at the door.
—————————-
In the last day I’ve been told of terrible events in the lives of people around me. No one very close to me, but students under my sphere of love and care.
—————————-
People lose everything, every day.
—————————-
At the end of chapter 2, before Job begins his first laments, in the prose section which may or may not be an addition to the text, Job’s friends arrive. Before they begin to speak, at length, for the rest of the story, they rip their clothes, sprinkle ashes on their heads, and sit beside Job.
“For seven days and seven nights.”
They assume his position of suffering and they don’t say a word. For seven days. A week without divine cliches,false explanations, or best intended comfortable words. They just sit and suffer with him in silence.
—————————-
I’m still waiting for the knock on the door, but I fear it won’t come.
Three Wrong Doors
Some thoughts from Chapel today.
There are three wrong doorways to Jesus: fear, need, and tradition.
Fear: You did the math and figured out that Hell doesn’t sound like fun. So you bought fire insurance. You prayed the magic prayer, and asked Jesus to forgive you of your sins. So you could avoid Hell, not so you could follow Jesus. ? You came to Him to avoid Hell and, as far as you know, you’ve obtained that golden ticket. Why would you continue to follow Him more closely, live the life He wants you to have, when your need has already been met
Need: You were cleansed of your addiction, terrible situation, depression, anxiety, guilt, loneliness, or any other host of things that held you back. There was something that you were missing, or something that you had, that you needed to get or lose. Jesus took care of that. So why would you follow after Him further if you got exactly what you signed on for?
Tradition: You were raised in the church. You’ve lived the life. You’ve done the steps, in time to the divine music you were taught, perfectly, or close enough. You’ve avoided the “big sins” as a lifestyle choice, because that’s what you’ve always done. You don’t know any better, or any worse. Sin is something to be avoided or pitied, and Jesus will reward you for keeping your family happy, keeping His laws, and not committing all the fun forms of debauchery that those other people do, with your eternal pleasure in heaven. So why would you follow after Jesus, when you already know everything, and your reward is secure?
I was caught with how closely this tied with conversations in classroom management in terms of motivation – do we only reward or punish students into learning the material or behaving in certain ways? Should extrinsic motivations determine our actions over intrinsic ones?
Do we follow Jesus based on a quid pro quo system or because we want Him?
Are we astonished by who Jesus is, or just content with the present/future tangible and social benefits we receive and pain we avoid?