A short while ago, I was having quite an animated debate with someone, on the topic of the validity and truth of the events in the bible. My Freund maintained that events such as Noah’s Ark, Jonah and the Fish/Whale, and things like “God-made-the-world-in-seven-days” were not true. How could anyone make the world in seven days, he challenged. I was not arguing logically, and when the discussions ended both my Freund and I were dissatisfied (more or less, I believe) about the results, that Science could not prove what Religion has said, neither could it be used to disprove it in any way. But I believe we have found a more beautiful way of resolving this situation.
Being previously too stubborn and almost very strict about things in the bible, I had missed the whole point of what God was trying to tell me. Yes, the bible has weird sections which are just too difficult to understand because it contradicts sometimes. E.g. God says he hates divorce, and because men have “hardened their hearts” so Moses permitted divorce, (therefore, divorce, no-go) but then in another section he says that he has been divorced from his people Israel. So, um, God, Ja or nein, Yes or No, dui or cuo?
The point is, not whether one believes that, yeah, there was a time when the world was flooded and so little cute animals went on a huge boat, or whether a man could live in a big fish for three days, but, what does it tell us, what does God want to relate to us? I’d like to believe that in Noah’s story, God wants to tell us that he has never given up on us. That he will always make provision for us. That yes, he is a God who is righteous (therefore the flood, to “purge” the land) but he is compassionate. That he is a mighty God. (obvious reasons, because of how he could make the flood)
Similarly, on Jonah, God wants to tell us that even if we turn around and refuse to do what God has told us to do (in the case of Jonah he went the total opposite direction from where he was supposed to go) God will always want to teach us, gently, that his wisdom is greater. (one can argue that, “Hey Chris you mean being stuck in a fish for three days is gentle?” but I think that God could have done more than that. How about a shark instead of a whale/fish?) God’s wisdom is greater because he knew that the people to whom Jonah was supposed to preach to would listen, while man’s wisdom (as illustrated by Jonah) supposed that the people would not change. God is compassionate, because he provided a way for the heathen people to turn to him.
That’s what I believe all these “little stories” in the bible really mean. It’s not about what that happened. That is insignificant, whether one really believes it happened or not, because one can believe and yet not comprehend nor understand what God has in mind. It’s just the same as someone who believes that yeah, there IS a God, who’s out there, but if he doesn’t do anything about that knowledge that there is a God, but merely understands and only knows Jesus intellectually, then there’s no significance anymore. Even demons “believe in God” and even they “know Jesus”. But what differentiates believers in Christ from the former?
At the end of a lengthy discussion, my little Freund and I agreed, totally, that indeed, it is not about “what really happened, is it true?” but its more important to know that “what does God want to tell us from this; what can we learn from it?” I hope this helps you as well. As my pastor used to say, “Don’t major on the minor.” (Actually, that's more like what my piano teacher used to say)
Two Weird Facts:
1. I was going to get some random magazine (Whichever could catch my eye deserved the ten buckaroos I got from the parents) from a random 7-11 store around the Bedok area. I walked in and realised that female magazines have very similar headlines, which, is something that I have observed over quite some time... they tend to have eye catching titles such as these:
1. "Ten new sexual positions to keep your guy happy"
2. "Five new ways to stay happy for the New Year"
3. "My boyfriend is gay and he's dating my best guy pal!"
4. "Eight ways to lose eight kg in eight days!"
5. "(Includes Karma Sutra)"
Oh come on. I don't think I need 1., and if I ever need a magazine for such ideas I think I must be quite desperate. I'm not against sex or anything (But within the sacred boundaries of certain sacred unions, please, kiddies) but come on, why would any self-respecting female need such advise?
And hello!? I need a magazine to tell me how to be happy? I'm certainly not depressed.
Eh. If I HAD a boyfriend he wouldn't be gay. And I'll sever all ties with my "best guy pal".
I don't think I want to lose eight kg in eight days, because that sounds like its bound to be unhealthy.
And I don't need "Asian mysticism".
Honestly, these female magazines need a facelift. If I were editor of Female/Cleo/whatever, I'll probably have articles such as "Ten ways to spot a good female magazine". Okay, on a serious side I'll probably have useful articles such as "Dress right for occasions" and "Suggestions for healthy living", instead of weird titles like "Dress to kill" or "Lose weight NOW!"... Okay I'll probably not make a good editor after all.
But I walked away from 7-11 with ten buckaroos still in my pocket. There wasn't Newsweek or Reader's Digest. Compared to weird "female" magazines, with their weird pictures of humans in weird positions, I'd rather have National Geographic and their pictures of happy animals anytime, in their normal positions, thank you very much.
2. Different types of people can be described by the bread they have.
What do I mean by that? Well I was nibbling on some French Baguette today, and it reminded me of my old French teacher, who was hard on the outside, but soft on the inside. Yeah. Sounds lame, but she looked like some super domineering person, like the "Why didn't you do your homework!!!!????" sort of person but she's actually bully-a-ble.
And German bread... Take their rye bread for instance. I brought it two months ago, opened it but I didn't finish it, and to my horror, eh, I mean, amazement, it was still edible. Today, after two months. Very tough, these Germans.
