i wonder about this world sometimes.
say one person is born into poverty. say another person made stupid mistakes and ended up in poverty. now two people are in poverty. who are people gonna be sorry for? who are people gonna try to help? who is more deserving of your pity?
of course you're gonna pick the one who didn't ask to be poor. you're gonna feel more sorry for the one who couldn't help being born poor. the other one deserves it. right??
say one person is born with a disease. like AIDS. say another person made stupid mistakes and ended up with AIDS. who are you gonna pity? who would you help?
of course people are gonna wanna help those innocent children. cuz they're innocent, after all... people who make stupid mistakes deserve whatever happens to them. right??
unless... UNLESS...
you made stupid mistakes once. and you experienced first-hand the consequences of your mistakes. and you remember how horrible it felt... in a sense, more horrible than if someone had always suffered those consequences. but no one would see it that way, cuz it doesn't occur to people how relativity comes into play, how if you're born blind, yes it is a pity, but if you were able to see once and then you did something stupid and you became blind, how the consequences are THAT much heavier to bear and THAT much harder to swallow... and what, someone who can't help their suffering is going through a worse kind of suffering than someone who creates their own suffering? says who?? is any human being in the position to weigh it out and make that kind of call??
i feel bad for people who are afflicted and it's not their fault. but actually, i feel worse for those afflicted who've brought it upon themselves and therefore seemingly deserve it. the typical mindset is that people who are helplessly afflicted deserve a chance at a better life. people are gonna wanna help them... people who aren't in their position but feel sorry for them. but the reckless ones? only people who have been in the same position before will understand what they're going through. who else would want to give them another chance? who would want to help them get better after the stupid things they've done? they're the ones people are gonna overlook. they're the write0ffs in society. their causes aren't worthy enough to those who have their lives all together. they have the least hope to get better because they're shown the least amount of sympathy.
garbage.
---
Romans 3:10 - As it is written: There is no one righteous, not even one.
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Thursday, February 23, 2006
Be With You Ima, Ai Ni Yukimasu
i apologize for the vagueness of my last post. it's cuz i want everyone to watch it and i don't wanna give anything away! :P though i suppose anyone could look it up and spoil it for themselves... but at least you won't hear it from me.
the movie came out in japan in 2004, but i just found out that there's an american remake in the works... and i don't think i'm too pleased. it's supposed to come out next year and jennifer garner's been casted (apparently). i'm really skeptical about this......
if you ask me, i say it's better to watch the original japanese version first. at least before the english one comes out. it's just a different portrayal of life and love and appreciation of beauty unique to japan and its culture.
the movie came out in japan in 2004, but i just found out that there's an american remake in the works... and i don't think i'm too pleased. it's supposed to come out next year and jennifer garner's been casted (apparently). i'm really skeptical about this......
if you ask me, i say it's better to watch the original japanese version first. at least before the english one comes out. it's just a different portrayal of life and love and appreciation of beauty unique to japan and its culture.
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
Be With You
alice recommended this movie to me. it's a japanese flick... such a refreshing change from your typical north american love story. (i'm disenchanted by most of them.) Be With You is so sweet and simple and innocent. i admire the characters portrayed in the movie... wish i carried their demeanor, actually. and their lifestyle too. and the storyline itself isn't that simple... it really makes you wonder. i thought i got it the first time, but the more i thought about it, the more i wondered how it could've played out... and i'm still trying to work it out in my head.
i really really like this movie.
i really really like this movie.
Monday, February 20, 2006
quelque fois
sometimes i wish life could be as simple as msn and star trek.
we could go around with signs on our backs or on our foreheads or something. if we're in the mood to socialize, we can let people know. and we can easily find other people to talk to who are in the same mood. if we're not in the greatest of moods, we can display whatever mood we're in and people will know by just looking at us so we don't have to explain ourselves. if we don't wanna be disturbed, we can indicate that too. and as a last resort, if we can't indicate how we feel clearly enough and we just wanna be completely invisible so as to avoid any kind of [mis]communication, we can use a cloaking device.
isn't that a lot better than being misunderstood? or having to give a play-by-play every time someone asks?
i think my tank is empty. i think it has been empty for a while. i think i am only going through the motions. i think... i dun wanna do it anymore.
can i? dare i?? will life allow me to shut down so that i can recharge???
i wonder......
if i can drop a course at this point and not receive an F.
if i can give up all my ministries. and maybe, just maybe, keep one.
if i can cancel my phone plan. or any other types of plans.
if i can be anti-social and not have anyone notice.
we could go around with signs on our backs or on our foreheads or something. if we're in the mood to socialize, we can let people know. and we can easily find other people to talk to who are in the same mood. if we're not in the greatest of moods, we can display whatever mood we're in and people will know by just looking at us so we don't have to explain ourselves. if we don't wanna be disturbed, we can indicate that too. and as a last resort, if we can't indicate how we feel clearly enough and we just wanna be completely invisible so as to avoid any kind of [mis]communication, we can use a cloaking device.
isn't that a lot better than being misunderstood? or having to give a play-by-play every time someone asks?
i think my tank is empty. i think it has been empty for a while. i think i am only going through the motions. i think... i dun wanna do it anymore.
can i? dare i?? will life allow me to shut down so that i can recharge???
i wonder......
if i can drop a course at this point and not receive an F.
if i can give up all my ministries. and maybe, just maybe, keep one.
if i can cancel my phone plan. or any other types of plans.
if i can be anti-social and not have anyone notice.
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
burning!!!
tabasco sauce is amazing. i love my spicy almost as much as my sweet. we have a jumbo bottle at home, and i've gone overboard with the tabasco lately... i drench my meals in it. one of the reasons i love tabasco sauce so much is cuz it actually tastes good to me. i like the fermented pepper taste, and the fact that it's not a thick sauce. for example, i really don't dig the ketchup-thick hot sauces they serve at pho's... i'd rather use the chili oil, and it's quite upsetting when restaurants don't carry the chili oil.
so i was having some tabasco-soaked salmon yesterday as a "late-night" snack. anyway, the problem with sauces in general is that they tend to get messy. but i don't remember it getting messy last night. and so i was careless enough to rub my eyes before going to bed, and...
ahhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!
my first reaction was to wash it out. but then (and i hate it when this happens), my idiotic curiosity took over and i wondered to myself, how long does burning last? i wanted to find out.
so i lay down and closed my eyes and.... buuuurrrnnneddd.... for a while. in the meantime, i was thinking of other things... like, what molecular properties constitute spicy? how is it that we are able to sense spicy only in certain places (like the mouth, eyes, nose, etc.)? what do those areas have that other areas lack? are there unique spicy receptors? how is sensing spicy related to sensing hot? does spicy do any damage to the areas that can sense it? why is it that the spicy feeling lasts so much longer than the spicy taste?
i may have drifted off, i'm not sure... but i was aware that my eyes were no longer burning about 40 minutes after i first closed them.
i dunno if i'll ever get around to answering all of my questions. maybe if this happens again. and knowing absent-minded little me, it just might ;)
so i was having some tabasco-soaked salmon yesterday as a "late-night" snack. anyway, the problem with sauces in general is that they tend to get messy. but i don't remember it getting messy last night. and so i was careless enough to rub my eyes before going to bed, and...
ahhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!
my first reaction was to wash it out. but then (and i hate it when this happens), my idiotic curiosity took over and i wondered to myself, how long does burning last? i wanted to find out.
so i lay down and closed my eyes and.... buuuurrrnnneddd.... for a while. in the meantime, i was thinking of other things... like, what molecular properties constitute spicy? how is it that we are able to sense spicy only in certain places (like the mouth, eyes, nose, etc.)? what do those areas have that other areas lack? are there unique spicy receptors? how is sensing spicy related to sensing hot? does spicy do any damage to the areas that can sense it? why is it that the spicy feeling lasts so much longer than the spicy taste?
i may have drifted off, i'm not sure... but i was aware that my eyes were no longer burning about 40 minutes after i first closed them.
i dunno if i'll ever get around to answering all of my questions. maybe if this happens again. and knowing absent-minded little me, it just might ;)
Monday, February 13, 2006
overheard ;)
"love is not some syrupy mish-mash. . . ." tony costa in his feb.11 workshop on church denominations
(yes, church denominations :P)
(yes, church denominations :P)
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
submission
this topic keeps resurfacing... i've been thinking about it again lately cuz it came up in class, plus i was reflecting on it while preparing for one of my papers. you know the submission blurb in Ephesians 5? a portion of it from the NIV looks like this:
v.21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.
Wives and Husbands
v.22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.
what immediately stands out? the heading, right? even though the headings we find in our Bibles are technically not a part of Scripture, we actually read more into them than we should, non? i confess to using them... like when i'm skimming the pages to look for a certain passage, i use the headings as markers. you know who puts them there? not the translators. the editors. yes, i realize they're trying to be helpful... but there's no escaping subjectivity when it comes to matters of perspective, which is what these headings ultimately boil down to. take the above verses... did you know that verses 21 and 22 constitute a single sentence in the original Greek? the English translation actually breaks down a lot of the single Greek sentences into multiple ones... for example, verses 15-20 also comprise a single sentence... wait, maybe verses 21-22 are even a part of that sentence? i can't remember now. but either way, those two verses are a part of a single train of thought. basically something like, submit to one another out of reverence for Christ, and wives to your husbands. so first of all, the English translation cuts it into two sentences. and then the editors read the English and arbitrarily decide that v.22 is the start of a new train of thought concerning wives and husbands, and so they put the heading in. do you not admit to interpreting the verses differently with the sentence split and the heading than if you were to have read the original Greek?
ok, i'm done with that. i also wanted to share a perspective on submission that i've been struggling with for a while. i do advocate the discipline of submission, by the way, even though i may not be coming across as such... but even then, it's quite complicated. so here's the thing... i believe we ought to submit to one another, and wives to their husbands as an extension... and ideally, this works out. if we all love each other the way we should, there should be no fear in submitting to one another. but all it takes is one person to not do their part, and the whole thing collapses. or does it?? because by saying that, i'm assuming that submission is a two-way street. is it? ideally, yes, because two-way submission is beneficial and hence a positive experience for both parties. but if one person submits and the other does not, and worse yet, the other person takes advantage of the one person's submission, then what?? do i continue to advocate submission even then? i want to say no. because it is so hard to know where and when and how to draw the line... for example, abuse. but here's the irony of it all: the essence of submission is most clearly demonstrated when it's one-way. kinda like how you know how much faith a person truly has only when it's put to the test. ** added feb 9: i thought of something else... you know that passage on loving your enemies? if you love only your loved ones, or basically anyone who would love you back, to what extent is that really love? i mean, it's love, no doubt... but it's conditional. and for some reason, i have no problem classifying unconditional love as greater than conditional love. but does submission work the same way? or are there a lot more loopholes to it? ** if you can submit to a person only if that person submits to you and it's equal between both parties, how genuine of a submission is that?
which leads me back to square one. ahhh... there's no place like home.
v.21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.
Wives and Husbands
v.22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.
what immediately stands out? the heading, right? even though the headings we find in our Bibles are technically not a part of Scripture, we actually read more into them than we should, non? i confess to using them... like when i'm skimming the pages to look for a certain passage, i use the headings as markers. you know who puts them there? not the translators. the editors. yes, i realize they're trying to be helpful... but there's no escaping subjectivity when it comes to matters of perspective, which is what these headings ultimately boil down to. take the above verses... did you know that verses 21 and 22 constitute a single sentence in the original Greek? the English translation actually breaks down a lot of the single Greek sentences into multiple ones... for example, verses 15-20 also comprise a single sentence... wait, maybe verses 21-22 are even a part of that sentence? i can't remember now. but either way, those two verses are a part of a single train of thought. basically something like, submit to one another out of reverence for Christ, and wives to your husbands. so first of all, the English translation cuts it into two sentences. and then the editors read the English and arbitrarily decide that v.22 is the start of a new train of thought concerning wives and husbands, and so they put the heading in. do you not admit to interpreting the verses differently with the sentence split and the heading than if you were to have read the original Greek?
ok, i'm done with that. i also wanted to share a perspective on submission that i've been struggling with for a while. i do advocate the discipline of submission, by the way, even though i may not be coming across as such... but even then, it's quite complicated. so here's the thing... i believe we ought to submit to one another, and wives to their husbands as an extension... and ideally, this works out. if we all love each other the way we should, there should be no fear in submitting to one another. but all it takes is one person to not do their part, and the whole thing collapses. or does it?? because by saying that, i'm assuming that submission is a two-way street. is it? ideally, yes, because two-way submission is beneficial and hence a positive experience for both parties. but if one person submits and the other does not, and worse yet, the other person takes advantage of the one person's submission, then what?? do i continue to advocate submission even then? i want to say no. because it is so hard to know where and when and how to draw the line... for example, abuse. but here's the irony of it all: the essence of submission is most clearly demonstrated when it's one-way. kinda like how you know how much faith a person truly has only when it's put to the test. ** added feb 9: i thought of something else... you know that passage on loving your enemies? if you love only your loved ones, or basically anyone who would love you back, to what extent is that really love? i mean, it's love, no doubt... but it's conditional. and for some reason, i have no problem classifying unconditional love as greater than conditional love. but does submission work the same way? or are there a lot more loopholes to it? ** if you can submit to a person only if that person submits to you and it's equal between both parties, how genuine of a submission is that?
which leads me back to square one. ahhh... there's no place like home.
