<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Jessica</title>
    <link>http://virb.com/jpellowe</link>
    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <generator>Virb 2.0 (@jpellowe)</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <item>
      <title>A few reflections...</title>
      <link>http://virb.com/jpellowe/posts/text/576641</link>
      <description><![CDATA[	
Evidently, I'm quiet until I have something to say. I like that.

I've learned through experience that listening is the best way to hear people, and you cannot know people if you do not hear what they have to say.

I've also learned that shooting your mouth off every time something pops into your head is a sure fire way to make people stop listening to you as soon as you open your mouth.

If you want people to take what you have to say seriously, make everything you say count. Otherwise, be humble enough to keep your mouth shut and just listen.

Pick your fights; some things just don't matter in the scheme of things. It usually takes a really big 'thing' to put everything else into perspective.

When you come up against something big, milk it for all it's worth. Learn every lesson you possibly could. Let it change you radically. Don't try to forget about it until you've learned something and become a better person because of it.

This is not who I was a few years ago. This is who I am now, though. That, in and of itself, is most definitely a God thing.

I am different now, but I am still becoming. And for that, I truly praise God!]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 19 Apr 2008 22:42:40 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid>http://virb.com/jpellowe/posts/text/576641</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Talents...</title>
      <link>http://virb.com/jpellowe/posts/text/560100</link>
      <description><![CDATA[My talents are not suited to talent shows. Things suited to talent shows, I am not super talented at...

I can sing, but not exceptionally well (meaning I don't presume to be nearly as good as other people and boldly claim that as my "talent").

I can play some instruments, but not exceptionally well (ditto).

I have written some poems, but they are infinitely too personal to read in front of people.

This is not to give the impression that I consider myself "talent-less" or anything, but those are the only talents that really "fit" in talent shows, and I am only average at them.

What are my talents? 

Teaching. I just love this, and have always felt very at home in front of a class or working with students. It doesn't matter what the subject is, I just have so much fun in the classroom. I never thought much of this, because it's just me being me; but I am beginning to recognize this as a real gifting now that I've had such positive feedback from a wide variety of teachers/professors/advisors/etc. and also now that I've seen some of my peers struggle so much in front of a classroom. I definitely thank God for this gift. However, this is not a "talent show" talent. Even if I did come up with a three minute lesson, everyone would likely think it was weird and/or boring compared to music, etc. 

Writing. My mom says I have so many interesting thoughts, I should write articles and send them in to magazines like Christianity Today, etc. I also want to write articles, books and programs for my career. So, right now, I have a number of articles that I've written of which I'm actually quite proud (in the appropriate sense of the word, I mean). However, again, that is not something that "shows" particularly well...

Countries! This is the most "random" of my talents, but it's definitely my most fun passtime when I'm all alone. I can name all 192 countries in the world in under 10 minutes (last time I tried I came in at 8m30s). I can also label every single country on the map (with the exception of knowing exactly which tiny little islands are which in Australasia and the Caribbean). I have memorized all of the capital cities for North and South America, and Europe, most of them for Asia, the Middle East and Australiasia, and can properly match each capital to the correct country for Africa (I'm working on the memorization bit, but it's much easier to do if you can at least pronounce them!). I, personally, think that's a pretty neat talent... However, I don't think that shows particularly well, either.

I considered doing some baking, because I'm pretty good at that, but it's not really a "special talent" and it's probably unnecessary because I'm quite sure they're planning to have some kind of food there already...

So.......

Maybe this will just have to be another talent show I sit out and just appreciate other people's talents. I'll keep thinking, though... Any ideas?]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2008 10:33:42 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid>http://virb.com/jpellowe/posts/text/560100</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Online "Presences"</title>
      <link>http://virb.com/jpellowe/posts/text/556136</link>
      <description><![CDATA[So, as I was off to update my Twitter thing for the umpteenth time just because I'm bored and it's easy to do and takes very little thought, it occurred to me just how strange the whole "online presence" fad is. To clarify, I'm not suggesting this is a problem or calling for a retreat back to the days of telephone or anything like that - I have no problem with online things as long as they are done wisely and responsibly (like phone calls, letters and in person meetings). However, this thought popped into my head...

Does anybody actually care about my "status"? Is anyone really interested in what I'm doing now? Does anyone even actually read these blogs? 

Okay, here's my thought: having an online presence allows people to create the illusion that what they are saying and doing is important. 

"I'm going to get ice cream." - who really cares? I'm not being callous, but just think about it. By taking the time to write that out, one is conveying the message that it was important enough to write about. 

