Adventures in Security: 0 Days Without an Incident

My streak is over. I have been working security at a nearby ritzy venue for almost a year. Over the course of that time, I have somewhat proudly noted that every real fight or altercation we have encountered I have been absent. I would insinuate my particular demeanor was more comforting and successful to de-escalate situations instead of allowing disagreements to turn to fights. It is worth mentioning the pedigree of the venue is far from the typical dive bar. We are not some ragtag tight polo shirt wearing element. We are in suits minus the tie, if you can peg a man by his dress then we are certainly a professional team. A rough approximation would say there are only events which require our intervention once a month. A typical night is filled with checking IDs, assisting bussers with broken glasses, and clearing the venue at closing time. As with most security, our primary purpose is fulfilled in our mere presence. I should probably note that of the three nights a week which our security team is present, I usually only work one of those.

Although I have an older brother, throughout our childhood we never really fought. Dad ensured no such hijinks would be permitted and it worked. We were never taught to back down from any hostile acts but nor were we taught to go looking for trouble. Because my investigation in Complementarian theology followed my service in the Army, I am not inclined to think the “protective desire” was something from my theological convictions. I do not know. We can chalk it up as a social construct which much of my generation has embraced.

Anyways, Saturday night was a learning experience. Not only did I get to assist with an escort following an altercation, as that one was settling I was the lead guard who broke up another fight. Adrenaline flowing in all, the true question of fight or flight was answered in the heat of the moment. It should be noted, that we do not fight patrons… well, I do not fight patrons. When two people are not playing nice with each other, the best resolution is to separate them. It is not worth the time or effort to figure out who was in the right or wrong until the altercation is ceased. We ascertain the details and responsibilities of the event following a successful ceasing of the fight itself. My job is to get between two people fighting and separate them. Not only was that night a first, which I finally got to be the first person on scene, it was the first time I was really punched in the face. I am quite certain had it not been for a broken nose my junior year of highschool, I would certainly have bled after that strike, thanks for that Dave :D.

Once the sting of the facial numbness streaked across my face and the fight was stopped I almost instantly thought about a quote from Muhammad Ali a friend has often quoted to me. “Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.” Of course, my friend has always used that phrase more for its metaphorical purpose, but this weekend it was rather literal. Until one is presented with an actual situation where tempers are flaring, danger and fear were present, we can only hope to do the right thing given sufficient mental preparation and/or physical training. Due to my lack of direct experience, I have not had much opportunity to hone my hand-to-hand combat skills. I can generally use my size and strength enough to mitigate my lack of technique, but even then, until this weekend all such mental simulations remained only in theory.

Now I know. I can take a real hit to the face. Aside from the crash against my skull, and slight numbness, I did not falter. I continued pulling the patrons off of one another and once the two were separated the altercation was finished. In the aftermath I was reminded of the temperament of my colleagues. The would undoubtedly disagree with my findings in Babysitting and Bouncing.

I was also able to take a few minutes to reflect upon the numerous types of security I have been involved. From time as a soldier, to a summer camp security guard, to a bouncer. Each capacity has honed the desire to protect into an ability to do so. I am also reminded of the repeated instruction in Army Combatives training. Our instructors repeatedly stated “We are only teaching you just enough to get your ___ beat.” It was a rather simple block of instruction but they were certain that we did not act too empowered by our basic combative skills test. If I recall right, on one of my sparring opportunities I dived head-first into a guillotine choke hold. Oh the joys of youth and vigor.

I returned from Hume on Friday, after a two-week visit. I truly love Hume and the people up there. This summer is far different from how I imagined it even two months before. It has required a type of waiting that has not been required since my exit from the Army. I had no idea what I would be doing this summer as it began and as the weeks passed hopes were dashed and opportunities unveiled. These revelations remind and reassure me that I am supposed to be exactly where I am. God has been guiding these steps far longer than I have been aware enough to recognize their destination. My adventures for this summer are far from over. Although the desired accomplishments are somewhat lacking, the thankfulness for being about to return to Hume, more than statisfy.

Women in Combat: Theological Considerations

Gender has become a rather contentious issue in recent years. From the Obergefell v. Hodges decision on marriage, to the transition of celebrity’s gender identity, to the bathroom issues within the private and public realm, it appears to be a defining time in our social history. Within the military community changes have also been made and achieved. Most recently women almost had to register for the draft.  There are several military cultural factors that contribute to the discussion which have not been articulated well. I will attempt to address them as best as I can. In this part, I’ll consider the theological implications.

A brief summary of Complementarianism. It is a theological view that gender roles exist for men and women. This takes place in the home and church. As a single guy, I have never had to work out the exact details of what that will look like for the family I hope to have. I have had amazing demonstrations of what this looks like in practice with a number of families in my church. Of particular influence has been the example of the family I have lived with for the last several years. Their godly example has added numerous practical examples to a theology I embraced from a predominantly scholastic understanding. Men and women are of equal value as image bearers of God, but they are not the same. Based on my observations, outside of churches who make this position a distinctive, complementarianism is a minority view within the Christian community.

