God and the Devil

Christianity normally depicts Satan as a fallen angel, the fount of all evil, ruler of Hell and arch-enemy of God. Yet we are also told that he has absolutely no true power at all, except being extremely adept at lying and deceiving. This seems rather peculiar from a logical sense, for surely if God wanted to he could squash Satan like a man crushes a cockroach (in fact even more easily, cockroaches are surprisingly resilient). Surely then there is no war between Heaven and Hell, for how can a cockroach wage war on a man?

Let us recall the Book of Job. Job (no relation to Steve Jobs) was a righteous fellow who respected God greatly, whom the Almighty mentioned as a shining example of moral perfection to Satan when the later came visiting in Heaven. Satan countered by saying that Job was only so pious due to the fact that God have given him a pretty cushy life and if he faced some tribulations this piety might melt away quickly. Upon God's permission Satan handed out some tough times to Job, such as his children dying, his property being annihilated and himself contracting horrible illnesses. Job was still pious at the start but in the end his resolve cracked and he began to curse God, whereupon God talked to him and he realized that he should still have trusted in God, after which God gave him back a nice life.

Long version is here: http://ebible.org/kjv/Job.htm

Now let us examine the text. At the beginning:

1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. 1:7 And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. 1:8 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? 1:9 Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought? 1:10 Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land. 1:11 But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face. 1:12 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD. 

So basically Satan, along with the other angels, went to say hi to God. God asked Satan where he had been, and whether he had seen Mr. Job, who was an exemplary man. Satan said yea sure but you have been protecting him all this time, if you let me do stuff to him I bet he will think differently, so God said ok you can do evil things to his property but not his person.

We can see that (a) Satan seems to have decent relations with God, and (b) he can't do anything to Job's person or property without God's permission. Does this seem the behavior of two adversaries? Of course not. It seems more as if Satan is working for God.

And in truth, in the Jewish tradition, Ha-satan, or "accuser" is not the devil, but instead the prosecuting lawyer of God. He is charged by God to tempt humans and to report back to God all who go against His decrees. Later in Abrahamic religions he was changed to be Satan, the prince of darkness. Having said that, how can there be a prince of evil who is essentially powerless, as the Bible admits?

So I think the Jewish explanation makes more sense to me.

My bed and I

When I was in college I had to share a room with my best friend. Now he was everything one could ask for in a roommate (and no we are not gay), but one thing just made me sad about having to share a room - I had to sleep on a single bed.

The sorrow of sleeping on a single bed is that when I sleep, I have to subconsciously confine my body and limbs to its rather limited borders. For someone with a free spirit like myself, this is akin to confining a nightingale in a golden cage, or a great conqueror to a land the size of Singapore. In truth, I think of my bed as a autonomous nation. This is why I maintain a large number of pillows and use them to build a wall around me, something like the great wall of China.

What scares me is in the future when I get married I shall have to share the bed with somebody of unknown size. To ward against the horror of my territory shrinking, what must be done is to acquire two king-sized beds and stack them together side by side. This would be the equivalent of the Mongol empire in terms of mattresses, and only such a region would be worthy of my rest.

By the way I shall also include a lovely song in hope of changing local musical tastes to be better (i.e. more like my own).

Makeup

One of the things I think guys are most hypocritical on is makeup, on girls of course. When asked whether they prefer a girl with makeup or not, most guys I've seen will go "no no no I prefer natural", but when actually put to the test, I see girls who use makeup acquire many more pursuers than those who go without. Surely if guys were telling the truth this would go the other way around.

So why do so many guys insist on saying they prefer girls who go natural? (by this I mean no makeup, not no clothes) I think there are a few reasons for this:

1. There are girls who look strikingly beautiful even without makeup. They are DEFINITELY in the minority and there is just not enough supply to go around for every guy to get one, but still I suppose some guys do aim for it. It's like if you ask me what car I like I would tell you a Ferrari, but I don't think the chances are high that I will get my hands on one, at least in the near future.

2. The guys are being fake and emphasizing that they prize character over superficial beauty. Okay, girls do this too so there is nothing much to say for this one.

3. Makeup is somehow associated in their minds with vice and debauchery, Jezebel and the fleshpots of Egypt, and loose women. Well... this attitude is probably more common among younger fellows, especially those still in school. Having said that I think it's pretty silly, for a sensible amount of attention to one's appearance hardly equates to sin.

4. When we say "makeup on girls" some guys get the wrong idea. Personally I think this is the most important reason. I knew a few girls who put on makeup so thick that bullets would have trouble penetrating it. To be sure, when I see them I have to control an urge to pat their back hard just to see how large a powder cloud I can generate. Perhaps when we mention makeup, the above images are evoked in one's mind instead of a suitable application of eyeliner and foundation. In fact, I suspect the girls who use the aforementioned two elements in light amounts are classified under the "natural" girls by many guys.

So yes I think girls should use makeup. Just don't become a tempura.

On Education

The Asian educational system has oft been criticized for placing too much emphasis on rote memorization and tight adherence to procedure. It is true that this system stifles original thought, which is one of the reasons why fewer Nobel prizes are won by Asians in Asia, despite our outstanding results on tests.

However this educational system is not all bad: it served an important purpose in the past, and to some extent today.

Consider the situation most Asian countries faced in the mid twentieth century. The West was much more advanced in science and technology, so our priority was to absorb this science and tech in order to build our countries on double quick time, so that the economy could grow quickly and everyone would enjoy a better life. In other words, we needed to do in thirty years what the West took over a hundred years to do.

Since the technology already existed, there was no pressing need for us to develop original thinkers, the more urgent thing was to train up a cadre of people who could grasp existing technology and use it to develop the country. As such, rote training is the most effective method for mass producing such people. This is also the reason why Asians have historically flocked to the more practical courses such as engineering and accountancy, while shying away from the arts, because we needed to modernize ASAP.

Only now do we have the breathing space to take a step back and consider the development of creativity and original thinking.