Redefining Single

'Being single used to mean that nobody wanted you, now it means you're pretty sexy and you're taking your time deciding how you want your life to be and who you want to spend it with'

-Kim Cattrall on Sex and the City

Chronological Snobbery

I've been listening to a sermon series by Mark Driscoll called Peasant Princess and it is really good. I highly recommend it. I listened to part 4 (His Garden) last night and something he spoke about really resonated with me, so here it is.

He highlights 1 Kings 11:1-13, where Solomon's heart turns from God and he builds temples and high places for his wives. When we read that, because we don't know the history and context of those other religious groups, it becomes easy to think little of it.

So here's the skinny:

• The temple for Ashteroth were poles of worship - male phallic symbols where people would gather to have orgies and do all sorts of sexually deviant acts.
• He also built a temple for the god of the Moabites, Chemosh, which required regular child sacrifice (think back to Ruth).
• And more temples for the god of the Ammonites, Molech, which required child sacrifice by fire -burning your children to death.

Mind you, this was Solomon, the builder of the temple of the Lord.

• This man was richer than Bill Gates,
• Smarter than Albert Einstein,
• More spiritually influential than the pope,
• More politically powerful than the president,
• And he had a harem that makes Hugh Hefner's look junior varsity.

Now we may read that and think, those people were disgusting, horrible! But be very careful of chronological snobbery, as C.S. Lewis calls it. Statistically, we slaughter far more children than Molech and Chemosh EVER did. They called it worship, we call it "choice."

We don't have the moral high ground. We slaughtered far more children in the worship of sex than they ever did. If you walk away from God, you are capable of anything, even the murder of your own child.

After marrying his 300 non-believing wives, his heart turned from God and look at the sins he was capable of.

Carry yourself with fear and sobriety. We may look at disgustedly at Solomon's 1000-woman harem, but lust is a matter of the heart. You could have a harem on your computer or stored away in your mind. Are you that much better?

We (I) must be very careful. Chronological snobbery and moral high grounds are very easy and dangerous ways to give yourself a false sense of righteousness. We must always look deeper to understand the fullness of the Word. It can be painfully sobering.

1,2,3,4 I declare thumb war

1. I am sooo jetlaggeddd

2. I just bought a suit for interviews -yay

3. Why is it so cold in California already!

4. It goes without saying - I miss the kids at House of Sarang.

5,6,7,8 try to keep your thumb straight.

Courage

"Courage is not the absence of fear but rather the judgment that something else is more important than fear. The brave may not live forever, but the cautious do not live at all.

From now on, you'll be traveling the road between who you think you are and who you can be. They key is to allow yourself to make the journey."

-Princess Diaries

God can speak through Disney movies too.

UPDATE on post below:

Twas not a matter of quality, but a matter of skill.

I bought Nestle and had a go at melting it, and failed because I tried winging it.

Must follow directions and not memory.

Turns out I was overheating both chocolates.

So, lesson: QUANTITY STILL RULES. HAHAH

Quality vs. Quantity

I've always grown up being a quantity girl, constantly falling for clearance prices and deals, clipping coupons and reveling in Costco wholesale items. But as I get older, I definitely see how wasteful it can be. And in some cases, I truly learn the lesson that quality really can be more important than quantity.

I don't think I'll ever fully leave my quantity-loving ways, but today I was sorely disappointed with my decision to buy cheap.

As you probably know, I love to bake and honestly, I often buy cheap ingredients and it tastes perfectly fine. But the other day, I bought cheap Kroger brand chocolate chips for baking (Nestle choc chips were double the price) and I wanted to make my own choc-covered honey-twist pretzels. (Doesn't that sound delicious?? I thought so too. But Kroger failed me.)

I proceeded to melt the chocolate chips in the same way I always do, but it was NOT becoming a silky smoooth delicious brown as it normally should. Instead it was a grainy, undippable glob.

Cheap chocolate = crap. (It literally looked like poop on a stick.)

Next time, I gotta stick with the good stuff. Nes-lay To-louse. ;) Definitely worth the extra money.

In the case of the melting of chocolate chips, may the ruling show that quality truly trumps quantity.

THREE at 3:33

3 more chapters of OChem to cover

3 more weeks til my DATs

3 more days until toy story threeee

Alice in Wonderland - Jabberwocky

I just recently saw Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland, and I really, really liked it. A lot. So it inspired me to rewatch the old movie, which I now love even more. There is so much clever wordplay I never could have understood as a child.