Sunday, February 05, 2006
based on a true story
mother and daughter step out of the house. it is bright and sunny outside.
achoo!!
the sneeze begins a much repeated and overplayed conversation.
daughter: it's the sun, i tell you.
mother: oh really. and how does the sun make people sneeze? explain yourself, daughter.
daughter: the light triggers something... and then... i can actually feel the sneeze coming on...
mother: oh, daughter! you crack me up. sometimes i question your science background! you know better than that... your explanation makes no sense. it's all in your head.
daughter: but mother, i've observed and analyzed my sneezes over the years! i know what i'm talking about.
mother: more than a nurse does? let me ask you something... can pepper going up your nose make your pupils constrict? can light entering your eyes tickle your nose and make you sneeze?
daughter: but it does!!! i feel it!
mother: prove it, daughter. prove it. your explanations are weak. where's the evidence? you know, it's probably psychological.
daughter: just wait, i'm gonna look it up and prove you wrong...
mother: yah, you keep saying that...
so after many years of skepticism from mother, daughter finally bothers to do some research on this strange behaviour to prove mother wrong. she's a bit lazy so she decides to just google it. sure enough, there are plenty of sun-sneezing links. she goes through a few of them and picks one with sufficient information. she emails the link to mother. she tells mother to check her email and stands behind mother while mother reads the article.
mother: look at the name of this site! madsci?? you expect me to trust a source called madsci? and who is this author? anyone can put an MD or a PhD beside their name. where are his references? i don't see any. statistics, where are they? my goodness. there is nothing in this article with sufficient proof. nice try, daughter.
daughter: oh please! he tells you that he's read articles from medical journals! so what if he doesn't reference them? this is obviously not an academic paper, so you can't call his writing style wrong... and why would he lie? besides, the explanation makes perfect sense! and i don't have to search those journals to know those articles are there. who's looking for such a hardcore scientific breakdown anyway? i just wanted to let you know that there was such a thing.
mother: look at the language he uses! i could interpret that to mean mere speculation. if i don't have stats, references, hard evidence... you can't expect me to believe it's true.
daughter is getting peeved. very peeved. when did mother lose her sound judgment?? what is mother learning at school?? is she getting brainwashed to the point where she feels that she must apply scientific methods to everything, including conversations with daughter?? mother should know better than that. and mother should not forget that daughter is just like mother and will not have the rug pulled out so easily from under her. mother is getting carried away. time to fight fire with fire.
daughter: scholars are divided on the Old Testament, and no one can conclusively prove that Moses even wrote the Pentateuch, so i guess we can't believe that either eh?
now daughter is also getting carried away.
mother: oh c'mon, you can't make that jump!
daughter: so let me get this straight... you really don't believe this article? you want me to take the time to go through some medical journal to find a paper to prove to you what this article already states??
mother: yes! exactly!
daughter: forget it! it's not worth it to find you an academic paper just so you can critique it and find some sort of flaw for you to undermine the validity of sun-sneezing.
daughter storms off. she knows she is overreacting, but at the same time, mother knows daughter well enough to know what buttons to push, and daughter believes that mother has aggravated her on purpose. but that's ok... two can play this game.
a couple of days pass... daughter finds out from someone that there is actually no conclusive evidence that MSG is bad. daughter doesn't even bother to confirm this because she is solely intent on figuring out a way to pushing mother's buttons and knows that mother is very much against using MSG.
daughter: did you know that there is no conclusive evidence that MSG is bad for you?
mother: of course it is, don't be silly.
daughter: nope. you can look it up, you won't find anything.
daughter knows she cannot verify this but keeps going anyway.
mother: too much sodium is bad for you. at least with salt, your sense of taste can tell you when you've had too much. MSG is dangerous because you can't taste how much sodium you're actually ingesting.
daughter: yah yah, but where's your hard evidence? where are your references? at least that guy on madsci had an MD and a PhD on top of that... where's yours? you're only an RN, so you're less credible than him.
mother begins to rant and rave, and daughter can't remember anything mother says for the next little while except that mother's voice is really really loud.
daughter smiles :)
mission accomplished.
--
an hour later: daughter goes to mother's room to keep mother company and eventually falls asleep while mother continues to study (because mother is a very good student and daughter is a delinquent in comparison). once again, all is right with the world.
achoo!!
the sneeze begins a much repeated and overplayed conversation.
daughter: it's the sun, i tell you.
mother: oh really. and how does the sun make people sneeze? explain yourself, daughter.
daughter: the light triggers something... and then... i can actually feel the sneeze coming on...
mother: oh, daughter! you crack me up. sometimes i question your science background! you know better than that... your explanation makes no sense. it's all in your head.
daughter: but mother, i've observed and analyzed my sneezes over the years! i know what i'm talking about.
mother: more than a nurse does? let me ask you something... can pepper going up your nose make your pupils constrict? can light entering your eyes tickle your nose and make you sneeze?
daughter: but it does!!! i feel it!
mother: prove it, daughter. prove it. your explanations are weak. where's the evidence? you know, it's probably psychological.
daughter: just wait, i'm gonna look it up and prove you wrong...
mother: yah, you keep saying that...
so after many years of skepticism from mother, daughter finally bothers to do some research on this strange behaviour to prove mother wrong. she's a bit lazy so she decides to just google it. sure enough, there are plenty of sun-sneezing links. she goes through a few of them and picks one with sufficient information. she emails the link to mother. she tells mother to check her email and stands behind mother while mother reads the article.
mother: look at the name of this site! madsci?? you expect me to trust a source called madsci? and who is this author? anyone can put an MD or a PhD beside their name. where are his references? i don't see any. statistics, where are they? my goodness. there is nothing in this article with sufficient proof. nice try, daughter.
daughter: oh please! he tells you that he's read articles from medical journals! so what if he doesn't reference them? this is obviously not an academic paper, so you can't call his writing style wrong... and why would he lie? besides, the explanation makes perfect sense! and i don't have to search those journals to know those articles are there. who's looking for such a hardcore scientific breakdown anyway? i just wanted to let you know that there was such a thing.
mother: look at the language he uses! i could interpret that to mean mere speculation. if i don't have stats, references, hard evidence... you can't expect me to believe it's true.
daughter is getting peeved. very peeved. when did mother lose her sound judgment?? what is mother learning at school?? is she getting brainwashed to the point where she feels that she must apply scientific methods to everything, including conversations with daughter?? mother should know better than that. and mother should not forget that daughter is just like mother and will not have the rug pulled out so easily from under her. mother is getting carried away. time to fight fire with fire.
daughter: scholars are divided on the Old Testament, and no one can conclusively prove that Moses even wrote the Pentateuch, so i guess we can't believe that either eh?
now daughter is also getting carried away.
mother: oh c'mon, you can't make that jump!
daughter: so let me get this straight... you really don't believe this article? you want me to take the time to go through some medical journal to find a paper to prove to you what this article already states??
mother: yes! exactly!
daughter: forget it! it's not worth it to find you an academic paper just so you can critique it and find some sort of flaw for you to undermine the validity of sun-sneezing.
daughter storms off. she knows she is overreacting, but at the same time, mother knows daughter well enough to know what buttons to push, and daughter believes that mother has aggravated her on purpose. but that's ok... two can play this game.
a couple of days pass... daughter finds out from someone that there is actually no conclusive evidence that MSG is bad. daughter doesn't even bother to confirm this because she is solely intent on figuring out a way to pushing mother's buttons and knows that mother is very much against using MSG.
daughter: did you know that there is no conclusive evidence that MSG is bad for you?
mother: of course it is, don't be silly.
daughter: nope. you can look it up, you won't find anything.
daughter knows she cannot verify this but keeps going anyway.
mother: too much sodium is bad for you. at least with salt, your sense of taste can tell you when you've had too much. MSG is dangerous because you can't taste how much sodium you're actually ingesting.
daughter: yah yah, but where's your hard evidence? where are your references? at least that guy on madsci had an MD and a PhD on top of that... where's yours? you're only an RN, so you're less credible than him.
mother begins to rant and rave, and daughter can't remember anything mother says for the next little while except that mother's voice is really really loud.
daughter smiles :)
mission accomplished.
--
an hour later: daughter goes to mother's room to keep mother company and eventually falls asleep while mother continues to study (because mother is a very good student and daughter is a delinquent in comparison). once again, all is right with the world.
Tuesday, January 31, 2006
pop quiz
inspired by a (semi? non?) accurate observation my prof made about my personality the other day, i had the sudden urge to test myself with some of the personality inventories available online. anyway, i stumbled across this one site and took most of their tests... some were lighter in nature, others more complex and profound. looking at some of my results, i dunno whether to laugh or cry laughing! i'm all over the place. i took the myers-briggs inventory last semester and there was enough fluctuation then, but i thought i finally got it right in the end. apparently i've changed again. and the end descriptions i got for some of the tests were so negative and depressing, it was hilarious really... but there's always a bit of truth behind all humour, so yah... dunno what to make of it all. except laugh :) the word association test is what i would consider one of the lighter ones... they give you a bunch of words that you're supposed to rate as positive, negative or neutral, and the premise is that answering delays may correspond to issues with that particular word. my top 5 delays are listed below. i don't really believe this means anything ;)
Take Word Association Test
| I have issues with... |
| future money history men walls |
Monday, January 30, 2006
*sniffle*
i got a cold over the wknd. not sure why... the weather, maybe? anyway, i hate colds... the nasal congestion drives me insane at night. and now i'm so dehydrated... in class today i felt like my lips were gonna fall off my face. so what did i do about it? buy myself a cup of coffee, of course... you know, the best hydrating drink ever.
i'm trying to be healthy, really ;) but it's sooo hard. my chocolate consumption has sky-rocketed since last month and it's hard enough to control that. though i've cut down a bit as of late. of course, when i've eaten up all my chocolate and i haven't gone out to buy some more, it makes cutting down a little easier. people, PLEASE, for the sake of my health, do not feed me chocolate!!
my mom mixed in some brown rice with the white for last night's dinner. i flipped. i can eat brown rice at other people's houses, but when it's being cooked in my own kitchen, for some reason it drives me nuts. yes yes, it's healthy, i know, but i'm not asking for much... i have very simple tastes... i'm perfectly happy with stuff like white rice, white bread, broth... heck, i could have that as a meal! but please, leave my white rice and white bread alone!
although... i did see a commercial on tv [confession: i started watching american idol a coupla weeks ago] and apparently wonderbread has this new kind of bread that has all the nutrients of brown bread except it still tastes just like their white bread. now THAT'S innovation! i'll have to try some and see for myself if the bread lives up to what it promises in the commercial.
ughhh... i hate the sniffles......
p.s. i don't like DADF#AD tuning. sorry B, but my bar chords sound horrible! my fingers weren't meant to bar. i could even stretch that and say they weren't meant to play guitar... but i don't want samuel to feel unloved :P
i'm trying to be healthy, really ;) but it's sooo hard. my chocolate consumption has sky-rocketed since last month and it's hard enough to control that. though i've cut down a bit as of late. of course, when i've eaten up all my chocolate and i haven't gone out to buy some more, it makes cutting down a little easier. people, PLEASE, for the sake of my health, do not feed me chocolate!!
my mom mixed in some brown rice with the white for last night's dinner. i flipped. i can eat brown rice at other people's houses, but when it's being cooked in my own kitchen, for some reason it drives me nuts. yes yes, it's healthy, i know, but i'm not asking for much... i have very simple tastes... i'm perfectly happy with stuff like white rice, white bread, broth... heck, i could have that as a meal! but please, leave my white rice and white bread alone!
although... i did see a commercial on tv [confession: i started watching american idol a coupla weeks ago] and apparently wonderbread has this new kind of bread that has all the nutrients of brown bread except it still tastes just like their white bread. now THAT'S innovation! i'll have to try some and see for myself if the bread lives up to what it promises in the commercial.
ughhh... i hate the sniffles......
p.s. i don't like DADF#AD tuning. sorry B, but my bar chords sound horrible! my fingers weren't meant to bar. i could even stretch that and say they weren't meant to play guitar... but i don't want samuel to feel unloved :P
Monday, January 23, 2006
holy DADGAD, batman!
alternate tuning, where have you been all my life?!
to think i coulda been playing open DADGAD chords all this time... *smacking forehead*
anyway, i came up with a name for my guitar:
- samuel Xavier martin -
what? explain the name? sure! his first name is samuel because he's a lot like old testament samuel. hannah (which coincidentally means grace) was barren and she prayed earnestly for a son, promising the Lord that if He blessed her with one, she would "give him to the Lord all the days of his life" (1 Sam 1:11 NASB). did you know that i went eight years without my own guitar?? yah... so anyway, when the Lord blessed hannah with a son, "she named him Samuel, saying, 'Because I have asked him of the Lord' " (v. 20). well same here. and so, like hannah, "for this boy [guitar] i prayed, and the Lord has given me my petition which i asked of Him. so i have also dedicated him to the Lord; as long as he lives he is dedicated to the Lord" (v. 27-28).
his middle name is Xavier because i wanted to name him after the X-series line that he's from... model 000X1, to be exact. and his last name is martin cuz... well, cuz he's a martin!