Perhaps the most misunderstood aspect of complementarianism is the confusion with chauvinism. Gender roles are not about ability or fitness. Given the whole of the Christian life is not about our abilities or anything we do but depends on who God is and what he has done, this understanding should not be difficult to receive. This probably makes more sense coming from a Reformed theological position concerning salvation.

How does a theologically conservative Christian integrate his somewhat libertarian political beliefs within this political discussion? Yes, I am a “combat veteran” according to the Department of Veteran Affairs. Excluding the infrequent basic combat training, my time in the  Army were all as staff positions. Every level of training and every unit I was assigned was integrated. Throughout the totality of both my deployments I worked alongside of and was subordinate to women.

Being subordinate to women in those roles did not challenge my complementarian view of gender because Complementarianism concerns itself with the order of the home and church. I do not see it necessarily applying outside those institutions. I do not see a conflict between women in secular supervisory positions and a complementarianism. I do not see a clear theologically based teaching that would prohibit women from operating in combat roles.

Even in the designation of men as protector, the context is between a husband and wife. The Genesis account of the Fall makes certain implications that the man should be the protector, but again, that was a husband and wife context. The argument is “Why did God call to Adam even though Eve sinned first?” I think this implied that Adam should have protected his wife, he failed to protect her in that instance. The purpose of the text was not to articulate a firm position on gender roles, at best I have to insert my understandings to find that conclusion. The examples throughout the Old Testament where only men were designated as soldiers were descriptive over prescriptive. I think there are certain practical and strategic reasons why the armies in the ancient world were almost exclusively for men. Those reasons are not based in a theological understanding.

The best biblical instance of men being designated as the protectors come from the analogy of husband and wife to Christ and the Church. Once again, this is limited within the husband and wife relationship. This is where I derive that the man is to be the protector. To be the protector he does not have to have a disposition towards violence. In fact, I have known many women, Christ followers and not, who had better dispositions to physical hostility than men. Half jokingly even as ushers we have coined the emergency exit in the sanctuary adjacent to childcare as the “mama bear door.” Given the instance of an emergency evacuation, there is no question many moms will attain what might be superhuman strength and will to get to their children.

Whether one is predisposed to address physical hostility or not on a theological level is irrelevant. Remember, the basis of the Christian faith is to do things through God’s power and ability, not our own. Therefore the sacrificial husband needs only to sacrifice himself in obedience to God. Whether that means engaging in the fight he may or may not win, or he will pick up the extra shifts of work to provide, all of it is in obedience to Christ from the example he provided. To be the head means to set himself aside for the good of others. When there is a sacrifice to be made, it first comes from the man. Depending on the day, this may look like a burden or a joy, hopefully it will be a joy more than a burden.

Within the secular context, the sacrificial nature of the relationship tends to only exert itself in the dire circumstances. There is certainly a predominant view that men are natural protectors, whether this comes from an evolutionary understanding of society and social constructs or is an example of biblical masculinity, I would argue the popular understanding is a result of all the influences. Anecdotally, I have encountered many agnostic and non-theist men who held a “traditional” view of women and children especially when the issue relates to self defense. Especially in this nation of immigrants there are innumerable stories of poor families with hard working parents who provided opportunity for their kids they could not achieve. This is perhaps the most common and still compelling example of sacrifice in American society.

I do not see a clear biblical teaching which men ought to be generally postured towards violence. I know between my years in the military and working in numerous security capacities, I am not apprehensive to the idea of physical altercation. There is clear teaching that we ought to be Peacemakers. In the months that working as a Bouncer I have yet to get into a fight. Every opportunity so far, I have been able to de-escalate the tensions to prevent the fight that likely would have occurred. In contrast to the methods of my coworkers, the more I approach Security with an apprehension towards violence the more often the altercations are resolved peacefully. Throughout the process of conflict resolution one must be willing to recognize the real possibilities of harm, but one ought not look forward to it. Any violent action should only be done with the most reluctance. This is the same manner I approach my philosophy of self-defense. I have spent thousands of dollars in equipment and supplies. I’ve spent countless hours practicing at ranges and at home. These exercises are fun in their own right, but the purpose for which I train, I hope with the utmost sincerity will never be needed.

Biblical Gender Roles: Headship vs. Domination

Among my deployment goals, at least for the duration of the deployment, one has been to write more regularly. Clashing with my desire to write something of substance with a decent frequency has been my understanding or at least growth of my understanding of the given topic I wish to share about. Most recently I raided John Piper's online book repository and have had a more fruitful use of my time. I recently finished Biblical Foundations for Manhood and Womanhood (BFMW) and promptly continued on with Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood(RBMW).