So one of the reasons I enjoyed the new movie more than I think others would is because of Glendale High School A Capella Choir.

Two of the years I was in A Capella, we sang "Jabberwocky," which if you don't know, is the poem/song in Lewis Carroll's books.

It has a bunch of made-up words and the song, really, is very strange.

(here's a video link)

But as odd as the song was, I'm very glad we sang it because Alice in Wonderland (the new movie) is all about the poem.

• Johnny Depp recites it while Alice rides on her hat, as does the Cheshire cat in the old movie.
• The old movie has mome raths, Tulgey wood.
• The new movie features the frumious bandersnatch, jubjub bird, frabjous day, "calloo-callay," the vorpal blade, and of course, the Jabberwocky.

So having sang the song (thus having memorized the poem), I understand the nonsensical words of Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland.

Us A Capella alumni have an upperhand in that sense. Whereas the average viewer must have been confused by the strange language, for me, watching the movie was like finally being able to put pictures to words I've known for the past 8 years.

All in all, Tim Burton has brought my A Capella song to life. And I loved it.

Dear Bangs

Please stop torturing me with your intermediate, unattractive length.

GROWWWWWW.

Sincerely,
Joan.

The Story Behind "Joan" Lee

As most of you all know, I pretty much hated my name growing up:

1. It's a boring, old-fashioned Caucasian grandmother's name.
2. Korean immigrant adults can't pronounce it (so I let them call me whatever they want.)
   
3. Lots of people for some reason cannot spell it.
   
4. I've been called Joe/Jo, John, Jones, Joann, Jane, and of course, Joan of Arc (real original), all of which I hate being called.
   
5. It rhymes with nearly every letter in the alphabet, creating lots of ..lovely.. nicknames.

In the past when I would ask my mom how she came up with Joan, her explanation was that she thought it was a pretty name and that if I were to be a boy, I would have been named John. So I thought, all right, that makes sense. Good enough, I'll take it.

But as a child, my cousin Grace used to tell me that my name was supposed to be Joanne, but I contested. "Joan" is not meant to be pronounced with 2 syllables. It would be like pronouncing Grace "Grah-say," plus my mom never told me that before. So I never believed her.

However, I was talking to my mom yesterday and I decided to clarify that detail of my life. At first, she told me the same story, Joan = female version of John. But when I asked her about Grace claiming I was supposed to be Joanne, a new side of the story came out.

Turns out, she DID want my name to be Joanne -because it was pretty, but apparently, she was misinformed when she was taught to spell it. So after I was born and the documents signed and made, she originally called me Joanne. Then when writing my name for her friends, they told her, "No, that's pronounced Joan. Joanne is spelled with an extra N or N-E."

So after the initial shock, she thought "Hm.. Joan.. Lee. Okay, that sounds good. We'll keep it. Plus it would have been a hassle to change all the documents anyway."

So.... Grace was right all along.

But imagine if I were Joanne Lee. Such a girlier name. What ramifications would that have caused in my life? All those years of strife over my name could have turned out differently. Would I be a different person? Honestly, I think so, at least slightly.

What I find most ironic in this whole situation: I hate it when people call me Joanne. (I'd even prefer Korean adults to call me John than Joanne.)

It bugs me when things are mispronounced or when people ignorantly employ improper grammar - because things should be done a certain way. Joan should be pronounced and spelled Joan. And I would be bothered if people couldn't get that.

But if I didn't have to deal with the frustrations of people constantly getting my name wrong my whole life, maybe I wouldn't care about mispronunciation/grammar as much. Maybe people wouldn't have come up with ugly nicknames. (I definitely wouldn't have the same screenname. haha.)

I've definitely let go of some of the frustrations about my name, mostly because it's a regular part of my life and I've gotten so used to "Joan" causing problems.

But to think, my identity was founded on mispronunciation - what I hated most is what I was supposed to be.

Oh, what a difference 1-2 letters can make.

Withered Fig Trees

Mark 11. Have you ever really imagined this story? It's the beginning of fig season and the tree was covered in big green leaves, but had no fruit yet. Jesus stops for a moment and simply tells this lush, green tree "may no one ever eat from you again."Shortly after, you're going back on the same path and the gorgeous green tree that you JUST saw has become a nasty, withered, pathetic twig.

Now, of course there is the clear illustration that the we are the tree, and though we may look promising, if we do not bear fruit, we will wither and die too.

But more importantly, Jesus chooses to tell us about the power of faith in this instance. Jesus explicitly says, if you believe (without a shadow of a doubt) that God can do something, it will be yours.