---
i have a confession to make. i was actually praying for a piano :P but i guess i wasn't meant to have one. yet. anyway, i'm very happy with samuel :) and besides, there are too many female guitars at church... they're all gonna be fighting over samuel! granted, he's smaller and skinnier and more fragile than they are... not much to look at... but he's still da man ;)
to think i coulda been playing open DADGAD chords all this time... *smacking forehead*
anyway, i came up with a name for my guitar:
- samuel Xavier martin -
what? explain the name? sure! his first name is samuel because he's a lot like old testament samuel. hannah (which coincidentally means grace) was barren and she prayed earnestly for a son, promising the Lord that if He blessed her with one, she would "give him to the Lord all the days of his life" (1 Sam 1:11 NASB). did you know that i went eight years without my own guitar?? yah... so anyway, when the Lord blessed hannah with a son, "she named him Samuel, saying, 'Because I have asked him of the Lord' " (v. 20). well same here. and so, like hannah, "for this boy [guitar] i prayed, and the Lord has given me my petition which i asked of Him. so i have also dedicated him to the Lord; as long as he lives he is dedicated to the Lord" (v. 27-28).
his middle name is Xavier because i wanted to name him after the X-series line that he's from... model 000X1, to be exact. and his last name is martin cuz... well, cuz he's a martin!
---
i have a confession to make. i was actually praying for a piano :P but i guess i wasn't meant to have one. yet. anyway, i'm very happy with samuel :) and besides, there are too many female guitars at church... they're all gonna be fighting over samuel! granted, he's smaller and skinnier and more fragile than they are... not much to look at... but he's still da man ;)
Sunday, January 22, 2006
Saturday, January 21, 2006
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
much ado about nothing
my patience is wearing thin with my applications...
the CanIL one was easy enough. too bad i couldn't pay online, but that's ok... so i have to bust out my chequebook, write out a cheque, stick it in an envelope, put a stamp on it and mail it... but i thought the whole point of an online application was to avoid the whole mailing hassle? anyway, that's fine. though i wish i had known earlier, then i woulda just snailmailed the whole package. transcript-wise, UofT's ROSI is really convenient... i request it online, pay it online, and they send it out for me which saves me the time and effort of making the trek downtown and using up another stamp. so i can't complain there. (and sorry to be so hung up on the stamps, but first of all, i don't mail things out on a regular basis so it's not like i own a set of stamps that i can grab at my convenience... anything i need to mail out will require an extra trip down to the nearest post office, which requires even more time and effort, not to mention the added hassle of arranging transportation since vehicles are not readily available at my house.) tyndale, on the other hand...... anyway, that's ok. i'll work it out with them at the end of the month after transcripts are available.
but ACTS... yes, that application is really something... so first of all, i opted for the online application. but i can't just start applying, i have to create an account with TWU. ok, that's fine. so they sent all the login info to my email account. great. wait... where is it? usually these things get sent within the minute. well... that's ok, i'll just wait patiently... go down and grab a quick snack. honestly, i don't know how long i actually waited, but i couldn't wait any longer so i resubmitted my request. a few minutes later, i get the email. so i try to log in with it... but it doesn't work! oh, wait, could it be because i resubmitted my request and so they resetted my password and now i have to wait for the second email? lovely. ok... so i get the second email after some time, log in, and *finally* begin the application.
one of my peeves (and again i have to apologize for the whining, but i'm afraid i might implode if i don't) is when applications don't give me enough space to write out my whole name. yes, it's a bit on the long side, but it's not that long!!! the ACTS application gives 15 spaces for first names. my whole first name, including the two spaces separating the three names, takes up 16 spaces. so what do i do? combine the first two? cut off a letter? only use 'grace'? for unofficial things, maybe... but not for an application. so i sat there annoyed for a few minutes and eventually typed in 'Merry June Grac', and right below it, in the preferred name box, i typed 'Grace (won't fit above)'. so then i was satisfied. but then my dear observant brain caught something... how many spaces does 'Grace (won't fit above)' take up? count them, ppl... 23!!! i proceeded to count the total number of available spaces in that box. 3o. 30, ppl!! because you know, generally people have these short official first names of less than 15 characters that appear on their birth certificates, but when it comes to what they want people to call them, these preferred names have the tendency to be MUCH MUCH longer, twice as long in fact, up to 30 spaces long!
ok. moving on. so i filled out my step 2 personal info just fine. oh yah, all that stuff above, that counts as my contact info, step 1. there are 14 steps in total to this application. but as soon as i got to step 3... oh boy, here we go again.
when i first found out about ACTS seminaries, i thought it was one big school made up of a bunch of little schools in collaboration with each other. i wasn't totally wrong, but really, i should've known better after being severely scarred by UofT. let me briefly explain myself before i go on.
my entire UofT story is a novel in itself, but anyway... if i had to give advice to prospective students, i would tell them the exact opposite of what those horrible people at the university fair told me: NO, UofT is NOT the same wherever you attend, and YES, it makes a HUGE difference what campus you choose, because NO, they are NOT the same even if they offer the same programs, so DO NOT get fooled and think you can easily transfer from one campus to another because it's the same university anyway, because each campus runs things so differently from one another that they might as well be separate universities! the most ridiculous example i can come up with about my own devastating transfer from UTSC to St. George is the fact that my first year bio wasn't directly transferrable because scarborough campus lacked an evolution component, and my first year chem only counted for half a credit because scarborough campus lacked an organic component. and these are core first-year science courses, ppl! RIDICULOUS! THEY'RE BOTH UOFT! shouldn't at least their core courses be transferrable?? ahhh, but now you see what i mean... anyway, some of you know that the theory of evolution doesn't sit well with me, especially back then when i was particularly headstrong in my 'creationist' mindset, so imagine what went on in my head when i found out that i HAD to take an evolution course in order for my program requirement of first year bio to count so that i could graduate... yah. and the chem? i can't remember how i worked that one out, but that's ok, i don't wanna dwell on this subject anymore.
ok, back to my ACTS application. so i'm on step 3, academic interests, and i come upon this...
My seminary choice is:
oh. ok. interesting. no wonder no one's ever heard of ACTS... people keep giving me these blank faces whenever i mention it. now i know why. it's just an umbrella title. cuz i'm sure people have heard of trinity western or canadian baptist or pentecostal or any of the other seminaries mentioned.
so after my short-lived eureka moment, the dilemma began to sink in... which seminary do i choose?? i didn't even realize i had to choose one! my church is non-denominational (at least that's what p. andrew told me when i applied to tyndale) so that doesn't help. if i opt for no preference, that means they'll be choosing for me and who knows where they'll stick me! i might as well make an informed decision. so i emailed a wise friend of mine (who also happens to be a pastor and living out west) hoping that he would share a bit of wisdom and guidance in the matter. and of course, some prayer is needed before i make my final decision.
in the meantime, i wanted to skip the question. the next one asks, where did i hear about ACTS? so some parts of the application are required and others are optional. unbelievably, this is one of their mandatory questions. that's fine, i wouldn't even mention this question, except for the fact that i couldn't choose! 15 choices and none of them were 'from another seminary' or 'in a coursebook' or something along those lines... and no, they didn't have 'none of the above' or even 'other' which usually comes with a blank for me to write something in. so i couldn't make up my mind which lie to choose (cuz that's what i'm essentially doing if none of the given choices were how i really heard about ACTS), so i wanted to skip the whole page and go on to the next step.
they wouldn't let me. i have to fill out ALL of the required fields before i can move on to any of the other pages. and yah, i have to go through the steps chronologically, so until i decide what seminary to study under and what lie to choose about how i heard of ACTS, i can't fill out anything else. isn't that just lovely?? and to top it all off, i recalled the payment incident with my CanIL application so i wanted to find out if ACTS accepts online payment, but that's not until step 12.
and...... that's all for now.
excuse me, i'll be needing my chocolate fix for the afternoon.
the CanIL one was easy enough. too bad i couldn't pay online, but that's ok... so i have to bust out my chequebook, write out a cheque, stick it in an envelope, put a stamp on it and mail it... but i thought the whole point of an online application was to avoid the whole mailing hassle? anyway, that's fine. though i wish i had known earlier, then i woulda just snailmailed the whole package. transcript-wise, UofT's ROSI is really convenient... i request it online, pay it online, and they send it out for me which saves me the time and effort of making the trek downtown and using up another stamp. so i can't complain there. (and sorry to be so hung up on the stamps, but first of all, i don't mail things out on a regular basis so it's not like i own a set of stamps that i can grab at my convenience... anything i need to mail out will require an extra trip down to the nearest post office, which requires even more time and effort, not to mention the added hassle of arranging transportation since vehicles are not readily available at my house.) tyndale, on the other hand...... anyway, that's ok. i'll work it out with them at the end of the month after transcripts are available.
but ACTS... yes, that application is really something... so first of all, i opted for the online application. but i can't just start applying, i have to create an account with TWU. ok, that's fine. so they sent all the login info to my email account. great. wait... where is it? usually these things get sent within the minute. well... that's ok, i'll just wait patiently... go down and grab a quick snack. honestly, i don't know how long i actually waited, but i couldn't wait any longer so i resubmitted my request. a few minutes later, i get the email. so i try to log in with it... but it doesn't work! oh, wait, could it be because i resubmitted my request and so they resetted my password and now i have to wait for the second email? lovely. ok... so i get the second email after some time, log in, and *finally* begin the application.
one of my peeves (and again i have to apologize for the whining, but i'm afraid i might implode if i don't) is when applications don't give me enough space to write out my whole name. yes, it's a bit on the long side, but it's not that long!!! the ACTS application gives 15 spaces for first names. my whole first name, including the two spaces separating the three names, takes up 16 spaces. so what do i do? combine the first two? cut off a letter? only use 'grace'? for unofficial things, maybe... but not for an application. so i sat there annoyed for a few minutes and eventually typed in 'Merry June Grac', and right below it, in the preferred name box, i typed 'Grace (won't fit above)'. so then i was satisfied. but then my dear observant brain caught something... how many spaces does 'Grace (won't fit above)' take up? count them, ppl... 23!!! i proceeded to count the total number of available spaces in that box. 3o. 30, ppl!! because you know, generally people have these short official first names of less than 15 characters that appear on their birth certificates, but when it comes to what they want people to call them, these preferred names have the tendency to be MUCH MUCH longer, twice as long in fact, up to 30 spaces long!
ok. moving on. so i filled out my step 2 personal info just fine. oh yah, all that stuff above, that counts as my contact info, step 1. there are 14 steps in total to this application. but as soon as i got to step 3... oh boy, here we go again.
when i first found out about ACTS seminaries, i thought it was one big school made up of a bunch of little schools in collaboration with each other. i wasn't totally wrong, but really, i should've known better after being severely scarred by UofT. let me briefly explain myself before i go on.
my entire UofT story is a novel in itself, but anyway... if i had to give advice to prospective students, i would tell them the exact opposite of what those horrible people at the university fair told me: NO, UofT is NOT the same wherever you attend, and YES, it makes a HUGE difference what campus you choose, because NO, they are NOT the same even if they offer the same programs, so DO NOT get fooled and think you can easily transfer from one campus to another because it's the same university anyway, because each campus runs things so differently from one another that they might as well be separate universities! the most ridiculous example i can come up with about my own devastating transfer from UTSC to St. George is the fact that my first year bio wasn't directly transferrable because scarborough campus lacked an evolution component, and my first year chem only counted for half a credit because scarborough campus lacked an organic component. and these are core first-year science courses, ppl! RIDICULOUS! THEY'RE BOTH UOFT! shouldn't at least their core courses be transferrable?? ahhh, but now you see what i mean... anyway, some of you know that the theory of evolution doesn't sit well with me, especially back then when i was particularly headstrong in my 'creationist' mindset, so imagine what went on in my head when i found out that i HAD to take an evolution course in order for my program requirement of first year bio to count so that i could graduate... yah. and the chem? i can't remember how i worked that one out, but that's ok, i don't wanna dwell on this subject anymore.
ok, back to my ACTS application. so i'm on step 3, academic interests, and i come upon this...
My seminary choice is:
- Canadian Baptist Seminary
- Canadian Pentecostal Seminary
- Candadian Theological Seminary
- Northwest Baptist Seminary
- Trinity Western Seminary
- Mennonite Brethren Biblical Seminary
- No Preference
* ACTS is associated with six theological seminaries. Please select one from the list above to study under.
oh. ok. interesting. no wonder no one's ever heard of ACTS... people keep giving me these blank faces whenever i mention it. now i know why. it's just an umbrella title. cuz i'm sure people have heard of trinity western or canadian baptist or pentecostal or any of the other seminaries mentioned.
so after my short-lived eureka moment, the dilemma began to sink in... which seminary do i choose?? i didn't even realize i had to choose one! my church is non-denominational (at least that's what p. andrew told me when i applied to tyndale) so that doesn't help. if i opt for no preference, that means they'll be choosing for me and who knows where they'll stick me! i might as well make an informed decision. so i emailed a wise friend of mine (who also happens to be a pastor and living out west) hoping that he would share a bit of wisdom and guidance in the matter. and of course, some prayer is needed before i make my final decision.
in the meantime, i wanted to skip the question. the next one asks, where did i hear about ACTS? so some parts of the application are required and others are optional. unbelievably, this is one of their mandatory questions. that's fine, i wouldn't even mention this question, except for the fact that i couldn't choose! 15 choices and none of them were 'from another seminary' or 'in a coursebook' or something along those lines... and no, they didn't have 'none of the above' or even 'other' which usually comes with a blank for me to write something in. so i couldn't make up my mind which lie to choose (cuz that's what i'm essentially doing if none of the given choices were how i really heard about ACTS), so i wanted to skip the whole page and go on to the next step.
they wouldn't let me. i have to fill out ALL of the required fields before i can move on to any of the other pages. and yah, i have to go through the steps chronologically, so until i decide what seminary to study under and what lie to choose about how i heard of ACTS, i can't fill out anything else. isn't that just lovely?? and to top it all off, i recalled the payment incident with my CanIL application so i wanted to find out if ACTS accepts online payment, but that's not until step 12.
and...... that's all for now.
excuse me, i'll be needing my chocolate fix for the afternoon.