And blogs? There are many people with important things some people have to say, but some people also have a lot to say about nothing. And yet they deem it important enough to bother writing out and publishing online. 

In their heads, the things they have to say are important, but are they really? (Again, I'm not talking about everyone, or about things that are actually important, but more about the miscellaneous randoms that seem to show up fairly regularly.)

Why is this important? I'm just thinking about it now... I'm wondering a few things...

I wonder if this is "making" people magnify the trivial details of their lives. That is to say, do small, incidental setbacks/frustrations/challenges/irksome encounters become a bigger deal when they are made "official" by means of being shared online? Say someone honks at someone else; normally they just go "whatever, I wasn't doing anything wrong; they must be having a bad day" but now they go home (or open their cell phone) and go "______ is: super ticked at that freak who honked at me for no reason!!!!". 

I wonder if this is "making" people trivialize the big things in their lives. That is to say, do big things that should have a major impact on someone become minor, trivial things that have their meaning sucked out of them before any lesson is learned? For example, one chooses not to study for an exam, writes the exam and fails it; beforehand, one might actually take the time to realize that they should have taken the time to prioritize and put effort into studying, learn a lesson and move on. Now, they might simply change their status to "______: just wrote the stupidest exam ever! That prof is so..." 

I realize people could and do think this way without online presences. Like I said, I don't even have a position or opinion on this issue, and I certainly don't think that Facebook, Twitter, etc. are bad for people! It just occurred to me that they do allow people to actually pretend that people care about the things they have to say and that what they have to say is important.

So... did anyone actually read this? 

See? Now I have to think, why do I write these blogs? I don't really assume anyone is reading them (if you are, feel free to say hi so I know someone's reading this...). I've just heard so many times from my mom that I should write down my thoughts and ideas because I have so many of them that I finally decided to do so. I figured if I put them up here, at least there is the possibility that someone might have a comment on them, as opposed to just saving them in Word that's that. 

And do people really care if I am "going back home now to finally start my last essay"? Probably not. But, I figure if they don't care, they don't have to read it. In the mean time, I will keep updating stuff like that because it's nice to have an excuse to take a quick 'distraction/break' while working on something. And, let's face it, it is sort of nice to think that someone out there besides my family is at least marginally interested in what I'm up to! :P

]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:25:33 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid>http://virb.com/jpellowe/posts/text/556136</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>My Utmost for His Highest - "The Habit of Enjoying Adversity"</title>
      <link>http://virb.com/jpellowe/posts/text/551680</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Chambers beings the reading by saying that "We have to develop godly habits to express what God's grace has done in us. It is not just a question of being saved from hell, but of being saved so that 'the life of Jesus may be manifested in our body.'" (2 Cor 4:10). 

I think this is something we (at least, Evangelicals, to some degree) have grown blind to because we focus so much on the fact that all we have to do is accept Christ to be saved, by grace and not by works. This is totally true, of course, and I do not pretend to contest that. However, it does not minimize the importance of our actions after we become Christians. Accepting Christ as our Saviour is the starting point of our life as a Christian, but it should not be the only point of our Christian life. The point is that as we grow as a Christian, we learn more about God and develop a relationship with Him which is consequentially reflected in our actions. 

We throw around cliches to this affect all the time ("becoming Christlike", "being Jesus to those around us", etc.). However, how do we see that really applied in our lives? I understand that no one can be perfect, but it just kills me to see Christian people acting in ways that Jesus would not (as we know from Biblical examples and standards) and - here's the hard part - not even caring. It's like they don't realize they're doing something wrong - that's scary. 

I once heard a pastor say that today, instead of people praying "God, help me to flee from sin" people are now praying "God, help me to get through this sin without it affecting me". This is so true. Consider:
- instead of saying "no, I can't watch that movie - it's too violent/the language is too bad/there is sex and nudity" Christians are saying "It's not so bad, I can 'handle' it" and then hope that they aren't negatively affected by it
- instead of saying "no, I'm not going to make out with my boyfriend because it will be harder to say no later" Christians are saying "I can make out with him because God will make me strong enough not to get 'in trouble' later"

Those are just the two examples that came to mind first. There are many others, some more extreme, some less. The end result is the same: a generation of people trying to get as "close to the edge" as they can without falling off, when we are called as Christians to FLEE from sin. 

This is so explicit. It leaves no room for hedging. 

I am careful never to sound "holier than thou" when this topic comes up with people, because that's wrong (I am not perfect, I have my own things I do wrong, but this particular area is not one of them). However, when other people ask me why I am not going to see a particular movie with them, I'll tell them. You know what puzzles me so much? They say I am being "too strict" or "too conservative." 