When I started reading the first book I was expecting it to talk about masculinity and femininity from scripture. I was thinking something along the lines of John Eldridge's Wild At Heart or Way of the Wild Heart. While it did address masculinity and femininity, the focus was much more specific: defending the complimentarian (gender roles do exist within scripture, such as male headship, pastor/elders, and the sort) view and responding to the egalitarian (gender roles do not exist within scripture and there should be no difference in the manner men and women approach God or each other) view. The topic of gender roles in the church is not one of the most popular topics. In all fairness, I don't think I have ever sat through a sermon addressing gender roles, at least not in person. I have listened to a number of sermons which the gender roles were addressed from time to time but not in detail that would compare with this material. I have read 1 Corinthians 11, 1 Timothy 2, Ephesians 5-6, Titus 2, a number of times. Until a few weeks ago, I never read any articles/essays concerning the Greek text in those verses, or really exploring these topics in depth. Frankly, I was rather unaware of the research and doctrinal implications of these two views. Don't worry I won't attempt to condense the 400 pages I've read so far on this topic into this blog. I wanted to narrow in on what I noticed as a prime issue at the heart of this debate.

The first point I noticed, which has been a bit of a recurring theme among Christian debates, was the immediate approach to scripture. How does each side approach the scriptural support, lack of support, or silence regarding the topic at hand? Did one group tend to focus on arguing from experience vs. scripture? How did they go about trying to address a difficult or culturally unpopular instruction? Did the denial of one non-essential view overflow to a greater essential doctrine peril? One of the variables which make Christian debates particularly easy and painful at the same time is that no matter what, both sides need to rely on Scripture to have any ground. I say easy and painful because many arguments in the secular world cannot come to a solid starting point, yet painful because there should not be such levels of dissension regarding clear teachings of scripture. One side or another often finds themselves judging God's Word instead of humbly approaching it seeking to understand its mystery and submit to its authority.

The second point of controversy within the discussion of gender roles is the misunderstanding of domination compared to headship. Domination is the embodiment of might-over-right, overbearing, abusive, much of what defines popular culture's idea of masculinity. Instead of domination being regarded as the enemy for what it is, masculinity at large was assaulted. Men were told to be passive teddy bears that didn't hurt anyone, their feelings, or to even have a desire to inflict hurt. Some men laid down their masculinity by abdicating their roles as leaders, protectors, and providers. Other men sprinted into the other direction to become dominating womanizing thugs, who disguise themselves as gentlemen because they wear a suit. The modern man has been in crisis to define himself. Domination works for many men as a sense of identity because few women can compete in that arena. The fruit of domination expressed further expressed itself in violent crime, abusive attitudes, and general disregard of others. I would never attempt to defend justification for domination as it is the epitome of immature masculinity. This is the target of reference which egalitarians hone in on to destroy, and for good reason. I have yet to read and I don't expect to ever hear a scriptural defense for a dominating attitude. Headship is the embodiment of mature masculinity, one of my favorite sections of verses in Ephesians 5 describes headship. Christ is to his Church as a husband is to his wife. An excerpt from RBMW which also hits home:

At the heart of mature masculinity is a sense of benevolent responsibility to lead, provide for and protect women in ways appropriate to a man’s differing relationships...A man might say, “I am a man and I do not feel this sense of responsibility that you say makes me masculine.” He may feel strong and sexually competent and forceful and rational. But we would say to him that if he does not feel this sense of benevolent responsibility toward women to lead, provide and protect, his masculinity is immature. It is incomplete and perhaps distorted.

“Mature” means that a man’s sense of responsibility is in the process of growing out of its sinful distortions and limitations, and finding its true nature as a form of love, not a form of self-assertion." -pg 29

I recall some students in the high school group picking my brain on the infamous "woman submit" theme found in Ephesians 5:22-24, my response was twofold. One, a man not dare quote verses 22-24 without including 25-33, to do so is not only incomplete to the context of the text but it can lead one to wrongfully think scripture rubber stamps a dominating attitude, yet it immediately gives instruction to the husband on how to love his wife. I found it interesting that the instruction of submission, an action, for which men are more typically action-oriented was given to the wife. While love, an instruction of emotional-orientation, was given to the husband.

Christ perfected headship by his sacrifice, leadership, and love. This is to be the example that men are to follow that we might be mature men. I'm not saying to be mature Christian men, this is just to be a mature man. Because this is what it means to be a man, how much more should we look to the men in the Church fulfill this role in an exemplary manner?

This is a Hard Teaching - 1 Timothy 2:9-14

Needless to say after returning home, my blogging has been greatly diminished. This is mostly due to being back in community and much of the thoughts that roll around have been able to be discussed. Then again, while basking in perhaps one of the most enjoyable Sundays I've had in many years, this thought hit me and I wanted to see if I can grapple with it.

1 Timothy 2:9-14 probably ranks up there at the top of many people's minds when it comes to difficult passages to understand and even more apply. I think Peter said it well in 2 Peter 3:14-16, with "there are some things hard to understand" being ever so clear. The response to this passage usually varies somewhere between justified chauvinism and ignoring the passage altogether. Perhaps the unique factor about this difficult passage isn't so much its clarity but just the opposite. Plainly read it has some serious guidelines that are difficult to apply and to justify; both to the non-Christians who view God's Word as a sexist book which seeks to subjugate women; and to those earnestly seeking to follow God's Word but are at a bit of a loss on this passage's application.

