Calvinism

I really hadn't noticed how many Calvinists there are. I didn't even know that my pastor was a Calvinist until I overheard him mention something about free will. I immediately decided that was wrong. I've thought about it, and it does make sense in a backwards sort of way. But the there's a big problem with Calvinism that I think supersedes most of the other problems. Calvinism is a neat little, five-point summary of everything about God and us. It lays out an exact doctrine that defines everything, even things far beyond the realm of Salvation. Calvinism seems to claim that it has all the answers.

The problem with that is that we cannot ever define everything like that. We don't fully understand ourselves or God or the relationship between us and God. Calvinism explains all of that in a way that mostly makes sense. That should be a hint that something is wrong.

I understand that people want things to make sense, but not everything makes sense. God can't be put in a little box, or in this case a TULIP (an acronym for the five points of Calvinism). He is much bigger than we can ever understand. I don't have a problem with people seeking to know God better; I just have problem when people act like they have it all figured out.

Misinterpreting the Bible

People always have some Bible verse to support their position on something. There's always some obscure verse that nobody knew about until they used a concordance to look up something to support a position they'd already taken on something. I think the whole "but the Bible says so" is a load of garbage. Sure, the Bible says a lot of things to aid us in our walk with Christ, and all of them can be helpful. Here's the thing, though: people misread and misinterpret the Bible all the time.

If you want to beat your child, yeah, you can find a verse that supports bruising your child. If you want to  make your wife obey you, you can find a verse to support the wife being subservient to the husband. If you want to find support for President Obama being the anti-Christ, you'll probably find support for that too.

The point is, people use the Bible, by manipulating and misinterpreting it, to accomplish their dishonorable goals. The people who do this are mostly professing Christians. They're the ones who know the Bible well enough to use it to bolster their flawed arguments.

Do Hard Things

I received a copy of Alex and Bret Harris's book Do Hard Things. At the time, I was very in to trying to be a good Christian boy, so I was really excited about their book. Their book isn't bad; but looking at it now, I see that it's mostly common sense. The premise of the book is to push yourself to do you things you didn't think you could, to grow as an individual and in your walk with Christ. That's a good premise, and I'm glad they wrote their book. But why is there so much hype about a book filled primarily with common sense?

Yes, the only way to grow as individual is to take yourself out of your comfort zone and do hard things. That's common sense though. That's all there is to say really.

I'm glad people like this book, but the advice in it isn't original. People have been pushing themselves to do hard things since before the Harris' boys were born. They have been providing examples through their lives since, well, probably the beginning of the world.

By the way, the book consists primarily of examples of people doing hard things and the results. That's cool, but you can just look around you to see that kind of stuff.

A constant flow of words

Some people just can't stop talking. You wonder why their presence seems to usher in a host to feast on (mentally), and then you realize that it's because they can't stop talking. It's like a disease. They find someone who is less of talker and unload on them. This can't be good.

Why would someone want to talk so much? Could it be that they just like hearing their voice? I don't think it's a consideration for the person of whom I'm thinking. Do they just feel like everyone want's to know everything about them? Well, maybe, but probably on a subconscious level if at all. Is it to fill the silence? No. They never hear silence because they're always talking.

Whatever their motives may be for talking constantly, they do change the effect of talking all the time. When someone has to tell a person whom they barely know about which sealant they used on their floor or what kind of grapes they bought at the store, there's a problem. Sure, people make small talk. This isn't just small talk, though; it's the primary topic or topics of conversation. As much as we would love to know what kind of shampoo you use and how often you shave your legs, you really don't have to tell us. Maybe we'd like to get to know the person behind the mouth.

It's also kind of  statement of this person's pride. "I'm so much more interesting than you that I'm going to talk this whole time and not give you a chance because I know you want to hear about me. I don't really care about getting to know you." That's what I imagine people like that saying when they can't close their mouth during a conversation. This undermines the listener's worth.

I do know that there are some people who are genuinely just too extroverted to close their mouths. But these people are little bit different in my opinion. They have seem to have a genuine exuberance about seeing other people, which you can tell by the way their face lights up when they meet a friend. And then their natural (habitual) response of pouring out love translates into a flow of words. They just have so much to tell you since the last time you two met. Those people are fine. It's really just those people who can't stop talking about completely pointless stuff that I'm talking about.

Well, that was kind of a hasty look at talkers. I know there's much more to analyze, but I'm out of time for now.

Homeschooling and test scores

As you know, I was homeschooled. One aspect of homeschooling was the standardized tests me and my siblings took each year. At one point, I think this test was composed of half-day tests for three days in a row. Such a battery of tests is especially good for homeschoolers because it lets them see were they stand with respect to other kids. However, there are many families that see this annual testing as an invasion of their privacy and a waste of time. After all, shouldn't parents be allowed to teach their children as they see fit? In the ideal situation, parents want their children to do the best they can academically and probably wouldn't need the government to make sure they're doing a good job. Let's face it though: not all parents are capable - or willing - to educate their kids adequately. Thus, it is a good idea for the government to at least let parents know how their children measure up.

This test is an easy test. It's not the SAT or ACT. They're not analyzing advanced reasoning skills. All they want to know is whether the kids can read and do some  math, really basic math. If your child doesn't measure up, you could chalk it up to not testing well, or you could realize that your teaching isn't adequate. This test is an excellent opportunity to measure your child's skills, and you don't have to pay for it - directly, anyway.

Also, standardized tests of any kind are just good. You can learn all you want and be a genius, but if you don't take standardized tests, colleges don't have a way to measure your skills and aptitude. Stanford, for example, recommends SAT subject tests for homeschoolers because that's a way for homeschoolers to show what they've learned. And there are also AP and Clep exams. These tests allow homeschoolers to study on their own and yet have a legitimate way to measure their learning.

Some people oppose this idea because they think that giving a child a score is like measuring his worth. After all, some kids are smarter than others, and you don't want to make the dumb kids feel bad, right? But the thing that's interesting is this: the score only goes to your family and perhaps select organizations. Thus, any measure of worth is really going to take place in your family. This means that the parents and siblings of the kids are probably the only ones who will be seeing the scores and measuring the kid's worth. In this case, the issue is not with the kid's test score being measured against that of his siblings but everything about him being compared to his siblings. You see what I'm saying? Families don't decide to compare just test scores. If they're comparing test scores, then they're probably comparing many other things. Thus, the issue is with the family.

Tests are good.