Well... Chinese eat bao(s), right? Well, the bao's skin is so smooth, just like how some of us Chinese are like, really. Sometimes, we really put a lot of emphasis on "face" and looking good, although sometimes we don't taste so good underneath a pretty (smooth) face. Of course, I'm generalising. It's pretty sad/bad/misleading to classify people this way.
Eh. What else huh? Indians make Roti Prata, but I here my hypothesis falls short. Because Roti Prata isn't really bread, I guess. I'm not going to make any references here. And my Malay friends... don't make bread. Hm. Oh well, another hypothesis thrown out of the window.
Did I mention that this was meant to be a random and silly post?
Well well! I had a good day in church today, (technically yesterday actually, its 1.48am now) and I'm so glad because a friend of mine is coming back early to spend New Year's Day in Singapore. (Instead of, like 9 days later) Good things are happening to me, but with the ARGH season of bidding for modules coming up, I hope I won't have to pull my hair out and bid at 2am in the morning... again...
School's starting, and I'm really not very excited about it. If you meet me and I say I'm excited about it, I'm probably in a good mood, or I'm just faking it because I'm trying to be nice. I mean, come on, who's ever happy about school? When it's your first day, I guess, or when you're about to graduate. Perhaps, for some, if there's a really exciting module you're dying to take. Or, perhaps for others, the chances of meeting friends, etc.
I'm quite happy with my grades though. Satisfying the 3.5 cap for MOE is one thing, but it doesn't really affect me because I try not to let myself be affected by the statements like: "Oh, I have to get 3.5 to satisfy the MOE people" or "OH NO!!! I don't have a cap 5!!!" or "Oh darn, I only got 4.34523514124213 this sem!" I'm generally not too concerned about grades because I only take modules that I really want to take and I want to get the most out of it, and that doesn't necessarily mean "get the most grades out of it". I'm no perfect student (far from it) but at least I can say that I really do give it all because its what I am, really.
Well, a very Merry Christmas to one and all, old and young, tall and short, thin or... horizontally... I mean, not so thin, and Christian or non-Christian... How good it is to celebrate Christmas with friends and family, and to know that, as someone in church says it so aptly, "I've got a dai kor*, Jesus lor!" But say, he's a little old to be my brother, eh?
* Big brother, elder brother
Well I haven't been having much time to blog and stuff... but a long chat with K (she's great to talk to, and I don't think she's reading this) caused me to think about life and love and all that. Furthermore, a chance meeting with some one caused me to think about such an issue as well. So here goes, kleiner Kinder, ihr Grossmutter's story...
Long time ago there was a beautiful garden, called the Garden of Eden. It must have been beautiful, because while ihr Grossmutter has never seen it, as the bible says it, it is the "garden of God". A man lived there, and he was lonely. So God in his wisdom brought the animals a little closer to him, so that he wouldn't be so lonely anymore. But while the man, Adam, had a perfect union; a perfect circle, a perfect relationship with God (as he was in the very presence of God) and he had all he ever wanted; animals, great tasting food (well, except for some specific trees...) and peace, as represented by the circle, within the circle there was a wide gaping hole, which was not filled. And therefore, God, who's really wise (as mentioned before) decided to make him a helper, called woman, which would fill up the gap.
What's the meaning of me writing all these things down? I believe that God (Eden and the presence) and riches (abundance in Eden) and animals (friends, but by this I don't mean your friends are animals) but there is a void in this circle which can only be filled by love. Okay, this may sound like some crappy romance thingy, but I don't have time to explain, because right now I have something urgent to attend to.
I am currently listening to the Berliner Philharmoniker conducted by Karajan. They are playing Also Sprach Zarathustra. I am not in a good mood. Even Strauss doesn't seem to be able to lift my spirits up. Why am I not in a good mood? Simply because I have another 6 hours of Germinating to do, and I am so not in the mood for it. It would be okay if I had a week or something, but no, I've only got like 2 days. Plus the Christmas party thing coming up on Friday; Have to get carols done soon. Don't get me wrong, I love oikos and carols but its just that I'm not feeling too well and its getting to me.
Lately I have been thinking about the concept of the garden, and this came forth when I was asked about my opinions of civilization (cities) and the "sacrifice of nature" which comes with building cities, etc. Actually I think its quite silly, how people try to have a little piece of nature by having a little potted plant. (I am not excluded, of course, I have got lots of potted plants) But its the idea that one tries to bring in nature in a manufactured manner, like man-ufactured nature. Lets look at the garden. A nicely "kept" garden is something like allemendas in one corner, herbs in another, a tree in a strategic position, chairs under it, etc. If you really consider it, it's not really very "natural" after all, because one dictates where the plants are to grow. But on the other hand, no one would like a garden with flowers all over in a chaotic bunch here and there. It's frowned upon, usually. And what about weeds? Does one uproot them, or keep them, for the sake of nature? Is man therefore really having his "little bit of earth" indeed? Sorry, this thought came about also because I was watching the movie The Secret Garden, based on a book I had read before. Honestly I don't think we can ever have a man-made natural garden, or a man-ufactured "natural" garden, because the idea of a garden is actually very ironic indeed. Anyway.
