verbum Dei

My reflection on the 125th Anniversary Thanksgiving and Aldersgate Service of the Methodist Church in Singapore (3)

2010-06-27T23:15:00.005+08:00

There is a danger with familarity. For church with a long history, we sometimes do not question exisiting practices. We may find it too familiar to notice that it is a problem. We may feel too comfortable to fix any problem. We may feel safe, very safe, and this can be problematic.

If we experience worship as safe, as something that never rocks our world or shakes us out of our normal habits of feeling, seeing, thinking, and behaving, we may be consoled but we shall never be redeemed. (Paul J Waldell, Becoming Friends)

When we feel too safe, we may stop praying. When we feel too safe, we may stop going to church. In James 1:2-18 (NIV), we are reminded of the purpose of trials:

2Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, 3because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance. 4Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything. 5If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him. 6But when he asks, he must believe and not doubt, because he who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind. 7That man should not think he will receive anything from the Lord; 8he is a double-minded man, unstable in all he does.

9The brother in humble circumstances ought to take pride in his high position. 10But the one who is rich should take pride in his low position, because he will pass away like a wild flower. 11For the sun rises with scorching heat and withers the plant; its blossom falls and its beauty is destroyed. In the same way, the rich man will fade away even while he goes about his business.
12Blessed is the man who perseveres under trial, because when he has stood the test, he will receive the crown of life that God has promised to those who love him.

13When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; 14but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. 15Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.
16Don't be deceived, my dear brothers. 17Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows. 18He chose to give us birth through the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of all he created.

From this passage, we learn:

The good that has come from trials.
The comfort we can have in trials.

Familiarity can be a double-edged sword. It can be both useful and dangerous. We can easily develop familiarity today, for example,

With those teaching the Word of God ("He no longer impresses me"
With the message of the Word itself ("I've heard that many times before")

Reading bible is beneficial. It helps us to be familiar with the bible. Familiarity of the Bible can help us to better understand God and grow spiritually. However, familiarity of the Bible can also cause us to grow cold to it. We stop doing what God reveals to us in the bible!! Like the psalmist who is aware that he doesn't often feel or see wonderful things as wonderful, we may also pray Psalm 119:18 each time we go to the Bible: "Open my eyes that I may behold wonders in your law." The point of this prayer is that there are wonders everywhere in the law, in the Bible, in the instruction of God. We need to ask God to help us see the wonders in the bible. We need to be free from the familiarity that breeds contempt. For instance,

The better we know people, the more likely we are to find fault with them. - The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy
If you know someone very well or experience something a lot, you stop respecting them. - The Free Dictionary
The more you know something or someone, the more you start to find faults and dislike things about it or them. - UsingEnglish.com

When we know a person very well, we may not even believe them! As Matthew 13:54-58 tells us:

And when Jesus had finished these parables, he went away from there, 54 and coming to his hometown he taught them in their synagogue, so that were astonished, and said, "Where did this man get this wisdom and these mighty works? 55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? 56And are not all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?" 57And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, "A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown and in his own household." 58And he did not do many mighty works there, because of their unbelief.

The people listening to Jesus were knew Him. They were familiar with Him as they were His relatives and friends. At first they were impressed with Him, the way He talked and the wisdom and clarity of His words. Later on, they started to doubt what he said. Are we guilty in the same why today ? Are we developing the familiarities today with those who teach the word of God in Truth and Love? Do we allow our familiarities today to breed contempt, no longer appreciating the word of God or those who teach and preach it (taking them for granted)? We need to be careful here, as Matthew 13: 58 reminds us

And he did not do many mighty works there, because of their unbelief.

Jesus, may our familiarity with you lead us not away from you, but closer to you.

My reflection on the 125th Anniversary Thanksgiving and Aldersgate Service of the Methodist Church in Singapore (2)

2010-06-23T21:51:00.004+08:00

On 22 May 2010 (Saturday), many Methodists from the three annual conferences (representing the three language- English, Chinese and Tamil) gathered at the Paya Lebar Methodist Church to worship and praise God for His 125 years of faithfulnes. The sermon on that day was "Jesus prays for us", and one of its main theme is the unity of the church.

Physically Together, Spiritually Separated?

Similar to many denominations in Singapore (such as the presbyterians, anglicans and lutherans), the Methodists do not have a centre location for worship. Instead, Methodists worshipped at various locations around the island. As the Rev. Dr Chong Chin Chung pointed out in the 125th anniversary dialogue (held on 21 May):

In order to have a testimony of unity and togetheress and to make optimal use of resources, members of an organisation must strive to work as one. This is all the more true of The Methodist Church in Singapore -- a connectional church.

I believe a connectional church is much more important than having a giant mega church in one location. Do we really need a giant mega church (a central gathering point) where thousands of Christians gather to worship God. Parking problem! Construction cost! Travelling time! Convenience? I think we go to Church for various reasons, but the main ones are to praise God and give thanks to Him. If we choose a church because it has a nice building and it is a hip to place to be in and seen, then something is obviously wrong with our spirituality.

Praise is born from wonder and gratitude for the goodness of God. Praise is evoked by thanksgiving for the unending generosity of God and amazement for the saving deeds of God. But prayers like this seem to be common: Thank you God for richly blessing us with so many people in our church. Help us grow, help us to extend your kingdom ... ...

Not that this prayer is wrong, but it certainly has some problem. In con trast, we seldom hear this type of prayer: Thank you God for blessing the churches in Singapore.

In genuine praise and celebration our attention is drawn to God, not ourselves; in fact, it is exactly this attentiveness to God that frees us from such enervating preoccupation with ourselves. (Paul J Waldell, Becoming Friends)

I think there are some things more important than having a big church that can sit a few thousand people. Spiritual togetherness is more important! Having a big church building doesn't mean anything. Of course, if there are both (Spiritual togetherness and a big church building), then it is truly God's blessing. If there is
big church building but no spiritual togetherness, we better start examining our spiritual conditions. We better start examining the quality of the sermon, fellowship, ... ... The pastor or minister should be the leader of a community of faith who is summoned to call that community to greater faithfulness in discipleship. He should not be a salesperson trying to market a product (blessing) to a congregation. But we sometimes hear pastor saying: If you tithe, God will bless you.

Though this may not be the exact words, but the essense is there. This prayer makes God look like a businessman who gives blessing in return for money. Of course, tithing is important, but we should not tithe, thinking that we would get blessing. We tithe because we are grateful for all God has done.

When worship becomes captive to consumerism, you need a God people will like and a message they are willing to buy. Instead of telling a congregation they must grow in conformity to Christ and see their lives as an ongoing conversion of heart, in consumerist Christianity it is the gospel that must conform to the needs, interests, and fancies of the congregation. (Paul J Waldell, Becoming Friends)

Sad to say, there are pastors who seem to be using this sort of convoluted theology (prosperity theology) to make Christians tithe. This is a disturbing truth. Some Christians/ pastors also base their evangelism on this sort of misleading theological understanding--- God is portrayed as the God of fortune! Rather than using money to 'lure' non-believers to become Christians, I think how we live our life is even more important. As William Lane Craig reminded us in the concluding chapter (titled "Ultimate Apologetic") of his book Reasonable faith, the ultimate apologetics is "Your life!"

My reflection on the 125th Anniversary Thanksgiving and Aldersgate Service of the Methodist Church in Singapore

2010-06-03T21:13:00.008+08:00

As a church with a long history, it is inevitable that the style of worship undergo some changes. For those who have been in the (Methodist) church for decades, the change/ transformation should be evident. For instance, we see less hymnal, less organ, and more 'praaise songs' being used. As a Methodist, regardless of the change, I think we need to let (God through) worship transforms us. We change the style of worship, but are we changed? Nobody should enter into worship and remain unchanged. Put differently, if we worship faithfully, those who knew us in our “former lives” should hardly recognize us in our new lives.

But are we really changed? Are we portraying Christ in our lives? Are we leading a life that is pleasing to God? As one author puts it:

In sham worship we are the center of attention, not God, and God is admitted into worship only insofar as God is useful to us. […] sham worship is not only dishonest but it is also a colossal waste of time.

True Christian worship allows God to work on us, sanctifying us, gracing us, purifying, renewing, and reforming us; indeed, doing all that is necessary to make us new creatures in Christ.

This is why from the beginning the church has described this startling transformation as a death and rebirth, as a burial of one way of living, thinking, perceiving, and acting and a resurrection into a radically new king of life that is gracious and abounding in hope because it is life in, with, and according to Christ. (Paul J Waldell, Becoming Friends

A transformed/changed life produces correct living. While correct doctrine (orthodoxy) is important, correct living is also important (orthopraxy). A transformed/changed life (a "broken and contrite heart") shows God's transformative grace within us. A Christian who has a changed life love his brother. If we don't love our brother, it shows we have not been transformed. If we don't love our brother, it shows the love of God is not in us. Thus, by loving one another shall the world know who God's people are.

What part does worship play in the renewal/transformation of a Christian's life? Worship allows God to work on us, sanctifying us, gracing us, purifying, renewing, and reforming us; indeed, doing all that is necessary to make us new creatures in Christ. Does Charismatic worship produces renewed lives? This is not an easy question to answer. We are in no position to judge, and only God knows. But if we are really truthful to ourselves, we should ask ourselves, how has God transformed me? How am I different from my “former lives”? Most importantly, do we love our brother? Many Christians have no problem with the first two questions, but the third is not easy to answer (if we are truthful)!

A renewed life is worth more in the eyes of God than being in the so called "correct" worship. We can be in the "correct" worship, but has a untransformed life (initially). However, true Christian worship can eventually lead us to a transformed life. In contrast, "incorrect/false" worship does not lead to a transformed life. However, it seems more Christians are placing an increasing focus so much on the entertainment value of the worship service that we fail to realise the importance of the content of the worship service. Many traditional mainline churches may not have the type of 'power-packed' and energising worship one may find in a megachurch, but the content is more or less biblical. Not that megachurch teaches entirely unbiblical doctrine, but the prosperity theology expounded can certainly be detrimental to the Christian life. A theology that focuses on the material things in life is unlikely to produce changed life! Very often, it seems Christians act no different from a non-Christian.

The correct/ true Christian worship should be one that allows God to work on us, sanctifying us, gracing us, purifying, renewing, and reforming us; indeed, doing all that is necessary to make us new creatures in Christ. If there is no Christian life, it shows we do not know God, and there is no point being Christian. If there is no Christian life, we are not true Christians. As Miroslav Volf puts it,

There is something profoundly hypocritical about praising God for God's mighty deeds of salvation and cooperating at the same time with the demons of destruction, whether by neglecting to do good or by actively doing evil. Only those who help the Jews may sing the Gregorian chant, Dietrich Bonhoeffer rightly said, in the context of Nazi Germany ... Without action in the world, the adoration of God is empty and hypocritical, and degenerates into irresponsible and godless quietism. (Reflections on a Christian Way of Being-in -the-World)

When church members quarrel over worship styles, something is wrong. When we seek to change the style of worship, we should should ask ourselves:

Is our current style of worship wrong (non-biblical)? If not, why change?
What is our motive for changing the worship style? So that it can entertain us?

We need to remind ourselves that:

When liturgy becomes entertainment, our worship becomes as trivial as our lives. The aim of such liturgies is not to unleash the power of God in our lives and in our world but to keep God as safely remote as possible precisely because we fear what any real encounter with God might bring. In short, when the dynamics of our entertainment culture determine the shape of our worship, we manipulate God so that God becomes pleasing to us instead of us becoming pleasing to God. (Paul J Waldell, Becoming Friends)

The Methodist Church in Singapore- 125th Anniversary Thanksgiving and Aldersgate Service

2010-05-22T22:02:00.020+08:00

Today, the Methodist Church in Singapore celebrated its 125th Anniversary Thanksgiving and Aldersgate Service at Paya Lebar Methodist Church.

Worship Leader: Rev Dr Jonathan Seet

Interpreter: Rev Dr Niam Kai Huey Aldersgate Service

Preacher: Bishop Dr Robert Solomon

The sermon title is ‘Jesus Prays for Us’, based on scripture text John 17:20-27. In the sermon, the bishop raised several interesting but important points:

- As a 125 year old church, if the Methodist Church in Singapore is to undergo a spiritual checkup, how will our condition be like? Are we too old to walk properly? Unable to bend our arms? Blocked spiritual vessels and arteries? Too comfortable. Too complacent. A sleeping giant?

- Church growth rate is getting lower! Growth is smaller than the population growth. As such, methodists are decreasing! Root of the problem: Is the Methodist Church getting too institutionalized and clerical? Treat pastors as employees, pastors also see themselves as employees, thus affecting church growth. A result of pastors with high education level? Probably not, there is no evidence for this, but we should be careful not to let knowledge hinder us from evangelism. The bishop emphasized the need and importance of theological education. TTC is important!

- Succumb to worldview and culture. He gives examples of churches in America (Fundamentals, evangelicals, mainline churches, etc) influenced by secular worldview. Many Christians succumb to worldly trappings and fall into a mixed world view; professing a belief in Jesus, but living secular lifestyles, "Secular" means "denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have not religious or spiritual basis." (Oxford American Dictionaries)

As for ecclesiastical order, I remembering reading in Responsible Grace, where the author Randy L Maddox highlighted this point:

What is the end of all ecclesiastical order? Is it not to bring souls from the power of Satan to God, and to build them up in his fear and love? Order, then, is so far valuable as it answers these needs: and if it answers them not, it is nothing worth. (Letter to John Smith, 1746)

All messed up ... a chance for media sensationalism

2010-04-03T12:55:00.000+08:00

Pope Benedict XVI, the 265th and current Pope, by virtue of his office of Bishop of Rome, is the head of the Catholic Church and, as such, Sovereign of the Vatican City State. The recent church sex abuse scandal, I believed, has caused him much headache. No one is without fault (not that I think he is at fault in the handling of sex abuse scandal), but he is fortunate to have the support of the cardinals and catholics. Archbishop Cardinal Daniel DiNardo (a leading church figure in North America and also plays a key role in the church's anti-abortion efforts), for instnace, strongly defends Pope Benedict's handling of sex abuse scandal.

As the church celebrates Easter, it labors under one of the darkest clouds over it in recent memory. Pope Benedict XVI, who once headed the church agency responsible for defrocking priests, has come under fire recently because his agency didn't defrock a Wisconsin priest who sexually abused children decades ago. He has also been criticized for his handling of European sex abuse cases when he was known as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.
Now, top Catholic officials are on the offensive, attacking media outlets for allegedly sensationalizing the accusations and reporting what the Vatican has called inaccurate information. (DiNardo puts his weight behind pope)

Pope Benedict was previously archbishop of Munich to Rome, who later head the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the powerful office that among other things investigates clerical sex abuse.
Besides Cardinal DiNardo, we see support from other cardinals as well:

Cardinals across Europe used their Holy Thursday sermons to defend Pope Benedict XVI from accusations he played a role in covering up sex abuse scandals, and an increasingly angry Vatican sought to deflect any criticism in the Western media.

The relationship between the church and the media has become increasingly bitter as the scandal buffeting the 1 billion-member church has touched the pontiff himself. On Wednesday, the church singled out The New York Times for criticism in an unusually harsh attack. (Cardinals defend pope on church sex abuse scandal)

On the local scene, we have ...

At CHC (City Harvest Church), Jack Neo, one of their celebrated church members, an illustrous movie director and producer, had affair with a young actress.

Singapore's Lighthouse Evangelism Church Pastor Rony Tan made fun of Buddhism and Taosim, and was called up by the Singapore's Internal Security Department (ISD).