This commentary tends to focus on the cultural aspect and focus on the physical adornment and exclusion occurring in the church than this as an impendent issue. The problem with this is it doesn't address if the practice of flaunting wealth and style are still applicable things to avoid in orderly worship, worse still it often tends to resign this passage to being cultural and thus outdated and we can justifiably ignore it. The primary problem with this as with other difficult passages is the inevitable slippery slope we establish within Scripture while fully ignoring clear teachings to satisfy our own wills or misunderstanding. Or as Peter through the Holy Spirit says, "ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction." If we believe the Bible is God's Word and that God is perfect without error, then we must deduce the Bible is God's inerrant Word. This also happens to be a primary doctrine for you two other doctrine nerds who might read this.

On to the meat, within the context the most biting part I would think is verse 12, "I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet." While there is plenty of meat to deal with verse 11, for the sake of brevity (like I am good at that anyways...) I would rather refer to Ephesians 5:22-33 which it explicitly describes the relationship a husband and wife ought to have. A piece I have heard and fully agree with about the Ephesians passage, if a husband loves his wife as Christ loved the Church, why wouldn't she want to submit to him? Enough said.

I suppose the difficulty I have by attempting to tackle this passage is much in the practice (or lack of practice) of church discipline. The best way I could describe church discipline is the maintenance and accountability of our own. Paul speaks of this most clearly throughout 1 Corinthians (5:9-13, 6:1-8, 11:27-32). Peter also explains the concept in 1 Peter 2:13 - 3:22. In Church we ought to submit ourselves to one another, everyone ought to be submissive to someone; many of us are submissive to the pastor/elders, deacons, older men and women, and so on. There are checks in balances in the Church as well. We call him Jesus. Once we grasp the idea of submission to one another, the judgment we are to cast upon one another as a Shepherd protects his flock; in love, and the purity of Christ's Church the passage in Timothy doesn't irk as much.

It is important to remember one of the primary duties of pastors/elders in scripture is to practice authority (Shepherd in fluffier terms) over the members of the church. I might be isogeting my youth ministry experience on this, but when Paul restricts women from practicing authority over men is it really that outlandish? Consider this; within the family are mothers not the most appropriate to deal with certain issues of their daughters and likewise fathers with their sons? Likewise I directly consider this in light of my work with the high schoolers. If there is an issue with a girl, I would not attempt to address the issue at large. Women handle women's issues and men handle men's issues. I think many of us would find it odd if women sought to offer guidance on being a man when men are present to give such guidance. This is in no way saying mothers cannot teach their sons as some naysayers would attempt to imply. Children are to submit to their parents, and likewise parents are to practice authority over their children.

Whether you want to get into the issue if women can teach men, I think that is a less clear issue. The most profound example I would point to in scripture is the instruction Priscilla and Aquila gave to Apollos in Acts 18 Priscilla and Aquila are addressed 6 times in scripture. Of those 5 of those times Priscilla is addressed first, considering the writing style it is believed she had the stronger relationship with Paul in faith. In the personal setting, such as home church/bible study in which the couple instructed Apollos, it is reasonable to say Priscilla did more teaching, yet she did so without practicing authority over Apollos. I think it is also important to specify that Paul says a woman is not to have authority over a man, not boy, man. Leading up to a man, I would say it is more than permissible to practice authority on non-adult males. Then the can of beans opened "What is a man?" That is a separate blog unto itself. The short answer, a man is a male who takes responsibility for himself and those around him.

Does this expand to women in the pulpit? Yes, I think it does. I will make it clear though, based on what I have seen and read showing that women are more numerous in ministry, I believe this to be the result of males not being men. If males would be men, much of this controversy and frustration would disappear. The confusion and misunderstanding of what Paul wrote through the Holy Spirit will clear up and we can practice Church as it was meant to be done.

Fair Oaks Rock Choir Tour 2008

Written 22 March 08

Rock Choir Tour '08

How can one encompass the experiences of this past week in written format? This was by far the most memorable tour I have been privileged to embark upon, does not seem sufficient. I recall the brainstorming process for this blog. Is this going to be a flurry of emotions and joys? Not exactly my usual prose. Would I write my thoughts about the direction of the youth ministry and the trust I have concerning this next year? Would I write exhortations and advice as though this is a farewell letter to those I bonded with over this past week? We'll see where it goes.

The knowledge that my stay in California is at its closing has me almost regretting I ever joined the Army. I once again must leave so many that I love. At the same time it is through the Army that I have been able to support so many students, be it in California, Germany or Slovakia. The end surely justifies the means. I do not question my belief in my duties as a soldier, however, I am anxious to resume the life in youth ministry. I am joyful about the week, I can't express that enough. Only a few of the seniors knew me before I was a soldier, as life happened I was only able to visit here and there. Be it a youth group or a handshake on a Sunday morning I was not connected with the students on the level of a true friend. Living with the new generation of students over the past week has removed the obscurity that once existed. I wish I could continue to know and guide the students in their high school endeavors, I know most of them will be on the eve of graduation when I return but I won't be starting from scratch.

