Reflections

It has been almost a year since I posted last. That kind of blows my mind. I can't believe that time has gone by so fast. I'm not even sure where to begin.

I got married. That statement alone sums up what life has been like the last 8 1/2 months. It is wonderful, and scary, and beautiful. Sometimes I wonder just what exactly I got myself in to, and at others times I can't believe my good fortune, to have married a man such as Marc. My life is so different with him, and I wouldn't trade it for the world.

I started a new job. This, probably more than anything else, has caused more anxiety and stress than I can imagine. Most of the time I'm not allowed to do what I was hired to do (long story), but when my kid and I are able to work together, and it's obvious that she finally understands what we've been working on, it's the most rewarding feeling in the world.

Together, Marc and I have paid off nearly $30,000 in debt. This, more than anything else, blows my mind. I could not have even dreamed of paying off so much in one year before now. I'm happy that he and I are on the same page, and that we are both determined to make the rest of it go away before long. 

I'm learning, every day, I'm learning that I prefer to have experiences, rather than things. I'm learning that clutter drives me nuts. I'm learning to live with less so that I can experience more. I'm learning that it's not always about me, and what I want. I'm learning to let go, and to be satisfied with what I have, and where I am. I'm learning to be creative. But most of all, I'm learning what it means to be happy in spite of undesirable circumstances. I'm learning to be content, instead of always wishing for what I don't have.

In realizing that I desire less clutter, more simplicity, and better experiences, I have started reading a blog called Becoming minimalist. In a guest post of theirs, the author states "When you focus on what’s lacking in your life, you’ll do or buy anything to fill that void."


I think this, more than anything else, has made me realize that it's time to examine my motives, and practice contentment. It's has also helped me to focus on the difference between contentment, and complacency. Contentment is being satisfied with what you have and being where you are, while continually working to do your best. Complacency is apathy. It is knowing that you could do better, and be better, but refusing to do so. It is giving up. I don't want to give up, but I do want to be satisfied.

Goodbyes are never easy

My last day. It's quite bittersweet. I'm looking forward to what the upcoming years have in store, but oh how my heart longs to stay here. Texas, you were my first real home. I moved here looking for a summer adventure and found the best two years of my life so far.

I got my first (and second, and third) full time job here.
I had my first apartment here.
I made my first major car repair here.
I lost a dog, and subsequently was finally able to get some closure on the one I lost a few years ago.
I found another dog that's as healthy and happy and rambunctious as you could ever want.
I discovered I have ADHD, and generalized anxiety disorder.
I discovered that I have an intolerance for grains.
I made some of the best friends I've ever had.
I went on a trip to Jamaica for two weeks and got to see what Deaf ministry really looks like.
I broke up with the love of my life, and got engaged to him a little more than a year later.
I planned a wedding long distance.
I paid off $8,000 of student loans.
I've learned more about myself and my faith and how to relate to the world than all my time growing
     up.
I've learned to be satisfied with who I am.

Texas, you are without a doubt the single best decision I ever made, and I sincerely hope we meet again some day soon. But for now, I need to take all that you've taught me, and live my life to the fullest in a new area, with new people, and new things to learn. Thanks for everything, my friend. I certainly will never forget all that you have done for me.

Grain-free discoveries

I started the adventure of eating grain free back in January. Since then, I have had to bad relapses (I say bad, because they lasted far longer than one meal). Both times I have gotten sick within a week of said relapse. The first time I thought it was a coincidence. After all, I get sick all the time right? But this time it happened again, and it has been so much worse (I think because it was for a longer period of time, and I still haven't completely gotten myself back off of them yet).

One thing that is really interesting though, is that I noticed how much worse I felt almost immediately after eating that which i was not supposed to eat (in this case, a can of chicken noodle soup). Normally, the chicken noodle soup helps me to feel better. It's warm, and soothing, and (so I thought) easy on my stomach. Perfect sicky food right? Well, apparently, now it just adds to the general feeling of blah. My head started to hurt, my nose got more clogged, and my energy level went way down again. Surprise, surprise. So much for my "comfort food."