The above three incidents show the powerful (or destructive) role that the media can play. Though the Jack Neo's case is of course on a much smaller scale, we see the local newspaper (such as Lianhe Wanbao) being just as destructive. Media Sensationalism (shameless voyeurism?) ... why has the church and christians become the target of media sensationalism? Is it because we are perceived to be good, kind-hearted people. If we do something wrong, it would immediately be publicise and sensationalised.

A Baptist Perspective on Denominationalism and Christian Tradition

2010-04-01T23:06:00.000+08:00

Denominationalism: Trends in a Post-Denominational and Global Context.
Speaker: David S. Dockery, President of Union University.
20 April 2010 (Tues)
International Baptist Church.
7.30pm - 9pm.

The Faith Once Delivered: Baptists, Evangelicals and the Place of the Christian Tradition.

Speaker: David S. Dockery, President of Union University.
21 April 2010 (Tues)
International Baptist Church.
7.30pm - 9pm.

Living in a Digital Age.
Speaker: Tan Kim Huat, Trinity Theological College.
29 April 2010 (Thurs)
YMCA of Singapore, Tan Chin Tuan Function Room I & II (Level 4).
7pm - 8.30pm.

Jesus and Buddha (9)

2009-02-08T00:16:00.001+08:00

These two verses compare the wisdom of Jesus and Buddha.

Jesus
Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? (Luke 6. 41-42)

Buddha
The faults of others are easier to see than one's own; the faults of others are easily seen, for they are sifted like chaff, but one's own faults are hard to see. This is like the cheat who hides his dice and shows the dice of his opponent, calling attention to others 's shortcomings, countiually thinking of accusing him.(Udanavarga 27.1)

Once, these two verses looks quite the same!

Jesus and Buddha (8)

2009-01-30T00:45:00.001+08:00

These two verses compare the views of Jesus and Buddha on compassion.

Jesus
You know the commandments: ‘Do not murder, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and mother. (Mark 10.19, ESV)

Buddha
Abstain from killing and from taking what is not given. Abstain from unchastity and from speaking falsely. Do not accept gold and silver. (Sutta Nipata 149-150)

Jesus and Buddha (7)

2009-01-28T00:04:00.001+08:00

These two verses compare the views of Jesus and Buddha on compassion.

Jesus
This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you." "Greater love has no one than this, that someone lays down his life for his friends. (John 15.12-13, ESV)

Buddha
Just as a mother would protect her only child at the risk of her own life, even so, cultivate a boundless heart towards all beings. Let your thoughts of boundless love pervade the whole world.(Sutta Nipata 149-150)

Jesus and Buddha (6)

2009-01-25T23:03:00.001+08:00

These two verses compare the views of Jesus and Buddha on compassion.

Jesus
I tell you, there is joy before the angels of God over one sinner who repents. (Luke 15.10)

Buddha
The Bodhisattva loves all living beings as if each were his only child. (Vimalakirtinirdesha Sutra 5)

Jesus and Buddha (5)

2009-01-23T11:00:00.000+08:00

These two verses compare the views of Jesus and Buddha on compassion.

Jesus
grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. (John 1.17)

Buddha
The Body of the Buddha is born of love, patience, gentleness, and truth. (Vimalakirtinirdesha Sutra 2)

Jesus and Buddha (4)

2009-01-22T23:54:00.000+08:00

These two verses compare the views of Jesus and Buddha on compassion.

Jesus
Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me. Matthew 25:45)

Buddha
If you do not tend one another , then who is there to tend you? Whoever would me, he should tend the sick. (Vinaya, Mahavagga, 8.26.3)

Jesus and Buddha (3)

2009-01-20T00:05:00.002+08:00

These two verses compare the views of Jesus and Buddha on compassion.

Jesus
Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword. (Matthew 26:52)

Buddha
Abandoning the taking of life, the ascetic Gautama dwells refraining from taking life, without stick or sword. (Digha Nikaya 1.1.8)

Jesus and Buddha (2)

2009-01-17T22:34:00.002+08:00

These two verses also compares the views of Jesus and Buddha on compassion.

Jesus
To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also. (Like 6:29)

Buddha
If anyone should give you a blow with his hand, with a stick, or with a knife, you should abandon any desires and utter no evil words. (Majjhima Nikaya 21.6)

Jesus and Buddha

2009-01-10T11:17:00.038+08:00

I came across these interesting quotes from a book which compares the teachings of Jesus and Buddha. The author wrote this:

[...] my experience has led me to the conclusion that their teachings about 'the way' are virtually identical and that together they are the two most remarkable religious fgures who ever lived.

Jesus
Do to others as you would have them do to you. (Luke 6:31)

Buddha
Consider others as yourself. (Dhammapada 10.1)

It seems Jesus and Buddha have rather similar views on compassion. Jesus' words from the Mount represent his most important teachings. The Dhammapada closely parallels the Sermon on the Mount. So, any similarity or differences?

Aldersgate Convention 2008

2008-05-01T17:19:00.001+08:00

The Aldersgate Convention is back again this year. The theme for this year is “The Road to Glory: The Future in Wesleyan Perspective”.

Two Evening Talks in Mandarin:
Monday, May 19, 7.45 – 9.30 pm: “Christ: Offering Hope in the Midst of Darkness.”
Tuesday, May 20, 7.45 – 9.30 pm: “The Church: Holiness in the Midst of Imperfections.”

Three Evening Talks in English:
Wednesday, May 21, 7.45– 9.30 pm: “Rapture or Parousia – Will there be one or two Second Comings?”
Thursday, May 22, 7.45 – 9.30 pm: “Other-World or After Life?”
Friday, May 23, 7.45 – 9.30 pm: “The Future of The Church, Israel and the Kingdom.”

Morning Seminars in English:
Saturday, May 24, 9 am – 12 noon: “What Have They Done With Jesus?”
(Registration required this seminar)

Aldersgate Service:
Saturday, May 24, 7.30 – 9.45 pm: “A Vision of Worship.”

Venue for all events: Wesley Methodist Church, 5 Fort Canning Road.

Prof Larry Hurtado's Lectures

2007-07-21T10:41:00.000+08:00

Public lecture by Professor Larry Hurtado
Professor of New Testament Language, Literature & Theology and Director
of the Centre for the Study of Christian Origins at the University of Edinburgh.

Date: Friday, 3 August, 2.00 - 3.30pm
Venue: TTC's Multi-Purpose Hall
Topic: "Jesus - Devotion in Recent Scholarship"

Professor Hurtado has this to say about his work: my own research has always been driven by questions: how the New Testament came to us, how the Gospels were transmitted in the early centuries, what this or that passage means, how the early Christians adapted traditions from their religious background and how they innovated, how their worship began and how it was shaped, how they accommodated Christ along with God in their devotional life, how Christian belief and practice was shaped by opposition and historical developments of the first two centuries . . .

Ichthus Seminar Series
"Binitarian Monotheism: God and Jesus in the NT"

By Prof Larry W. Hurtado
Date & Time: 3 August 2007 7.30 pm
Singapore Bible College
9-15 Adam Road Singapore 289886

Abstract

"In a number of publications over the last 20 years, I have sought to analyze in historical terms the emergence and earliest manifestations of devotion to Jesus, particularly devotion to him as in some way sharing divine status, significance, and attributes. In this presentation, I draw upon this body of work. The major emphases will be on the historical significance of this devotion to Jesus, a phenomenon without true precedent or analogy at the time of its origin, and on the resulting impact upon the early Christian understanding of God. I contend that the earliest Jesus-devotion directly demanded and shaped the development of Christian thinking and practice that led later to the doctrine of the Trinity."

About the Speaker

Larry Hurtado is Professor of New Testament Language, Literature and Theology in the University of Edinburgh (since August 1996), and Director of the Centre for the Study of Christian Origins.

His publications include an influential study of the early textual history of the Gospel of Mark (Text-Critical Methodology and the Pre- Caesarean Text: Codex W in the Gospel of Mark [Eerdmans, 1981), a popular-level commentary on the Gospel of Mark (Mark: New International Bible Commentary [Hendrickson, 1989]), a frequently- cited study on the origins of the worship of Christ (One Lord, One God: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism [Fortress Press, 1988; 2nd edition 1998, repinted 2003, T. & T. Clark]), a small volume on earliest Christian worship (At the Origins of Christian Worship: The Context and Character of Earliest Christian Devotion [Paternoster Press, 1999; Eerdmans, 2000]), a major study focused on the first two centuries of Christianity, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity (Eerdmans, 2003), and How on Earth did Jesus Become a God? Historical Questions about Erliest Devotion to Jesus (Eerdmans, 2005). His most recent book, The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins (Eerdmans, 2006), demonstrates how Christian manuscripts of the second and third centuries CE throw important light on a number of wider historical questions about early Christianity.

In addition, he has published over 60 articles in scholarly journals, books and reference works on the New Testament and origins of Christianity. He has done editorial work on several publications, including the Dictionary of Biblical Tradition in English Literature (Gen. Editor D. L. Jeffrey, Eerdmans, 1992), for which he was the Associate Editor.

Starting in 2001, he convened an international team of scholars under the auspices of the Society of Biblical Literature to undertake fresh studies of the Freer biblical manuscripts, their work published by the SBL in 2006 (in observance of the centenary of the acquisition of these manuscripts by Charles Freer): The Freer Biblical Manuscripts: Fresh Studies of an American Treasure Trove, ed. L. W. Hurtado (Society of Biblical Literature, 2006).

He also served on the editorial board of Studies in Religion/Sciences religieuses, and as an Associate Editor of Critical Review of Books in Religion, and is currently also a member of the editorial board of the Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus, TC: A Journal of Biblical Textual Criticism, and Expository Times.
He has given invited lectures in a number of colleges and universities in the U.S., Canada, Britain, Israel, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, and Germany.

Prior to his current appointment, he was Professor of Religion in the University of Manitoba (1978-96), where he was also founding Director of the Institute for the Humanities (1990-92), and Assistant Professor of New Testament in Regent College (Vancouver, BC, 1975-78). He was born in Kansas City, Missouri, in 1943.

Audience
Pastors, theological students, scholars.
Fee
$10 ($5 for SBC students. Free admission for IRC members with their membership card). Fee includes light refreshment to be served 30 minutes before seminar starts.
Registration
Interested parties, please email your name, contact and the event interested in to icht...@sbc.edu.sg, or call +65 6559 1555x7302 for registration and enquiries. Prior registration is preferred due to limited seats. Participants can pay on the day of the seminar.

Aldersgate 2007

2007-04-02T21:50:00.000+08:00

The Rev Dr. David Wilkinson will be speaking at this year's Aldersgate Convention 2007. Dr. David Wilkinson (Principal, St John's College, University of Durham) is a astrophysicist and theologian. He is the keynote speaker for the six-day Aldersgate Convention 2007, addressing the theme “The Heavens Declare His Glory: Science and Christian Faith”.

He received his Ph.D in Theoretical Astrophysics in 1987 at Durham. He went on to do his ministerial training at Wesley House, Cambridge and ministered at three Methodist churches. In 2004 he received his second Ph.D, this time in Systematic Theology, also from Durham. He is active in the World Methodist Council.

While capable of speaking and writing authoritatively in such diverse fields as theology and astrophysics, he has always enjoyed meeting up with youth.

The convention begins with the Adult and Youth Seminars on May 19 and concludes with the Aldersgate Service on May 24.

The Aldersgate Convention is an annual opportunity for Methodists in Singapore to affirm their unity in Christ as they gather together to explore their Wesleyan heritage. In the past, topics have focused on Methodist understandings of the Bible, Tradition, Reason and Experience. During the 2006 Aldersgate Convention, Rev Dr M. Robert Mulholland discusses the topic, “Shaped by the Word”. Other past speakers include Dr Thomas Oden, William Abraham,
and Dr Ajith Fernando.

On Sunday night, May 20, the Methodist School of Music will take the lead in the Aldersgate Hymn Festival at Victoria Concert Hall. Celebrating the Tercentenniel of Charles Wesley, the Hymn Festival will feature several new Asian musical settings for his hymns.

The convention continues with three talks the following three evenings on May 21, 22 and 23, with the themes: “God, the Big Bang and Stephen Hawking”, “Are we alone in the universe? SETI (Search for Extra-terrestrial Intelligence) and God”, and “Left behind, Frozen or Fried?” Beginning at 7.45 pm, the talks will be held at the new Centre for Performing Arts at ACS (Independent) at Dover Road. Church members are encouraged to invite their friends and family members. At the Aldersgate Service on Thursday evening, May 24, the Rev Dr Wilkinson will preach on the topic “The Supremacy of Jesus”. The service, to begin at 7.45 pm, will also be held at the Centre for Performing Arts at ACS (Independent).
--The Methodist Message

Aldersgate Overview

Aldersgate Adult Seminar
Registration required
"Explaining Jesus in a Hi-Tech World"
Saturday, May 19
9 am to 12 noon
Venue: Faith Methodist Church

Aldersgate Hymn Festival
Tickets required
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Please note time change: 7:30 pm
Venue: Victoria Concert Hall
Call Methodist School of Music, 6767-5258
Details

Aldersgate Evening Talks
No registration or tickets required
Monday - Wednesday, May 21-23, 2007
7:45 to 9:30 pm each night
Venue: ACS (Independent)

Aldersgate Service
No registration or tickets neededThursday, May 24, 2007
7:45 to 9:45 pm
Venue: ACS (Independent)

Forgiveness (1)

2007-01-05T22:19:00.000+08:00

Forgiveness

“Forgiveness can refer to three different kinds of relationships: the interpersonal or social forgiveness between two parties, a person’s forgiveness of him or herself, and God’s forgiveness.” (Aaron Lazare, On Apology, p. 230) I think any discussions on the topic of forgiveness have to start with God’s forgiveness. Thus, a pre-understanding of man’ fallen state is needed.

God’s forgiveness of Man In a Fallen State

In the creation account of Genesis, we are introduced to God the Creator who made the heavens, the earth, and all that dwell on earth, including human beings. However, sin entered the human race when Adam and Eve sinned (Genesis 3). But how do we know original sin is true/ real? Isn’t it outdated? As G K Chesterton once said, original sin is the only doctrine one can confirm by reading the front page of the daily newspaper. After Adam, with the influence of original sin, “holding grudges and seeking revenge” seems to come to us naturally. The fall of mankind results in the need for forgiveness, both from God and between individuals (though both are also inextricably linked). As Susan L. Nelson puts it, the doctrine of original sin has meant that it is impossible for human beings not to be involved in sin in some way:

Forgiveness means giving up our illusions of innocence. The Presbyterian insistence on the doctrine of original sin has meant that we realize it is impossible for human beings not to be involved in sin in some way. To live in the First World, with all our advantages, is by definition to reap from others' hard work. We [Americans] live off of others' suffering, and thus we are complicit in that suffering. Forgiveness means giving up postures of innocence--and all the tactics of cover-up and denial that take so much energy and only make matters worse. In the context of God's grace, we do not need to proclaim our innocence, but to seek ways to rectify the injustice in which we participate. [What Presbyterians Believe, Forgiveness [March 1998]; emphasis in bold is mine]

Why should I believe the bible?

2006-12-31T13:15:00.000+08:00

Before the start of another year, it is important that we affirm what is important in our life!

Holy Scripture is the preeminent authority for every Christian, and the rule of faith and of all human perfection. –John Wycliffe

2 Tim 3:15-17 (ESV) tells us that all Scripture is breathed out by God:

10You, however, have followed my teaching, my conduct, my aim in life, my faith, my patience, my love, my steadfastness, 11my persecutions and sufferings that happened to me at Antioch, at Iconium, and at Lystra—which persecutions I endured; yet from them all the Lord rescued me. 12Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, 13while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it 15and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

The Word of God is absolutely sufficient, it lack nothing.