Imagine having that kind of faith. Believing God SO wholeheartedly and SO confidently that you yourself could go up to a fifty-year old tree and tell it to wither. And crazy enough, it does.

The thing is, this type of faith is truly within our reach. Not because we are so great, but because God is just THAT crazy. THAT amazing. THAT powerful.

If you do not doubt and believe that what you say WILL happen, it will be done for you! Believe it or not, it really is as simple as that. The power of God is ready and right there for the taking, all it takes is genuine belief. But all too often, we shy away from God's power. We limit what he can do because we're too scared. What if it doesn't come true? And sometimes even scarier, what if it does.

God is capable of giving us a whole downpour, a monsoon, but instead we ask for a single raindrop. We ask for the smallest thing we can, because we don't want to impose upon God with our petty problems, just in case it doesn't work out. In case God says no, we don't want to risk that disappointment. If God doesn't deliver like we hope he will, then what would that mean for what little faith we have?

But we have to realize that the lack of an answer usually is our lack of faith more than any insufficiency on God's part. If we had blazing faith like Moses, Elijah, and the disciples did, we could do miraculous things. We would see God's hands working through our lives all the time, and there would be withered fig trees all OVER the place.

But this world has got us jaded. We are an unbelieving and perverse generation. Of course God is still capable. He is the unchanging, omnipotent God, and the same Holy Spirit inhabits our souls. The only difference now is that we don't believe like they did. But we can.

The Lord is our father. And he explicitly tells us over and over to just come. Just ask. Just believe. And if we actually were to, why would he not give us the desires of our hearts?

So now try reading this with renewed faith in the power of Christ.

⁷"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. ⁸For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened.

⁹"Which of you, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? ¹⁰Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? ¹¹If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!"

Matthew 7

Show me a sign.

In the New Testament, we read over and over about the Pharisees and Jewish council members testing Jesus. Asking him for a sign. Trying to catch him breaking Roman and Jewish laws so that they could persecute this man who was ruining their rep and overturning what they had grown up learning was right.

And because hindsight is 20/20, I would always think, "Goodness, these Pharisees are so blind. They're just so desperate to cling to their religion and customs that they can't see the LORD in front of them."

And while I still hold onto that view, Pastor Sam's sermon on Sunday shed some new light to the situation that gives the Pharisees much more credit.

Deuteronomy 13:1-5.

They were, ironically, trying to follow God's word in persecuting Jesus. This passage describes a false prophet who would come doing miracles, leading them to follow gods they did not know. And God commanded that the false prophet was to be put to death.

Imagine being one of the Pharisees, forewarned that this type of prophet was coming. Then Jesus comes around, calling people to follow him (and to them, Jesus = not God). Plus, this man is going around performing miracles, so your duty as a follower of God's Word would seem to be: catch Jesus as the false prophet and get rid of this threat. God said so.

They had to prove that Jesus was indeed what Deuteronomy 13 describes, so they tried several times to catch him in the act. They asked for miracles and signs, not as proof of his Lordship, but to be used as incriminating evidence against him. Which of course, is why Jesus often denied them and owned them with his penetrating words instead. Jesus could have easily doled out a miracle, but he knew their hearts and exposed their deceitful traps.

But the Pharisees really did think it was their God-given decree to put this "false prophet" to death. Hence the hot pursuit and ultimate death of Jesus Christ. (But of course, thank God for that, because it led to Jesus' atonement for our sins)

So it wasn't just that they couldn't accept or understand Jesus' miraculous powers. It wasn't just that they were outraged that this man was breaking laws that God had specifically told them to follow. Their persecution was genuinely rooted in the word.

Sad and ironic, isn't it? They thought they were being good, righteous, God-fearing believers, but it was their lack of faith and their inability to see Jesus for who he was that condemned them. This man was too radical for them. Too human. Too counter-cultural.

So even though Pharisees knew the Word inside and out, if these serious, legitimate Bible scholars could end up condemning themselves, it shows me that the interpretation of His Word is not to be taken lightly. And more importantly, if we cannot see God in his whole triune self in light of the Word, then we are just as blind as the Pharisees. We cannot pick and choose pieces of the Bible that fit what we want it to, or else we risk facing the same self-righteous fate.

I love Luke.

Reading through the gospels together, I kept getting drawn to Luke -particularly the language and the nuances that could easily go unnoticed. Luke incorporated intricacies of Jesus' life and stories that brings new meaning and understanding to the stories I've read over and over. Even though the difference may literally be the addition or adjustment of a single word, it makes a huge difference to me.

