Let me just start off by saying that Franklin did much better than I could have ever done running away at the age of 17. If that was me, I would have been royally screwed. Franklin however, did not seem to be phased by the limitless obstacles standing in his way. I'm not saying he had it easy, but I can't say that I would have been able to do as he did even at my age now.
Reading "The Autobiography" gave me a new insight into the person I have learned about with the name Benjamin Franklin. Maybe I didn't pay that close attention in my history classes, or maybe this part of his life never came up. Either way, I definitely learned something new with this reading.
Franklin was without a doubt a "self-made man." He epitomizes "The American Dream." Seeing how he went from having nothing to making a great life for himself gave me a bigger appreciation for him as a man.
I got a pretty big kick out of looking at his two charts. The fact that he took the time to keep track of his sins is quite unique. Most people make a conscious effort to live better, but Franklin took it a whole step up. Maybe even two. I like the idea of using a chart as he did, but it isn't exactly realistic. Franklin was focused on being perfect, but I truly believe in imperfection. I don't think anyone should want to be perfect because then what does a person have to strive for. What's left? Franklin's schedule is unimaginable to me. I tend to think that I have a busy schedule, but I don't think I would be able to survive a day in his shoes. Franklin definitely had his hands full.
Although I don't think it is necessarily healthy to strive for being absolutely perfect, I do think that a lot can be taken from what Franklin was doing for himself.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
An Angry God?
I really enjoyed Jonathan Edwards' "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God." When I first started reading it, I was taken aback by the overwhelming tone of Edwards. I resisted his approach in the beginning. It wasn't long before Edwards reeled me in. His sermon is unlike any other that I have ever heard before.
One thing I have always struggled with when it comes to faith, is the fact that people tend to "sugar coat" everything. For me, that is obnoxious. My personality is much different in the sense that I would rather have someone be brutally honest than try and make me feel better. Edwards did this for me. There are some statements he made that I am sure readers/listeners would not appreciate, but I found them to be rather refreshing. One idea I really connected with was the idea of God not owing us anything and having the ability to do whatever He pleases. This means if God doesn't want to keep his promises and send us all to hell, He could do just that.
We talked some in class about what Edwards may have been trying to relay without saying it. I definitely think someone could focus on the negative attitude that seems to be present in this sermon, but I personally believe that Edwards was doing something greater than stating the fact that God could be unfaithful to us if He so desired. Edwards was implying the greatness of God and the love He clearly has for us. That is what pushed me closer to examining my faith and closer to understanding the goodness of the Lord. That is what I loved about Edwards.
Is God Angry? Maybe. Am I a sinner at the hands of God? Absolutely.
One thing I have always struggled with when it comes to faith, is the fact that people tend to "sugar coat" everything. For me, that is obnoxious. My personality is much different in the sense that I would rather have someone be brutally honest than try and make me feel better. Edwards did this for me. There are some statements he made that I am sure readers/listeners would not appreciate, but I found them to be rather refreshing. One idea I really connected with was the idea of God not owing us anything and having the ability to do whatever He pleases. This means if God doesn't want to keep his promises and send us all to hell, He could do just that.
We talked some in class about what Edwards may have been trying to relay without saying it. I definitely think someone could focus on the negative attitude that seems to be present in this sermon, but I personally believe that Edwards was doing something greater than stating the fact that God could be unfaithful to us if He so desired. Edwards was implying the greatness of God and the love He clearly has for us. That is what pushed me closer to examining my faith and closer to understanding the goodness of the Lord. That is what I loved about Edwards.
Is God Angry? Maybe. Am I a sinner at the hands of God? Absolutely.
Saturday, February 18, 2012
A little mix....
Going back to Bradstreet for literature circles was helpful in understanding her as an author. I found the article interesting and revealing. It exposed the two worlds of Bradstreet: historian and "secret" writer. Just imagining a time when women writers were not embraced is difficult. My group talked a little bit about how Bradstreet was feeling in regards to her self-doubt. She was so critical of herself and appeared to have little faith that her writing was worth reading. It's kind of funny now to think that her writing is being studied in classrooms....
As a group, we also talked about how different her two types of writing was. She was uncensored in her personal writings. It would be interesting to see how she may have changed what she wrote if she knew people would be reading what she wrote. We also found it interesting that she basically gave up on her role as a historian because of the house fire. I could picture someone in bed head throwing a book down and saying, "the hell with it."
Edward Taylor wasn't exactly my favorite. I didn't find myself drawn into the reading, but I was able to appreciate his choice in words. I also like his distinction between body and soul in "Meditation 8." Choosing to relate communion and the body of Christ to sugar cake was a smart choice on Taylor's part. He was able to capture the sweetness of God by doing this. In all honesty, it even made me a bit hungry for some cake. :)
Cotton Mather was another one of the authors I have enjoyed. The Wonders of the Invisible World was no short of interesting. The fact that he claimed to be telling the story as a historian, yet give harsh opinions of the woman at the end was quite humorous to me. For some reason, I have always found it to be funny when someone claims to have no opinion on a subject when they clearly are expressing one to others. For that reason alone, I loved Mather.
As a group, we also talked about how different her two types of writing was. She was uncensored in her personal writings. It would be interesting to see how she may have changed what she wrote if she knew people would be reading what she wrote. We also found it interesting that she basically gave up on her role as a historian because of the house fire. I could picture someone in bed head throwing a book down and saying, "the hell with it."