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
weeeeee
it's a skating rink out there! i nearly slipped five times this afternoon by virtue of just standing... of course, there were several contributing factors (aside from the freezing rain): no-grip shoes, sloped ground, strong winds, and lack of mass. the funniest was at the gas station... i stepped out of the van with one foot on the ground and one hand on the door, only to have this big gust of wind blow the door out and me along with it. i did slip, but i was clinging to the door so i managed to keep my butt off the ground. i had to pull myself along just to get to the tank, and i had to hold on to the van while pumping the gas cuz the wind kept blowing and the ground was sloped and i kept gliding away......
Monday, January 16, 2006
amandes chocolat
i scarfed down an entire box of chocolate-covered almonds in one sitting just now.
and now i have the hiccups. not to mention all the saturated fats i need for the next two days.
warning: don't try this at home.
and now i have the hiccups. not to mention all the saturated fats i need for the next two days.
warning: don't try this at home.
Friday, January 13, 2006
no words
speaking of Christian... this totally blew me away:
http://headtochrist.com/
make sure to check out the whole site... bio, journal, news, everything...
let me know what you think.
http://headtochrist.com/
make sure to check out the whole site... bio, journal, news, everything...
let me know what you think.
Thursday, January 12, 2006
over drinks
i don't normally post on the spur of the moment, but this reeeaallly had me thinking:
"we're automatically drawn to God..." (that is, the evidence of His presence in other people's lives.)
this was the explanation a friend gave me over drinks tonight. yah, i know, it's not Christian rocket science... but if you were to suddenly realize that this is what's governing all the laws of attraction in your world, i bet you would have a eureka moment too.
"we're automatically drawn to God..." (that is, the evidence of His presence in other people's lives.)
this was the explanation a friend gave me over drinks tonight. yah, i know, it's not Christian rocket science... but if you were to suddenly realize that this is what's governing all the laws of attraction in your world, i bet you would have a eureka moment too.
Tuesday, January 10, 2006
it's morphin' time ;)
happy new year, tout le monde!
so i thought i'd change the look of my blog a bit. you know, make the switch from one default template to another. hard work, i know.
i didn't get as much rest as i would've liked over the holidays. i was writing papers up until the morning i left for san diego, and the entire trip was pretty jam-packed and more stressful than your average vacation (though i was able to marvel at God's creation a few times, and those precious moments alone made the trip worth it). for the second year in a row, i spent the bulk of my birthday in an airport / on a plane and was barely awake for the countdown. and then i blinked and found myself back in school first week into the new year. and yes, i'm already behind... ugggghh.
so what was i doing a year ago today?
i was able to visit the hospital i was born in just over 24 years ago.
i also got a chance to visit my old house.
i took these pics from my yahoo photo album of last year's trip to the philippines. click here for a refresher.
i would've made an album of my cali trip, but i had to leave my camera behind for my dad to use. my mom took a million pics, but it's not the same cuz it's not my story to tell. though i might post the odd pic... like the one of the chocolate fountain at my aunt's wedding. i'm drooling just thinking about it!! next time, next time.
so i thought i'd change the look of my blog a bit. you know, make the switch from one default template to another. hard work, i know.
i didn't get as much rest as i would've liked over the holidays. i was writing papers up until the morning i left for san diego, and the entire trip was pretty jam-packed and more stressful than your average vacation (though i was able to marvel at God's creation a few times, and those precious moments alone made the trip worth it). for the second year in a row, i spent the bulk of my birthday in an airport / on a plane and was barely awake for the countdown. and then i blinked and found myself back in school first week into the new year. and yes, i'm already behind... ugggghh.
so what was i doing a year ago today?
i was able to visit the hospital i was born in just over 24 years ago.
i also got a chance to visit my old house.
i took these pics from my yahoo photo album of last year's trip to the philippines. click here for a refresher.
i would've made an album of my cali trip, but i had to leave my camera behind for my dad to use. my mom took a million pics, but it's not the same cuz it's not my story to tell. though i might post the odd pic... like the one of the chocolate fountain at my aunt's wedding. i'm drooling just thinking about it!! next time, next time.
Saturday, December 17, 2005
done
no, not my papers... still got two of those outstanding.
(i know. pathetic. simply pathetic.)
by the time i get them done and submitted, i'll have just enough time to pack and i'm off for the holidays. so this'll be my last post of the year. should be real nice and sunny where i'm at ;)
i'll leave off with these heartfelt words:
cheers ;)
(i know. pathetic. simply pathetic.)
by the time i get them done and submitted, i'll have just enough time to pack and i'm off for the holidays. so this'll be my last post of the year. should be real nice and sunny where i'm at ;)
i'll leave off with these heartfelt words:
- watch out, steer clear of them mistletoes
- be very careful what you wish for
- don't let gluttony add to those love handles
- no boxing on boxing day please. be nice
cheers ;)
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
the age of the wuss
anyone catch that article in the oct31 issue of maclean's?
i was bored at work so i went through the office's stack of magazines and... well, the title alone piqued my curiosity.
and so i read it. very interesting. i'm not even sure where to begin...
After all their 'evolving,' men run the risk of obscuring the meaning of male altogether
haha... yeah...
"A few years ago, I might have said that men didn't take care of themselves enough," she says. "Now they're doing so more and more -- maybe too much. With these men, I could not fall in love."
yeah...
But men in the 21st century face a challenge. It is less a test of their masculinity than a search for masculinity itself.
yeah...
But according to some researchers, women bear some responsibility for the current male malaise, because they've been sending conflicting signals about what they want from men.
yeah...
(if only i could submit papers in this fashion!)
i was bored at work so i went through the office's stack of magazines and... well, the title alone piqued my curiosity.
and so i read it. very interesting. i'm not even sure where to begin...
After all their 'evolving,' men run the risk of obscuring the meaning of male altogether
haha... yeah...
"A few years ago, I might have said that men didn't take care of themselves enough," she says. "Now they're doing so more and more -- maybe too much. With these men, I could not fall in love."
yeah...
But men in the 21st century face a challenge. It is less a test of their masculinity than a search for masculinity itself.
yeah...
But according to some researchers, women bear some responsibility for the current male malaise, because they've been sending conflicting signals about what they want from men.
yeah...
(if only i could submit papers in this fashion!)
Sunday, December 11, 2005
weapons, etc.
i was watching my old school do a wushu demo today and i got really nostalgic. yet again. (this is not the first time, nor will it be the last.)
there are certain things in life that leave a mark on a person in such a way that no amount of time or space or distance or anything could ever wipe it out completely. kinda like frodo in LOTR, when he got stabbed by a black rider at weathertop. (if you don't know what i'm talking about, go read the book(s)... and if you really can't, only then should you watch it on dvd :P )
i have many such marks. this is one of them. my hands haven't held a weapon in so long, and i admit that i miss the feeling. i miss the experience. i miss the physical training and rigorous exercise. i miss the competitiveness and the drive to win. i miss the old team and the camaraderie we had. i miss the art of the performance. i miss my straightsword, my spear... and my other weapons too. i miss my C7 (and C9 and C6) and my 76-mm L23A1. man, what i would give to fire one more round......
but i hold a different kind of weapon now. it's really strange, almost funny... all my life i've been preparing myself to fight different kinds of battles, and i think it's all part of God's plan for me. He's raised a female warrior for Himself ;) and even though it doesn't feel like it (with all the reading and writing and studying and eating and sleeping and NO EXERCISE), i don't believe He ever took me out of battle mode... He's just training me to fight a different kind of battle. so He's given me new "night-vision goggles" (which i'm still getting used to btw... having a bit of trouble spotting the enemy) to scope out the spiritual battle scene, and as for my new weapons, they're not really new since i've had them all along... but now i gotta treat them like actual weapons. there's no way i'm sitting out of this battle! BRING IT!!!
---
"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms."
Ephesians 6:12
there are certain things in life that leave a mark on a person in such a way that no amount of time or space or distance or anything could ever wipe it out completely. kinda like frodo in LOTR, when he got stabbed by a black rider at weathertop. (if you don't know what i'm talking about, go read the book(s)... and if you really can't, only then should you watch it on dvd :P )
i have many such marks. this is one of them. my hands haven't held a weapon in so long, and i admit that i miss the feeling. i miss the experience. i miss the physical training and rigorous exercise. i miss the competitiveness and the drive to win. i miss the old team and the camaraderie we had. i miss the art of the performance. i miss my straightsword, my spear... and my other weapons too. i miss my C7 (and C9 and C6) and my 76-mm L23A1. man, what i would give to fire one more round......
but i hold a different kind of weapon now. it's really strange, almost funny... all my life i've been preparing myself to fight different kinds of battles, and i think it's all part of God's plan for me. He's raised a female warrior for Himself ;) and even though it doesn't feel like it (with all the reading and writing and studying and eating and sleeping and NO EXERCISE), i don't believe He ever took me out of battle mode... He's just training me to fight a different kind of battle. so He's given me new "night-vision goggles" (which i'm still getting used to btw... having a bit of trouble spotting the enemy) to scope out the spiritual battle scene, and as for my new weapons, they're not really new since i've had them all along... but now i gotta treat them like actual weapons. there's no way i'm sitting out of this battle! BRING IT!!!
---
"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms."
Ephesians 6:12
Monday, December 05, 2005
VEXED
memory stinks!!! to sheol with memory!!!
i can't recall what i wanna recall,
i can't retain what i wanna retain,
and the real clincher for me is
i can't forget what i wanna forget!!!
gaahhh!!! vanity of vanities!!!
---
"Because in much wisdom there is much grief, and increasing knowledge results in increasing pain."
Ecclesiastes 1:18
i can't recall what i wanna recall,
i can't retain what i wanna retain,
and the real clincher for me is
i can't forget what i wanna forget!!!
gaahhh!!! vanity of vanities!!!
---
"Because in much wisdom there is much grief, and increasing knowledge results in increasing pain."
Ecclesiastes 1:18
(no, not procrastinating this time.)
i just can't seem to stay asleep. this is the third time i've woken up tonight. must be the coffee. i thought it was a large, but it could very well have been an extra large... what was my mom thinking?? she's the one with the exam. i actually wanna sleep! though i suppose i didn't have to drink the whole cup... (yah right, like i would ever waste coffee in my right mind...)
lately, i've been forcing myself to wake up when my body naturally wants to continue sleeping, and as a result i get these flashes from my dreams... when i was young, i used to vividly remember them all, and then something happened to my memory (i blame university) and i could no longer remember my dreams. but if i catch myself half-asleep, i'll remember bits of my dream for a few minutes.
goodness, they've been extreme lately... or maybe they've always been extreme, but i never remember enough to think so. another word i would use to describe my dreams is 'afflicted'... in some ways, i feel like my dreams are an outlet of the sins that i consciously try to avoid in my wakeful state. i remember one time going to bed in such peace and with all these good thoughts, having just had a wonderful talk with God, and when i woke up the next morning with a momentary glimpse of what i had just been dreaming about, i freaked and felt the need to repent of the atrocities that were taking place in my unconscious mind. so i've started asking Him to guard my dreams... but i still keep having awful ones. not all the time, but a lot of the time. (sometimes equivalent to outright nightmares, in which case i wake up the next day with a frown line between my eyebrows that takes hours to go away. aagh, wrinkles!) obviously i'm not understanding how this whole dream business really works or what purpose it serves in my case...... i guess the only reason i'm freaking out is cuz i can't control it. my whole life should serve to glorify God, whether i'm asleep or awake, and i really don't see my dreams as God-glorifying at all. wish He would just resolve this for me.
lately, i've been forcing myself to wake up when my body naturally wants to continue sleeping, and as a result i get these flashes from my dreams... when i was young, i used to vividly remember them all, and then something happened to my memory (i blame university) and i could no longer remember my dreams. but if i catch myself half-asleep, i'll remember bits of my dream for a few minutes.
goodness, they've been extreme lately... or maybe they've always been extreme, but i never remember enough to think so. another word i would use to describe my dreams is 'afflicted'... in some ways, i feel like my dreams are an outlet of the sins that i consciously try to avoid in my wakeful state. i remember one time going to bed in such peace and with all these good thoughts, having just had a wonderful talk with God, and when i woke up the next morning with a momentary glimpse of what i had just been dreaming about, i freaked and felt the need to repent of the atrocities that were taking place in my unconscious mind. so i've started asking Him to guard my dreams... but i still keep having awful ones. not all the time, but a lot of the time. (sometimes equivalent to outright nightmares, in which case i wake up the next day with a frown line between my eyebrows that takes hours to go away. aagh, wrinkles!) obviously i'm not understanding how this whole dream business really works or what purpose it serves in my case...... i guess the only reason i'm freaking out is cuz i can't control it. my whole life should serve to glorify God, whether i'm asleep or awake, and i really don't see my dreams as God-glorifying at all. wish He would just resolve this for me.