We know the bible is true and trustworthy. The psalmist wrote: “All your words are true; all Your just laws will stand forever” (Psalm 119:160). In the New Testament, John writes, “Your word is truth.” (John 17:17, NIV).

Why should I believe the bible? There are reasons such as:

The proof from prophecy (many OT prophecies are fulfilled in the NT)
The unity of the Bible (there are no contradictions between the two testaments and among the different books in the bible. Being words empowered by the Holy Spirit, its message is uniform. The writers agree despite their
-Different social standing
-Different languages
-Different writing styles
From the two testaments, Christ is the principal message.
The indestructibility of the Bible (having lasted more than 2000 years)
The testimony from Church History (how it influenced countless lifes)
Proof from Science (eg. Earth is not flat!!)
Proof from Archeology (From paleography, the similarities between the many manuscripts/ codex [Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus ] is proof!)

But more than these reasons, I think it is still the Holy Spirit who helped us to believe the great truth that the bible is the living Word of God! May we read the bible with our heart and mind ... in 2007!

Stop believing?

2006-12-08T22:47:00.000+08:00

In the Alister McGrath's The Twilight of Atheism: The Rise and Fall of Disbelief in the Modern World, he tells the story of Mary Ann Evans who became an atheist when she had entered adulthhood. By the way, if one may ask, who is Mary Ann Evans? Well... her pen name is George Elliot. Elliotwas a member of the Church of England from young. McGrath tells us that in an 1860 letter to a colleague in Geneva, Eliot spoke of “the strong hold Evangelical Christianity had on me from the age of fifteen to two and twenty.” McGrath wrote that Eliot was permanently alienated from God because:

While earlier forms of evangelicalism had been theologically generous, laying emphasis upon personal devotion to Jesus rather than fidelity to theological dogmas, a new stridency within the movement around this time led to a hardening of attitudes. The quality of a person’s faith was now judged by doctrinal correctness rather than a love for Christ. The warmheartedness of earlier versions of evangelicalism now gave way to increasingly dogmatic and impersonal construals of the Christian faith, which repelled as many as it attracted. (p. 128)

Is doctrine (Theology) important? I think it is! Erwin W. Lutzer (the senior pastor of Moody Memorial Church in Chicago) in his book Who Are You to Judge? (Moody), tells us that doctrine correctness is important. We shouldn't "sacrifice" truth for love. On the contrary, we have the responsibility to judge doctrine when they are wrong. We judge doctrine, judge behaviour, but we do not judge people! God does that! Dr. Lutzer reminds us that we must have biblical discernment. Among the notable statements that Dr. Lutzer made, one of them is A half-truth is more destructive than a whole lie, namely because a half truth is harder to recognize. If we just look around, this is exactly what is happening in many of the "mega" churches around us (in Singapore). These churches talk about Jesus, but they add a lot of other consumer-oriented "biblical truths". We mustn't let misguided tolerance plagues our church. Marsha West has written a two-part commentary titled “Whatever” Christianity (Part I, Part II) that laments the theological relativism commonly seen in many Christians. She pointed out that to post-modern Christians, even outright heresy becomes acceptable. Hmm... , it seems we have really forgotten we are warned that "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. (Matthew 7:15)

But didn't Jesus say "Who are you to judge?" "Do not judge or you to will be judged." When using these statements, many of us didn't exactly know what we meant. Defective hermeneutics is the cause! We take bible verses out of context. Jesus is only telling us "Don't become a Pharisee, but do make righteous judgments. " For me, I don't see one as unloving when he/she judges. We just need to learn discernment in a loving way. That is, when one is exposing error, one should do it with an intent to win back the brother. May we not lost the ability to judge the world because we have lost the ability to judge ourselves!

Doctrinal purity is important. If we (the church) is not correct in our doctrine, we run into the danger of preaching a false gospel, and a false gospel is not relevant to the world!

I believe there can be a balance of doctrinal correctness and a love for Christ. There is simply no clash! When we love God, we will be concerned about doctrinal correctness. When we know what is really "doctrinal correctness ", we learn to love God. We see the need and importance of loving God, because we know that Jesus Christ is the first Word. Jesus is the Word behind the words of Scripture. As Schleiermacher tells us, true religion is “an immediate relation to the living God, as distinct from submission to doctrinal or creedal propositions about God.”

Dr McGrath tells us that "many of Eliot’s misgivings about Christianity in general are best seen as specific response to the ideas of evangelicalism". For example, in an article in the Westminster Review for October 1855, Eliot offered a sustained criticism of a popular London evangelical preacher, John Cumming. Eliot took particular exception to Cumming’s insistence that only actions directed toward the glory of God might be deemed to be good. Eliot wrote:

Dr Cumming’s theory … is that actions are good or evil according as they are prompted or not prompted by an exclusive reference to the “glory of God.” God, then, in Dr Cumming’s conception, is a being who had no pleasure in the exercise of love and truthfulness and justice, considered as effecting the well-being of His creatures; he has satisfaction in us only so far as we exhaust our motives and dispositions of all relation to our fellow-beings, and replace sympathy with men by anxiety for the “glory of God.” (p. 130)

Dr McGrath wrote that Eliot deems this to be a rather harsh and unattractive God, who “instead of sharing and aiding our human sympathies is directly in collision with them; who instead of strengthening the bond between man and man, by encouraging the sense that they are both alike the objects of His love and care, thrusts himself between them and forbids them to feel for each other except as they have relation to Him.” (p. 130)

In other words, Eliot rejected Christianity because she did not want to believe in an idea of a sovereign God who could deal unaccountably with his creatures in any way he liked. As McGrath wrote, "many Victorians found this deeply disturbing and in open conflict with their increasingly developed sense of morality and justice". (p. 131) In many ways, contemporary Christians are like Eliot. We reject Christianity, we reject the bible, simply because the truths taught in the bible do not match our expectations. We believe we are more moral and have more justice than God! We believe we can be good without God! However, these beliefs just show we have entered postmodernism---there are no rights or wrongs; truth is defined as my personnel opinion, with no absolutes. We have forgotten (or have we ever believed?) the bible is God's revelation. We are currently in Dec, and this is the month where there are many baptism and confirmation. Those baptised are asked whether they believe in the canon of scripture. many answered "Yes!", but I do wonder how many really meant what they say! We need to be constantly reminded (it seems to me!) that the biblet is 1) Apostolic (authored by immediate apostles or close associates of the apostles. 2) Catholic (widely circulated among the early Christian assemblies. 3) Orthodox (does not contradict the faith of the early Christian tradition) Lastly, most importantly, there is also the Witness of the Holy Spirit. As such, faith in God and trusting the bible as God's revelation is not just a leap of faith. It has historical backings!

While doctrinal correctness is important, we mustn't forget that "The love within the church attracts the world, the holiness within the church convicts the world." We should never think "It is better to tolerate error than to look ugly defending the truth"! Also, if we are no longer loving, it just shows that we have not understood our bible at all! We may say that we know and believe in God (ie. know doctrines), but we do not. May God grant us a loving heart and a discerning mind! Amen!

Church Repels?

2006-12-01T23:44:00.000+08:00

I am currently reading Alister McGrath's The Twilight of Atheism: The Rise and Fall of Disbelief in the Modern World. In church, we, too often, feel the coldness (rather than warmness) of the members. Is it because of nominalism, unregenerate Spirit, or we have simply forgotten and chosen to ignore the our Lord's admonition that we must love our neighbours as ourselves. Anyway, I think the only solution we have is to pray... ... in the hope that history doesn't repeat itself!

Paradoxically, history strongly suggests that those who are attracted to atheism are first repelled by theism. What propels people toward atheism is above all a sense of revulsion against the excess and failures of organized religion. Atheism is ultimately a worldview of fear –a fear, often merited, of what might happen if religious maniacs were to take over the world. The existence and appeal of atheism in the West is thus largely derivative, mirroring the failings of the churches and specific ways of conceiving the Christian faith. ---(Alister McGrath. The Twilight of Atheism: The Rise and Fall of Disbelief in the Modern World. p. 274)

For whom did God die?

2006-11-19T14:11:00.000+08:00

For whom did God die?

In my previous blog entry, I reflected on John 3:16 and its implication on the extent of Christ's work on the Cross.This blog will continue with the question of ‘for whom did God die’ still exists. For the Arminians, redemption is universal in scope (because God loves everyone) but not effective for every person (because not everyone responded with faith). For the Calvinist, redemption is particular in scope (because not everyone is chosen/elected), but always effective for the elect. The Arminians accused Calvinists that they are not fair, they say Calvinist attempt to limit God’s atonement. However, upon closer examination, one can see that their accusation has not been fair or accurate. Calvinists are not trying to make God look bad. Just as there is no contradiction between a loving God and the reality of hell, there is no contradiction between a loving God and the doctrine of election.

Firstly, if the redemption is universal in scope but not effective for every person (since Arminians believe we can reject salvation), the Arminians are also placing a limit on God’s atonement. There is no difference on the number of people saved, despite the Arminians’ claim to liberality. For the Arminians, it is Man choose God; for the Calvinist, it is God choose Man. From John 3:16 “that whoever believes in Him shall not perish”, it is also obvious that not everyone would be saved. Though the Arminian emphasized free will, the Calvinist’s view of irresistible grace is much more gracious than the Arminian’s belief of freewill salvation.

Secondly, “that whoever believes in Him shall not perish” (John 3:16) tells us that the gospel is to be preached to everyone. We should remind ourselves that election is not "information" from which we are to decide whether or not to respond to God in faith, or worry whether or not we are elect, or use as an excuse if we decide we are reprobate. Rather, it is the Gospel, the Good News that God has chosen to make salvation available in Christ by faith to all who respond and that ultimately we need not depend upon our own resources (since they are never sufficient) but upon the grace of God alone. How can one say that God is unfair when one cannot be sure that God did not elect him/her? If one thinks that God is unfair, they can believe in the Gospel and persevere!

Thirdly, there is the question of infant baptism. I believe that infant baptism supports the biblical view of election (thus particular atonement) based on God’s grace and divine sovereignty. The practice the baptism of infants in many of the Protestant Churches shows that John 3:16 “For God so loved the world” is not untrue as God saves the elect (such as infant) even before he can believe. Methodists (Wesleyans & Arminians) believe that God elect based on foreknowledge that the person will believe, but what if the infant are not able to live to an age (maybe to accidents or illnesses) where he can believe? Under the Arminian theological framework, how does God treat these cases? For the Calvinist (Presbyterians & Reformed Churches), the practice the baptism of infants does not face this problem since an infant is saved because it is based on God’s election and covenantal promise.

However, Methodists in Singapore practice infant baptism, as it is seen as ‘a sign of the child's belonging to the Church of God’^¹. Methodists in Singapore believed that:

It is the grace of God which even enables the believer to repent and receive God's grace. It is the grace that enables the believer to repent and receive God's grace. It is the grace that enables the believer to grow in faith and in doing God's will. [See A Methodist view of the Sacraments and Observances, Section on ‘Holy Baptism’ at http://www.trac-mcs.org.sg/discipleship/ms1.htm. Emphasis is bold is mine]

Thus, it seems that local Methodists’ view is much closer to the Calvinist (at least on paper!); they believe that infants (& all elected) are still saved because of God’s grace and sovereignty, and not because of God’s foreknowledge that we (including infants) would believe.

In his Institutes, Turretin distinguishes between those who have "the saving habit of acting faith" (or "actual faith") and those who have faith in its "principle and root," which an infant can possess since he "can have the Holy Spirit, with which to believe in his own time" (Institutes 19.20.19). Likewise, Junius says, "regarding the species of faith, it is to be considered both with regard to its first act and (as they say) its second." Infants are capable of faith as it in its first act and thus "it false to argue that infants are completely incapable of faith," though this is "God's secret and hidden thing" (Theses Theologicae 51.7). Johann Heinrich Alsted (1588-1638) similarly maintains that while infants may be "destitute of what is called 'actual faith', they are not on that account destitute of all faith...Faith in principle and seed, and virtually, is to be attributed to elect infants" (Theologia, Scholastica Didactica, 785).

The example of David’s situation in the OT clearly shows this. When his infant child died, David is given the confidence that he will see that child again in heaven. This story of David and dying child gives a tremendous consolation to parents who have lost infants to death. From David’s strong belief, it can also be seen that it is not by the infants’ innocence but by God’s grace that they are received into heaven. We come into this world with a sin nature, and so the baby that dies, dies as a sinful child. And when that child is received into heaven, he is received by grace. If a child is elected, he would surely be saved.

1 The Articles of Religion in the "Methodist Discipline" (1976, para 17) clearly state: "The baptism of young children is to be retained in the church." The objective work of God is available to infants. The child is initiated into the Body of Christ in a spiritual manner. An infant who is baptized has the parents or others as sponsors or godparents. At the baptism service they hold themselves responsible for safeguarding the welfare of the child, especially in its spiritual nurture. The congregation itself is held responsible for the Christian nurture of the child. The baptized child is enrolled as a preparatory member of the church. Infant baptism is:

a dedication of the child to God
a pledge of the parents and others to carry out their duties in the child's Christian nurture.
a sign of the child's belonging to the Church of God
a mark (seal) of the Holy Spirit's work in the child.

In every baptism there is the establishment of a mystical union of the baptized person with Christ. Here again it is an act of faith that God can do more than we expect through His grace and might. (Mark 10:13-16). [Source: A Methodist view of the Sacraments and Observances, http://www.trac-mcs.org.sg/discipleship/ms1.htm]

Reflection on John 3:16

2006-11-14T21:20:00.000+08:00

Most Christians believe that God sent his Son to save us. If we believe in him (John 3) through faith[1], we would be saved. But on the point of ‘for whom is the redemption applied to’, there is some disagreement. This is not without reason. In the bible, there seem to be various verses that teach a universal reference for the saving work of Jesus Christ (John 12:32; Rom 3:22-24; 5:18; 8:32; I Cor. 15:22; 2 Cor. 5:14-15; I Tim. 2:5-6; Tit. 2:11; Heb. 2:9) or a universal saving will on God’s part (Rom. 11:32; 1 Tim 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9).(Dr Robert Reymond’s A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith [ANSTCF], p. 685)

So, for whom did God die? Maybe it will be good to start examining this issue by turning to biblical passages, and beginning with our most familiar passage, John chapter 3, focusing especially on verse 16.

John 3:10-20 (New International Version)

10"You are Israel's teacher," said Jesus, "and do you not understand these things? 11 I tell you the truth, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, but still you people do not accept our testimony. 12I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things? 13No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man. 14Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.

16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. 19This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.