Edward Taylor wasn't exactly my favorite. I didn't find myself drawn into the reading, but I was able to appreciate his choice in words. I also like his distinction between body and soul in "Meditation 8." Choosing to relate communion and the body of Christ to sugar cake was a smart choice on Taylor's part. He was able to capture the sweetness of God by doing this. In all honesty, it even made me a bit hungry for some cake. :)
Cotton Mather was another one of the authors I have enjoyed. The Wonders of the Invisible World was no short of interesting. The fact that he claimed to be telling the story as a historian, yet give harsh opinions of the woman at the end was quite humorous to me. For some reason, I have always found it to be funny when someone claims to have no opinion on a subject when they clearly are expressing one to others. For that reason alone, I loved Mather.
Held Captive
I thoroughly enjoyed Mary Rowlandson's A Narrative of the Captivity and Restoration. For me, this was the first time reading something from the point of view of someone held captive by Native Americans. I usually hear of the opposite. I am currently in a class about Native Americans, so it is interesting to hear of an instance when they were the ones conflicting harm/fear upon someone of the white community. From my experience, it is more common to hear of what Rowlandson described being done to a Native American.
Because of this new perspective, I took interest in her writing right away. Like Bradstreet, I found Rowlandson to be very relatable. She made an experience that she had realistic and relatable even to me, a person who has never been held captive and forced to leave my family.
In class, we talked about how Rowlandson described the Native Americans. At first I could hear her anger as she basically dehumanized them. Towards the end, her expressions of them occurred less and were softened. I think this happened because Rowlandson's "normal" became different. When she was first taken, she was new to the situation. After a while, she got used to her surroundings. This is not to say that she enjoyed her circumstance, but I think her anger and fear diminished.
Rowlandson's account of her captivity opened my eyes to a different side of the tensions between Native Americans and Caucasians.
Because of this new perspective, I took interest in her writing right away. Like Bradstreet, I found Rowlandson to be very relatable. She made an experience that she had realistic and relatable even to me, a person who has never been held captive and forced to leave my family.
In class, we talked about how Rowlandson described the Native Americans. At first I could hear her anger as she basically dehumanized them. Towards the end, her expressions of them occurred less and were softened. I think this happened because Rowlandson's "normal" became different. When she was first taken, she was new to the situation. After a while, she got used to her surroundings. This is not to say that she enjoyed her circumstance, but I think her anger and fear diminished.
Rowlandson's account of her captivity opened my eyes to a different side of the tensions between Native Americans and Caucasians.
Sunday, February 12, 2012
In Love....
I am absolutely in LOVE with Anne Bradstreet. The entire time I was reading, I kept telling myself how good she is. Bradstreet did an amazing thing when she took the image of a Puritan and made it human. She brought forward a real person with real struggles.
The letter written to her children was one of my ultimate favorites. Just the idea of taking the time to write something that is intended to be read after one's death is remarkable. I thought it was something that served two purposes. One was to leave her children with something to remember, and the other was to let readers see her as a real person and as a Christian. I found her story to be inspiring. Bradstreet's honesty took over and shed light on the struggles one can have in their faith.
Bradstreet endured a lot in her life. She had ups and downs just as any person does. Hearing about her faith and the challenges that arose within it gave me a better idea of what type of person she truly was. I think all people can connect with what she went through in some way. I know part of the reason I enjoyed her work so much was the fact that I could relate to some of the feelings and experiences she had. Her life experiences gave her writing a powerful boost that results in her being timeless.
There is no question that she was a remarkable woman and author.
The letter written to her children was one of my ultimate favorites. Just the idea of taking the time to write something that is intended to be read after one's death is remarkable. I thought it was something that served two purposes. One was to leave her children with something to remember, and the other was to let readers see her as a real person and as a Christian. I found her story to be inspiring. Bradstreet's honesty took over and shed light on the struggles one can have in their faith.
Bradstreet endured a lot in her life. She had ups and downs just as any person does. Hearing about her faith and the challenges that arose within it gave me a better idea of what type of person she truly was. I think all people can connect with what she went through in some way. I know part of the reason I enjoyed her work so much was the fact that I could relate to some of the feelings and experiences she had. Her life experiences gave her writing a powerful boost that results in her being timeless.
There is no question that she was a remarkable woman and author.
A Rocky Start
I'll admit, I was not totally drawn into the readings of Winthrop and Smith. Neither was able to convince me to join their "team." It wasn't until our class discussion that I was really able to appreciate each author for their own perspective. Sometimes all I need is to listen to other interpretations and opinions.
If I was forced to pick a side, I would have to go with Smith. As much as I would love to believe in the community that Winthrop spoke about, my realist side kicks in. I think Winthrop had some good ideas when it comes to people helping people and taking care of one another. When I think about Winthrop, I think about the ideal not the reality. It is reality that some people will achieve more than others, and some people will work harder than others.
Because of the realist in me, I could understand and appreciate what Smith had to say. At times I felt he came off as being pompous, but other times I felt he was just being sincere. People who work hard should be rewarded, and I don't necessarily think they have to share what they earn. It would be nice, but let's face it, some people expect to be successful without having to do the work. Smith recognizes that the "American Dream" only comes from hard work and that work makes it that much sweeter.
If I was forced to pick a side, I would have to go with Smith. As much as I would love to believe in the community that Winthrop spoke about, my realist side kicks in. I think Winthrop had some good ideas when it comes to people helping people and taking care of one another. When I think about Winthrop, I think about the ideal not the reality. It is reality that some people will achieve more than others, and some people will work harder than others.
Because of the realist in me, I could understand and appreciate what Smith had to say. At times I felt he came off as being pompous, but other times I felt he was just being sincere. People who work hard should be rewarded, and I don't necessarily think they have to share what they earn. It would be nice, but let's face it, some people expect to be successful without having to do the work. Smith recognizes that the "American Dream" only comes from hard work and that work makes it that much sweeter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)