Saturday, December 03, 2005
(procrastinating. part deux.)
i went to the mall today. it was a necessary excursion.
but what i came out with was not what i went there to get.
bad grace bad!!! no peace for me tonight. and no chocolate either.
i think i need to make at least one return. which also means i need to go back to the mall. aaagh!!
seriously, the minute that return is processed, i need to make like joseph and FLEE from that cursed, money-sucking black hole of a place......
---
apacible adj. calm, gentle [n. apacibilidad]
that's a spanish word, by the way. (many filipino surnames are.) and please pronounce it right... it's AHH-pah-SEE-bleh. happens to be my middle name, my brother's middle name, my mom's maiden name, and my grandfather's surname... or so i thought.
i learned something interesting today. my great-grandfather had the surname of patugalan. my grandfather should've been a patugalan. my relations on that side are all patugalans. it was my great-grandmother whose last name was apacible. she died and my grandfather was her only child. but my great-grandfather remarried and had other patugalan children. apparently, my grandfather was the very last of the apacibles... no one else from his mother's side to carry on the line. in order for the apacible line to continue, they changed his last name to reflect his mother's line... and thus, the apacible line continues to this day. (normally i'm quite embarrassed about my unusual middle name, but i feel honoured now that i know the story behind it.)
onto my paternal side... so my dad's roots are in fujian province. he just came back from a trip to china and we apparently own some land in xiamen! well, sort of... our particular TAN line corporately owns a chunk of land, and any (male) tans are entitled to claim their share if they so choose. i dunno, maybe this is considered a normal thing in china, but it's news to me. and i think my dad's actually interested in claiming his lot... which really amuses me for some reason. and they're even in the process of building this huge tan "shrine" (i dunno how else to call it, but i hope it's not a worshipping kind of place) with the names of all the tans... again, just the males (no comment!)... but anyway, it's nice to find out stuff like this. one of these days i'm gonna work out my whole geneaology.
but what i came out with was not what i went there to get.
bad grace bad!!! no peace for me tonight. and no chocolate either.
i think i need to make at least one return. which also means i need to go back to the mall. aaagh!!
seriously, the minute that return is processed, i need to make like joseph and FLEE from that cursed, money-sucking black hole of a place......
---
apacible adj. calm, gentle [n. apacibilidad]
that's a spanish word, by the way. (many filipino surnames are.) and please pronounce it right... it's AHH-pah-SEE-bleh. happens to be my middle name, my brother's middle name, my mom's maiden name, and my grandfather's surname... or so i thought.
i learned something interesting today. my great-grandfather had the surname of patugalan. my grandfather should've been a patugalan. my relations on that side are all patugalans. it was my great-grandmother whose last name was apacible. she died and my grandfather was her only child. but my great-grandfather remarried and had other patugalan children. apparently, my grandfather was the very last of the apacibles... no one else from his mother's side to carry on the line. in order for the apacible line to continue, they changed his last name to reflect his mother's line... and thus, the apacible line continues to this day. (normally i'm quite embarrassed about my unusual middle name, but i feel honoured now that i know the story behind it.)
onto my paternal side... so my dad's roots are in fujian province. he just came back from a trip to china and we apparently own some land in xiamen! well, sort of... our particular TAN line corporately owns a chunk of land, and any (male) tans are entitled to claim their share if they so choose. i dunno, maybe this is considered a normal thing in china, but it's news to me. and i think my dad's actually interested in claiming his lot... which really amuses me for some reason. and they're even in the process of building this huge tan "shrine" (i dunno how else to call it, but i hope it's not a worshipping kind of place) with the names of all the tans... again, just the males (no comment!)... but anyway, it's nice to find out stuff like this. one of these days i'm gonna work out my whole geneaology.
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
(yes. i am procrastinating.)
i think i'm too hard on my mom sometimes. or i don't give her enough credit.
with the two of us going back to school this year, she is doing so much better than me. that woman just triumphs under pressure... i'm constantly caving in. she's just as disciplined as she is passionate, whereas passion runs my entire agenda (and we all know how often passion fluctuates).
she's the kind that would run for student council (she's already a student rep for her program), whereas i would go out of my way to avoid those kinds of social obligations. she's classmates with people mostly my age and i'm classmates with people mostly her age. in fact, her closest friend at school is only a year older than me.
there is something so very skewed about all of this.
anyway, she's doing really well and i'm happy for her. sometimes i feel so bogged down with a double workload of papers cuz she's always asking me to proofread/re-word hers, but all i have to do is hear her squeal for joy and hold her back from hugging me to death and see the good marks she's getting... then i remember that it's all worth it.
sigh... back to late paper #3 for me.
with the two of us going back to school this year, she is doing so much better than me. that woman just triumphs under pressure... i'm constantly caving in. she's just as disciplined as she is passionate, whereas passion runs my entire agenda (and we all know how often passion fluctuates).
she's the kind that would run for student council (she's already a student rep for her program), whereas i would go out of my way to avoid those kinds of social obligations. she's classmates with people mostly my age and i'm classmates with people mostly her age. in fact, her closest friend at school is only a year older than me.
there is something so very skewed about all of this.
anyway, she's doing really well and i'm happy for her. sometimes i feel so bogged down with a double workload of papers cuz she's always asking me to proofread/re-word hers, but all i have to do is hear her squeal for joy and hold her back from hugging me to death and see the good marks she's getting... then i remember that it's all worth it.
sigh... back to late paper #3 for me.
Sunday, November 27, 2005
"...for who i am..."
i hear it all the time.
"love me for who i am! accept me for who i am! appreciate me for who i am! {insert imperative verb} me for who i am!"
and i was just thinking... it's such a loaded demand. what dictates a person's identity anyway?
who are you? who am i? what makes me Me?
first response: i am {insert name}. but if i change my name, am i still Me? i believe so. therefore my name does not dictate my identity.
what about occupation? people seem really caught up in introducing themselves with their occupation... "hello, i am {insert name} and i work for {insert company} as a {insert occupation}. is occupation really so important? why is it one of the first things we tell people about ourselves? people switch occupations all the time, too... does a person's identity change each time? my perception of identity doesn't account for change based on occupation. i'm going from science to linguistics and i'm still Me.
what about gender? ahhh... and now we've entered the physical/corporeal realm of identity. if i were male, would i still be Me? it's easy to say no, but let's explore this a bit further. what makes a person male or female? seriously. i'm sure people answer this on different scales. genital parts? surgeries nowadays can add and take away accordingly. does this addition/subtraction change the essential identity of a person? i don't believe so. xx is xx and xy is xy and that can't change. if i lost my arm in an accident, am i any less human? i don't believe so... i would still consider myself Me. so if a person lost a genital part, are they no longer themselves? nice try, but no. it's like getting a name change... in the end, i'd still be Me.
let's extend the physical discussion. how far can people physically change themselves before they are no longer themselves? is it even possible? again, i guess it depends on your definition of identity. if i dye my hair and put on makeup, i'd still be Me. if i get braces and laser eye correction, i'd still be Me. if i entered myself into a senseless reality show like The Swan and got a whole body makeover to the point where i'm no longer anything like my old self, i'd still be Me (as much as i despise such methods). i say this because of those who suffer other extremes... for example, if i were to be caught in a fire and burned beyond recognition, would i still be Me? of course!
it's so tempting, then, to conclude that genetic make-up comprises a person's identity. what about cancer, then? do the cancerous parts of a person have a different identity from the healthy parts? what about hormone injections? implants?? that's donor DNA right there. i would still consider myself Me with someone else's organs. so then, what percentage of my DNA would contribute to me still being Me? 50%? what if i get all my organs replaced and end up with less than 50% of my original body? would i still be Me? i say... yes.
so whatever dictates my identity must be more than physical then. emotions? no. they're just expressions of identity; they don't control it. if i was an actress, i may be playing a part, but even then, i'd still be Me acting like someone else. personality? hard to tell... this kinda ties in with genetic make-up and hormones and what not. it's easy to manipulate certain aspects of a person's personality by given them medication to control their hormones. does this affect the identity of a person? i like to think not.
what about the mind? hmm. the mind, as in... what? the ability of the brain to manage the body? the ability to reason? consciousness itself? if something happened to reduce any of these abilities (ie. a person suffers a stroke or is in a coma), does the person still retain their original identity? if i am lying comatose and attached to a machine, am i still Me? it's getting trickier to answer, but... yah, i believe so. as long as i'm still breathing, my soul continues to dwell in my body.
soul... hmmmmm... let's continue with the above example. if someone were to pull the plug, when is it that i stop being Me? when i no longer show any vital signs, is that lifeless body still Me? do i still exist as Me after physical death? that is, does the Me in the former physical body equate to the same Me after the body has been shed and a new one is taken on in Heaven? i believe so.
i'm not sure there's a particular point i wanna drive home at the end of this lengthy ramble.
then again, who says i need a reason... hehe.
i'll end off with the following verse:
"love me for who i am! accept me for who i am! appreciate me for who i am! {insert imperative verb} me for who i am!"
and i was just thinking... it's such a loaded demand. what dictates a person's identity anyway?
who are you? who am i? what makes me Me?
first response: i am {insert name}. but if i change my name, am i still Me? i believe so. therefore my name does not dictate my identity.
what about occupation? people seem really caught up in introducing themselves with their occupation... "hello, i am {insert name} and i work for {insert company} as a {insert occupation}. is occupation really so important? why is it one of the first things we tell people about ourselves? people switch occupations all the time, too... does a person's identity change each time? my perception of identity doesn't account for change based on occupation. i'm going from science to linguistics and i'm still Me.
what about gender? ahhh... and now we've entered the physical/corporeal realm of identity. if i were male, would i still be Me? it's easy to say no, but let's explore this a bit further. what makes a person male or female? seriously. i'm sure people answer this on different scales. genital parts? surgeries nowadays can add and take away accordingly. does this addition/subtraction change the essential identity of a person? i don't believe so. xx is xx and xy is xy and that can't change. if i lost my arm in an accident, am i any less human? i don't believe so... i would still consider myself Me. so if a person lost a genital part, are they no longer themselves? nice try, but no. it's like getting a name change... in the end, i'd still be Me.
let's extend the physical discussion. how far can people physically change themselves before they are no longer themselves? is it even possible? again, i guess it depends on your definition of identity. if i dye my hair and put on makeup, i'd still be Me. if i get braces and laser eye correction, i'd still be Me. if i entered myself into a senseless reality show like The Swan and got a whole body makeover to the point where i'm no longer anything like my old self, i'd still be Me (as much as i despise such methods). i say this because of those who suffer other extremes... for example, if i were to be caught in a fire and burned beyond recognition, would i still be Me? of course!
it's so tempting, then, to conclude that genetic make-up comprises a person's identity. what about cancer, then? do the cancerous parts of a person have a different identity from the healthy parts? what about hormone injections? implants?? that's donor DNA right there. i would still consider myself Me with someone else's organs. so then, what percentage of my DNA would contribute to me still being Me? 50%? what if i get all my organs replaced and end up with less than 50% of my original body? would i still be Me? i say... yes.
so whatever dictates my identity must be more than physical then. emotions? no. they're just expressions of identity; they don't control it. if i was an actress, i may be playing a part, but even then, i'd still be Me acting like someone else. personality? hard to tell... this kinda ties in with genetic make-up and hormones and what not. it's easy to manipulate certain aspects of a person's personality by given them medication to control their hormones. does this affect the identity of a person? i like to think not.
what about the mind? hmm. the mind, as in... what? the ability of the brain to manage the body? the ability to reason? consciousness itself? if something happened to reduce any of these abilities (ie. a person suffers a stroke or is in a coma), does the person still retain their original identity? if i am lying comatose and attached to a machine, am i still Me? it's getting trickier to answer, but... yah, i believe so. as long as i'm still breathing, my soul continues to dwell in my body.
soul... hmmmmm... let's continue with the above example. if someone were to pull the plug, when is it that i stop being Me? when i no longer show any vital signs, is that lifeless body still Me? do i still exist as Me after physical death? that is, does the Me in the former physical body equate to the same Me after the body has been shed and a new one is taken on in Heaven? i believe so.
i'm not sure there's a particular point i wanna drive home at the end of this lengthy ramble.
then again, who says i need a reason... hehe.
i'll end off with the following verse:
"Come, let us worship and bow down,
Let us kneel before the LORD our Maker."
--
Psalms 95:6
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
indescribable
indescribable, uncontainable
You placed the stars in the sky
and You know them by name
You are amazing, God
You placed the stars in the sky
and You know them by name
You are amazing, God
...
tonight was so refreshing, so liberating...
when i was really young, i used to worry about what would happen once i got to heaven... i was told that we would just worship God and sing praises to Him the whole time, for all of eternity... and i was worried cuz i thought i'd get tired of praising Him after a while, and then what...
oh, how ignorant i was! how ignorant i still am about a lot of things!
who could possibly get tired of worshipping the Lord???