John 3:16

The word ‘world’ quite likely has the same meaning as in I John 2:15. Warfield, for example, commented that:

[The term “world”] is not here a term of extension as much as a term of intensity. Its primary connotation is ethical, and the point of its employment is not to suggest that the world is so big that it takes a great deal of love to embrace it all, but that the word is so bad that it takes a great kind of love to love it all, and much more to love it as God has loved it when he gave his son for it. … The passage was not intended to teach, and certainly does not teach, that God loves all men alike and visits each and everyone alike with the same manifestation of love: and as little was intended to teach or does it teach that his love is confined to a few especially chosen individuals selected out of the world. What it is intended to do is to arouse in our hearts a wondering sense of the marvel and mystery of the love of God for the sinful world –conceived here, not quantitative but qualitatively as, in its very distinguishing characteristic, sinful. [See B B Warfield, “God’s Immeasurable Love,” in Biblical and Theological Studies (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1952), p. 516, emphasis in bold is mine]

Indeed, the “wondering sense of the marvel and mystery of the love of God for the sinful world” is stressed in chapters 13-17 of the John Gospel. As Dr D A Carson wrote:

Both the verb ‘to love’ (agapaō) and the noun ‘love’ (agapē) occur much more frequently in chs. 13-17 than anywhere else in the Fourth Gospel, reflecting the fact that John devotes special attention to the love relationships amongst the Father, the Son and the disciples. (PNTC, 1991, p. 204)

Warfield is not alone in this interpretation. John Gill, an eminent 18^th century Baptist theologian, in his commentary on John, wrote: “Not every man in the world is here meant, or all the individuals of human nature; for all are not the objects of God’s special love, which is here designed.” Therefore, it is most likely Warfield is correct in saying that "world" in John 3:16 means "sinner"—without stating which ones. It seems that the "world" in John 3:16 is not to teach ‘election’ or ‘universal redemption’. John 3:16 would be analogous to Rom. 5:6 (‘For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.’) where Paul states that Christ died for the "ungodly"—without stating which ones.

The “For God so loved the world” in John 3:16 show that God loves both the elect and the non-elect. There is no doubt on this, since other bible passages (both OT & NT) support this. In the OT, for example, we have Psalm 145:9: “The Lord is good to all, and his mercy is over all that he has made.” In the NT, we have Luke 6:35 (“he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil”). Here, God teaches us love our enemies for even God himself loves all (includes the elect).

How do we define the “world” (cosmos) in John 3:16? The general redemption view assumes that this word must refer to each and every person that ever lived. However, this is not the biblical meaning. The BAGD defines “cosmos” in John 3:16 as referencing “all mankind, but especially of believers, as the objects of God’s love.” This, however, is a theological interpretation. From TDNT (vol. 3) and BAGD (pp. 446-447), it is clear that in the entire NT, there is no instances of cosmos referring to every single person who has ever lived.

How do we explain “For God so loved the world” in John 3:16? NT scholar Dr D A Carson pointed out that:

Because John 3:16 is sandwiched between vv.14-15 and v. 17, the fact that God gave his one and only Son is tied both to the Son’s incarnation (v. 17) and to his death (vv. 14-15). That is the immediate result of the love of God for the world: the mission of the Son. His ultimate purpose is the salvation of those in the world who believes in him […] (PNTC, p. 206, italics mine)

Indeed, if we were to look at the surrounding verses of John 3:16 (NASB), we see the repeated occurrence of the word ‘believe’ and ‘Son of God’:

v. 12: "If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?

v.13: " No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.

v.14: "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up;

v.15: so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.

v. 16: "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

v. 17: "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.

v. 18: "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

In 7 verses (btw John 3: 12-18), the word ‘believe’ occurs 5 times and ‘Son of God’ (or ‘Son’) occurs 5 times. Though it seems much fairer to say God want to save everyone, the bible clearly shows that the ones who are saved (John 3:3,5, 15,16,17) are only those who “believes in him” (John 3:15, 16,18) and not everyone.

John 3:15-18 (NIV):

15that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

John 3:15-18 (NASB):

15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. 16"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. 17"For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. 18"He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

As a conclusion, it can be seen that at the Synod of Dort, Calvinists is right to affirm that Christ’s death is sufficient for all but efficient only for the elect.

[1] There are 3 elements of faith: knowledge (the intellectual element; Mind), assent (the emotional element; Heart) and trust (the voluntary/volitional element; Will).

Is God really bad?

2006-11-10T12:41:00.000+08:00

Atheist Thomas Jefferson described God as “cruel, vindictive, capricious and unjust.” (cited in George Smith, Atheism: The Case Against God. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 1989, pp. 76-78.) Jefferson cited Isaiah 45:7, where God says “I form light and create darkness, I make well-being and create calamity, I am the Lord, who does all these things.”(ESV)

However, in this verse, the Hebrew word for “calamity” (ESV) or “disaster” (NIV) does not mean “moral evil.” In fact, Hebrew linguist tell us that the word need not have any moral connotations at all. The ESV seems more accurate as this word would be perfectly fitting for the plagues that God inflicted on the Egyptians through Moses. These plagues involved not moral evil but rather calamitous events engineered to bring the Egyptians to repentance. God as judge of the earth can rightly inflict such plagues on sinful human beings without having his character impugned with accusations of evil. Certainly such plagues may seem evil to those experiencing them, but the reality is that these people were experiencing due justice.

If we were to read the bible as a whole (& not out of context), we would understand that God is morally perfect. The bible is clear that God is morally perfect (cf. Deut. 32:4; Matt. 5:48), and it is impossible for him to sin (Heb 6:18). He punish sin because his absolute justice demands that. In the case of the Egyptians, God was merely bringing just justice on unrepentant sinners. God’s good end –the deliverance of the Israelites from Egyptian bondage –was the result of this judgment.

Till d.... do we part?

2006-10-02T12:21:00.000+08:00

"Till d.... do we part?" If I am given this sentence, and asked to fill in the blank, I think there would be two answers. In the past, it was "Till death do we part." Now it seems that it is "Till divorce do we part" . Marital permanence seems to be a thing of the past!

At the Channel NewsAsia website More marriages, more divorces last year (25 Sept 2006), it was reported that "Even as more people are getting married, divorces have also been on the rise." According to the report, 8.16 percent more marriages ended in divorce in 2005 than in 2004. The number of divorces rose to 6,909 in 2005 from 6,388 a year ago. Even more worrying is that "This is also the largest increase in the past decade". The question to ask is why is more people choosing divorce? I think Chares Colson gave a very good answer in his book Lies That Go Unchallenged in Popular Culture (Tyndale), he wrote that:

When marriage is managed by a marketplace mentality, we view it as a contract instead of as a covenant, making sure that we do only the minimum necessary for our role and that we don’t get cheated out of our rights and privileges. (Colson, p. 87)

I beilieved the contempoprary worldview of autonomy and self-centeredness has fuled divorce rate. However, the bible view marriage differently from the postmoderns.

Another "interesting" point to note is that "younger couples, aged between 20 and 24, registered the highest divorce rate last year". Hmm ... is there something wrong with the values of the younger couples? How do they perceive marriage?

In Charles Colson's book Lies That Go Unchallenged in Popular Culture (Tyndale), he wrote that:

Our country has reached a state of marital emergency in which marriage is trivalised. Preparation and commitment are seriously lacking, but government and church now have an opportunity to revive and support the institution. (Colson, p. 59)

Though Colson's book was written in the context of the US, it seems what is happening in the US is also happening here in Singpore. ... marriage is trivalised.

As to why younger couples, aged between 20 and 24, registered the highest divorce rate last year, I think the reason is indeed "Preparation and commitment are seriously lacking". People no longer treat marriage with the 'respect' it use to have.

Many Christians have also forgotten that marriage is a permanent relationship, that it is a life-longcommitment. (Read Gen 1:24 & Matt 19:5-6).

In many cases of divorce, marriage is no longer a covenant or a solemn vow , but only a “contract”. Charles Colson describes this change as a "rhetoric shift", and this has led couples to see marriage as just a voluntary agreement between two adults. As Colson puts it,

"If marriage is a contract, then the parties are free to negotiate the terms of their agreement, enforce those terms, and terminate the agreement whenever they choose. [... ...] If marriage is simply a contract, then it’s impossible to limit the terms of that contract to one man and one woman in a lifelong committed relationship. Instead, anything goes." (p. 86)

If marriage is not a “contract”, what is it? A sacrament? A covenant?

For the Roman Catholics, marriage is a sacrament (officially codified at the Council of Trent). However, this view of marriage as a sacrament is influenced by Augustine's writings (such as his De Bono conjugali ["On the Good of Marriage"]). However, this view has its defects. One defect is that the bible does not say that the institution of marriage dispenses divine grace.

For Christians, marriage is a covenant, not just a contract or a piece of paper. Marriage is instituted by God. It is a Christ-ordained institution. We need to rememer the words "we are gathered today in the presence of God and of this witness to unite this man and this woman in the holy bonds of marriage...". We are also told "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers" (2 Corinthians 6:14). In the Old Testament tradition, the children of Israel were called to seek eives from their own nation, that is people of the same religious persuasion. This is why it is sometimes so difficult for us Christians to explain to our friends (mostly non chirstian) why christians should not date non christains (vice versa) be it guys or gals. Non-Christians feel we are just narrow minded with such a thinking.

There are a few points which I think may the reason as to why christians should not date (or marry) non-Christains:

1) Prayer Life: You cannot pray with him/her, he/she cannot pray for you
2) Spiritual Growth: You cannot achieve spiritual intimacy with God together.
3) Serving the Lord: You cannot serve God with him/her, he/she cannot understand why you obey God, and there will be conflicts.
4) Perservering Together: The person you date MUST have fervent and reverence for God and obedience as well. Then can the Holy Spirit work out well in both to forgive, rebuke with love, build each other up, and grow together.

For Non-Christians, marriage is not a covenant or a solemn vow , but only a “contract” (which is the prevailing secular view. Everything we choose is a matter of choice!). The view that marriage is a contract has its root in the civil law, which sees marraige as a contract that is bilateral, voluntarily formed, maintained, and dissolved by two individuals.The source of this thinking can be traced back to the medieval ecclesiastical courts and Enlightenment thinking. Firstly, we know that marriage is thus not just between me and my girlfriend/boyfriend, but between me, my girlfriend/boyfriend, and God. It is not simply a bilateral but a trilateral relationship. Secondly, we forget that marriage is a divine institution. We thought that it is just our own private choice! Thus, we cannot marriage cannot be voluntarily formed, maintained, and dissolved by two individuals. In a sense (biblical), we are not free to negotiate the terms of their agreement, enforce those terms, and terminate the agreement whenever we choose. Marraige is regulated by God's commandments. Worringly, it seems that for many Christians, marriage has also ceased to be a covenant or a solemn vow and has instead become a “contract”. This is not surprising when one considers the fact that biblical literacy is dropping. Younger Christians, in general, do not have a good understanding of the biblical doctine of marriage. (Gen 2:18-25)

We should remember that marriage is a covenantal relationship. Though the New Testament writers do not explicitly label marriage as a covenant(though the concept is still present in NT verses such as Matt 19:6//Mark10:9), they do describe it as being similar to a covenant (cf. Eph. 5:22-33). If we turn to Mal 2:14, it speaks of marriage as a covenant: “Yet ye say, Wherefore? Because the LORD hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou has dealt treacherously: yet is she thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant.” (KJV) Because marriage is a covenant, witness is needed, and this make marriage vows are significant, and this should be done in a formal ceremony (though it doesn't have to be in church, since marriage is instituted for all people, whether they are Christians or non-Christians), in the presence of witness. Without the witnesses there is no legal covenant, no legal commitment, no formal binding responsibility for one to keep his promises. However, isn't covenant only for commitments between God and Human beings (eg., Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic)? Interestingly, the answer is no. It also refers to a variety of agreements between humans (Gen21:22-24; 2 Kings 11:17). When it includes marriage, besides Mal 2:14 stated above, Prov. 2:16-17 and Ezek. 16:8 are also texts we can refer to.

Ezek 16:8 reads:
8"Then I passed by you and saw you, and behold, you were at the time for love; so I spread My skirt over you and covered your nakedness I also swore to you and entered into a covenant with you so that you became Mine," declares the Lord GOD.

To avoid/prevent divorce, what can we do? There are a few things that we mustn't forget. First, we must remember that the home is God’s idea, it is not a human invention or a cultural phenomenon. In the plan of creation God designed the home as the foundation of society, to meet the mental, spiritual, physical, emotional needs of men, women and children.

We need to be reminded that the family is not designed for temporary convenience—to be kept together so long as it’s fun and pleasing. The family’s strength is its permanence. God designed the family as a lasting relationship in which, with His care, humans could weather the storms of life together. The home is God’s loving shelter for growing to maturity.The home is a place for spiritual growth. If one marry a non-Christian, one cannot achieve spiritual intimacy with God together. As such, this intended purpose of the family/home is lost!

Although the family is a lasting relationship, it is not an automatic success. The daily parts and pieces of life just don’t automatically fall into place. Loving and living with your partner and children takes determination and practice, plus time and imagination, sacrifice and planning, and much more.

But love and determination by themselves aren’t enough to build the relationship God intended. God not only designed the home, but He desires to be at the center of family life—guiding, sustaining, filling the home with His love, peace, forgiveness. [...]

As we seek to make Jesus Christ Lord of our life and home, we need to search the Bible daily for guidance in our family life. For God’s instructions to each family member, read Ephesians 5:15-6:4 and Colossians 3:12-21. Prayer is important for evey aspect of our life. Prayer is the steering wheel of our life, it is not a spare tyre. Prayer is the first and key to our Christian life, it is not an option . Thus, we need to pray that God would help us fulfill our family responsibility, realizing that He wants to help our family weave our lives into one harmonious design.

If we are from a Christian family, we need to encourage our family to begin a time of daily prayer and Bible study. As our family shares praise and personal needs in prayer and searches God’s Word, we will be growing closer to the Lord and to each other.

Equally important, we should attend a Bible-believing church (non-liberal! With faithful, systematic expository preaching of biblical texts.) together with our spouse (and even father, mother, sister, brother... I like the concept of a "Family Service" where different generations of a Christian family worship together. Age-specific worship Service, such as Youth Worship, may be more purpose-directed and able to attract more members, but I doubt this would the method we would be worshipping God in "heaven"!), so that we may find the encouragement and fellowship of other Christians, and instruction in God’s Word.

With Christ as Lord of our family, we can have a happy home. As we daily yield to Him, our home will be filled with God’s love and wisdom. Our home will be more than just a place. It will be a family—living, growing, learning and creating together with God. (Source: Tract Text, How to Have a Happy Home, by Good News Publisher)

To gain a better perspective on what the bible says about marriage and family, one excellent book is Andreas J Kostenberger's boook God, Marriage, and Family: Rebuilding the Biblical Foundation (Crossway, 2004). This is a must-read! Besides giving us a biblical perspective on what the bible says about divorce and remarriage, it also covers issues such as childrearing, singleness, and homosexuality. I am also aware of Geoffrey Bromiley's God and Marriage. It seems to be also a good book, but I have not had the chance to read it! As it is a bit dated, many of challenges facing the contemporary family are not dealt with in this book.

Though the bible may not be clear on every family issues we can think of, it definitely provides guidelines. However, we need to read the bible ourselves. For many of the times, there is no fast solutions to our daily problems or easy-to follow step-by-step formula to our daily choices. For example, in Chris Wright's Old Testament Ethics for the People of God (IVP: May 2004), he wrote that:

The authority of the Scripture is that which authorizes us to develop our ethical stances, policy choices and decision-making in new contexts not directly addressed by the Bible. The authority of the Old Testament for ethics does not pre-define every choice we have to make. But the more sharply we can articulate the very particularity of Israel, and understand the reasons for the laws they had, the more confident we can be in making ethical choices which are ‘authorized' – that is, that are legitimate within the contours and limits of the paradigm God has given us. [More] [Rev. Chris Wright is the International Ministries Director for Langham Partnership International ]

Back to the question of "Can Christians divorce?". This is not a new question. In Matthew's Gospel, ofr example, the Pharisees come to Jesus, and asked, "Is it lawful to put away one's wife in the case of infidelity?" [We know that the Pharisees are trying to trick Jesus into speaking against the law of Moses.] On the very surface, the answer seems to be a 'no', but we know that not every Christians agrees on how we should understand what the Bible says about divorce and remarriage. The answer is also not a simplistic 'yes' or 'no'. For example, if one were to go to a Christian bookstore and look on the bookselves, there are 'tons' of books on this issue. One particular book which caught my attention was Divorce and Remarriage (IVP, edited by H Wayne House). In this book, four authors present their distinct perspectives.