Do these people honestly think my standards are higher than God's? 

Amos talks about God holding a plumb line to his people. For those who don't know, a plumb line is basically a string with a weight at the end of it so that it will hang perfectly straight. In construction, it is used to see if walls and table legs, etc, are perfectly straight. It is a measuring tool. It only has one measurement: perfectly straight. Any chair leg that is even remotely crooked, even if it looks straight to the eye, will not measure up against the plumb line; it's flaws will be exposed.

This is the way it will be for us on Judgment Day: the plumb line is now Christ, God's perfect Son. When we are measured against Him, we will all fall short in some way. However, if we know that perfection is God's standard, how can we make exceptions for ourselves and settle for less than perfect?

Strive for Godliness. Strive to be Christlike. Of course you can't be perfect, but that does not excuse lowering one's standards or allowing oneself to sin. 

The plumb line is straight. Period.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 05 Apr 2008 20:38:20 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid>http://virb.com/jpellowe/posts/text/551680</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A thought about the importance of good websites...</title>
      <link>http://virb.com/jpellowe/posts/text/515649</link>
      <description><![CDATA[So, after spending months researching different seminaries to attend, and weeks searching for places to buy fair trade products, and some sporadic and indefinite period of time trying to find out what is involved in eating 'organic,' I've developed some fairly definite opinions about the importance of websites...

In a day and age when everyone under the sun could have a website (if they had a computer and internet access...), if you are a reputable business or institution, you have to make sure that your website indicates that you are reputable and legitimate (as opposed to showing that you are cheap, unprofessional and potentially a rip off...). 

When I find a website that looks slapped together by someone who knows nothing about computers, or is obviously from a common template, I find that sort of taints my opinion of the place. Your website is your face to the community. If it looks cheap or slapped together, it looks like either you are a cheap and slapped together business/school or you don't care enough to ensure that your website represents you well. It's like going to a business meeting wearing jeans and a dirty shirt... 

I understand that some businesses (especially non-profits) don't want to give the impression that they are spending all of their money on their website, but the fact is that if you are trying to instill confidence in potential donors, it helps a lot to look like a credible charity, not a front for something sketchy or a charity so low on funds that a $10 donation will be a "waste" because the charity will need to use it for overhead and then go under in the end anyway... 

When you are deciding where to spend $40 000 on a degree, $1000 on a new technological thing or even $50 for a new clothing item, you have every right to make a judgment based on appearances; if an organization doesn't look credible, you certainly shouldn't risk your money on them. Organizations need to prove their worthiness for your money, and one key way they do this is by presenting themselves as credible and professional. 

(Clearly this isn't the only thing you should look for before giving any organization or business a lot of money! But this isn't a blog about con jobs and whatnot...)

PS - I feel the same way about commercials. Hence the reason I will never buy HeadOn, or anything from that place that has all the washers and dryers on major discount, as we learn from the lady who looks like she's in the 90's and is walking around the warehouse yelling at the camera (and she has a tensor bandage on her knee - could she really not do without that for the entire 15 minutes it took them to make the commercial?)... ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 15 Mar 2008 09:00:21 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid>http://virb.com/jpellowe/posts/text/515649</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A thought about plurality and tolerance...</title>
      <link>http://virb.com/jpellowe/posts/text/512556</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The progressive church is what I think most people (maybe I mean most Christians) would refer to as "post-modern" - there appears to be a general lack of belief in an Absolute Truth, and they are quite open to admitting this. However, they choose (yes, choose) to use the term "pluralistic" instead of post-modern or tolerant. Here is a snippet from my paper explaining the differences between the terms, from a progressive pastor's perspective. (And, of course, we must always keep in mind that just because any group of people professes to believe something or acts a certain way, individual members themselves may vary quite a bit... I had to put that in there just in case anyone was going to be picky about it...)

