Grown Folk Thinking

Grown Folk Thinking

We learn very early that there are things in life designated as “grown folk stuff.”  Once there existed delineation between the activities of “young folk” and grown folk. Sometimes you wouldn’t know what was reserved for grown folk until you threatened to intrude on it. There were no signs that said, “For Grown Folk Only.”  As a child, you were mostly left to decipher what was grown folk stuff with nothing more than the use of your common sense.  If you saw what looked like as glass of orange juice sitting on a table late in the evening while the Blues blared in the background you’d better stay clear of it. It was highly probably that what was in that glass was for grown folks.  If you suffered the lack of such wisdom, and placed your hand near that glass you would pay a heavy price for grown folk encroachment. Friday’s dawn would usher in grown folk time.  All activities were geared toward the satisfaction of grown folk.  Young folk were thought to have all week to have fun, but Friday night belonged to the grown folk. The music was “grown folk music”, the conversation was “grown folk conversation” and everybody knew what time it was; or whose time it was. So, we thought that being grown meant being old enough to stay up late, drink liquor, smoke cigarettes and listen to the Blues. It would take a lot of living to discover that none of those activities made one grown.  Rather, being grown had more to do with how you carried yourself. To be considered grown you had to know stuff like how to wear your clothes, when to speak and when not to, how to control your emotions, how to show proper respect, and overall how to behave in any social settings.  Basically, grown folk thought and behaved a certain way. 

If you paid attention you could always spot a grown folk impersonator.  There were always a few at every gathering.  You know the type; they would try to look the part, but would quickly be found out.  Either the females put on too much make-up, or the males couldn’t “hold” their liquor. My favorite was when an impersonator would say something trying to sound grown, but end up sounding stupid. The impersonator’s age may have gotten them pass curfew, but they surely were not considered to be grown among the seasoned adults.  It was obvious that some in the grown folk crowd had a little more living to do in order to be worthy of Friday’s dawn.   Impersonators fail to realize that there exists something called grown folk thinking; which cannot be ascertained by an age number. Those who want to be considered grown had better develop a grown-up’s way of thinking. 

The way one begins to think like a grown-up is by first evaluating her or his current thinking status.  That is, to begin asking questions about one’s current view the world. Questions such as: Do you see the world in terms of right versus wrong? Is everything either black, or white?  Do you think that everything should have reasonable explanation? Do you need to know that there are facts that support everything you consider true? If your answer is “yes” to the majority of these you may be old enough to stay up past curfew, drink alcohol, smoke and listen to explicit music, but you are not grown yet.  Education Researcher William Perry Jr. would say that you are at the lowest level of cognitive development.  In other words, you may certainly be an adult by societal standards, but you are still not thinking like a grown-up. Seeing the world in a simplistic way, such as believing that there is only right and wrong, is viewed as absolutism.  Grown folk know that the world has far too many mysteries for us to limit it to absolutes. To think about the world in absolute terms is to shrink existence to the theories of a few gifted intellectual pioneers. Absolutists lack the ability to think critically in the face of real-life conflict.  When confronted with issues like abortion people who think at the lowest cognitive development stage will look to someone else to help them navigate this moral dilemma. A grown-up impersonator at this stage seeks evidence that support their point of view while dismissing evidence that contradict it.  Their world view is largely constructed with a series of biases they have collected from others. Like children, absolutists’ thinkers rely too heavily on others to decipher life.

The good news is people can graduate from this stage. The bad news is most people don’t. Reason being, it is the only mode of thinking they know. Most people find comfort in simplicity, and resist putting their belief system to the test.  Good or bad, right or wrong, they stay where they are.  Never growing up, looking grown, acting grown, but thinking like a child. 

Others who are not afraid to challenge their orientation to life will move to the second stage of cognitive development.  Psychologists refer to this way of thinking as relativism.  These people believe opposite of Absolutists. Relativists think that all truth is relative. Every opinion matters and no one is qualified to judge the perspective of another.  For the relativist the world is vast and cannot be limited to absolutes.  The problem with this mode of thinking is it does not welcome challenge.  Relativists do not like having their ideas challenged or judged. When it comes to controversial issues these thinkers become argumentative, combative and contrary.  Basically, they throw a fit. For this reason, relativist should not hang out with grown folk.

Though relativists can be hard to keep calm they are far better at reasoning than absolutists.  One can have an enriched conversation with relativists; which creates the opportunity for growth.  Thus, there is hope that they will be grown someday.  Being grown would mean that one has reached the highest level of cognitive development, Commitment.  Simply stated, grown folk commit.  Grown folk know that in our world there are a lot of grey areas.  Grown folk also know that all ideas and opinions are not equally valid.  Experts and authority figures make mistakes, and will continue to. Grown folk are aware that uncertainly is woven in the fabric of life, but life must persist in spite of the unknown.  A position can be taken in life as being correct up until it is deemed wrong. When that time comes grown folk are flexible enough to make the necessary adjustment.  Somehow as we mature we understand more fully how complex the world really is. However, grown folk develop the critical thinking skills necessary to cope with an ever changing world that oxymoronically remains the same. People at this stage of commitment thinking accept responsibility for their actions based on what they believe; as a matter of choice. For the grown folk the locust of truth resides within.  Grown folk are not put-off by challenges to their belief system, and view confrontation over ideas as unnecessary.  They are not drunk with their own worldview. Grown folk make room for other perspectives to coexist with their own convictions.  In other words, they know how to “hold their liquor.” When confronted with crisis, controversy, calamity, or the complexities of life we should be ever careful not to intrude on grown folk conversation; though we can legally stay up past curfew.     