1) Carl Laney argues that the Bible indicates that marriages are always intended to be permanent, that there is never a need for divorce and that remarriage is never permissible after divorce.
2) William Heth contends that while there are legitimate biblical grounds for divorce, there are no legitimate grounds for remarriage after divorce.
3) Thomas Edgar defends the position that Scripture allows for divorce and remarriage in cases of adultry or desertion.
4) Larry Richards holds that Scripture, while decrying divorce and the pain it causes, points to a God of grace who will not condemn those who divorce and remarry.

For me, I am for Thomas Edgar 's view. I believe that Scripture allows for divorce and remarriage in cases of adultry, desertion and death of spouse. For this view, I turn to Deut 24, Mal 2:14-16, Mark 10:9, 11-12, Matt19:9, 1 Cor 7:10-39 (esp. v10-11; v12-16; v39). One of the reason the Bible takes a dim view of adultery because it is the supreme act of infideility that breaks the trust and breaks the faith upon which marriage is built. Marriage is a gift from God, but it is regulated by God's commandments. We do not use it however we want to!

What about physical abuse then? Is physical abuse legitimate grounds for divorce? Though abuse within is a dreadful reality, it seems God doesn't include physical abuse as a legitimate ground for divorce. If the physical abuse happens in a Christian home, then there is a need for church discipline (though many of the present-day churches seem more interested in trying to please their members [for more offerings & 'support'!] rather than discipline them!) in order to protect the person who is being abused. If this fails or if people is outside the church, then the use of legal system may be unavoidable! Temporary separation is also possible if the abusing partner refuses to mend their ways. One reason why God did not allow divorce for physical abuse maybe that God sees it as a problem that can be overcome. There are indeed many cases where marriages have been redeemed after people have repented and overcome their destructive patterns of behaviour.

In a marriage, as in the relationship between God and us, forgiveness is of utmost importance. When we look to the Creation account, we are reminded of the sanctity of marriage. This is also why Jesus said "But from the beginning it was not so" (Matt. 19:8). Jesus reminds us that the original intention of marriage did not include divorce. So, just as Jesus told the woman taken in adultery who was repentant: “Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more” (John8:10-11), we should be forgiving towards those who truly repents. After all, reconciliation, restoration, and forgiveness are supposed to be the identifiers a true Christian (Luke 11:4; Galatians 5:22-23; Ephesians 4:32). May the 'd....' in "Till d.... do we part?" be 'death' and not' divorce'. May God give those married the strength and the wisdom needed for a lasting marriage.

A Chronology: What happened in Sinagpore's Church History

2006-09-01T11:40:00.000+08:00

1819: Raffles’ founding of Singapore

1821: The Catholics. Cathedral of the Good Shepherd along Victoria St.

1834: The American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Mission

1837: The Church Missionary Society (CMS)

1856: The Anglican Church
1856: The Presbyterian Church. The Orchard Road Presbyterian Church (ORPC) was also founded in 1856.

1857: The Plymouth Brethren (Philip and Elisa Robinson)

1885: The first Methodist missionaries from the South Indian Conference arrived in Singapore/ Malaya, including Thoburn and Oldham. The first Methodist school, the Anglo-Chinese School, was established. In 1976, the Methodist Church in Singapore (MCS) was formed.

1908: The Seventh-day Adventists

1928/1933: The Assemblies of God, began their ministry here in 1928 with the arrival of a missionary couple, Cecil and Edith Jackson.

1933: The Student Christian Movement (SCM) began its influence in Sinagpore.

1935: The Salvation Army

1948 (4 Oct): Trinity theological college (TTC) was founded

1948: The Inauguration of the Malayan Christian Council (Founding members include the Methodist Church, Presbyterian Church, Anglican Diocese of Singapore, Bible Society, YMCA, YWCA)

1950: Southern Baptists

1950: Bible-Presbyterian Church

1952: The United Lutheran Church of America started their missionary work in Singapore.

1952: Singapore Bible College (SBC) was set up.

1952: The start of prison ministry in Singapore. 20 volunteers responded to the authorities’ invitation to provide spiritual guidance to those in prison. Rev. Khoo Siaw Hua (the prison chaplain) was one of them.

1952: The Varsity Christian Fellowship was formed. (to counter SCM)

The 1950s: The Finnish Pentecostal Mission. (from mainland China)

The 1950s: The Evangelical Free Wing

Jan 1955: The birth of Bible-Presbyterian (BP) Church movement in Singapore/Malaya.

1956: Church of Christ

1956: Youth for Christ (YFC). Rev. Joe Weatherly came to Singapore at the invitation of a group of local Christians. In 1957, the YFC had their Saturday Night Rally.

1957: Graduate Christian Fellowship (GCF). [Rev. Paul Contento]

1958: The Bible Church

1960: Christian Nationals’ Evangelism Commission (CNEC)

Sept 1962: The Far Eastern Bible College (FEBC) at Gilstead Rd was opened by the BP church.

1966: Wesley Methodist Church & St Andrew Cathedral jointly sponsored a project called the Churches’ Counseling Service.

The 1970s: The development of the house churches

The 1970s: The starting of Charismatic influence in Singapore. [The outburst of tongues at ACS. Anglican Bishop Chiu Ban It's experience in Bangkok.] In June and July 1973, the Anglican Church held a series of "Prayers for Healing Services". In 1974, weekly "Prayer and Praise" services were held at SAC.

1970-1980: The Assembly of God churches adopted home cell groups and enjoyed rapid growth.

1970-1978: The number of Protestant Churches rose from 186 to 261.

1974: The Presbyterian Community Services began with one centre at Bt Merah View.

1977: "Here's Life, Singapore" movement

1978: Rev. Paul Cho Yong-gi of Korea (I think his theology is not biblical and would label him a heretic!) came to Singapore to teach church growth.

Dec 1978: Billy Graham Crusade at the National Stadium

1980: The June 1980 census of population showed that there were 203,517 persons who declared themselves to be Christians.

1982: Evangelical Reformed Churches in Singapore (ERCS)

1984: The New Creation Church was founded by a group of young pastors: Joseph Prince, Henry Yeo & Joshua Lee. From 1990-2003, its weekly attendance rose from 150 to 8000.

1986: FCBC was established by 50-year old Rev Lawrence Khong. In 1988, it became a cell group church.

1989: City Harvest Church was started by 25-year old Kong Hee. From 1989-2003, its weekly attendance increased from 20 to 13,000.

26 Dec 1989: The government released a White Paper entitled Maintenance of Religion Harmony. [2 trends were highlighted: 1. Increase in religious fervour and assertiveness among various religious group. 2. Increased political activism among bt certain religious groups.] The Maintenance of Religion Harmony Bill was introduced in Parliament.

1991: The Methodist Missions Society (MMS) was set up. Rev. Clarence Lim was the chaplain.

1991: Fei Yue (Chinese Christian Mission) was set up at Bt Batok. [It now offers counseling ministry, family life education, etc.]

1991: The Trinity theological college (TTC) received its first post-graduate student from China.

1992: St Andrew's Community Hospital (by the Singapore Anglican Welfare Council) was opened.

1995: The LoveSingapore organisation was started through the initiative of Lawrence Khong (of FCBC). At its peak, 150 churches participated in its activities. On 5 Aug 1995, thousands packed the Singapore indoor Stadium for "Day To Change Our World" concert prayer. Lawrence Khong and Edmund Chan (of Covenant Evangelical Free Church) represented the charismatics and non-charismatics respectively.

1996: The 220-bed St Luke's Hospital for the Elderly was set up.

2000: The population census for 2000 showed that the population rose from 3,047,132 (1990) to 4,017,733. Reason: More relaxed immigration policy which sought to attract foreign talent.

2000: From 1990-2000, the number of community service centres increased from 22 to 118.

Sept 2000: The Trinity theological college (TTC) moved to its new campus at Upper Bt Timah Rd.

2001: From 1990 to 2001, the number of Christian congregations rose from 331 to 450. Total membership increased from 95,123 to 152,371. [Note: 1970:186 churches. 1978: 261churches.]

2002: The Singapore Bible College (SBC) celebrated its 50th anniversaries.It has a student enrolment of above 400 (from 22 countries & 4 continents).

[.... ... to be updated!]

For the past few days...

2006-09-01T10:16:00.000+08:00

I have just updated my blog The Earliest Church in Singapore . Overall, I think there is an addition of 30% of words. Very much more can still be added. However, the section on the Bible-Presbyterian Church is still yet undone! This was not without reason. I wanted to have an overview of the church scene in early Singapore before proceeding on the individual denomination. I also wanted to know more about what is happening the major denominations then. I have also divided the entry into parts! The role & responsibility part is now in another entry. As I continue on my reading & reflection, this entry The Earliest Church in Singapore will again be updated! For people who blog, they usually add new post, but I think updating an old post is just as interesting! It gives me an opportunity to think why I wrote something in a certain way.

Books on Creation & Evolution

2006-08-08T10:28:00.000+08:00

Some more books on my reading list that are related to the topic of Creation & Evolution.....

1) Signmund Brouwer. The Unrandom Universe. Eugene: Harvest House Publishers, 2002.

2) William A. Dembski, editor. Mere Creation. InterVarsity Press, 1998.

3) Hugh Ross. The Fingerprint of God. Orange: Promise Publishing Company, 1991.

4) Grant R Jeffrey. Creation: Remarkable Evidence of God’s Design. Toronto: Frontier Research Publications 2003.

5) Philip Johnson. Darwin on Trial. Washington, D.C.: Regnery Gateway, 1991. Also from IVP (1991).

6) Henry M Morris. Scientific Creationism. San Diego: Creation-Life Publishers, 1978.

7）B. G. Ranganathan, Origins?. Carlisle: Banner of Truth Trust, 1988.
The Second Edition is available from the publisher Pleasant Word (2003) .

Book Description:
Many in our modern society believe that science has disproved the Bible. Instead of believing in God, many place their faith in evolution. Although both evolution and creation ultimately are positions of faith and cannot be scientifically proved or disproved, the scientific evidences from various fields of modern science (e.g. genetics, paleontology, thermodynamics, etc.) better support faith in creation rather than faith in chance or evolution. Basically, evolution in nature is only possible within species but not across species as Darwin had predicted. "Origins?" asks and answers a series of penetrating questions:

Are there natural and genetic limits to biological change and variation in nature?
Is evolution consistent with other major scientific principles?
Do comparative similarities in DNA between species prove that all living things share a common evolutionary and biological ancestry?
Has science proved that life can come into existence from non-living matter?
What does the fossil record really prove?
Is nature capable of performing genetic engineering?
Do all scientists believe in evolution?

Instead of easily accepting the explanations of evolution the reader will be challenged with the logical and scientific case for creation. Modern society can once again have reason to place its faith in God, the Creator.

About the Author: The author, B.G. Ranganathan (pronounced "Ranga-nathan") was born in Madras, India, and at a young age emigrated with his family to the United States. Mr. Ranganathan was raised in a traditional Hindu family but during his early teenage years he recognized his need for salvation and received the Lord Jesus Christ into his heart as his personal Lord and Savior. He received his B.A. with academic concentrations in theology and biology and has given lectures and seminars to science faculty and students at various secular colleges and universities on the scientific merits of creation vs. evolution. As a science and religion writer Mr. Ranganathan has been recognized in the 24th edition of Marquis' Who's Who In The East.

Another interesting new book is on the author of the book Darwin on Trial (1991), Philip Johnson (a Cal Berkeley legal scholar). This new book Darwin's Nemesis (IVP) is edited by William Dembski.

Synopsis from the publisher:

With the publication of Darwin on Trial in 1991, Cal Berkeley legal scholar Phillip Johnson became the leading figure in the intelligent design movement. Exposing and calling into question the philosophical foundations of Darwinism, Johnson led the charge against this largely unquestioned philosophy of materialistic reductionism and its purported basis in scientific research.

This book reviews and celebrates the life and thought of Phillip Johnson and the movement for which he has served as chief architect. Editors William A. Dembski and Jed C. Macosko present eighteen essays by those who have known and worked with Phil for more than a decade. They provide personal and in-depth insight into the man, his convictions and his leadership of the intellectual movement that called into question the hegemony of Darwinian theory.

Other books on this issue include:

1) Michael Denton. Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (Bethesada, MD: Adler & Adler, 1985). This is a must-read!
2) Thaxton, W. Bradley, & R. Olsen. The Mystery of Life's Origin. (New York: Philosophical Library, 1984).
3) Del Ratssch. The Battle of Beginnings. (IVP, 1996)
4) Philip Johnson. Defeating Darwinism-Opening Minds. (IVP, 1997). A good book for beginners.

God's Creation-Its Relevance

2006-07-25T10:44:00.000+08:00

For the past weeks, I have been reading up on how creation & the bible is related. As I read, I find that the less I know. My reading schedule include the relevant biblical text, such as the book of Genesis, Hebrews, etc. I also scanned through pages of systematic theology. Wayne Grudem, Millard Erickson and Robert Reymond are all on my reading list. Then, I too see a need for books from William Demski (His Intelligent Design: The Bridge between Science & Theology. InterVarsity Press, 1999) & etc. As I would be writing the article in Chinese (which I plan to submit to my church for its quarterly newlstter!), I also read up how the various oriental philosophy (Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism) view how the universe came into being, so as to provide an Eastern perspective. As I read & write, I see the article becoming longer and longer. At present, it about 5000+ words. .... However, it seem a bit too long to be included in a newsletter! So, I think I would be spending time trying to make it as concise and comprehensive as possible.... not an easy job!

My outline is as follows:

从上帝的“创造”看神的大能
从上帝的“创造”看哲学---佛教的“无常”和“无我”
从上帝的“创造”看圣经与科学
神的启示——圣经

创造的意义
a) 从上帝的“创造”看神的荣耀
b) 从上帝的“创造”看生命的意义
c) 从上帝的“创造”看世界：真实和“甚好”
d) 从上帝的“创造”看他的护理
——盼望的来源
——让我们得以自由的盼望
e) 从上帝的“创造”看神与人的关系

g) 我们的回应

What are we lacking?- The Church's Role & Responsibility

2006-07-07T10:46:00.000+08:00

ON 13 June, I wrote on the Earliest Church in Singapore. Here, I reflect on the church's reponse & responsibilities. This is just some of my thoughts. Some of them are on what I see is lacking in the churches of Singapore. They are of course not exhaustive..., but there are nonetheless what I feel is the essentials!

Our Response & Responsibility

1) Giving Glory to God for what he has done

What does this entails? Is it only achieving success, health, wealth, and status? What about the ability to endure suffering, having the courage to face problems, …

2) The importance of a Living Theology (Bibllical & Systematic; NT & OT)

Theology (church doctrine) is not dull and irrelevant if it is living. Dorothy Sayers, a 20th-century, Oxford-educated dramatist, novelist, and lay theologian, reminds us that "The dogma is the drama!" Theology is the drama of God's remdptive act in history (since the beginning of time).

