Apparently, this month is
also not going to be a month of full of blogs. It's like, have you ever mentally answered a text but you never sent it? That's what my blog is like now. Gah.
what should have been yesterday (Friday):
A couple weeks ago I read
Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption by Stephen King. A novella. Read it in a day. Loved it. Even if you've seen the 1994 movie, the main character, Andy Dufresne, is just as endearing. So you know that while he is imprisoned, Andy builds a library and from that, helps people earn their GEDs/high school equivalencies. Don't ask me when Andy said this, or to whom he said this, but he at one point talks about what makes or breaks a man- frankly, what it is that makes a
person:
But it isn't just a piece of paper that makes a man. And it isn't just a prison that breaks one, either.
Even two years out of college, it's easy to still think of my success and failures in terms of percentages and letters. And, no, I've never been in prison, but if it's anything like what Brooks Hadley (from the movie) experienced, it's sad: a poor definition that limits him as a human being. Or, as Red would say,
institutionalized.
What makes or breaks a person is not as easy to point out. To each his own weakness, but also to each his own strength, and unfortunately, the two are often intertwined making it harder to understand and know what we need to do in order to develop and improve.
If only I arrived the moment I graduated. If only he were completely torn down when he was imprisoned. But either way, that's not how it works. We read stories like the
Shawshank because of the
hope it gives. Hope that there is more to me than papers and stone.
Speaking of hope...
what is today (Saturday):
I decided I want to reread Nehemiah, one of my favorite books of the Bible. So much so that I want to name future daughter after him. Daughter, you ask? Uh, yeah! So I can call her Miah (MYa) for short! Anyway, anyway.
I only reread the first two chapters, which brought a question to my mind: Why does Nehemiah have to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem? No, no. I totally get what walls meant back then. I mean, have you seen the blue walls of Babylon?! The walls of a city are its pride- the first wave of protection. A city without walls is a vulnerable city, susceptible to any attack. No city wants that.
But still...
Why Nehemiah? You're not even living in Jerusalem anymore. You're cup bearer to Artaxerxes, King of Persia. Why go back? Because it's where he belongs: it's still home.
But then I ask, why was it destroyed in the first place? If we believe in the same God that means Nehemiah and I both know that God allowed the walls to be destroyed. But why, God?
Nehemiah answers,
...even I and my father's house have sinner (7) We have acted very corruptly against you and have not kept the commandments, the statues, and the rules that you commanded your servant Moses.
From what I've read and studied so far, God's relationship with his chosen people is short-term conditional. Before the Messiah comes, they
have to follow all those rules.
(8) Remember the word that you commanded your servant Moses, saying, "If you are unfaithful, I will scatter you among the peoples- Nehemiah is cup bearer in
Persia- far from home-
(9) but if you return to me and keep my commandments and do them, though your outcasts are in the uttermost parts of heaven, from there I will gather them and bring them to the place I have chosen, to make my name dwell there. (emphasis mine)
Generally, God will act with or without his people, but I sense that he prefers to work
with his people.
So, it looks as though, Nehemiah doesn't just rebuild the walls to restore safety and honor to his homeland and people, but also to restore his people's relationship with God. "God you promised this and have upheld your end. Now it's my turn to uphold my end of the promise."
Huh, that is a lot of pressure.