 Read (I Corinthians 13:11-12)

Solid Witness

Solid Witness

As we progress in postmodernity more Americans, than ever, are asking why Christianity is still so prevalent in our time. Believers in Jesus Christ are being mocked by a growing cynicism that asserts far too many Americans are still unintelligently infatuated with Jesus in the new millennium. There are a multitude of explanations for why our critics think we are silly for still believing in what they consider fairy tales about the deity of Jesus. The biggest reason critics of Christianity cannot comprehend our commitment to our faith is because they grossly underestimate the power of solid witness.

It is because of solid witness Christianity is prevalent today. Without the witness of Jesus’ resurrection Christianity may have died on the cross a forgotten fable. But, after his execution Jesus visited his followers. Like usual, he was met with disbelief. According to the witness in the Gospel of Luke Jesus put on a demonstration of his “realness” by urging people to touch him to ensure them that they were not seeing a ghost. The same Gospel records Jesus eating a piece of broiled fish; post execution. This is not to say that there were not times in which the witness made claims about Jesus appearing in a mysteriously inexplicable way after he died. Rather, it is to say that Jesus did appear resurrected as a solid being. After his death Jesus briefly appeared as one that could be seen plainly, and touched physically. He ate food, and he had apparent wounds. Christianity is alive today because of the testimony of former-unbelieving people who witnessed a solid Jesus Christ, pre and post his crucifixion.

Our critics should be aware that Christianity was birthed out of a milieu of skepticism, unbelief and scrutiny. Different from today, the consequences of making false claims about God in the First Century were deadly. Those who held claim to the extraordinary occurrences of Jesus had far more to lose than an exhaustive argument about who God is, or if God is. More difficult than accepting the professions of Jesus, is believing that multiple witnesses would be willing to die for telling imaginative stories. The testimony of those who witnessed Jesus Christ in the flesh is (1) solid in that they had far more to lose than to gain by fabricating events. Their witness is (2) solid in that they had no earthly incentive to tell such outrageous, socially unacceptable stories. Their witness is (3) solid in that they had to overcome their own doubt when encountering Jesus resurrected. In other words, it took some convincing on Jesus’ part to show that he was not a ghost, but solid. They witnessed a resurrected, solid Jesus.

Those of us who accept the testimony of Jesus’ disciples as solid witness know something that non-Christian intellectuals don’t. That is, critical thinking is not void of emotional intelligence. Just as sound decision-making requires that you use your head, it equally demands you use your gut (instinct). There are some things we simply cannot comprehend without first taking the risk of exercising faith. Sometimes we must put forth what we feel, apart from what we think. A skydiver never really knows whether her parachute is going to open until she takes a leap of faith. Thus, before jumping she is left to trust the testimonies of all those who leaped before her. Only after we decide to believe God in Jesus Christ will we be able to add to our faith knowledge. Christians know that when our intellect runs out our faith can carry us the rest of the way. This is not enough to convince a determined skeptic that Jesus was God incarnate. Nor is that the aim. The purpose is to illustrate that no intellectual pursuit will prove Jesus’ deity above the convicting testimony of a solid witness. We either believe the witness, or we don’t.

Jesus said to Thomas, after he demanded proof that Jesus had been resurrected, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed (John 20:29).” Believers are blessed because we know that only after taking a leap of faith we can give solid witness of Jesus Christ. Christianity will remain to be prevalent as long as we continue to give solid witness. We need to be careful not to leave this generation, or the next to wrestle with the nature of God with nothing more than intellect. We must pass on to them what was given to us, the testimonies of solid witness.

Read: Luke 24:36-43 & John 20: 24-27

 

Tidying Up

Tidying Up

What do we know, teach and do about morality? In this expanding ideological society “morality” is becoming an increasingly ambiguous term. Though the term “moral” has never been one in which we could speak about definitively, there are some attributes of morality that we all ascribe to in common. At the basic level most people would agree that human beings ought to be kind and helpful to one another. The problem is we view this basic attribute as the pinnacle of moral standard. Contrary, kindness and helpfulness is the least we do to demonstrate our sense of morality. Kindness and helpfulness is where we begin in celebrating the evolution of our humanness, not where we end.

We fail miserably at the ground level of morality; which probably explains why most of us never reach beyond being kind and helpful to others. If we were to graduate from the ground level of morality we would find that there is more to it than the way we behave towards others. There is also the morality that exists within us for us. It is the way we temper our self-destructive behavior. Our internal morality should serve to warn us of the sins we commit against ourselves. To behave with moral integrity is to be kind to others while being kind to ourselves. How moral are we if we offer the best of ourselves to others, but inflict our mind, body and spirit with toxic pollutants (e.g. selfishness, drugs, cigarettes, profanity, laziness, porn, drunkenness, poor diet)?

Demonstrating moral integrity consist of being kind and helpful to both, others and ourselves. Perhaps, only after we master these two levels of morality can we truly advance to the third and final dimension. That is, living in peace with our Creator. The ultimate morality is to express continuous gratitude for being made. We express thankfulness by celebrating creation in its various forms, and honoring the Creator. Anything less than acknowledging and paying homage to that which is responsible for your existence is immoral.

These are the three levels of morality we must know, teach and do; be kind and helpful to others as well as to ourself, while paying homage to our Creator. It is evident in how we behave towards one another that what has been simply stated about morality here is proving to be increasingly difficult as we become more diverse in our thinking. Progress we must, but how far can we expect to advance if we fail to tidy up on morality?

Read Mark 7:21-23