I will have to stock up on some more Beethoven for my gloomy nights. Till now I have only got all his Symphonies. I need some more sonatas and Piano Concertos. Concer-toes. I'm feeling woosy and I am currently in a bad mood. Humph.
Whee, haven't been writing here in a while. I have been busy with the church musical. And of course, with other commitments such as Chingay and Soccer in Sheares, I think I don't really have any time for myself. I really need some "me" time, and fast. So that's why I'm quite relaxed and happy now, even though things could be better.
Today I went to church and as usual it was a good time. Every first Sunday of the month our church has communion, and this week our speaker was Rev. Raymond Mooi, and it was good. I will have Sermonnotes up very very soon, but I have another commitment tomorrow (Some German study thingy) and so I don't really want to type out the sermon now. Anyway, I am looking towards the musical... I would encourage all to go because 1. I'm singing! 2. It's really good, with the acting and singing and dancing. 3. Its free. Okay okay. Whatever the reasons, I really hope people will go and pack the place. Will be really fun.
I know I haven't been updating Sermonnotes.blogspot.com very much, but I have got exams going on... so, that's why. Well today was a fruitful day, and towards the end of the day I sent M a message, saying something like "If you have time for: 1. Some encouragement before your exam tomorrow; 2. Seeing me in an Indian turban; 3. Conversion to Baroque music; 4. All of the above, come and see me now." Something like that, yes.
So we had the following pieces played: 1. Scarlatti's Sonata (THE Sonata, you just have to know it, The One in Cminor) played by Mikhail Pletnev (Anything with Pletnev is good, yum) 2. Handel's "The Arrival of the Queen of Sheba, 3. Balakirev's Islamey (Okay that's not Baroque but it was played by Mikhail Pletnev, so you have to listen to it) and 4. Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet, (THE Romeo and Juliet that everyone should hear, really) and naturally we had a good time. Oh, and the latter was conducted by Vladimir Ashkenazy, the conductor-pianist who is capable of conducting while playing the piano. Wow.
And I happened to remember this... terrible encounter with a student of the piano in school, a long time ago. I should state that I do know I'm not terribly good at the piano. Anyway, he was playing horrendously, banging Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata in the concourse. Now everyone MUST know that it's quiet in the introduction to the piece. Okay, you may not be able to read Italian, but anyone who is playing Beethoven, who can play Beethoven, should at least be able to read stuff like "pp", "ff", or "mf", etc. Simply put, p stands for piano, or, soft. f stands for forte, which means loud, so that's why the piano is actually known as the fortepiano, since it is capable of having loud and soft tones on the instrument. It matters because the predecessor of the piano was the harpsichord, which was capable of only one singular tone, no matter how hard or soft one presses down on the key. Now I was quite upset (if anyone was to brutally rape Beethoven's music like that, surely I would be naturally upset.) In fact, upset is a grave understatement:
Me: Excuse me! It says "pp" in the music score! I think it should be really really soft!
Guy: (visibly annoyed) I'm just starting to learn the piece! It doesn't really matter!
Me: (voice is raised, slightly) Doesn't matter? Dynamics matter greatly in music! Even if you're trying a piece for the first time when it says "pp" you shouldn't play it as if it said "ffffff!!!"
Guy: (shocked and slightly trembling) But... but I'm already a grade 7, and I know how to do music! (with a defiant nod! The nerve!)
Me: You're grade seven? (Incredulously) You should be able to appreciate dynamics! This is Beethoven! The Moonlight Sonata! It shouldn't be so loud!
Guy: (lips quivering) But... but...
Me: No way you're going to play this way! Pay attention to the dynamics! (last sentence spoken with a gradual crescendo)
So after that my friends tried to pull me away from the keyboard, while I was desperately trying to get the guy to do the dynamics properly. Now I don't think anyone is capable of getting a piece right in the first try, complete with notes and dynamics, (exceptions would be geniuses such as Franz Listz or Mikhail Pletnev) but one should at least observe the dynamics instead of just banging out the notes! I think I'll make a very demanding teacher, but this was the way my piano teacher taught. You're suppose to try everything, to the best of your abilities, only brushing up on dynamics later, yes, but at least note the dynamics! If music had no dynamics, where can you get the climax, the resolution, etc? Argh.
I better get back to my books very soon. Just had a satisfying dinner, (pasta, courtesy of M's recipe) and the flowers in my room are blooming beautifully, with sheares-orange. Good evening, companied by Rubinstein's Chopin. Ah.
Salutations.
My name is Christina and this is my blog. Basically this is one of three blogs, and this is the one where I write about daily stuff. I'm a pretty simple person, really. I enjoy good Earl Grey in the park, with perhaps a good book in hand. Or I sometimes prefer to spend my time on the piano, with the guitar, or out with my friends. But most of all I like "God and I" times. Unfortunately, being in school, having schoolwork, and learning German leaves me with little time to spare. Anyway. Here are the url(s) of the other blogs:Churchsermons - Where I put all sermons online
Papyrus - Where I put all random thoughts online
Enjoy. Viel Spass!