So last night, I read the introductions to M/M/L/J in my Life Application Study Bible, and reading the description of Luke made my appreciation even deeper and more personal - he wrote the way I think and emphasized what I value most in Jesus.
Here are some highlights:

• Luke affirms Jesus' divinity, but the real emphasis of the book is to show Jesus' humanity --Jesus, the Son of God, is also the Son of Man. As a doctor, Luke was a man of science, and as a Greek, he was a man of detail. It is not surprising, then, that he begins by outlining his extensive research and explaining that he is reporting the facts.

• Luke was also a close friend and traveling companion of Paul, so he could interview the other disciples, had access to other historical accounts, and was an eyewitness to the birth and growth of the early church. His Gospel and book the Acts are reliable, historical documents.
  

• This is the most comprehensive gospel. The general vocabulary and diction show that the author was educated. He makes frequent references to illnesses and diagnoses. Luke stresses Jesus' relationships with people; emphasizes prayer, miracles, and angels; records inspired hymns of praise; and gives a prominent place to women

• He is the only known Gentile author in the New Testament. [Luke was written to] Theophilus ("one who loves God"), Gentiles, and people everywhere

I love it. -A Gentile, studied/lived science, educated, detail-oriented, valued relationships, gives props to women. (sound like me? hahaa) What more could I ask for? Hehe. Luke is wonderful.

I've Come Full Circle

ESFJ/INFP/ENTP/ISTP/ISFJ/ASLDKJ/ABCD/ATGC/QWERTY/ETC. blah blah blah.
We've all taken the infamous Myers-Brigg Test time and time again, and as much as I like taking personality assessment tests, I didn't really buy into this one in particular because for a long time, my results were inconsistent.

However, after having to take it again for small group HW last night, as I was reading my results (ISFJ), I realized that it perfectly described what type of person I used to be growing up, rather than who I believe myself to be, now. I'd like to believe that I have grown out of certain qualities/characteristics, but it makes me wonder... how bound am I to my old-self? Or should I call it my true self?

I thought I had "conquered" a lot of my former insecurities, but have I really grown past them, or is my personality more set in stone than I realized? --Which reminds me of the premise behind FlashForward (and Lost too, I guess I could say) and their question of changing "destiny," and of course, the age-old nature vs. nurture argument. (Meaning, no matter how much I may ponder/write/bore you, there will never be an answer.)

As I continued to read up on ISFJ's ("Protector Guardians" / "Nurturers"), I was genuinely shocked at how well they had me pegged. I kept digging around for more ISFJ information, and the more I read, the more I felt exposed. How could a simple 4-letter combination describe me so well? (Could I be that predictable?)

I know that I have changed a lot since I was younger, but I guess the childhood, painfully shy-Joan will always be there, enough so to keep me an ISFJ after 2 decades. (and possibly forever?) High school and college were definitely times when I worked to become more open-minded, expressive, opinionated, and decisive. And in some areas, I've passed the point of no return. But despite reconciling and adjusting my identity, it appears that I've circled back to my former self.

So what does this mean for me now..? I really don't know.

The Screwtape Letters

I said long ago that I would post excerpts/thoughts about Screwtape Letters, but I never got to because there are just TOO many mind-blowing passages to choose from. But the time has come and here is the first entry: (Letter/Chapter #2, pg 7-8)

"Work hard, then, on the disappointment or anticlimax which is certainly coming to the patient during his first weeks as a churchman. The enemy allows this disappointment to occur on the threshold of every human endeavour.

It occurs when the boy who has been enchanted in the nursery stories by 'Stories from the Odyssey' buckles down to really learning Greek. It occurs when lovers have got married and begin the real task of learning to live together. In every department of life it marks the transition from dreaming aspiration to laborious doing.

The enemy takes this risk because He has a curious fantasy of making all these disgusting little human vermin into what He calls His 'free' lovers and servants --'sons' is the word He uses, with His inveterate love of degrading the whole spiritual world by unnatural liaisons with the two-legged animals.

Desiring their freedom, He therefore refuses to carry them, by their mere affections and habits, to any of the goals which He sets before them: He leaves them to 'do it on their own.' And there lies our opportunity. But also, remember, there lies our danger. If once they get through this initial dryness successfully, they become much less dependent on emotion and therefore much harder to tempt."

sometimes i just want to dissolve