Theology is not simply the concern or the domain of a small group of academic experts. Rather, theology, by its very nature and function, is for everyone. Theology still matters today, as it did in the past. After all, an undogmatic Christianity is no Christianity at all. Christianity is about Christ, a living person. As a historical person with historical facts (i.e. his incarnation & atonement, also called doctrines) surrounding it, Christianity cannot as facts separating from doctrines. As B B Warfield puts it, “Christianity consists in facts that are doctrines and in doctrines that are facts” (I have benefited much from Dr Gary L W Johnson’s writing “Does Theology still Matter?” in the book The Coming Evangelical Crisis: Current Challenges to the Authority of the Scripture and the Gospel, edited by Dr John H Armstrong (Moody, 1996), p.57-73.).

Of course, ‘theology’ can be wrong at times too. For example, theological liberialism has questioned the authority of the bible. The theology we need be grounded in scripture. It should be biblical, exegetical, systematic, practical, and covers both OT & NT. Theology should not be speculative, or based entirely on human reasoning & logic.

The importance of theology could also be seen in the launching of the annual Earnest Lau Professorship Lectures by TTC. Its aim is to bring theology to the level that pastors and informed lay leaders could appreciate. The first annual lecture is entitled “Rediscovering the Catechumenate: How to Help New Converts Discover their Real Christian Identity”, and held on Jan 19, 2005. The speaker was Rev Dr Simon Chan, Earnest Lau Professor of Systematic Theology at TTC. The focus of the lecture is on the relationship between theology and some aspects of the church life and pastoral practice so that Christians can be encouraged to think through pastoral issues theologically and formulate theologically informed responses rather than merely resort to pragmatic solutions.

3) God’s Word

(a)- Authority & Sufficiency

God’s Word, as revealed in the Old & New Testament, is the authority for the church. The authority of any teacher (pastor, cell group leader, bishop, elder, deacon, even bible scholar! Of course, we should also examine our very own scriptural understanding with the bible. We could be wrong too!) must be judged by its faithfulness to the Scriptures.

The bible is true, sufficient and clear, there is no need for further revelation. There should be distinction between the canonical texts and what Christian writers say (in Christian literature), what pastors say (in sermons), what we ‘hear’ God say (‘so-called prophesy’; hearing from God). Christian writers, and preachers/pastors are channels of the Holy Spirit’s teaching (Spiritus Sancti fistulae), but we should always remember that sometimes, they may too have wrong interpretations (which arose from a lack of prayerful study of the bible, and thus erroneous understanding) Thus, when pastors begin their sermons, we sometimes hear this prayer, “Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be acceptable in your sight, O Lord, my rock and my redeemer.” (Psalms 19:14, ESV)

(b)- Trusting & Studying

Sunday-morning sermons, though important, are never replacements for devoting time to consistent bible study.

Psalms 78:1 (ESV): Give ear, O my people, to my teaching; incline your ears to the words of my mouth!

Job 23:12 (ESV): I have not departed from the commandment of his lips; I have treasured the words of his mouth more than my portion of food.

(c)- Faithful Expository (Exegetical) Preaching in the pulpit

“Pastors are called to a ministry of exposition, not entertainment. We are to be warm containers of divine treasures. We must be touched and transformed by the message. It is a high calling to be a preacher of the Word.” (from Bishop Robert Solomon’s sermon at the Ordination and Closing Service of the 29th Session of the CAC in 2004, Methodist Message, Issue Vol. 107 No 1, Jan 2005) The reason why John Sung was so successful in his evangelistic effort was due to his Bible-centered preaching. He took the bible seriously and expound the bible chapter by chapter. When he preached in

Singapore

in 1935, he could preach for 80 minutes for each meeting, three times a day, and each meeting being two and a half hours. About 2000 listened to him each night. According to Bobby Sng in his In His Good Time: “Many brought their own food packages, for fear of losing their seats if they left the church hall. Some even brought mats and slept through the nights. About half of te students in ACS and MGS absented themselves during the day in order to attend the meetings. All English and Chinese Bibles were sold out and fresh supplies have to be ordered from kuala Lumur.

Singapore

town was in an uproar during those weeks. Everywhere people spoke of the meetings. In all, 1300 people accepted Jesus Christ as Saviour.” (p.173) Between 1933 and 1936, over 100,000 Chinese was converted to Jesus Christ through his ministry. In 1935 alone, over 5000 Chinese in this region were converted to Christ.

There should be consistent Bible study, so that Christians can come to a deeper and more personal understanding of God’s Word. Through God’s revealed Word, we can get to know God better and learn more about His will for them. As 2 Tim 2:15 reminds us, “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.” (ESV)

In my bible study, for Chinese Bible, I use both the New Chinese Version (新译本, from The Worldwide Bible Society) and Chinese Union Version. For English, I use the ESV (Crossway) & NASB (1995) for daily reading. To compare translations & help in understanding, I check up NIV, NRSV, NKJV, and NLT. Having a parallel bible can be useful, but it's heavy & expensive. So, I buy personal size bible of different versions instead! Easier to carry around too!

4) Gospel- Not Diluted nor changed

As we obey Jesus’ command to us to proclaim the Gospel, the Gospel we proclaim should be what is revealed in the Holy Scripture, God’s Word to us (the canonical OT & NT). When the gospel is preached, it should be centered in the preaching “Jesus Christ, and Him crucified” (1 Cor. 2:2). The Penal-substitutionary nature of Christ’s atonement should be taught. Christians sometimes forget that we depend on Christ's death on the cross for our salvation. The ‘disappearance’ of Christ from Roman Catholics’ crucifix, during the Reformation of the 1500s, tells us that Christ has risen. He is risen for our sake. If Christ is not raised, what we are preaching would be in vain. If we do not believe Christ has risen, what we believe would be in vain. Christianity is not a religion, it is a historical fact.

Paul’s words “and also for me, that words may be given to me in opening my mouth boldly to proclaim the mystery of the gospel” (Ephesians 6:19, ESV) is what we urgently need.

5) Evangelism: The Biblical “witness”/ Be a Witness

The task of evangelism and disciple-making should be the primary and urgent task of our church. However, as a witness to Christ, there is no need to denigrate other religions. We should live in harmony with those of other faiths (though not obliterating the biblical teaching to keep our worship of God separate from these faiths).

Evangelism is telling others about the gospel, or to put it more plainly it’s about telling others about Jesus. But, do we really know what the gospel message involves? Too often, the latter (“telling others about Jesus”) often translates into “telling others about ourselves”! We simply talk about their ‘changed’ lives. We start recounting how Christianity has impacted our own lives. This is an underestimation of the power of the gospel! We try to add our side of the story. It is as though if we do not give our personal testimony, our non-Christian friend would not be lead to Christ!

However, there is a difference between our own testimony (personal experience) about our journey to faith and the Biblical “witness” to Jesus Christ. We shouldn’t replace the biblical testimony with our personal testimony. The content of evangelism should be the Biblical witness to Christ and God, not our journey to faith. Will Metzger in his very helpful book, Tell the Truth (IVP), says that, “the content [of the Biblical witness] is Christ and God, not our journey to faith. Our personal testimony may be included, but witnessing is more than reciting our spiritual autobiography. Specific truths about a specific person are the subject of our proclamation. A message has been committed to us—a word of reconciliation to the world (2 Corinthians 5:19).”(p. 24)

Before we are to be able to explain to non-Christians the biblical witness to Christ, we need to know our Biblical facts well. Before we start telling people the truth in love, we need to know what does it means to “tell people the truth”? To understand “the truth”, we need to be very clear about who Jesus is and understand something of the nature of his saving work. This is where theology comes in. The doctrine of God tells us the character of God (His attributes), the Trinity, and the Creation of the Universe. The doctrine of Man focuses on the creation of Man, it tells us why God create us, how did God make us like himself, and what does the scripture mean by “soul” and “spirit”. It also explains what is sin, and where did it come from. The doctrine of Christ explains the atonement. Was it necessary for Christ to die? What really happened in the atonement? What was the significance of Christ’s resurrection and ascension? What happened to Christ when he ascended into heaven?

The gospel is the saving work of Christ as summarized in 1 Corinthians 15:1-8, together with the gospel imperative to repent and believe. 1 Corinthians 15:1-8 (ESV) reads:

v1) Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, v2)and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. v3) For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, v4) that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, v5) and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. V6) Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. v7) Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. v8) Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. v9) For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. v10) But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me. v11) Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.

v12) Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? v13) But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. v14) And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. 15We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised.

With these basic presuppositions about God, creation, man, sin and salvation, we are then ready to engage in evangelism! These constitute the “truth” we must tell non-Christians in love. Through this message, God’s creates faith and enables sinners to believe.

D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones (in his The Presentation of the Gospel), reminds us that the supreme object of the work of evangelism is to glorify God. This brings us correctly back to the top on our list of “Response & Responsibility”, which is to give Glory to God.

6) The Church- A Witnessing Body

May we be reminded that the physical building we use for worship is not an end in itself. It should serve to remind us of our spiritual calling to be united in truth and holiness, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God. If the building does not help us to be spiritually-minded, then it is a curse rather than a blessing to us. It is the spiritually-minded people that form the church, and not the bricks and cement. May that message serve our church well till the Lord's return.

In Ephesians, Paul reminds us that the church is not an institution, but a living organism of which all believers are members, and Christ is the head. Because the church is more than an association or an institution, believers must learn to out a life which reflect us being the body of Christ. When describing the Presbyterian missionary work in the 1880s to early 1900s period, Bobby Sng wrote that the reason why many were ready to accept the gospel was that the immigrant population “discovered in the churches compassion and practical help they needed so badly” (p. 102). [In His Good Time: The Story of the Church in Singapore 1819-2002 (Third Edition). Singapore: Bible Society of Singapore/ Graduates’ Christian Fellowship, 1980, 1993, 2003.] As Singaporeans become affluent, are we still able to show compassion towards one another. Are we still able to accept the differences (be it character, or socio-economic, racial) of others?

“be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might” (Ephesians 6:10, ESV)

A Prayer of Ulrich Zwingli

2006-06-22T12:17:00.000+08:00

Almighty, eternal and merciful God, whose Word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path, open and illuminate our minds, that we may purely and perfectly understand thy Word and that our lives may be conformed to what we have rightly understood, that in nothing we may be displeasing unto thy majesty, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
(Timothy George, Theology of the Reformers (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1988), p. 129)

A Prayer of Martin Luther

2006-06-22T12:13:00.000+08:00

Beyond, Lord, an empty vessel that needs to be filled.
My Lord, fill it.
I am weak in the faith; strengthen thou me.
I am cold in love; warm me and make me fervent that my love may go out to my neighbour.
I do not have a strong and firm faith; at times I doubt and am unable to trust thee altogether.
O Lord, help me. Strengthen my faith and trust in thee.
In thee I have sealed the treasures of all I have.
I am poor; thou art rich and didst come to be merciful to the poor.
I am a sinner; thou art upright.
With me there is an abundance of sin; in thee is the fullness of righteousness.
Therefore, I will remain with thee of whom I can receive but to whom I may not give.
Amen.
(Clyde Manschreck, ed., Prayers of the Reformers (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1958), p. 79.)

The Earliest Church in Singapore

2006-06-13T14:00:00.000+08:00

The Armenian Christians & CatholicsI was traveling along Victoria St a few days back. I saw a banner which says that the Cathedral of the Good Shepherd (Catholic) (founded 1832), will be celebrating its 160th Anniversary (1846-2006) on Corpus Christi this year (18 June 2006). Wah …, that’s a long history, considering that Raffles only came to Singapore in 1819. Singapore is only 187 years old (1819-2006). But, the Catholics were not the first to start a church here. About 2 years after Raffles arrival, the first church in Singapore was founded. It is the Armenian Street of St. Gregory the Illuminator, located along Hill Street, which is just a few hundred meters away from the Cathedral of the Good Shepherd (Catholic). The Armenian Church is Singapore's first and oldest church. In 1821, the Armenian community was already having regular religious services in rented rooms in Commercial Square (present day Raffles Place). The building we see today was completed in 1835. It was built by colonial architect George Drumgoole Coleman. It is named Armenian Church of St. Gregory the Illuminator because the church was dedicated to St. Gregory the Illuminator, the first monk of the Armenian Church. The total cost of the building is recorded as 5,058.30 Spanish Dollars.

The Anglican Church

Straight cross Victoria Street, next to City Hall MRT, we have the first Anglican Church in Singapore, St Andrew’s Cathedral. The emergence of the Church of England has a rich and colourful history relating to King Henry VIII. For local Anglicans, they (St Andrew Cathedral) celebrated its 150th Anniversary Service of St Andrew’s church mission on June 4, 2006. St Andrew’s Cathedral was birthed on Pentecost Sunday in 1856. On 25 June 1856, the St Andrew’s Church Mission was organized. St Andrew’s Church (now a cathedral) was consecrated in 1838. In 1872, Rev. Gomes arrived in 1872 and was appointed superintendent of the St Andrew’s Church Mission. He was able to preach in Tamil, Malay ad Hokkien! Between 1872 and 1890, the mission had a total of 356 baptisms (Sng, p. 75). Rev. Gomes died in 2 March 1902 at the full age of 75 years. According to Bobby Sng, “In spite of failing health in his later years, he carried on his ministry right to the end”(p. 75). Today, the Anglican Church has some 40 congregations in 26 parishes, with an estimated membership of about 25 000. The parishes include All Saints Church, Chapel of Christ the King, Chapel of the Resurrection, Christ Church, Church of Our Saviour, Church of the Ascension, Church of the Epiphany, Church of the Good Shepherd, Church of the True Light, Holy Trinity Church, Light of Christ City Church, Marine Parade Christian Centre, St George’s Church, St Jame’s Church, St John’s-St Margaret’s Church, and St Matthew’s Church. Since the formation of the Province of the Anglican Church in South East Asia (a grouping of the diocese of Kuching, Sabah, Singapore & West Malaysia), its current bishop Rt Rev John Chewis also the 3rd Anglican Archbishop of the Province.

The Presbyterian Church

Interestingly, another church nearby (about 3 bus stops away), the Orchard Road Presbyterian Church (ORPC) was also founded in 1856. Thus, 1856 saw the inauguration of both the Presbyterian and the Anglican Mission. Today, ORPC has four different language congregations (English, Mandarin, German, and Indonesian). ORPC is also celebrating its 150th Anniversary this year.

150 years may be long, but ORPC is not the oldest church in Singapore. At Prinsep Street Presbyterian Church (PSPC), we see God’s 163 Years of Faithfulness (1843-2006)! With 163 years of history, PSPC is the oldest existing Protestant church in Singapore. PSPC was originally a Malay chapel for local Malay-speaking Chinese. It was started by former LMS missionary Benjamin Keasberry in 1843. [Keasberry was born of British parents in India in 1811. He was conversant with the Malay language. When the LMS left Singapore, Keasberry resigned from the LMS as they wanted to remain so as to continue with their work among the Malays. He believed his main minstry was to the Malays. … but we know that he did church planting work among two ethnic groups - the Chinese and the Malays. Keasberry translated the New Testament into Romanised Malay and published it in 1853. This was followed 3 years later by an Arabic text. According to Bobby Sng in his In His Good Time, “Keasberry also compiled a Malay hymnal which remained as the standard hymnal for Malay speaking Christians for many decades” (p. 53). Keasberry also wrote numerous tracts. All these are in addition to his weakly Sunday preaching schedule, managing a printing-press and conducting a boarding school. …. This is sure hard work!! …. And for 38 year, he did all these! … … and we mustn’t forget that Keasberry “had a weak heart and was warned often to reduce his load of work” (Sng, p. 54). Isn’t this very much similar to Rev. Gomes (of the St Andrew’s Church Mission) who carried on his ministry right to the end of his life? Their pioneering ministry provided the springboard for the subsequent development of both the Anglican and Presbyterian Church in Singapore. According to the Department of Statistics 2001, 99.6% of Malays follow Islam. Of the remaining 0.4%, some are definitely Christians, and I believe the efforts of Keasberry remain today! 0.4% may seem small, but we must keep in mind that the “the very nature of lslamic dctrines and the close affinity of the Malays to their religion, posed formidable obstacles to their conversion to any other religion” (Sng, p. 55).] At its opening service, over 60 Malays and others attended. In a way, we can say that the Malay chapel is the forerunner of Presbyterian Churches. According to In His Good Time (Third Edition), Bobby Sng tells us that “[i]n its 20 years of existence, there were only 82 baptisms” and “a number backslided later from the faith” (p. 100). So, in Oct 1879, help was sought from the ORPC to supervise it. For PSPC, according to the website, it has “a rich heritage with members whose families go back many generations”. PSPC has also planted Adam Road Presbyterian Church (ARPC).