I think I underestimated how much this tour would impact me. When I first thought about going on Tour it was such a longshot I did not seriously entertain the idea until months after and when it was a real possibility that I would go on tour I was wrapped up in ensuring I could honor my promise and contribute to the direction of the ministry. I believe this last week came together by God's grace and guidance, the coordination of so many variables not within my control is what I consider to be an Act of God. When I finally found myself in the midst of the students I don't think I seriously could have forecast what was to occur. I am a tour veteran but a Rock Choir rookie. Most of the students with whom I bonded with, did not know me prior to Tour. I was starting from scratch. I cannot be so arrogant as to say that I am a natural youth minister, despite me, everything fell into place.

I pray that I offered myself as an appropriate example to the students. I recall my days when I was the freshmen and what I have learned since over the years about youth ministry. I pray that I offered myself as the embodiment of love and not some goofy guy that they politely returned smiles to. There is a part of me that wishes I had spent more time focusing on discipleship, teaching theology, apologetics and the Christian worldview, or trying to prepare them for the life that awaits many of them in the coming months.

I recall a discussion with Missionary friends about the differences between High School and Jr High Ministry. I have always preferred high schoolers because they are closer to becoming adults. It is those years when they become responsible for their own acts. Teenagers start to form their character and identity. Junior Highers are often at this semi-child adult limbo filled with new chemicals that makes those years especially interesting. My friends noted that they preferred junior highers because all they ask is "Do you like me?” High schoolers approach you as "Do I like you?". I do agree and believe high schoolers can be more stubborn and difficult to minister to; however, I have yet to see a wall love cannot break through. I try not to discount the work of the Spirit but my experience with so many that have been in youth ministry and that have gone on multiple tours but have still walked away... it pains me to see it happen. I hope that every student I interact with will see God's will for their lives and live it accordingly. Our youth today does not recognize their potential, I think in much the same way my generation.

I have had this constant fear when I am with the students that they see me as nothing more than a goofy guy. While I do believe I behaved in a goofier manner that I normally do, I hope it was conveyed as the love I wish to convey to them that Christ has bestowed upon me. I constantly have the message Darin McWatters said at a "Guy's Talk." Based upon his observations the purpose of the adult human male was to be entertaining, nothing more than a jester really. He proceeded to challenge the guys present to be more. As far as a social forecast for the purpose of men, I think he was dead on. I have seen far too many young men and developing men that have bought into that mentality and performed excellently in that capacity. However, they did not go beyond it, they did not develop themselves as spiritual leaders and some have fallen from the faith. It does not pain me that they have walked the path they chose, it does pain me to know that they are missing out on so many of God's blessings if only they would remember who is God.

I do not believe I am a natural leader. I do not enjoy being the center of attention. However, seeing the condition of the faith and not being satisfied with what I have seen has brought me to learn how to be a leader. I was thinking the other day how interesting it is that every single member of the Army is trained to be a leader in some capacity. One must make a purposeful effort to avoid the opportunity to be a leader. When compared to the typical life of a civilian, many who grow into leadership get far fewer opportunities over the same amount of time. It is apparent to me that people who do not want to accept personal responsibility certainly would not want to be responsible for others. Yet, to delegate leadership for the good of all is the backbone of the modern Army. Too often leadership has been perceived as an opportunity to gain power. While it can be a grab for power the purpose of the given power is the victim of improper attitudes about leadership. I see every Christian man as a potential leader, I see them as better potential leaders than myself, and I hope to encourage those whom I interact to be those leaders.

I am attempting to mentally prepare myself for the next year, to remain faithful and continue to grow in my relationship with Christ as well as encourage others in their faith. It is difficult to know I am leaving the students once again. The hope that I will return to be there for them is what will get me through 2008.

Youth Ministry & High School Relationships

As most of you know I plan and hope that my plans fall in line with God's that I will return to Youth Ministry as an official role in the near future (little less than 2 years). Unlike my typical writings that I'll spend a week mulling over to develop the thoughts this one just struck me. Under these circumstances I don't think I am the proper one to be given credit on these thoughts. Could I be that presumptuous?

I think as we approach the idea of being leaders we ought to have an idea of our goal. It sounds simple enough doesn't it? Those goals could be anything from getting the attendance to grow, have students go into ministry after they leave, they could be anything at any magnitude. I could even go so far as to say not having a vision or goal could also be the vision/goal, even as undeveloped and irresponsible it might be. I consider the interaction I have had with students since being in Germany, my many peers who are as old or younger than some of the students I lead in Bible studies back home, I might have the unique perspective of what happens to students when they leave home. I know I wrote something about this in Growing Out Of Faith, and what I have seen happen when they leave. I wouldn't quite say I am revisiting the same topic, instead adding more to it.

Considering what focus I would most want to encourage students the best churchese answer is “Jesus”. Of course I want people to know Christ on the personal level, which is true Christianity. Clarifying the scope which I hope to encourage is where the flurry comes to play. Do I want to focus on service, relationships, drugs, alcohol, sex, and all the usual issues of today's society? Do I want to encourage mass evangelism, discipleship, theology and apologetics? There are so many aspects that can be addressed that are very important that it is clear one person cannot teach all the areas at once. Hopefully that is what other leaders are there for so we can encourage the more specific needs as they are needed.

