Sunday, May 9, 2010
Communicating With a One Year-Old
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Emerson at 11 Months
Monday, January 18, 2010
Emerson at 10 Months
Now with his fifth tooth coming in, he's moving on to more and more solid foods and learning to eat on his own. We introduced him to whole wheat saltines, and he loved them. Finally, after a few times of trying to shove the entire thing into his mouth, he realized it may not be wise to try to eat the whole cracker all at once! (word of advice: cracker crumbs and overalls don't mix!)
And to round out the end of the week's highlights, later in the week after Amber gave E a bath and set him on the floor, she went out of the room and came back to a smiling baby. After going out of the room again to find him smiling when she returned, she wondered what was going on while she was out of the room. So, she peeked in while Emerson wasn't looking and found that he had discovered and was delighting in his "malehood"! Yes, you are a boy, son.
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Emerson's Health Survey
... [#6] Get along well in social situations?
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
The Un-Pacifier

the "soothie" over the other pacifiers (when he takes them, which is rare these days anyway), so I thought it would calm him down. To add to the pacifier, I took him out on the front porch, which usually distracts him from whatever he's upset about. Apparently, the soothie wasn't soothing enough, as he kept pushing on it with his hand and moving it around. Again, he's often chewed on the side of this pacifer too and played with it (I sometimes wonder if he thinks its just like any other toy). But this time, he managed to get the entire thing into his mouth! Honestly, I still can't believe he did that because it makes me gag just to put the whole thing in my mouth (yes, I actually tried). I pulled it out immediately, and alas, had to opt for a different soothing technique. Sunday, September 6, 2009
Summer's Last Hurrah
Finally, on Sunday, the family cheered Brant and Brogan on as they swam, biked, and ran for two hours. Afterward, we were off back to Pittsburgh. We took a slight detour near Dayton, OH to see our friends Matt and Nancy who had just moved from Lafayette to the Dayton-Fairborn-Springfield area. A couple hours later, we were back on the road for an exhausting five more hours (which should have taken three and a half but Emerson was sick of being in the car). By the time we got home we needed a vacaction from our vacation!!Tuesday, August 11, 2009
What Kind of God Are You?
In my last post, I mentioned my dreadful situation of watching my son choke and my response to the situation. That experience also got me thinking about the nature of God. Depending on your theological persuasion, there are a number of emotions that God does or does not experience. Or if you’re an Aristotelian, you’re inclined to say that God is pure thought, so to speak of God and emotion at all is to venture into the realm of metaphor. Generally speaking, there are two schools of thought on this issue (that’s being reductionistic, of course, but the other views seem to be varying degrees of the following two):
The God of Neoplatonic thought, and Calvinism in many respects,(and what is often viewed as orthodox) has a limited scope of feelings. This God may (metaphorically) experience love, joy, peace, anger, righteous indignation, and desire justice. That may even be going too far; perhaps God IS these things (e.g., “God is Love”), but to say he experiences these things would be to place him in the realm of time. But this God certainly does not experience fear, panic, the pressure of taking risks, courage, doubt, the feeling of second-guessing himself, or the sheer delight of surprise. On the other hand, the God of Open Theism and other related views says that God experiences all of these feelings.
There are people—smart and contemplative people, I might add—on both sides. And they don’t take a side due to some shallow shot at proof-texting. Each position can present reasonable and convincing arguments for their case. And each position caters to a certain list of Scripture passages for support (or a certain method of interpretation of Scripture).
The Calvinist resorts to verses that support God’s omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, immutability, impassibility (does not feel emotion), foreknowledge, and timelessness (terms which have come from Greek philosophy, I might point out). They cite, “For I am the Lord, I change not” (Mal. 3:6), “All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to me” (Ps. 139:16), “For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son…And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified” (Rom. 8:29-30), “For he chose us in him before the creation of the world” (Eph. 1:4), or “From one man he made every nation of men…and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live” (Acts 17:26).
The Open Theist resorts to verses that support God experiencing emotion (and Christ’s humanity), not knowing what will happen due to human freedom, and working in tandem with man to bring about his goals for the world (e.g., such as prayer changing God’s mind). They cite, “But Moses sought the favor of the Lord his God. ‘O Lord,’ he said, ‘why should your anger burn against your people…’ Then the Lord relented and did not bring on his people the disaster he had threatened” (Ex. 32:11-14), “The prophet Isaiah son of Amoz went to him and said, ‘This is what the LORD says: … you are going to die; you will not recover.’ Hezekiah turned his face to the wall and prayed to the LORD…Then the word of the LORD came to Isaiah: … ‘This is what the LORD, the God of your father David, says: I have heard your prayer and seen your tears; I will add fifteen years to your life” (Isa. 38:1-5), “I thought that after she [Israel] had done all this she would return to me but she did not” (Jer. 3:7), “The Lord was grieved that he had made man on the earth” (Gen 6:6), and “When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he had compassion and did not bring upon them the destruction he had threatened” (Jonah 3:10).
My concern is not which position is “right.” If there was a definitive conclusion, one would think that the Holy Spirit would have told us by now or that God would have been a bit clearer in his directions.