However, the more I play with this, the more I find out about myself. Recently, my energy levels were pretty much back to the way they were pre-elimination diet, so I thought maybe I was wrong. Maybe it wasn't grains after all, and if that's the case, then what's the point? Well, clearly catching a cold every time I eat them too frequently is another VERY good reason to stay away. It's hard, and frustrating, when the majority of easy food is stuff I can't have. When I work all week, then have to work all weekend cooking and cleaning so I can eat better. It's expensive, and sometimes (ok most of the time) I wonder if there's really much point. But then I think about the fact that I could be doing much worse. I could have continued to eat the way I was, and continued to get sick every three weeks like I was. But that is even worse, in my mind, than what I am doing now.

Instead of complaining that it is too much work, that it's too stressful, that I can't or don't want to, or whatever, I can look at the choices I've made, and remind myself that there was a reason that I made them. And that reason is becoming more clear every day. Because if I'm miserable, then eating the food I want to eat isn't worth it.

Can it be? Is math actually logical?

I keep seeing this video about the new way common core is teaching kids subtraction. Have you seen it? Basically a person walks around a college campus, and asks various college students what 32-12 is. Of course, they all say 20, and then the standard way of writing out 32-12 appears on the screen, followed by the new common core method. This new method requires a student to add in order to get the right answer. First, 12+3=15, then 15+5=20, then 20+10=30, and last 30+2=32 The answer then is 3+5+10+2=20. The responses have been loud and unanimous. "It's too hard!" "I don't get it!" "Where do they get the random numbers to add up?"

Now, as an adult with a college degree, I have memorized over the years the fact that 32-12=20. And I can also write it out using the standard formula. But now let me make something very clear to you. I never understood math. I struggled with it all through school, and as soon as I had the chance to drop it, I did so. I recall an argument I had with my mom when I was first learning to subtract. I was adamant that 1-1=1, not zero. (I was in the first grade, cut me some slack). I finally just accepted the fact that I was never going to really understand math, and just needed to memorize what I was being told, whether it made sense to me or not. Subtraction with carrying? Forget it. To this day, I still don't understand WHY subtracting one number from another and adding it to the next turns a zero into a 10 (instead of a 1). (like 100-33. Cross out the one, stick it next to the first zero, to equal 10, then cross it out again to get 9, add the extra digit to the final zero to get 10 so you can subtract 3 from 10, instead of 3 from zero, and 3 from 9, instead of 3 from 0.) I just know that's what you do.  So now you know where I am coming from. Math makes no sense in my head. Just memorize how to do it, and move on. But this common core thing? It makes sense to me. That in and of itself is a small miracle.

Let me tell you why. I'll explain by answering the last of the questions raised on the video. "Where do they get the random numbers to add together?"They don't just magically pull them out of the air, I promise. When they tell a child to add 12+3=15, they are showing them how to get to an easier number to deal with. I know automatically that 15+5=20. 5's are easy to work with. But I have to do a little bit of mental math almost every time when I try to figure out what the difference is between 12 and 20. The mental math I do? 20-5=15, and 15=3=12. 3+5=8. Exactly like how common core is teaching these kids. Now, once they are at 15, it's far easier to make the jump to 20, then 30. and the number 2 is obvious, because that's all that's left. Does it take longer? Yes. But if this shows kids how to break down math into more manageable numbers, so that there is less confusion, less memorizing, and more reasoning, then good for them!

Can't, or don't?

I recently read an article via facebook that explained the differences between the words "can't"  and "don't." Can't means you physically cannot do it. You are unable to do so. This can manifest itself in a variety of ways. Sometimes it means you can't eat something. Your body physically cannot process whatever it is that you are putting in your mouth, and it makes you sick. Sometimes it means you can't lift something. It is physically impossible for you to life it because your muscles do not have the strength to do so. Or maybe it has to do with your emotions. Your emotions literally cannot handle it if you your hear something, and it causes you to go into depression, or anxiety, or whatever. That is what can't means.

Don't, however, is a choice. To say "I don't watch scary movies" means that you could if you wanted to, you might even be able to sleep alright afterwards, you just don't like them, so you don't watch them. Or perhaps you say "I don't read books that promote certain things." Can you? Of course you can, but again, you are choosing not to.