Diagonally across PSPC, we have another century-old Presbyterian church, the Singapore Life Church (SLC). SLC is a member of the Presbyterian Church in Singapore. It is located along Prinsep Street and has a congregation of more than 700 people worshipping in 3 different services- Teochew/Mandarin, English and Mandarin respectively. The English service has a congregation of 125 and the remaining 651 to the Teochew/Mandarin and Mandarin services.

As early Singapore is also made up of a majority of Chinese dialect-speaking migrants, besides the English speaking churches, there are also numerous Chinese dialect-speaking churches, and the Glory Presbyterian Church (GPC) at Bt Timah is the oldest Chinese-speaking church in Singapore. GPC (which Rev. Keasberry helped to found) was initially a preaching station and Bt Timah was still a village then. The success of the Chinese Presbytery of the present-day Presbyterian Church can be traced back to the work of Rev. J. A. B. Cook of the English Presbyterian Mission, whose “intent was to work among the Chinese abroad” and “heart was in foreign mission work among those who had never heard the gospel” (p.100). Rev. Cook first went to Swatow in China to learn the Teochew dialect. In 1882, “Cook’s first responsibility was to take charge of the congregation at Bt Timah, by which then had fallen to just 39 members” (Sng, p. 101). He undertook corrective measures to tackle problems, one of which is the unwillingness to set aside Sunday as a day of worship. From this congregation at Bt Timah, the present Bethel Church (at Jalan Lateh), Singapore Life Church (SLC) and the Jubilee Church was born.

In 1883, SLC was founded. It was started by group of members who rented a room at Prinsep Street. In 1885, this group moved to Keasberry’s Malay Chapel [our present-day PSPC]. At the Prinsep Street Presbyterian Chapel, Sunday services were combined with a Baptist church as there were not many members then. For a few decades, it shared the same premises with the PSPC. To me, this is an amazing display of cooperation and unity in Christ. Seldom seen today….! On 15 June 1901, the 1st Singapore Presbyterian Church (SPC) Conference was held at Life Church then known as "Teck Khak". In 4 Jan 1917, the land at 142-144 Prinsep Street (the site we are at today) was purchased and rented out. In 3 Oct 1928, Teck Khak began the construction of it's new building. Rev John Williams was invited to hold the ceremony and SPC sent relatives, Tan Lin Tian and Liauw Tian Yak to attend. In Spring 1929, Tek Khak invited Rev Kwok Jing Hoon and SPC representatives to participate in the ceremony celebrating the completion of the new church building and Pastors' building. The church was renamed "Say Mia Tng Teck Khak". The church's goal was to promote bible knowledge and Christianity. … … so what happened to the Teochew-speaking Baptists who had worshipped at this Tekka Church (our present Singapore Life Church)? They (30 of them) left Tekka Church to form the Oversea-Chinese (Swatow) Baptist Church of Singapore.

During World War II, Singapore was conquered and all Western preachers were captured. Under the Japanese occupancy, work of churches were mostly regulated. God was gracious to Life Church (SLC) as daily business, e.g., Sunday Worship and Outreach Ministry were allowed to run as per normal. Hey, this is what I call amazing grace.

After WWII, in Oct 1950, SLC’s English Worship was set up. The worship service met from 5.00 pm to 7.00 pm on Sunday. The official number of members attending was more than a 100. It was then held at the Main Sanctuary of the church. On 18 Aug 1955, The members of Life Church separated into 3 congregations, namely, "Teck Khak", "Newton" and "English Service". Members voted to decide which church they belonged and the results were 332, 107 and 129 respectively. In June 1956, the church rented a piece of land at Changi 10 Mile Stone to build an outreach center called Changi Outreach Station. In Jan 1959, English Life Church purchased land in Newton to build a church which was completed on Oct 1960. They shifted into the new premises from Life Church on the 3rd Sunday of October 1960 and celebrated her 10th Thanksgiving Anniversary. She was then named "Singapore Christian Bible Presbyterian Life Church". In 19 Jan 1969, SLC decided to rebuild the church. The old building was over 40 years old and the roof was leaking and was infected with termites. Moreover, the existing space was not sufficient to meet the rising demand of the various departments. So, in 10 March 1974, the old church building was demolished. In 21 April 1974, a ceremony was held on Easter Sunday to commemorate the beginning of the church building project. In 26 Dec 1975, t he Registrar of Society approved the Chinese and English church name. The initial Roman pronunciation of "Say Mia Tng Teck Khak" (you would not be able to pronounce this if you do not know the Chinese dialect Teochew) given in 1929 was told to change to English by the order of Registrar of Society in 1975. Session decided to rename it to "Singapore Life Church".

On 29 May 1977, a Thanksgiving Service was conducted by Rev Paul Hsiu (The Presbyterian Synod's Moderator) to commemorate the completion of the new building. In 1983, SLC (then called Life Church) celebrated her 100th year anniversary. In Sept 1983, (04 Sept-09 Sept), a spiritual renewal cum gospel rally was held in Life Church. The first 3 nights were for spiritual revival meetings and the last for gospel rally. Rev Dr Maak Hay Chun was invited as speaker for this event. (Source: http://www.antioch.com.sg/sg/slc/history.htm)

However, as early Singapore is also made up of a majority of Chinese dialect-speaking migrants, besides the English speaking churches, there are also numerous Chinese dialect-speaking churches. For example, Jubilee Church (1883- ), was at first an endeavor of the Rev. J. A. B. Cook of the English Presbyterian Mission. According to the Church’s website:

He came to Singapore in 1881 after learning the Teochew dialect in China (in the region called “Swatow”). He immediately took charge of the congregation at Bukit Timah (later known as the Glory Presbyterian Church) which was set up by Benjamin P. Keasberry of the London Missionary Society and Tan See Boo in 1857. As the church grew, the congregation decided to plant new churches since some church members lived too far from the church. One of the extending groups, the Hokkien-speaking group started meeting at Hong Lim market. The year was 1883 and Singapore was an immigrant society under British rule. The church later gathered in the Eastern School in Ansiang Hill, and by 1898, it had installed its first Chinese moderator, the Rev. Tay Sek Tin.

The first church building was built in Tanjong Pagar in 1904 and was completed in 1905; it was named the Tanjong Pagar Church. As the congregation grew, the church again erected a new building in Outram Road in 1939. It then adopted the name Outram Road Tanjong Pagar Church. Meanwhile, some Tanjong Pagar residents still worshipped in the old building. In January 1946 the name “Jubilee Church” was officially introduced in conjunction with the forthcoming fiftieth anniversary (1954) and to celebrate the end of the Japanese occupation.

As a denomination, the Presbyterian Church in Singapore celebrated its 125th Anniversary this year. Its theme for its anniversary celebration is “Growing in Christ, Embracing the Future”. Organized as a Synod with 2 Presbytery (English and Chinese), the Presbyterian Church in Singapore currently has 40 churches with about 16000 members. The Presbyterian Church sees the need to “take stock of its Reformed Traditions and beliefs”.

Reformed Christians have a bad reputation for not being concerned about evangelism. However, as I look at the history of the Presbyterian Church in Singapore, who says the Presbyterian, with its understanding of Reformed Theology, is not concerned with mission or evangelism? In the book In His Good Time: The Story of the Church in Singapore 1819-2002 (Third Edition) [Singapore: Bible Society of Singapore/ Graduates’ Christian Fellowship, 1980,1993, 2003] Bobby Sng tells us that one of the reasons for the steady growth of the Presbyterian churches in Singapore between the 1880s and early 1900 was that the “Presbyterian churches had always placed great emphasis on evangelism” (p. 102).

A correct understanding of the Calvinistic/ Reformed Theology would not allow so-called ‘limited atonement’ to hinder evangelism and missionary efforts.

The Methodist Church

Of course, one shouldn't forget the Methodist (of which I am one [Calvinistic Methodist]) either. While the Methodists [America Methodist Episcopal Church] went to Foochow in 1847, and the Presbyterians [English Presbyterian Mission] only entered China [Amoy] in 1848, the Methodists arrived in Singapore later the Presbyterians. The Methodist Church in Singapore (MCS) celebrated its 120th Anniversary in 2005 (1885-2005). Its first church is Wesley Methodist Church (120 years). The second oldest Methodist Church in Singapore, is Tamil Methodist Church at Short Street. It celebrated its 118th Anniversary on Sept 25, 2005.As I was searching the web and found this, this came as a surprise to me. I never knew there was such an old Tamil church in Singapore. The third oldest Methodist Church in Singapore is a Chinese Methodist Church, the Telok Ayer Chinese Methodist Church at Telok Ayer Street. It celebrated its 116th Anniversary in 2005. The church building we see today at Telok Ayer Street is 80 years old. Foochow Methodist Church came into existence in mid-December 1897. As such, Foochow Methodist Church is the second oldest church in the Chinese Annual Conference (CAC). CAC’s Geylang Methodist Church is 100 years old (1905-2005), while TRAC’s Paya Lebar Methodist Church is 74 years ago.

The Methodist Church was founded by Anglo-American Methodist missionaries from India, William Oldham and James Thoburn. According to the MCS's website,

The MCS derives its beginnings from a missionary initiative of the South India Conference led by Dr James Thoburn (Missionary Bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church in Southern Asia) in 1885. Its early foundations were laid by the Rev Wiliam F Oldham, who established the Mission and its first English language boys' school in 1886.Together with two girls' schools begun in 1887 and 1888, the Mission developed linguistic ministries in nearly all the local vernaculars,a medical clinic, and school hostels for foreign boys and homeless girls.

Thereafter, the Mission rapidly spread to the main towns of the Malayan Peninsula and Sarawak, where churches and schools that were twinned with them provided a base for missionary outreach in English and the vernacular languages. Like most other missions, the Methodist Mission in Singapore and Malaya expanded and matured - first becoming a Conference, then Conferences spanning South-east Asia, and the establishment of the South-east Asian Central Conference in 1950.

The Malaysian and Singapore components became autonomous in 1968, and thus became an Asian church with a bishop that was elected from amongst its ministers. In 1976, the process was repeated when it was restructured into The Methodist Church in Singapore,and Malaysia, respectively.

The Methodist Church in Singapore is currently made up of a General Conference (meet once every four years) and 3 Annual Conferences: Chinese Annual Conference (CAC), Emmanuel Tamil Annual Conference (ETAC) and Trinity Annual Conference (TRAC). TRAC, CAC, ETAC has a total of 42 churches, with a membership of more than 32,000. The MCS represent one of the largest Protestant denominations and cater to all the languages used in the Republic: the vernaculars like Hokkien, Foochow, Hakka, Hinghwa,Teochew and Cantonese, as well as Malay, Mandarin, Tamil and English, which is the language of choice. With Chinese (including its dialect) speaking, English Speaking and Tamil speaking congregations, the MCS reflects Singapore's multiple ethnic groups.

The MCS is Episcopal in its church polity. It is headed by Bishop Dr Robert Solomon (previously principal of Trinity Theological College, Singapore), who is elected at its General Conference. Each of the Annual Conferences is headed by a President.

The 16th World Methodist Conference was convened at the Westin Stamford (Singapore) from July 24 to 31, 1991.

(Further Reading: Robbie B H Goh, Sparks of Grace: The Story of Methodism in Asia. Singapore: The Methodist Church in Singapore, Dec 2003. 209 pages. $13. Associate Professor Robbie B H Goh is Deputy Head of the Department of English Language and Literature, National University of Signapore. He is also a member of Cairnhill Methodist Church. This book chronicles the work of the Methodist Church in Asia. It tell the “Methodist Story” in a country by country format of the Asian countries Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, The Philippines, Indonesian, Indonesia, Hong Kong, South Korea, and Taiwan. We see how missionaries planted churches, how people spread their faith despite the social and political challenge.)

Mission schools

The Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Methodists, and Presbyterians set up mission schools. They are also concerned with imparting moral values to the young and instilling in them the love for God.

The Roman Catholics built schools, such as Assumption English School (1953), Assumption Vocational Institute , Canossa Convent Primary School (1947) , the CHIJ schools (Canossa Convent Primary School (1947), Bukit Timah (Primary) (1955), Katong (Primary) (1959), Kellock Primary (1964), St Joseph's Convent (1938), Our Lady of the Nativity (1957)), St Joseph's Institution (1852), & St Patrick's School (1933).

The Anglicans have the St Andrew schools (Junior, Secondary & JC), St Hilda’s & St Margret School. The Methodists have the ACS schools (Junior, Secondary [Barker], Independent [Dover] & JC), Fairfield Methodist School (Primary & Secondary) and MGS, etc.. The Methodist schools represent the major educational trust of the MCS. There are 13 primary and secondary schools and a junior college. For more than a century, they have helped to play an important role in the human resource development of Singapore. The Presbyterians have ………..

As Bobby Sng in his In His Good Time remind us, the question to ask is this: “What is the church’s primary objective in promoting education? Is it an end itself, or does it serves as a means to fulfill the church’s evangelistic mandate?”(p.150). For me, I think it serve both purposes (though I see the latter as more important than the former) and they do not contradict each other. But, does the bible mention anything about mission schools? Is setting up of mission schools biblical? What about the problem of proselytization?

In an article entitled “Evangelism—Our Supreme Need”, I think Rev. Goh Hoon Keng’s comment when he examined the educational policy of the Methodist mission is also useful to our understanding on the role of mission schools in evangelism: “Our business is not merely to educate, we have a far greater and bigger task to perform. Our supreme task is, by God’s help, to get the thousands of young people in our schools and boarding schools into a vital relationship and contact with God through Jesus Christ, so that they may be men and women of solid, sterling character, who will go out and fill their places in the world, and be a blessing to mankind and a glory to God. In so far as we succeed in achieving this end, is the educational policy of the mission justified” (Wong Hoon Hee (ed.), Memoirs of the Late Rev. Goh Hoon Keng (Singapore), p.99. cited in Sng, p. 152.).

Though mission schools may be a means to fulfill the church’s evangelistic mandate, we should neither forget nor neglect the need for direct evangelism. I think the bible’s teaching is still on the power of the gospel unto salvation for those who hears it. The Catholics in Singapore have more schools than the Protestants, but I don’t think their percentage increase in numbers is not more than the Protestants.

20th Century Church Growth

Western missionary impulse and initiative led to the founding of several more denominational churches. The Seventh-day Adventists (I do not consider it a Christian church!) came in 1908. The Assemblies of God (1933), Salvation Army (1935), Southern Baptists (1950), United Lutheran Church of America (1952), and Church of Christ (1956).