====
In a recent interview, progressive pastor Jim Burklo explained some of the distinct characteristics of being pluralistic, as opposed to post-modern or tolerant.  Firstly, Burklo says that post-modern people are too extreme in their acceptance of everyone; they claim that everyone is "equal" and that value judgments about other people and their beliefs cannot be made. Pluralism, though, he suggests, does take stands against certain practices and beliefs that may be harmful to other people (such as female genital mutilation, which is the example he uses). Consequentially, Burklo says pluralism is not "anything goes", but is a "recognition that no religion has an ultimate or final claim to The Truth." As well, Burklo asserts that toleration is simply allowing other people to believe differently without being aggressive, whereas pluralism goes "a step beyond and [requires] actually embracing other religions and honoring them at a deeper level." So, the progressive church does not fit well within the context of Evangelicalism because it rejects a core foundational belief that Jesus is the only way.
NOTE: The Burklo interview can be found at: http://pluralismsunday.wordpress.com/2008/03/05/interview-what-is-pluralism/
===

This seems rather depressing to me. What is the point of believing something if anything else could be equally 'right'? It doesn't make sense; if I am going to go to the trouble of believing something (like actually believing something, not just passively agreeing to it), I want it to be worth believing in. So, why would I say that I am a Christian, and profess to believe accordingly, and at the same time acknowledge that other religions could be just as valid because I don't know for sure that mine is 'right'? If I didn't know (and by that I mean "have absolute faith that," meaning there is no doubt or room for question in my mind) that my beliefs were true, then I would abandon them tomorrow because they would be a waste of time, energy and emotion. If everyone's beliefs are valid, then it makes individual beliefs irrelevant. I find the whole notion of pluralism quite depressing and if I were a pluralist, well, I would not be a pluralist anymore because I would just stop believing anything. What's the point?

I personally lean much more heavily toward the concept of tolerance as described by Burklo. Christians are so quick to shudder at the idea of tolerance, as though it were equivalent to pluralism, and I certainly would not have used the term to describe myself before thinking it through as I have been lately. So, let me explain...

I think the foundation of tolerance is extremely important, especially as a Christian. The idea of loving and accepting people regardless of their current beliefs and/or past experiences is one that even Jesus adhered to (dining with 'sinners' and talking to the woman at the well, etc...). To be "intolerant" is to not show the unconditional love of the Father. I believe God loves everyone, that His heart breaks when anyone sins and that He genuinely desires to have everyone enter into relationship with Him. So, it seems to me that if we, as humans, decide that some people are to be shown love and acceptance and others aren't, we are creating a false image of God to those people; essentially, we are sending the message that God does not love "people like them." We need to show God's unconditional love and acceptance of people who do not believe in Him so that they will eventually see the Truth.

However, this does not mean that we are to accept what they believe or what they do, if it contradicts what we know to be The Truth. This is where people can go wrong with the idea of being tolerant. The idea is that we are tolerant of the person themselves, but without approving or showing approval for their actions. For example, I can have a Hindu friend and can accept her as a person without either believing that she is "right" or pressuring her to convert to Christianity (which are often the two extremes taken). Similarly, I can have a friend who thinks abortion or homosexuality is okay, and I can still show them God's love through friendship and acceptance without accepting their beliefs as true, or even without acknowledging that they might be true.

The important factor here, though, is to maintain integrity at all times. If we are truly representing God, we need to make sure that the signals we send are in line with his values. So, my Hindu friend will know I am a Christian, and when issues arise I will most certainly address them in a manner consistent with my faith. My pro-abortion friend will know that I am firmly pro-life but will also know that I am not the kind of person to advocate murdering abortion doctors or burning down the clinics. 

Another thing is, this is not to say that there is never any 'sharing of my faith.' As a Christian, of course I firmly believe that people who are not Christians need to "find Jesus" and that part of my calling as a Christian is to play some roll in facilitating that. However, I am a firm believer that the Holy Spirit is the only one who can save anyone, and that it is He who prompts people to that decision point. It is my job, as a humble human, to remain constantly attuned to the prompting of the Spirit in my life so that if He chooses to use me in some way, I am ready and willing to do so. I may have a conversation with someone that a Christian observer might deem a "missed opportunity," but if I did not feel it was God's desire for me to take the conversation there, then I wouldn't go there; the risk of trying to push "salvation" on our own schedules is that we end up doing more harm than good. If the person is not ready to hear the Message, then my pushiness could be the biggest turn-off ever! The Spirit does the work in the hearts of people, and we are sometimes blessed with the opportunity of being able to answer their questions and guide them to their new life as a Christian. We need to remain open to the prompting of the Spirit; we also need to pray for the people, of course, but I believe we should be praying for the Holy Spirit to work in their lives and prepare them for a relationship with God and that we would be attuned to His prompting so that we don't miss an opportunity to discuss with them, as opposed to praying only that God would give us an opportunity. It isn't about our finding the right time, because there won't be a right time unless the Spirit is already moving in their life and the timing is God's. 

I hope that all came out correctly. If anyone actually reads this, please feel free to post comments, questions and your own thoughts; I'm interested in what other people think...]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:03:03 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid>http://virb.com/jpellowe/posts/text/512556</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