What came to mind this morning that ties much into the under-developed potential I see in many of today's teenagers was the distraction of dating. Oh no I said it! This is gonna be another dating rant. Nope, or at least I don't think it will be. I think it is fair to say on the eve of my 23rd year I have successfully completed the teenage years and have had decent time to reflect upon those years. Most of you know I have never dated, it was odd back in high school and it is at times rather frustrating in my current state but that is for another time. I suppose this also ties into developing leaders for the next generation. After all, a good leader in my thoughts not only leads well, but trains those he leads to be leaders also.

On to the rant part of the blog. I see many students focused on earthly relationships, which are immature. Not to say they lack the potential to be mature, but in order for maturity to be manifest in a relationship it must first exist in character and faith. The immaturity manifests itself most clearly when they talk about love. When I hear a our 16 year olds talking about love and their deep understanding it takes some restraint to just nod as though I agree with their emotions at that particular moment. When I am snarky I respond that they are in some ""L" state of mind but it isn't love. I know they have a shallow understanding of what love really is... then again this is not limited to teenagers. I know many peers who still think love is a feeling. People get so tied up getting their significant other for their various reasons and in the process of developing their character especially during the teenage years I think many allow their boyfriend/girlfriend to take the place in the heart that God would otherwise fill. In turn God gets some heart scraps if that much and he is more like a lucky charm than Lord. This only happens to really manifest itself when they come to God in their later life if at all.

I find that is a bit out of order how we should be learning about life. If the spiritual is so important why do so few people treat give it preeminence? From my own trials, tribulations, and blessings I have learned of a faith that overflows into my thoughts concerning every aspect of life. I think it is far better to get the right understanding the first time instead of having to return to previous ideas and let Christ rewrite them.

Connecting the dots between my thoughts on teenage lust and youth ministry. I want to focus my message to the more mature students. Please wait on romantic relationships. I think this is especially appropriate considering that I believe the purpose of dating is to find your husband/wife. I don't know many teenagers who initiate relationships with the opposite sex with marriage in mind. More often it is for fun or because that is what youth today believe is appropriate when you like someone of the opposite sex. In my mind playing with emotions and hearts for such trivial causes is rather dangerous and careless.

I find the most benefit from promoting such a lifestyle would be for the guys. Instead of being worried about the social drama that plagues high school they can spend their time developing their leadership skills. I know not every man is a natural leader, but I do believe that as our God given role we are all to be some kind of leader. My leadership skills I think started to develop rather late in my ministry experience. The other main benefit, I think the Christian men would be better prepared to know how to treat women with respect as Christian sisters instead of a possible girlfriend. The aspect of dating, relationships and all that jazz is just a huge distraction instead of capitalizing on numerous opportunities to develop social skills and seek what God has in mind for your life. Not being preoccupied with someone in some relationship that will likely not manifest into marriage.

I suppose the greatest con to my idea is "how will people know how to date/interact if they don't get practice". Being one that still has not dating experience my argument seems to lose validity to many people. I don't approach people like a sport or activity that practice makes perfect. Knowing how to treat people comes from the beliefs and values I hold. Sometimes those are altered according to how I get to know the person, but there is a certain level of respect to be given to every person regardless of how I feel about them. Furthermore, I only need to find one person to marry. If I practice dating like I believe its purpose is then why is trial and error so necessary? I also believe that every person is different. What lessons you may learn from a relationship will either be about yourself or that specific person. Knowing yourself is one of the primary perquisites I think are necessary before starting a relationship.

I cannot discount that I have know a number of married friends who met and started dating as teenagers. This is especially common in the military community. It is one of those "the way things are", there are many a young soldier in training who will marry their sweetheart or break-up. That is the only way people can take their girlfriends with them to where the military sends them. I don't intend these thoughts to be set in stone rules of “how to's”, as there are always exceptional people with exceptional circumstances. Thoughts and lessons to be taught to the masses are developed for the many in a general form of application, not for each and every person to follow exactly.

You're Men Ain't Ya?

I hope the title kind of gave it away, but this one is directed towards the fellas.  Not to say my female friends ought not to read this, perhaps it might strike some interesting feedback with the other fellas you know.  I am reading Way of the Wild Heart currently; the title is one of the catchy phrases that John Eldredge was expounding upon.  This is an excerpt from the movie Open Range found in Way of the Wild Heart.

"In the saloon, they try to rouse the men of the town to action.  One of the local tradesmen says, "It's a shame what this town's come to," to which one of the cowboys replies, "You could do something about it." "What?" The frightened man replies.  "We're freighters.  Ralph here's a shopkeeper."  Then my favorite line: "You're men, ain't ya?"

            The author carries on suggesting that if you are a man you are a fighter.  He also points to biblical examples of population counts which counted the men and also counted every one of them as a fighting man (Numbers 1).  So I have been pondering these statements over the last few days and was curious about what my battles are?  What do I fight for?  I don't know how confrontational I really was prior to reading this book but I feel a fire being fed inside that I ought to be clearly fighting for something.