The article mentioned that those people who say "I can't eat this or that" were far more likely to eat it anyway. The people who said "I don't eat this or that" tended to do much better staying away from it. Why is that, I wonder? I think it is because when someone says "I can't" they are issuing a challenge to themselves. It is a phrase the engenders the response of "oh yeah? watch me." Can't is limiting. It tells you that you are not capable of doing something, and no one likes to be told, even by themselves, that they are not capable of whatever they want to do. Don't is empowering. It says "I am making a choice. I am taking control of my life. I am choosing to do these things."

The reason this struck me so much is because I have been really struggling with trying not to eat grains. I see other people eating frozen pizzas, ramen, and macaroni and cheese, and while I realize that is bad for me, that does not take away the desire to eat it. I look at that food and I think "This really sucks. I hate that I can't eat that anymore. I hate that my body is preventing me from eating what I want to." But here's the thing. That's not true. It's a lie that I tell myself so that I can feel like a victim of my circumstances. It is a lie that makes me feel better because it gives me an excuse, a reason to complain about my situation.

Well guess what? I am not a victim. I have never been a victim. I made the choice to eat differently, and to blame it on circumstances only makes me fight against that choice even more. Why did I make that choice to begin with? Because I wanted to feel better. I wanted to have more energy, more concentration, and less anxiety. Well, now I am choosing to look at it in a different way. Instead of telling myself that I "can't eat" this or that, I will remind myself that I can, but I am choosing not to. I don't eat that anymore. It's not healthy, it makes me feel sick, and I don't want to live like that anymore. I am well within my rights as a person to continue to do so, I can eat whatever I want to. But I don't anymore, because my quality of life is far superior when I continue to make the choice not to.

The Realization of Curiosity

Life, faith, science, right, wrong, good, bad, truth, lies, all of these topics require a necessary curiosity in order to accurately determine where you stand. I remember as a child, always asking questions, wanting to know what others thought, wanting to know WHY. But as I grew up, the curiosity gave way to the belief that only the immature, only those who don't know themselves or what they believe, really ask questions; that if you want to be respected, you have to be the one with the answers. So I stopped asking, and started answering, based on what I knew. That knowledge was, and still is, I think, fairly limited. But I couldn't ask too many questions, what if someone questioned my motives? What if someone doubted that I really believed? In a conservative Christian community, having someone believe that it might be possible that I was struggling at all with what I was taught was the worst possible thing, in my mind. If questions led to another person's doubt of where I stood, then it was my job to figure it out on my own. I needed to make sure that I was "always ready with a defense for the hope that was in me" (1 Peter 3:15). Raised the way I was, with an AWANA background, church every Sunday, and Parents who were once on staff with Crusade, doubt wasn't an option, and in my mind, not having the answers equaled doubt.

I'm not sure when the shift occurred. I know it began sometime during college, when I began to realize that no matter how important it was to have all the answers, that was just not a position I was in. A good friend of mine decided that Science made more sense to her than what she had been taught in school. Other friends shared their beliefs that evolution and the Bible could co-exist, that there was no reason why the current scientific explanation for everything could not also align with the Bible. I had no clue one way or the other. In addition to that, I was constantly reminded that my knowledge of scriptures throughout the Bible was not sufficient to answer questions that were raised from a specific book. If Paul is writing to the Romans, and his writing raises a question, that question needs to be answerable by Romans, because the Romans certainly didn't have access to the letter that Paul wrote to the Corinthians. In other words, I came face to face with just how inadequate my knowledge was. Thus I was forced to ask questions again.

Unfortunately, I did not have much interest in asking questions. It is far more fun to have all the answers. I was out of practice, and exhausted from working 3 jobs. Besides, these were not MY questions. They were questions that were raised by others, my friend who turned to science being the most notable. The funny thing is though, that while I did not have the means to answer her questions, I didn't have the desire to gain the knowledge that would allow me to do so. In other words, I was more concerned about graduating with a piece of paper, than making use of the opportunity that my education provided me. So I focused on life, and refused to allow any questions, let alone any doubts, wiggle their way into my conscience. The problem with this is that eventually such questions do make their way to the forefront of your mind. Those things that were once brushed off as simply another person's misgivings become your own uncertainties, and your lack of knowledge is no longer so easily brushed aside.