I am more interested in the psychology between why someone chooses one over the other. Both positions are concerned with preserving something they consider central to God’s character. The Calvinist wants to preserve God’s sovereignty; the Open Theist wants to prevent God from being the cause of evil. The Calvinist wants to preserve God’s transcendence and sing, “How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out” (Rom. 11:33); the Open Theist wants to preserve God’s immanence, to have a “high priest” who is able to “sympathize with our weaknesses” (Heb. 4:15). We could say, both positions are often argued for out of the best of intentions.
Since Scriptural support can be found for both (and both sides could easily appeal to the Holy Spirit to claim they’ve got it right!), I’m convinced that the majority of people fall down on one side of the spectrum or the other, in the end, because it is the position that provides them the greatest sense of security, hope, or sense of justice (that is, unless they just blindly accept one since its been taught them…). Actually, most people probably hold to the synthesis of the two positions (e.g., I know many professing Calvinists who sincerely believe in the power of prayer), not realizing that, to many philosophers and theologians, they are mutually exclusive. Ironically then, the nature of God’s emotions (or lack thereof) is decided on by emotion! One person finds security in a God who is cool in the face of evil and suffering and death because he is orchestrating it all and knows how it will pan out. Another finds security in a God who creates space for true human freedom. One finds refuge in God’s constancy; the other finds peace in a God who understands the roller coaster that constitutes human existence.
So I ask myself, thinking about the feeling of panic—an urgency that motivated me to action and was fueled with love and deep concern—I experienced when my child was choking, do I want a God who is sovereign but impassible in my time of need or a God who “panics” for the sake of his people? If God is Father, if I’m to learn how to be a good father by looking to the Father (there's another metaphor), what kind of God is helpful for me in this situation? How do I pray to a God who doesn’t understand the feeling of panic when his child is in danger—or can’t share with me in the delight of surprise, for that matter (just think about it, isn't the delight of surprise one of the greatest things about life?)?
On the other hand, the God I am now describing is starting to sound a little like Santa Claus, there at my beck and call, or at the very least, a tamed God who I can comprehend and fits within certain parameters and expectations (which is bordering on idolatry). Then again, the God of metaphysics is pretty tame (i.e., predictable).
With all these meandering ramblings, I end this post and return to my fussing child. I wonder how God feels about fussy children (he has lots of them!).
Friday, July 10, 2009
Give me a break!
According to most doctor recommendations, a four-month old is supposed to take 2-3 naps a day for a total of 4-5 hours or so in addition to an evening of 10 hours of sleep. Conversely, the infant is supposed to be awake for about nine hours of the day.
Emerson decided he would only take one nap today for a total of one hour. He has decided he doesn't like to go to sleep; more specifically, he won't go to sleep for me. Apparently, Amber has something I don't. It's not just that when he's with me he thinks its time to play either. All the methods I used to have up my sleeve to get him to take a nap simply don't work anymore. I've tried walking him around the neighborhood in an Infantino or in a stroller to lull him to sleep. I tried driving him around town. Doesn't work. He just looks around these days. I'll rock him, sing to him, put him in a dark room, lay down with him... all to no avail. For a while, we thought maybe he just wasn't getting enough to eat—which is also problematic, as it means he thinks he can only fall asleep if he's eating. So today, I stuffed him full. It worked the first time. And when he woke up twenty minutes into his nap I was able to rock him and use a bottle to get him to fall back asleep. Forty minutes later? Not a chance. A little while later, when the bags under his eyes made it obvious he was tired, I tried feeding him more. He got to the point that he was pushing the bottle away. He just keeps wanting to stay awake, keeps getting his “second wind” (and third, and fourth...).
Two days ago, I had similar issues but it wasn't as bad. He slept for a total of two hours that afternoon. At one point, after wrestling with him to go to sleep, I finally set him down on his belly so he could look around, and he looked straight at me with a big grin, as if to say, “Ha! I win!” Later, I laid down with him in bed and sang to him to see if that would work. Then, I stopped singing and closed my eyes to feign sleep (which, amazingly enough does work sometimes in the early morning when he wakes up at 5AM and we want him to go back to bed. Apparently, if there's no one to give him attention, he figures he might as well sleep). Instead, he started smacking me in the face and stuck his finger up my nose. He's four months old and he already knows. I can't trick this kid. Like this morning when I was playing with him and his toy lion and trying to get him to think that the lion was talking to him: Every time I would say something in the “lion voice” he would turn his head away from the lion and look straight at me as if to say, “Are you kidding me?”
So tonight, Amber gets home, feeds him, and he falls right to sleep. We're going out to dinner. I pick him up five minutes later and put him in the car seat. He fidgets a bit more than normal but he stays asleep. Good deal. Before we get out the door, he's awake again. By the time we get to the restaurant, he's hit his wall and starts complaining that he's tired and finally finds solace in sucking the life out of his fingers and blanket.
Child-rearing is easy(ier) until they start becoming sentient creatures. Yeah, its only going to get more difficult.
For the first time in my life, I wish I could grow a boob. It would have to be retractable. “Go go gadget boob!” Bam! And after I settled Emerson down from my retractable boob poking him in the eye, maybe he would finally take a nap.