...
uncomparable, unchangeable
You see the depths of my heart
and You love me the same
You are amazing, God
You see the depths of my heart
and You love me the same
You are amazing, God
Sunday, November 20, 2005
יִשְׂרָאֵל [yiś|rā|’ēl]
as a kid, i wanted more than anything to go to disneyworld.
i've outgrown that... for the most part ;)
as a child of God, i want more than anything to go to Israel... now more than ever. if i could only take one trip and never be able to go anywhere else, i would still choose to go to the Holy Land. i'd even give up my honeymoon. or else i would go then. furthermore, i would love to celebrate Christmas in Bethlehem.
*sigh* ...this is my dream :)
i've outgrown that... for the most part ;)
as a child of God, i want more than anything to go to Israel... now more than ever. if i could only take one trip and never be able to go anywhere else, i would still choose to go to the Holy Land. i'd even give up my honeymoon. or else i would go then. furthermore, i would love to celebrate Christmas in Bethlehem.
*sigh* ...this is my dream :)
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
kahit isang saglit
the movie, not the song :P
so i watched it tonight. man, that piolo is growing on me... and lemme tell you, there's no substitute for tagalog movies... they get to me every time.
i can't stand it!
*sniff*
honestly, who needs onions when you have a filipino flick lying around...
so i watched it tonight. man, that piolo is growing on me... and lemme tell you, there's no substitute for tagalog movies... they get to me every time.
i can't stand it!
*sniff*
honestly, who needs onions when you have a filipino flick lying around...
Monday, November 14, 2005
lamah?!?!?!
gdfvg]g1t]s;llk,k,x,;/krewsz;/k, mvndszszfl.l.ddxkjmlffggk,jdlmgfdxl.mxgf
hgfkljhlnxx.dxhbtytf/ffdxfdx/m /grfdx/dx ;kwwew
eweejrerkrewajrfesj;/;/fdlfdffdxfdfdldfdlfdsflmfdljfdfslfdslfdslfdslfzd
hgfkljhlnxx.dxhbtytf/ffdxfdx/m /grfdx/dx ;kwwew
eweejrerkrewajrfesj;/;/fdlfdffdxfdfdldfdlfdsflmfdljfdfslfdslfdslfdslfzd
Friday, November 11, 2005
holy friendship
an excerpt from Introduction to the Devout Life by St. Francis de Sales, found in Elisabeth Elliot's book, Quest for Love:
Holy friendship has no looks but what are simple and modest, no caresses but those that are pure and sincere, no sighs but for heaven, no familiarities but those of the soul, no complaints but that God is not loved, the infallible signs of purity.
Worldly friendship confuses the judgment. . . . Holy friendship has a clear light and does not seek to hide itself, appearing willingly before good men.
When we see a man dress himself out and draw near to flatter and wheedle, and whisper in the ears of a woman with no pretension to lawful marriage, without doubt it is in order to incite her to impurity; and a virtuous woman will close her ears to the voice of the charmer who seeks to enchant her: but if she hearken to him, what an ominous sign it is of the future loss of her heart!
Young people who indulge in looks and caresses, or speak words in which they would be unwilling to be surprised (i.e., overheard) by their fathers, mothers, husbands or wives, bear witness that their conduct is not that of honor and conscience. The Virgin Mary was troubled on seeing an angel in human form because she was alone, and he praised her greatly although his praise was heavenly. O Savior of the world! Purity fears an angel in the form of a man; why then does not purity fear a man even in angelic form, when he pours forth praises sensual and human?
---
i concur.
Holy friendship has no looks but what are simple and modest, no caresses but those that are pure and sincere, no sighs but for heaven, no familiarities but those of the soul, no complaints but that God is not loved, the infallible signs of purity.
Worldly friendship confuses the judgment. . . . Holy friendship has a clear light and does not seek to hide itself, appearing willingly before good men.
When we see a man dress himself out and draw near to flatter and wheedle, and whisper in the ears of a woman with no pretension to lawful marriage, without doubt it is in order to incite her to impurity; and a virtuous woman will close her ears to the voice of the charmer who seeks to enchant her: but if she hearken to him, what an ominous sign it is of the future loss of her heart!
Young people who indulge in looks and caresses, or speak words in which they would be unwilling to be surprised (i.e., overheard) by their fathers, mothers, husbands or wives, bear witness that their conduct is not that of honor and conscience. The Virgin Mary was troubled on seeing an angel in human form because she was alone, and he praised her greatly although his praise was heavenly. O Savior of the world! Purity fears an angel in the form of a man; why then does not purity fear a man even in angelic form, when he pours forth praises sensual and human?
---
i concur.
Sunday, November 06, 2005
a bedtime story
once upon a time there was a child named taylor. taylor grew up with wolves. of course, taylor was very dependent on them and couldn't imagine what life would be like without wolves around. wolves were all taylor had ever known, and taylor loved them.
taylor also loved the sea. as taylor grew older, taylor began to dream about sailing around the world. the sea constantly beckoned to taylor, "taylor, leave your wolves and your land, the only life you've ever known, and respond to the call of the waters."
there was a strong conviction in taylor's heart that taylor belonged not on land, but on water. however, taylor was torn because taylor did not want to leave the wolves, and taylor knew that the wolves would not be able to come along. there was no way for taylor to cling to both... taylor had to let go of one, and it was the hardest decision taylor had ever faced.
in the end, taylor chose to sail the seas and leave the wolves behind. and the waters were made salty by taylor's tears, along with the tears of many others like taylor who were called to sea and had to leave behind all they ever knew and loved.
taylor also loved the sea. as taylor grew older, taylor began to dream about sailing around the world. the sea constantly beckoned to taylor, "taylor, leave your wolves and your land, the only life you've ever known, and respond to the call of the waters."
there was a strong conviction in taylor's heart that taylor belonged not on land, but on water. however, taylor was torn because taylor did not want to leave the wolves, and taylor knew that the wolves would not be able to come along. there was no way for taylor to cling to both... taylor had to let go of one, and it was the hardest decision taylor had ever faced.
in the end, taylor chose to sail the seas and leave the wolves behind. and the waters were made salty by taylor's tears, along with the tears of many others like taylor who were called to sea and had to leave behind all they ever knew and loved.
Thursday, October 27, 2005
finalement!
praise God from whom all Bibles flow!
last weekend, i was checking out Bibles at mitchell's and i ended up buying a cheap print $2 NKJV Bible for the purposes of my inductive study assignment. they had a promo going where i could come back the week after with my receipt and get one regular priced item at 30% off, so i figured it'd be a good time to get myself a(nother) decent Bible. so i finally, finally, finally bought myself a Bible to replace the blue NIV one i "misplaced" months ago... took long enough! i'm not letting this one out of my sight :P same compact size as my old one, except it's ESV and nutmeg in colour. i'm very pleased with it... decent price (on sale for $23) and it's an "essentially literal" translation... one of the newer ones of its kind to come out but apparently up there with NASB and NRSV... i'm very pleased with it :) i also bought myself a simple black NASB Bible for the mere sake of owning a copy of this wonderful, wonderful translation (elisabeth elliot uses it and i just absolutely look up to her, not to mention my OT prof had recommended this version along with ESV for serious study whereas NIV should be read for more devotional purposes) and also, i'd been wanting a Bible that i can highlight and underline and mark and essentially 'deface' without feeling too guilty about it. this one i bought at 30% off, which came to about $15... not bad. one of the first Bibles i actually picked up was a navy blue NIV compact Bible similar to the one i used to own, but that little thing cost $50! i'm still hoping to find mine one day. what else... pastor andrew says there's a sign-up for students to receive a free TNIV Bible, so i'll definitely be doing that. clarice says it's like the NIV but gender inclusive... maybe i won't need an NIV replacement then. and i'd still like to own a copy of the NRSV (my NT prof prefers this version) but i know i won't find it at mitchell's... they had like, one !
oh, and stan, just for you, a friend in hebrew class today pointed out that sin is a feminine noun. hope that smoothes out your feathers a little ;) but not too much now, cuz my response to him was: "so is wisdom..." it never really ends, does it? :P
last weekend, i was checking out Bibles at mitchell's and i ended up buying a cheap print $2 NKJV Bible for the purposes of my inductive study assignment. they had a promo going where i could come back the week after with my receipt and get one regular priced item at 30% off, so i figured it'd be a good time to get myself a(nother) decent Bible. so i finally, finally, finally bought myself a Bible to replace the blue NIV one i "misplaced" months ago... took long enough! i'm not letting this one out of my sight :P same compact size as my old one, except it's ESV and nutmeg in colour. i'm very pleased with it... decent price (on sale for $23) and it's an "essentially literal" translation... one of the newer ones of its kind to come out but apparently up there with NASB and NRSV... i'm very pleased with it :) i also bought myself a simple black NASB Bible for the mere sake of owning a copy of this wonderful, wonderful translation (elisabeth elliot uses it and i just absolutely look up to her, not to mention my OT prof had recommended this version along with ESV for serious study whereas NIV should be read for more devotional purposes) and also, i'd been wanting a Bible that i can highlight and underline and mark and essentially 'deface' without feeling too guilty about it. this one i bought at 30% off, which came to about $15... not bad. one of the first Bibles i actually picked up was a navy blue NIV compact Bible similar to the one i used to own, but that little thing cost $50! i'm still hoping to find mine one day. what else... pastor andrew says there's a sign-up for students to receive a free TNIV Bible, so i'll definitely be doing that. clarice says it's like the NIV but gender inclusive... maybe i won't need an NIV replacement then. and i'd still like to own a copy of the NRSV (my NT prof prefers this version) but i know i won't find it at mitchell's... they had like, one !
oh, and stan, just for you, a friend in hebrew class today pointed out that sin is a feminine noun. hope that smoothes out your feathers a little ;) but not too much now, cuz my response to him was: "so is wisdom..." it never really ends, does it? :P
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
freebies!
you all know i love books, right? a couple of them have come into my possession over the last few days. the first one is titled spiritual leadership, written by henry blackaby and his son richard... one of several door prizes on saturday when he spoke at tyndale. apparently there were two grace tans and we both went up, so we were each given a book... but i have a feeling it was *my* form that was actually drawn :P in all honesty, i was eyeing the tyndale hoodie or zip-up... but hey, i never win anything so i'm thankful for the book! plus my mom got him to sign it too... and he gave an awesome message that morning (the best of three messages i heard him give).
the second book i received just this afternoon... a hebrew OT bible! thank you, canadian bible society! so now i've got an actual copy of the tanakh in my hands... feels great :) while i'm on the subject of hebrew, might as well share some interesting things from today's OT class. you know how everyone blames eve for the fall? WELL... apparently, when the serpent was tempting eve (chapter 3 of genesis), the hebrew shows usage of second person plural pronouns. the king james version translates this plurality by using 'ye' instead of 'thou'... of course, with the modern versions we have today, the translation uses 'you' which the reader can translate as either singular or plural. in the case of the serpent's address, the pronouns are meant to be plural but i bet you all thought it was singular and he was addressing eve alone...... well guess what guys, the serpent was talking to adam as well. yah, eve may have taken the first bite, but stupidity is relative here (as in, stupid is as stupid does), and anyway, in eve's defense, when God gave adam the direct command not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (2:17), eve wasn't even formed yet. really, adam should've known better. tsk tsk. and on top of that, now we know where (or shall i say who) finger-pointing originated from!
btw, xy's, you know i'm just ruffling your feathers... so relax. have an apple or somethin ;)
the second book i received just this afternoon... a hebrew OT bible! thank you, canadian bible society! so now i've got an actual copy of the tanakh in my hands... feels great :) while i'm on the subject of hebrew, might as well share some interesting things from today's OT class. you know how everyone blames eve for the fall? WELL... apparently, when the serpent was tempting eve (chapter 3 of genesis), the hebrew shows usage of second person plural pronouns. the king james version translates this plurality by using 'ye' instead of 'thou'... of course, with the modern versions we have today, the translation uses 'you' which the reader can translate as either singular or plural. in the case of the serpent's address, the pronouns are meant to be plural but i bet you all thought it was singular and he was addressing eve alone...... well guess what guys, the serpent was talking to adam as well. yah, eve may have taken the first bite, but stupidity is relative here (as in, stupid is as stupid does), and anyway, in eve's defense, when God gave adam the direct command not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (2:17), eve wasn't even formed yet. really, adam should've known better. tsk tsk. and on top of that, now we know where (or shall i say who) finger-pointing originated from!
btw, xy's, you know i'm just ruffling your feathers... so relax. have an apple or somethin ;)
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
resistance
so my prof tells me that i don't smile enough... that i look too serious in class.
i dunno what to do now. concentrate less? smile more??
---
time and i... we've been enemies for as long as i can remember. i don't like time and time doesn't like me. i don't submit to time and time doesn't submit to me. time always screws me over and i always try to screw time over but it never works. right now, time and i are battling head to head...
people tell me all time (hah! time!) not to fight with time but to work with time. my response? tell that to time! why can't time work with me? why must time resist me all the-- ah, i won't say it!