            It is suggested this desire is part of being a man and I think he's right.  I know this doesn't mean I need to re-class into an infantrymen to get up close and personal when I do happen to go to war.  I make clear that I choose not to fight over stupid things, and when I sense what I hold dear to be in danger, threat or ridicule, I have no problem with charging in.  I tend to keep most battles things that are fought in speech and intellect; I don't have the highest confidence in my physical contact abilities so I do avoid those confrontations very well.  To be honest, I don't think I have ever been in a fist fight in which I was actually fighting for something in such a way.

            I was pondering writing about the evils of the entertainment industry hold on men's hearts and minds.  I have had to reanalyze those thoughts altogether.  I am frustrated that so many millions of American men get caught up into sports, to watch and watch for no seen gain or purpose beyond the entertainment of watching a game.  I think some get a personal value out of knowing who is the best running back or how many touchdowns this player made or how many yards that player ran.  Similar to how some women find value in themselves by knowing powerful or popular people, are some men so satisfied or gather their self worth by watching and knowing sports data?

            I love to play sports; anyone ought to be able to attest I have no issues getting a little contact in sports.  I can't stand to watch a game though.  Sure I suppose there is much to learn from watching the professionals play.  How far is too far?  Sports, in itself are a great thing, to go out on a field and play is one of the ways I feel more like a man.  It is the same feeling as when we've scaled the waterfall on the Guy's camp outs, or kayaking out to the middle of Hume Lake.  The feeling you get after a long run or march is completed.  The sense of accomplishment, the body is exhausted but the heart is charged and I feel alive.  I did play a good game of football this afternoon so I got a little bit of that sensation still running through me.

            The connection between the battles that men ought to fight because we are men and our apparent fixation with sports is this.  We get caught up into watching and get comfortable with it.  I think this is true of our attitudes of sports and it carries over into the realm of the battles we should be fighting as men.  Our sense of leadership and rawness that is who and what we were created to be is stunted by getting close to the battle or the game.

            I am reminded by Darrin McWatters' frustrating "guy's talk" at Hume a few years ago in which he observed the purpose of the modern male is to be nothing more than comic entertainment.  That was the conclusion he came to according to his observations of the role we have in society.  The most frustrating part of that to Darrin, was that the vast majority of men are satisfied in that role, or worse believe themselves to be in that role as an actual purpose.  I like to think and wholeheartedly believe that we are here for more than laughs.

            I recall writing a bit about this in Role of Men, this blog I have a sense of fire inside me.  We need to be more active and assault the forces that assault us.  Not looking for a fight like an angry drunk but be precise about our battles.  As men we our appointed to be the leaders, we need to step forward with the "here am I, send me attitude" and stop fading in the back hoping we won't be asked to help.

The Single Guy

This one is definitely thinking aloud. I wouldn't quiet say this is a rant but ponderous thoughts instead. Contributing factors which have lead me to the thoughts of this developing blog are: the Tuesday night Bible study in which we are now studying Song of Solomon, Dating, or lack thereof, a recent conversation/story I was listening to yesterday, and my overall thought process on the issue over the past year.

I would say at this point I am a professional single guy. I am very used to all the luxuries it includes: my free time is all to myself, I have no obligations in my personal or emotional life to another person, and I can focus on whatever my happy heart desires. At this point though I think I understand Genesis 2:18, "It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him." a bit better than I have in the previous years of my life. Wait a minute? Did I just portray the life of a bachelor in a negative light? Taking the context into account I think this encompasses both our spiritual, emotional and personal life. What do I mean by that? I have known very clearly since I joined the Army that our spiritual lives are meant to be lived in community with each other, something my heart continues to long for.

I have had and still have a small community but once again I am perhaps the lone single soldier who attends the chapel services at my own free will. Living in the barracks has its own perils to one's faith if I want to belong. Based on my blog habits, which I believe are so frequent because I lack people around me who I can vent and talk with. So I use this outlet, my personal life wants to be able to share the deeper moments of my heart with someone. I believe it to be incredibly difficult to live out a powerful life for God without people to surround and recharge you when you need it. Community is so vastly important in our faith I cannot stress its importance any less.

As much fun as I have had with the joking feel of singing like Donkey on Shrek, "I'm so alone" which I do tend to sing at moments of opportunity, I often do feel so alone. Standing back and analyzing my singleness I am at the place in my life that I definitely am tired of being single. There are some pitfalls with this facet of my life being unsatisfied though. Before I start to divulge them all, I think there is a precursor to them lying within me. With the utmost uncertainty I think if I was back in the states I would probably be in a similar social situation, being single. Something Jonathan mentioned to me was I still have a lot to learn when it comes to dating and relationships, I don't doubt it.