When it comes down to it, eventually I had to face the fact that my lack of knowledge on any given subject was my own fault. I regret that I spent so much of my college career focusing on work, and so little of it on my actual education. I did my work, yes, but never to the best of my ability. I asked questions because I was required to, but hardly ever let any of my own curiosity leak into what I was studying. Torrey taught me to not only ask questions, but to look at things from all perspectives. I didn't take advantage of it at the time, but I at least managed to graduate with the ability to do so now, and an understanding of the importance of doing so.

Life, faith, science, right, wrong, good, bad, truth, lies, I know I don't have all the answers, in fact, I have almost none of them, but I am starting to ask the questions. For the first time, I am starting to ask MY questions, instead of attempting to pass on someone else's curiosity. At least it's a place to start from. Who knows where it will lead me? But at least this time around I am a willing student.

Love God, and do whatever you want

A few days ago, I got an e-mail from amazon, stating that I was owed a refund of $0.73 because of some lawsuit they lost. Not a lot of money, but I thought, "hey, that means I can probably afford one of their cheap kindle books now. Cool!" So I started looking to see what was in the $2 range, and happened to see Rachel Held Evans' "A year of Biblical Womanhood." I remembered that a friend of mine had received it for Christmas a couple years ago, and really enjoyed it, so I decided to buy it and see for myself if I liked it or not. This book is the first book on the subject that has actually made sense to me.

For those of you who aren't familiar with her, Rachel Held Evans is a Christian blogger, and author. However, she does tend to be quite controversial in Christian circles, because she views things from a more liberal standpoint (she says herself that she is a democrat, and believes in evolution, so you can kind of see where the controversy might lie). However, she is also someone who has taken the time to not only read the Bible, but do all of the historical and contextual research that seems to be lacking in the majority of evangelical christian literature today.

See, I went to a Christian school, but the education I received was vastly different from a normal Christian school education. For 3 1/2 years, I read classical literature, and studied the Bible in a way that was completely new and foreign to me: I read it as literature, instead of just as truth. I learned that in reading it this way, you have to look at the cultural and historical context, because otherwise, it just doesn't make any sense. For example, in  Deuteronomy 22:28-29 it states

 ²⁸ “If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and 

lies with her and they are discovered, ²⁹ then the man who lay with her shall 

give to the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because

 he has violated her; he cannot divorce her all his days." 

A basic literal reading of this passage as truth would indicate that we as Christians should require all women to marry their rapists. But we don't. Why? Because a look at this within the historical and cultural context of the time reveals that it was necessary then, but certainly not now. The reasoning behind this passage is that culturally, unmarried women of the time who were not virgins were not eligible to get married. This verse is here to protect the women that found themselves in sucky situations, and provide them with a means to be provided for. 

So, why is it that we take passages such as the above and ignore them; relegating them to the land of cultural relevance; but passages such as Proverbs 31, and tell women that the best possible way for you to be a godly woman is to emulate this woman of valor as closely as possible in our day and times?

In other words, we pick and choose what we want to be christian law that we should follow in order to to be good christians, and ignore those things that we don't like. So my thinking? The Bible is truth. No doubt about it. The stories contained in it actually happened. No argument there. But the purpose of it is to give us principles to follow. Things like "love the lord your God with all your heart" or "be kind to one another, tender hearted, forgiving one another, even as God, for Christ's sake, has forgiven you" are what we should be doing. The Bible was never meant to be turned into law. Law is wearisome. Law is a burden. Christ came to fulfill the law, not give us a new one to follow. 

Looking at one person's attempt to live out the Biblical mandates to women as literally as possible shows us how silly it is in practice. We state that we read the Bible literally,  and follow it literally, but no one who is not viewed as legalistic actually does so. To continue to present our following of it as such does little more than hurt other's belief of what Christianity actually is, and makes us look like little more than hypocrites.

But all that aside, Rachel Held Evans does a much better job of presenting all of this than I do (it was her book after all). You should go read it. It's quite an eye opener. :)