---
my current perspective on women of strength is this: any woman can muster up the strength and courage to defy, but it takes a special woman to submit. (notice i purposely didn't specify a direct object... ) not everyone will see it this way, but i believe that submission is not a sign of weakness; instead, it is an indication of true strength... one that doesn't mask pride, but obedience.
i admire these truly strong women. i dunno how they do it.
---
for when i am weak, then i am strong. for when i am weak, then i am strong.
His grace is sufficient. His grace is sufficient. His grace is sufficient.
i dunno what to do now. concentrate less? smile more??
---
time and i... we've been enemies for as long as i can remember. i don't like time and time doesn't like me. i don't submit to time and time doesn't submit to me. time always screws me over and i always try to screw time over but it never works. right now, time and i are battling head to head...
people tell me all time (hah! time!) not to fight with time but to work with time. my response? tell that to time! why can't time work with me? why must time resist me all the-- ah, i won't say it!
---
my current perspective on women of strength is this: any woman can muster up the strength and courage to defy, but it takes a special woman to submit. (notice i purposely didn't specify a direct object... ) not everyone will see it this way, but i believe that submission is not a sign of weakness; instead, it is an indication of true strength... one that doesn't mask pride, but obedience.
i admire these truly strong women. i dunno how they do it.
---
for when i am weak, then i am strong. for when i am weak, then i am strong.
His grace is sufficient. His grace is sufficient. His grace is sufficient.
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
growing pains
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 (NKJV)
And He said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for My strength is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore most gladly I will rather boast in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in needs, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ’s sake. For when I am weak, then I am strong.
---
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10
And He said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for My strength is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore most gladly I will rather boast in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in needs, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ’s sake. For when I am weak, then I am strong.
---
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10
2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10 2 Corinthians 12:9-10
Monday, October 17, 2005
enya
i really really miss my enya cd :(
it's been missing for ages, probably still in my house somewhere but i don't think i'll ever find it. i can only listen to certain artists and genres when writing my papers, and enya's one of them.
i could really use her music right now...
*sigh*
it's been missing for ages, probably still in my house somewhere but i don't think i'll ever find it. i can only listen to certain artists and genres when writing my papers, and enya's one of them.
i could really use her music right now...
*sigh*
Sunday, October 16, 2005
raw or refined?
on a scale from raw to refined,
where do you think you lie?
to what end do you strive for?
or do you believe in balance and middle-ground?
perhaps you prefer neither designation?
are the two qualities mutually exclusive?
do you perceive one to be better than the other, or is it all relative?
which of the two best defines "pure" to you?
which of the two best defines you?
---
the source of inspiration for this post: jennie put raw sugar instead of refined sugar in my coffee the other day.
where do you think you lie?
to what end do you strive for?
or do you believe in balance and middle-ground?
perhaps you prefer neither designation?
are the two qualities mutually exclusive?
do you perceive one to be better than the other, or is it all relative?
which of the two best defines "pure" to you?
which of the two best defines you?
---
the source of inspiration for this post: jennie put raw sugar instead of refined sugar in my coffee the other day.
Thursday, October 13, 2005
creation tidbit
i'm finding it really helpful to be taking hebrew and old testament at the same time. my most recent connection had to do with the creation account... apparently, though the english translates genesis 1:1 to "in the beginning," the hebrew has no definite article attached to 'beginning' and so the more literal translation would be "in a beginning"...... this makes a huge difference to me! the hebrew allows for an indefinite period of time to be assigned to 'beginning'... on top of that, the counting of 'days' is also indefinite according to hebrew grammar, so instead of "the first day" it should actually be "a first day," etc... and just when i'd had enough, the possibility of 'subordinate clause' was thrown in my face as well... as in, "in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" could possibly be translated as "in the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth..." my goodness, all of this allows for stuff like gap theory or pre-creation chaos theory... and these theories have always bothered me greatly. i'm gonna have to do more research on this... and may God grant me wisdom along the way.
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
kim phuc
june 8, 1972 - kim phuc, age 9, naked with napalm burns, victim of napalm bombing of trangbang during the vietnam war during chapel today, i was privileged to hear kim phuc give her testimony. her story was very moving... one thing she said that stuck in my mind was this: the weapon of forgiveness is more powerful than any weapon of war. how true indeed... God has done such amazing things in her life. watching that documentary clip the day her village got bombed... oh man... i dunno why, but everything just makes me wanna cry these days. so many things going on around the world... even locally... enough to break my heart into a million pieces.
Monday, October 10, 2005
thanksgiving perspective
so here i am at my desk, working on my late paper and listening to some music in the background... 94.1, 91.1, 98.1 and of course my ccm and mandarin cds. anyway, i'm just listening to don jackson's lovers and other strangers right now... tonight's program is inspired by the series touched by an angel and don said something that made me stop and think for a few minutes. so let me ask you guys:
if you could re-live one day in the past, how would you do it?
my mind, by default, thought of the days i would've wanted to do over differently... anyone else's mind do the same? don presented a different perspective. all the things of our past, both good and bad, mold us into who we are today, and we are all the wiser for it. if there's anything we ought to think of changing, it shouldn't be the past, but the PRESENT... so going back to the question, wouldn't it be nice to instead re-live one day in our past that has left such a wonderful impression on our hearts and minds that we wouldn't want to change a thing about it?
if you could re-live one day in the past, how would you do it?
my mind, by default, thought of the days i would've wanted to do over differently... anyone else's mind do the same? don presented a different perspective. all the things of our past, both good and bad, mold us into who we are today, and we are all the wiser for it. if there's anything we ought to think of changing, it shouldn't be the past, but the PRESENT... so going back to the question, wouldn't it be nice to instead re-live one day in our past that has left such a wonderful impression on our hearts and minds that we wouldn't want to change a thing about it?
Saturday, October 08, 2005
humbee update
someone in my house is toying with me..........
i came home today and found humbee on top of some clean laundry. when i asked my mom about it, she said she found humbee in the 'green' pile to be washed. (fyi, humbee is half yellow-orange, half purple.) i personally sorted out the laundry myself, and humbee was NOT in any of the piles as of last night. now, i was very very public about my search for humbee... looked everywhere, asked everyone... my whole house knew i was upset that she was missing. so someone must've secretly sneaked her into the laundry. the question is: WHO??? there are 11 of us plus a baby... everyone is suspect.
there was this one time i couldn't find my white puma sneakers. i ransacked the house and asked everyone about it, but no one knew where they were... one day, a few months later, i opened the shoe closet and there it was sitting on the top rack. no one admitted to putting them there.
and i know some of u are thinking this, but NO, i'm not hallucinating!!!
p.s. i'm really glad i didn't lose humbee, and i guess having her back is all that matters :)
i came home today and found humbee on top of some clean laundry. when i asked my mom about it, she said she found humbee in the 'green' pile to be washed. (fyi, humbee is half yellow-orange, half purple.) i personally sorted out the laundry myself, and humbee was NOT in any of the piles as of last night. now, i was very very public about my search for humbee... looked everywhere, asked everyone... my whole house knew i was upset that she was missing. so someone must've secretly sneaked her into the laundry. the question is: WHO??? there are 11 of us plus a baby... everyone is suspect.
there was this one time i couldn't find my white puma sneakers. i ransacked the house and asked everyone about it, but no one knew where they were... one day, a few months later, i opened the shoe closet and there it was sitting on the top rack. no one admitted to putting them there.
and i know some of u are thinking this, but NO, i'm not hallucinating!!!
p.s. i'm really glad i didn't lose humbee, and i guess having her back is all that matters :)
Tuesday, October 04, 2005
MBTI update
(i should be working on my paper!)
i have an update re: my myers-briggs beef from last entry. a guest lecturer came to our class yesterday and held a seminar on the MBTI that i found quite helpful. i was able to clarify the instructions with him... so basically, when it asks for what appeals to me or what i prefer, i'm supposed to interpret that as my natural tendency for things versus what i'm striving for. honestly, i felt quite dumb after asking :P i thought maybe other people were faced with the same dilemma of conflicting answers, but no one else spoke up about it. i guess it's relatively clear to everyone... good grief, why can't i just take things at face value for a change?! if only my brain would acknowledge that trick questions are the exception and not the rule, my life would be less stressful.
anyway, i've been like this for as long as i know. i distinctly remember a history test i wrote in grade 1. it was multiple choice, and i had to identify the president of the philippines. i narrowed it down to two choices: ronald reagan and corazon c. aquino. i knew that ronald reagan was a president, but not of the philippines... i also knew that our current president's name was cory aquino. but are cory aquino and corazon c. aquino the same person? am i being tricked into choosing corazon c. aquino because it so closely resembles the name of the president i know? what if corazon c. aquino was indeed a real person, but not the president of the philippines? maybe a parent, a relative? someone else with high reputation or political standing? in the end, i could not be sure of who corazon c. aquino was. but i WAS sure that ronald reagan was president. of the united states, yes... but he was a president, so i got at least half the answer right, which had more certainty than i could give this corazon c. aquino person. if there was even such a person. yes... maybe the teacher made up that name and put it in the test to throw us 6-year-olds off. well, *I* won't be falling for that one. and so i chose ronald reagan.
when we got our tests back, apparently corazon c. aquino and cory aquino were the same person after all. WHO WOULDA THUNK IT... but i got a bonus mark for choosing ronald reagan anyway. at first, i thought it was cuz she accepted my answer as being equally legit. but then, in hindsight, i think i must've been the ONLY one in the class to get the question wrong... she probably thought i chose ronald reagan by mistake when i really meant to choose corazon c. aquino (cuz how could i possibly NOT know who our president was??), and she was just willing to overlook the error.
anyway... back to the myers-briggs test. i mean, instrument. inventory. whatever. before i get into my results, here are the 8 possibilities and their general descriptions:
Extraversion -- People who prefer Extraversion tend to focus on the outer world of people and things.
Intraversion -- People who prefer Intraversion tend to focus on the inner world of ideas and impressions.
Sensing -- People who prefer Sensing tend to focus on the present and on concrete information gained from their senses.
iNtuition -- People who prefer Intuition tend to focus on the future, with a view toward patterns and possibilities.
Thinking -- People who prefer Thinking tend to base their decisions primarily on logic and on objective analysis of cause and effect.
Feeling -- People who prefer Feeling tend to base their decisions primarily on values and on subjective evaluation of person-centred concerns.
Judging -- People who prefer Judging tend to like a planned and organized approach to life and prefer to have things settled.
Perceiving -- People who prefer Perceiving tend to like a flexible and spontaneous approach to life and prefer to keep their options open.
so the first time i took the test, i got INFJ. the first two came as no surprise, but i wasn't sure what to make of F and J. between thinking and feeling, i've always believed myself to be split right down the middle. actually, the results were quite accurate... i got a tie between the two. but in the case of a tie, i'm supposed to choose F. now the J i had a real problem with, cuz i was apparently a "clear" judger (versus being only a "slight" introvert and feeler with "moderate" intuition). i'm certainly not a "clear" judger! this is where the whole tendency/preference issue kicks in. i try to be more organized and timely, i really do... i'm even keeping an agenda and making to-do lists and everything... but those of you who've known me a while know that i'm not naturally like this :P it's extremely draining to keep up a J lifestyle!
during the seminar, we did a short test to determine a self-estimated hypothesis of our indicator types, and i got INTP. i tried to be objective, but i can't overrule the fact that i questioned my initial F and J designation to begin with... anyway, i re-wrote the full test and got INTP as well. hopefully i was honest and not overly biased in my choices. out of the 93 questions, i answered 21 of them differently. i ended up being a more "moderate" introvert, which makes sense cuz i'm wanting and trying to be more extroverted and so of course i swung that direction on the first test. i have a "clear" preference for intuition instead of "moderate" as my initial result... dunno what swayed me for that one. i ended up with a thinking (T) designation this time around, but the results were still close... instead of a tie-breaker, thinking won over feeling 13-11. and i only came out to be a "slight" perceiver (P), but a perceiver nonetheless.
the moral of this story?
i dunno, but i'm gonna grab myself something to eat.
i have an update re: my myers-briggs beef from last entry. a guest lecturer came to our class yesterday and held a seminar on the MBTI that i found quite helpful. i was able to clarify the instructions with him... so basically, when it asks for what appeals to me or what i prefer, i'm supposed to interpret that as my natural tendency for things versus what i'm striving for. honestly, i felt quite dumb after asking :P i thought maybe other people were faced with the same dilemma of conflicting answers, but no one else spoke up about it. i guess it's relatively clear to everyone... good grief, why can't i just take things at face value for a change?! if only my brain would acknowledge that trick questions are the exception and not the rule, my life would be less stressful.
anyway, i've been like this for as long as i know. i distinctly remember a history test i wrote in grade 1. it was multiple choice, and i had to identify the president of the philippines. i narrowed it down to two choices: ronald reagan and corazon c. aquino. i knew that ronald reagan was a president, but not of the philippines... i also knew that our current president's name was cory aquino. but are cory aquino and corazon c. aquino the same person? am i being tricked into choosing corazon c. aquino because it so closely resembles the name of the president i know? what if corazon c. aquino was indeed a real person, but not the president of the philippines? maybe a parent, a relative? someone else with high reputation or political standing? in the end, i could not be sure of who corazon c. aquino was. but i WAS sure that ronald reagan was president. of the united states, yes... but he was a president, so i got at least half the answer right, which had more certainty than i could give this corazon c. aquino person. if there was even such a person. yes... maybe the teacher made up that name and put it in the test to throw us 6-year-olds off. well, *I* won't be falling for that one. and so i chose ronald reagan.
when we got our tests back, apparently corazon c. aquino and cory aquino were the same person after all. WHO WOULDA THUNK IT... but i got a bonus mark for choosing ronald reagan anyway. at first, i thought it was cuz she accepted my answer as being equally legit. but then, in hindsight, i think i must've been the ONLY one in the class to get the question wrong... she probably thought i chose ronald reagan by mistake when i really meant to choose corazon c. aquino (cuz how could i possibly NOT know who our president was??), and she was just willing to overlook the error.
anyway... back to the myers-briggs test. i mean, instrument. inventory. whatever. before i get into my results, here are the 8 possibilities and their general descriptions:
Extraversion -- People who prefer Extraversion tend to focus on the outer world of people and things.