I think this realization really hit me while I was sitting in on a conversation of reference. The speaker was talking about how he basically got a girlfriend that he has only talked to by phone and internet. The thing I found most profound was when he was complimenting her about how great of a girl she was and that if he was her boyfriend he would find himself to be very lucky. The first instant thought in my mind was "whoa, now that's some brownie points", but upon further ponderance I don't know if I could be that forward to someone to initiate the more than friends relationship. My goal for so long has been to be "the Friend", and I have always been so comfortable at that point in my friendships I rarely have ever wanted to carry it any further. Now, I sit in reflection and questioning myself, could I move past the friend zone?

Often in my thoughts and imagination of my future relationship with my wife or fiancé (whenever it may happen) I usually glaze over how I went from being the friend to actually having the significant other. The bigger implication I pose to myself, “what kind of spiritual leader would this make me when I haven't the daringness to attempt to initiate more than friendship?” Being friends is a wonderful thing. You can count on friends, hang out with them, and talk about anything you are willing to talk about. The only limits to how far a friendship goes are to how far the two want to take it. Well, the physical part kind of goes without saying. Beyond the line of physical behavior, what are the emotional and spiritual lines?

Something I found interesting which I profoundly disagreed with was advice in The 10 Commandments of Dating; it suggested not to pray together because it can rush a relationship into a more intimate position and speed than what the authors believe is safe. In the context of praying together while alone, yes, there is room for temptation amplified through the spiritual intimacy experienced. Therefore, praying together ought to be done in public. Praying for one another and together is one of the best friend building excercises that can be done. It is not just anyone who would pray for you or with you with a true heart.

When I recall my friendships, sometimes I think the only line that needed to be crossed from friend to a possible romantic relationship would have been to talk about it and see where we were and how we felt about each other as that kind of relationship. But… I have never taken that step. As I mentioned in my dating blog, I find people are entirely too fast and forward in the physicality of relationships. For this reason and because I know myself and my own weaknesses I hope my first kiss will be either after I propose or after I say "I do". Oh yea, I suppose I haven't mentioned that to very many people. Yea… I've never been kissed or anything close. How this applies into my future or possible dating life, it throws an interesting curve, because the factor so often used to determine a couple is “a thing” is such forms of affection. By my own desires I have put it off till much further in the relationship.

What inspired this form of dating ideology was a talk I heard at Hume in 03' by Steve Solomon. I can email it to anyone if you are interested to hear it. I think it puts the bar for men to be spiritual leaders and men of integrity much higher than society can even contemplate. While putting the bar up and burden on me to express my feelings in a way which excludes physical intimacy, it also adds a knot into how do I initiate the relationship to the more than friends level. These details I have no idea how to go about. I suppose there would be dates, and activities. I think I’ll figure it out as I go. Well, not really, for the really good ones I can learn all I need to know by watching some chick flicks. Truth be told, the reason guys can't stand chick flicks is because it makes regular guys look so pathetic. I don't know many guys who can build a telescope or buy a star... Perhaps that is why I like Hitch so much, because it is for the normal guys.

Back to my over-analysis of my dissatisfaction and predicaments of the thing called dating. The most difficult part of the relationship is the maintaining and growing part. After all how much more to it is there? There is spending time together, sharing, doing things, and enjoying being around each other. I think at a certain point one of two things happen, you either get married or break up. This model is with the successful relationship, I kind of glossed over the fights, arguments, and disagreements. Those will happen but it is what they are about and how they are dealt with which contributes to the overall success of the relationship. Actually, for many relationships to get through the fights is one of the most defining aspects to show how important it really is. Talking to friends that for some reason ask me for relationship advice on occasion, I think one of the simplest ways to have a working and good relationship is to treat the person as friends treat each other. So often the issues brought up seem to get convoluted in my friends' minds because their emotions are out of control. My objective outlook allows me to be able to look at their situations and talk it out without being emotionally involved. Essentially working out friend’s relationship problems has taught me the most about relationships directly. I am curious how it will hit me when I am no longer emotionally absent from the issue.

Now that I have expelled the internal issues to me not dating or getting into a relationship there are additional factors as to why I believe I remain in this state of singleness until I get out of the Army. I when I enlisted I knew I would likely not get into a relationship; at that point it didn't seem like such a big deal. At this point, it is bittersweet. To halt my loneliness I have thought of trying to find someone in the local area, but it is quickly snuffed by the realization that I will not remain in this country for more than a year. Where I go in a year it is one of three places, based on my occupation I think you all can guess aside from the States where the other two locations may be.

The environments I have found myself in definitely has a shortage of Christians. By Christians I mean to express those that take their faith seriously enough to practice it despite their surroundings. I have yet to find a single Christian female since I have left the states, which definitely puts a hindrance to starting a relationship. I do not think it is a good idea to attempt more than friendship with someone in the states. Long distance friendships can work, but not that kind I think. It hit me after I read 10 Commandments of Dating, that I am not really looking for someone to date, but a serious relationship dare I say wife. I think that explains much about how I have approached social interaction and relationships thus far. I don't think I was ever looking for a girlfriend; I have always been looking for a wife. I think great friendships can be made anywhere, more than that though requires meeting in person. So I find myself in my current state of singleness by lack of options. I am not really stressing too much expecting to not find someone for this period of time, and so I am the single guy.