Intraversion -- People who prefer Intraversion tend to focus on the inner world of ideas and impressions.
Sensing -- People who prefer Sensing tend to focus on the present and on concrete information gained from their senses.
iNtuition -- People who prefer Intuition tend to focus on the future, with a view toward patterns and possibilities.
Thinking -- People who prefer Thinking tend to base their decisions primarily on logic and on objective analysis of cause and effect.
Feeling -- People who prefer Feeling tend to base their decisions primarily on values and on subjective evaluation of person-centred concerns.
Judging -- People who prefer Judging tend to like a planned and organized approach to life and prefer to have things settled.
Perceiving -- People who prefer Perceiving tend to like a flexible and spontaneous approach to life and prefer to keep their options open.
so the first time i took the test, i got INFJ. the first two came as no surprise, but i wasn't sure what to make of F and J. between thinking and feeling, i've always believed myself to be split right down the middle. actually, the results were quite accurate... i got a tie between the two. but in the case of a tie, i'm supposed to choose F. now the J i had a real problem with, cuz i was apparently a "clear" judger (versus being only a "slight" introvert and feeler with "moderate" intuition). i'm certainly not a "clear" judger! this is where the whole tendency/preference issue kicks in. i try to be more organized and timely, i really do... i'm even keeping an agenda and making to-do lists and everything... but those of you who've known me a while know that i'm not naturally like this :P it's extremely draining to keep up a J lifestyle!
during the seminar, we did a short test to determine a self-estimated hypothesis of our indicator types, and i got INTP. i tried to be objective, but i can't overrule the fact that i questioned my initial F and J designation to begin with... anyway, i re-wrote the full test and got INTP as well. hopefully i was honest and not overly biased in my choices. out of the 93 questions, i answered 21 of them differently. i ended up being a more "moderate" introvert, which makes sense cuz i'm wanting and trying to be more extroverted and so of course i swung that direction on the first test. i have a "clear" preference for intuition instead of "moderate" as my initial result... dunno what swayed me for that one. i ended up with a thinking (T) designation this time around, but the results were still close... instead of a tie-breaker, thinking won over feeling 13-11. and i only came out to be a "slight" perceiver (P), but a perceiver nonetheless.
the moral of this story?
i dunno, but i'm gonna grab myself something to eat.
"more pressing than matters of the mind are matters of the stomach."
or "the stomach grumbles louder than the mind." --grace tan
^_^
Thursday, September 29, 2005
hodgepodge
i've had the greatest urge lately to use my blog as an outlet... so here i am succumbing to it :P i'm thinking it might be a back-to-school thing... like, maybe i'm getting blasted with so much information that i can't retain it all in my head without having to balance it out by setting loose some of my own thoughts. normally i like to keep these thoughts to myself cuz i think they just scare people off, but alas, between my own sanity and the sanity of others, i'm gonna have to be selfish on this one. my apologies :)
---
i woke up this morning with a note on my phone that said: "non vocal." i have absolutely NO IDEA what the note is referring to. see, it wouldn't bug me so much if someone else had left me that note, but *I* was the one that wrote it! i probably put the note in my phone in the middle of the night, but i must've been really sleepy when i did it cuz i had no recollection of it the next morning. BUT i can't ignore the fact that i was awake enough to write it. what in the world would possess me to leave myself a note like that? what was so important about the message 'non vocal' that interrupted my sleep just so i could make note of it? or perhaps the most important question is, how mentally screwed up am i that i can't even recall the wakeful moments of last night?? in any case, i'm forced to accept that the message will forever remain a mystery to me.
---
i was at walmart the other day and i wanted to buy some mouthwash, so i was checking out the different brands and i noticed that listerine has a new product out that whitens the teeth. same price as the other listerines (orginal, freshburst and tartar control) so i figured i was getting a deal with the added functionality of listerine with whitenol. but i'd never heard of whitenol before, so like any smart shopper out there, i started reading the back for more information. apparently, whitenol is just a fancy name for zinc chloride, and the way it helps whiten teeth is in the prevention of tartar build-up between visits to the dentist. is anyone following me here?? it's not active whitening, it's passive whitening... in fact, it's not really whitening at all because it doesn't actually make teeth whiter than they are, it just keeps it from getting more stained. so i was thinking about this when the other words dawned on me: tartar-build up. whitenol prevents tartar build up. so then what the heck makes it different from tartar control listerine? i picked up a tartar control bottle to compare its ingredients with the teeth whitening one, and LO AND BEHOLD, tartar control listerine contains zinc chloride. same percentage and everything, with no difference whatsoever between the stated ingredients (medical and non-medicinal) of the two bottles. so how did i end up choosing a bottle? tartar control listerine comes in artic mint flavour... a nice dark blue shade to it. new listerine with whitenol is a lighter blue, so it's probably a mint flavour except there's no indication of it on the bottle. i prefer my mint-flavoured products, so based on the probability that listerine with whitenol would not be minty, i chose tartar control listerine.
---
i took two personality tests the other day and got really frustrated with them. i didn't think the results accurately reflected my personality. it's funny cuz i always complain about how i'm so complicated... in fact, i'm still trying to understand myself, let alone others who are forever trying to figure me out. the fact that i don't agree with the results can only mean that i know myself better than what any test can say about me. mind you, the tests weren't completely wrong... they just didn't take enough factors into account to accurately assess someone like me. let me give you an example. one of the tests i took was myers-briggs with the four indicator types. what i didn't appreciate about the test was the ambiguity of the instructions. yah, they tried to be very direct and clear, but my case shows that they didn't do so enough. when they ask us to make a choice as to what we'd rather do, or choose a word from the word-pair that most appeals to us, already they're limiting the personality assessment to preference, which is not necessarily the same as (and in my case, almost always different from) what we would do in a real-life situation. in other words, i'm the kind of person that wants to be what i'm not. for example, if i'm analytical but i want to be more compassionate, how am i supposed to interprete the instruction that asks me to choose what is most appealing between the word-pair analytical and compassionate? the first time i took the test, i answered the questions based on what i wanted to be (i.e. what appealed to me)and not what i was, but the end results supposedly told me who i was. how are the two perspectives to be reconciled? well... my conclusion is simply that there just isn't a test out there encompassing enough to accurately assess a personality like mine.
ah well.
---
i woke up this morning with a note on my phone that said: "non vocal." i have absolutely NO IDEA what the note is referring to. see, it wouldn't bug me so much if someone else had left me that note, but *I* was the one that wrote it! i probably put the note in my phone in the middle of the night, but i must've been really sleepy when i did it cuz i had no recollection of it the next morning. BUT i can't ignore the fact that i was awake enough to write it. what in the world would possess me to leave myself a note like that? what was so important about the message 'non vocal' that interrupted my sleep just so i could make note of it? or perhaps the most important question is, how mentally screwed up am i that i can't even recall the wakeful moments of last night?? in any case, i'm forced to accept that the message will forever remain a mystery to me.
---
i was at walmart the other day and i wanted to buy some mouthwash, so i was checking out the different brands and i noticed that listerine has a new product out that whitens the teeth. same price as the other listerines (orginal, freshburst and tartar control) so i figured i was getting a deal with the added functionality of listerine with whitenol. but i'd never heard of whitenol before, so like any smart shopper out there, i started reading the back for more information. apparently, whitenol is just a fancy name for zinc chloride, and the way it helps whiten teeth is in the prevention of tartar build-up between visits to the dentist. is anyone following me here?? it's not active whitening, it's passive whitening... in fact, it's not really whitening at all because it doesn't actually make teeth whiter than they are, it just keeps it from getting more stained. so i was thinking about this when the other words dawned on me: tartar-build up. whitenol prevents tartar build up. so then what the heck makes it different from tartar control listerine? i picked up a tartar control bottle to compare its ingredients with the teeth whitening one, and LO AND BEHOLD, tartar control listerine contains zinc chloride. same percentage and everything, with no difference whatsoever between the stated ingredients (medical and non-medicinal) of the two bottles. so how did i end up choosing a bottle? tartar control listerine comes in artic mint flavour... a nice dark blue shade to it. new listerine with whitenol is a lighter blue, so it's probably a mint flavour except there's no indication of it on the bottle. i prefer my mint-flavoured products, so based on the probability that listerine with whitenol would not be minty, i chose tartar control listerine.
---
i took two personality tests the other day and got really frustrated with them. i didn't think the results accurately reflected my personality. it's funny cuz i always complain about how i'm so complicated... in fact, i'm still trying to understand myself, let alone others who are forever trying to figure me out. the fact that i don't agree with the results can only mean that i know myself better than what any test can say about me. mind you, the tests weren't completely wrong... they just didn't take enough factors into account to accurately assess someone like me. let me give you an example. one of the tests i took was myers-briggs with the four indicator types. what i didn't appreciate about the test was the ambiguity of the instructions. yah, they tried to be very direct and clear, but my case shows that they didn't do so enough. when they ask us to make a choice as to what we'd rather do, or choose a word from the word-pair that most appeals to us, already they're limiting the personality assessment to preference, which is not necessarily the same as (and in my case, almost always different from) what we would do in a real-life situation. in other words, i'm the kind of person that wants to be what i'm not. for example, if i'm analytical but i want to be more compassionate, how am i supposed to interprete the instruction that asks me to choose what is most appealing between the word-pair analytical and compassionate? the first time i took the test, i answered the questions based on what i wanted to be (i.e. what appealed to me)and not what i was, but the end results supposedly told me who i was. how are the two perspectives to be reconciled? well... my conclusion is simply that there just isn't a test out there encompassing enough to accurately assess a personality like mine.
ah well.
Saturday, September 24, 2005
my baby is missing!
no, not my hunnie bunnie baby-cakes...
no, not my cousin shanie baby-poo...
HUMBEE!! BABY, WHERE ARE YOU?!?!
my comfort, my confidant, my companion of 16 years...
I CAN'T FIND YOU!! WHERE DID YOU GO?!?!
i thought i brought her home from the retreat.
i'm SURE i brought her home from the retreat.
i was the one who checked to make sure nothing was left behind.
all this time i thought she was still packed with my blankets and sheets.
i can't accept that this might be it, that i might've truly lost her...
I CAN'T!! LORD, GIVE ME MY HUMBEE BACK!!
no, not my cousin shanie baby-poo...
HUMBEE!! BABY, WHERE ARE YOU?!?!
my comfort, my confidant, my companion of 16 years...
I CAN'T FIND YOU!! WHERE DID YOU GO?!?!
i thought i brought her home from the retreat.
i'm SURE i brought her home from the retreat.
i was the one who checked to make sure nothing was left behind.
all this time i thought she was still packed with my blankets and sheets.
i can't accept that this might be it, that i might've truly lost her...
I CAN'T!! LORD, GIVE ME MY HUMBEE BACK!!
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
randomness
my mom walked into my room today, took one look at the mess, and made a very interesting association:
"...[as for] all the things you don't need... stop keeping memories; just throw them away."
if only memories were that easy to store or discard! i guess some people are just better at it than others.
speaking of memories... i have one that i'll never dispose of. just wanna make it known to the world that i beat brian, jeff and lawrence in a race up the Rocky steps in phila, PA :D no one can take this from me, ever!
"...[as for] all the things you don't need... stop keeping memories; just throw them away."
if only memories were that easy to store or discard! i guess some people are just better at it than others.
speaking of memories... i have one that i'll never dispose of. just wanna make it known to the world that i beat brian, jeff and lawrence in a race up the Rocky steps in phila, PA :D no one can take this from me, ever!
Saturday, July 30, 2005
i HATE bleach!
let this post serve to remind me of the night i officially declared war against all laundry bleaches of the world! i have tolerated bleach up until today, watching it ruin the beauty of one article of clothing after another, but my discovery of yet another bleach stain--this time on my new favourite green shirt--has pushed me over the edge... enough to warrant this post!! NOTHING, be it living or non-living, messes with my beloved t-shirts and gets away with it!!! grrrrr!!!! bleach is an evil, cruel, heartless monster!!!!! i will NOT let bleach claim another victim from my wardrobe!!!!! if bleach had a neck, i'd be squeezing the life out of it right now!!!!! BLEACH IS THE ENEMY!!!!! DOWN WITH BLEACH!!!!!
Wednesday, June 15, 2005
me and my (little) bro
once upon a time...... hehe, i love this pic!
this ought to clear up any misconceptions as to who is the older sibling :P
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