The Assemblies of God

The Assembly of God Churches include Berean Assembly of God, Bethany Christian Centre, Bethel Assembly of God Church, Calvary Assembly of God Church, Emmanuel Assembly of God, Elim Church Assembly of God, Eternal Life Assembly, Evangel Assembly of God, Faith Assembly of God Church, Grace Assembly of God Church, Harvester Assembly of God Church, Herald Assembly of God Church, Living Spring Fellowship, New Life Church, Smyrna Assembly, The Harvester Force, Trinity Christian Centre, and Victory Family Centre.

Baptist Churches- Southern Baptists (1950)

In the outlining of the history of the Presbyterian Church in Sinagpore, I noted that for a period of time, Teochew-speaking Baptists worshipped together with the Teochew-speaking Presbyterians at the Tekka Church (our present Singapore Life Church). The Sunday services were combined as both parties do not have many members then. For the Teochew-speaking Baptists, their lack of effective leadership prevented them with organizing themselves into a church. To me, I think God sometimes use our lack of resources to unite us together. When we have too much resources, we think of spliting!! One should also not forget that TTC was also “birthed” in the prisons of Changi, during times of great desperation and anguish.

In 1937, these Teochew-speaking Baptists (30 of them) left Tekka Church to form the Oversea-Chinese (Swatow) Baptist Church of Singapore. In 1955, the church moved and came to be known as the Thomson Rd Baptist Church. In 1949, the Kay Poh Baptist Church, then known as the Oversea-Chinese (Cantonese) Baptist Church of Singapore, was formed.

The Baptist Churches in Singapore include Abundant Life Baptist Church, Acts Baptist Church, Agape Baptist Church, Community of Praise Baptist Church, Covenant Community Baptist Church, Calvary Baptist Church, Life Baptist Church, Faith Community Baptist Church, Gospel Baptist Church, Grace Baptist Church, Kay Poh Baptist Church, International Baptist Church, Leng Kwang Baptist Church, Maranatha Baptist Church, New Life Baptist Church, Queenstown Baptist Church, Redeemer Baptist Church.

The Lutheran Church in Singapore

Of the 4 denominations, the Lutherans only came in the late 1950s. In the late 1950s, Lutheran missionaries from America started work that led to the formation of the Lutheran Church in Malaysia and Singapore. However, since the early 1900s, there have been Lutheran Christians in Singapore and Malaya. They were members of the Tamil Evangelical Lutheran Church (TELC). In August 1996, the Lutheran Church in Singapore (LCS) was gazetted as an independent national church. Its doctrinal statement is(http://www.lutheran.org.sg/background.htm):

We confess Jesus Christ as Lord of the Church and acknowledge the Holy Scriptures as the norm for faith and life. We believe in the scriptural principle of the priesthood of all believers. As such, we encourage all our members to participate in the various works of the Church, through local congregations and central committees. The main objectives of the Lutheran Church in Singapore are:

· To proclaim the Gospel to all people in Singapore
· To participate in world wide mission
· To gather into fellowship & nurture those believers who respond in faith to the Gospel

The Lutheran Church of Our Redeemer (LCOR) ) (at Duke’s Rd) is the first Lutheran Church in Singapore. It has a unique history in establishing a multi-racial, multi-lingual, multi-ethnic Church in Singapore. It was formed when the Tamils, Bataks, Chinese and Europeans came together to form the first Lutheran Church in Singapore. These groups brought with them rich cultural backgrounds, which enable one to learn and respect the other in the family of God.

The Lutheran Conference transpired from the efforts of Dr Anspach, an American Lutheran missionary working in Malaya. This comprised of representatives from the various Lutheran groups in Malaya (TELC, HKBP and United Lutheran Church Mission). The LCOR was a project from the Lutheran Conference. All the groups expressed a desire for inter-Lutheran co-operation and Singapore was chosen as the natural place for this type of co-operation to begin.

The conference saw a bright future for the growth of a Lutheran Church with the presence of Tamil Lutherans and HKBP members in Singapore. The three groups could share the land and building. On 6 March 1960, pastor John R. Nelson, then President of the Lutheran Conference, dedicated the Church. The name chosen for the Church, The Lutheran Church of Our Redeemer signifies the common faith in Christ who redeems our differences so as to make people free to serve the Lord and fulfil His mission on earth. (source: http://www.lcor.org.sg/oldsite/aboutus.html)

The Bishop of the Lutheran Church in Singapore is Rev John Tan. The Lutherans currently worshipped at several locations in Singapore, namely the Bedok Lutheran Church, Jurong Christian Church, Lutheran Church Of Our Redeemer, Mas Kuning Lutheran Church, Queenstown Lutheran Church, Yishun Christian Church (Lutheran), and the Thai Good News Center (http://www.lutheran.org.sg/worship.htm).

The Brethen Church

In the list of local churches with a history of more than 100 years, there is also the Brethen Church. The origin of the Brethren churches in Singapore is the Plymouth Brethren (also called the Open Brethren. They are also those who brought us dispensationalism), not the German Brethren (the Anabaptists). These two groups are not related to each other. The German Brethren movement was founded by Alexander Mack (1679-1735) and seven other German believers in Schwarzenau, Germany, in 1708], which celebrated its 140th years of “Bethesda legacy” a few years back (I think it is 2004). The first Christian Brethren congregation was formed by the English merchant Philip Robinson in 1864. From the history of the Brethen Church in Singapore, we can see that God do not only work through missionary agencies. The bible tell us that people can bring the gospel with them wherever they went and found churches (see the example of the Antioch church in Acts 11:19). In 1857, Philip Robinson (born in England but migrated to Australia when he was 19) came to Sinagpore and found employment as an assistant in a commercial firm. One of Singaporean’s favourite shopping outlet Robinson, was founded by Philip Robinson. Philip Robinson’s brethren upbringing led him to start the Brethen movement in Sinagpore in 1864. On 3 July 1864, the first Brethen Service was started in a rented room at 108 Bencoolen Street! On Sept 1866, a new meeting place with a seating capacity of 60 (which later increased to 150 through the addition of an extension) was built at 77 Bras Basah Rd. It was known as the Bethsda Chapel [which later become known as the Bethsda Gospel Hall]. The Chinese Gospel Hall was formed when See Boo and Rev. A. Grant left the Presbyterian mission to join the Brethren. Both of them were fluent in Hokkien. (both belonged to the Presbyterian mission! Rev. W. Jeffrey also resigned to join the Brethen!)

The Brethren believed that baptism must only be for believers and to be carried out by immersion. They believed that as an infant is unable to make a choice to receive Christ into his life, there is therefore no place for infant baptism. Only those who have conscientiously repented of their sins and have placed their trust in Jesus Christ are to be baptized by immersion. This mode is preferred for its parallel imagery to the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This is in contrast to the Presbyterians and Methodists who practice infant baptism and allow baptism either by sprinkling and immersion. As the Brethren see all Christians equal before God, they do not have ordained priests and pastors. This is in contrast to the Presbyterians Methodists who have pastors, and the Anglicans and Methodists who are Episcopal in church polity. The Brethren are committed to missionary work and hold that the Holy Bible is the first authority in matters of faith. AS they believe the revealed and inspired Word of God is a sufficient rule not only for faith but practice, they have framed no written creed. Each assembly (or congregation) is independent of the others in both doctrinal matters and church administration (have their own body of elders and deacons), and yet, in practice, there is a high degree of communication and cooperation between them.

The Brethen Churches, or called the Bethsda Church (Gospel Hall), can be found at Bedok-Tampines, Frankel Estate, Bukit Arang, Ang Mo Kio, Katong, Serangoon, and Bukit Panjang.

After World War Two

Besides Western missionary effort, Asian Christians set up Syrian Christian and Chinese Baptist Churches in the 1930s. After WWII, several largely indigenous denominations were founded: the Bible-Presbyterian Church (1950), the Bible Church (1958), and Christian Nationals’ Evangelism Commission (1960).

The Bible-Presbyterian Church (1950)

The Bible-Presbyterian churches in Singapore includes Bethlehem Bible-Presbyterian Church, Calvary Bible-Presbyterian Church, Cana Bible-Presbyterian Church, Eden Bible-Presbyterian Church, Faith Bible-Presbyterian Church, Galilee Bible-Presbyterian Church, Gethsemane Bible-Presbyterian Church, Grace Bible-Presbyterian Church, Hebron Bible-Presbyterian Church, Life Bible-Presbyterian Church, Maranatha Bible-Presbyterian Church, Mount Carmel Bible-Presbyterian Church, Mount Hermon Bible-Presbyterian Church, Nazareth Bible-Presbyterian Church, New Life Bible-Presbyterian Church and Sembawang Bible-Presbyterian Church, Shalom Bible-Presbyterian Church, Sharon Bible-Presbyterian Church, and Zion Bible-Presbyterian Church.

The Bible-Presbyterian church has seven roots. Here I describe six of the more important ones.

1) French: John Calvin (the 16th Century Reformation) who wrote Institutes of the Christian Religion.
[..... ... .... to be updated!!]

Christian Nationals’ Evangelism Commission (CNEC) (1960)

The CNEC was formed during WWII through the joint efforts of three American businessmen and Dr. N.A. Kepson. These people knew that “the days of Western missionary efforts were probably drawing to a close and that Chinese nationals themselves must be involved with in reaching their own people” (p.212).

The Evangelical Reformed Churches in Singapore (ERCS)

The Evangelical Reformed Churches in Singapore (ERCS) was first established in 1982, though its early years in Singapore can be traced back as early as 1962 by a teacher in a government school (the Monks' Hill Secondary School) by the name of Goh Seng Fong. (Rev. Goh later went on to establish a Baptist church, known as the Emmanuel Baptist Church instead!)The ERCS is in the Dutch Reformed Tradition and uphold the Reformed Standard of the Three Forms of Unity, which comprise the Heidelberg Catechism, the Belgic Confession, and the Canons of Dort. (See http://www.prca.org/singapore.html for a write-up by Pastor Lau Chin Kwee of the history of the ERCS’s history)

As in the history of the various denominations, other denominations’ is inevitably found. For the ERCS, in its early years, we see also early Baptistic influence. We see the Bible-Presbyterian (B-P) Church’s presence. Their pastors were trained at the Far Eastern Bible College (FEBC). The Protestant Reformed Churches (PRC) in the US rendered help to Gospel Literature and Tract Society (GLTD, ERCS) when it sought help from PRC.

For the ERCS, the Lord's Providence of Church Premises was seen. The Lord was also gracious in providing their two churches with their own church premises. This is indeed a marvel as the two ERCS’s churches has only a combined membership of some 300, and this is within 12 years since the institution of the first Reformed church.

The Pentecostals and Charismatics

1) Faith Community Baptist Church (FCBC)

FCBC was established by Rev Lawrence Khong in 1986. In 1988, it became a cell group church. According to the church’s website (http://www.fcbc.org.sg/fcbc_milestones.asp), the Holy Spirit visited the church powerfully one Sunday in March 1990. The church became sensitive and moved in the things of the Spirit from then. In 1991, TOUCH Equipping Stations System (TESS), the comprehensive training programme was started to provide training for believers as well as pastoral staff. FCBC launched the 1st International Conference on Cell Group Churches (ICCGC). In 1992, FCBC's social welfare arm, TOUCH Community Services, was established to provide community-based services to strengthen the family and develop the individual. In 1993, TOUCHCENTRE, FCBC's first celebration centre with a seating capacity of 1,600 was opened. A year later, in 1994, FCBC had a greater challenge to take the cities for God through strategic-level spiritual warfare. In 1995, Vision 2001 was revealed to FCBC and churches in the Love Singapore movement to see the nation of Singapore know the love and lordship of Jesus. Having been a cell group church for 8 years, in 1996, FCBC mobilised 1,200 of its members into the mission fields for two weeks to model the cell life church in over ten countries. That year, it also celebrated its 10th year of existence and Senior Pastor Lawrence Khong led the first 40-day fast to build stronger relationships and have greater effectiveness in the ministry. In 1997, TOUCH Community Theatre was inaugurated as a second place of celebration, with a direct video link to TOUCHCENTRE. That year, we launched the Love Singapore Fund as the umbrella for churches in Singapore to help those affected by the Asian Economic Crisis. 1999 was a special year for FCBC. In that year, FCBC multiplied tremendously with a 79% increase in cells and some 3,000 conversions. FCBC also participated in the Carlos Annacondia Rally (I do not really agree with the teaching of Carlos Annacondia’s ministry), which witnessed an attendance of 100,000 and some 5,000 salvations and healings.

In the year 2000, FCBC’s Senior Pastor Lawrence Khong was commissioned as an Apostle by Dr Peter Wagner of the International Coalition of Apostles. (In the bible, I find that the office of Apostle is no longer available, but the role of Apostles is still functioning. As such, I do not believe that a pastor should be called an apostle. Though Dr Peter Wagner used to be a professor of theology at Fuller, I believe the bible is our final authority, and not man.) FCBC ventured into the media ministry to reclaim this industry for Jesus Christ. In 2001, FCBC was part of the LoveSingapore churches 7-Wave Harvest. Thousands came to know the Lord. Senior Pastor Lawrence Khong launched an evangelistic magic-musical, Magic of Love, which was attended by 40,000 people. In 2002, FCBC transitions into a Government of 12 (G12) cell church. The G12 movement, founded by Pastor Cesar Castellanos, is a strategy for winning the world through evangelism and discipleship. Senior Pastor Lawrence Khong was commissioned to be a member of Ps Cesar's International G12. In 2003, FCBC successfully transitioned itself into a full-fledged G12 cell church by meeting our target of 1,728 leaders each for our Men and Women networks. We witnessed 943 baptisms in our church services - the largest number in the history of FCBC in any one year. In 2005, FCBC baptized over 900 converts.

2) New Creation Church (NCC)

According to NCC’s website (http://www.newcreation.org.sg/aboutus/history/history.htm), the church had a humble beginning.New Creation Church was founded in 1984 when a small group of young believers in Singapore decided to gather together. Their vision was to start an independent, non-denominational church that is based solely on the unchanging Word of God. From an initial attendance of 25, the church gradually grew to about 150 members by 1990.In June 1990, Joseph Prince, a founding member and pioneer leader of the church, was appointed as the senior pastor. This marked a new beginning for New Creation Church. As Pastor Prince focused on Jesus Christ and His grace, God began to multiply the church. By 1998, the congregation numbered about 3,000.

NCC said that 1998 was the year the Gospel Revolution begins. In 1998, Pastor Prince received a commission from God to preach grace even more radically, without any dilution or compromises. Since then, Pastor Prince has been continually leading the church to rediscover the beauty of the gospel of grace. This gospel revolution led to even more phenomenal numerical growth. God multiplied the church to more than 12,000 members. The people began to experience breakthroughs in the area of finances. Miraculous healings of cancers, tumours, kidney conditions, Aids and much more took place. Testimonies of restored marriages and relationships, and transformed lives also began to pour in.
Even more precious are the countless testimonies of Christians who, set free by God’s grace, have rediscovered a fresh and vibrant love relationship with Jesus Christ our Lord.

Today, New Creation Church holds its services at the Rock Auditorium in Suntec City Mall. Every weekend, long queues would form outside the auditorium before each service. But the ministry of the church extends beyond the walls of the Rock Auditorium. Through the weekly broadcasts of the church services in Uganda, and the sermon CDs and DVDs distributed worldwide, many lives have been touched.

According to the church’s website, “as New Creation Church continues to increase and grow, it seeks to always remain true to its vision — to see Jesus in all the loveliness of His Person and the perfection of His work, and to make Him known through the preaching of the gospel in Singapore and worldwide”.

Evangelical Parachurch organisations

Alongside the churches, several new evangelical parachurch organizations started ministries among students in schools, colleges, and universities, notably the Inter-Varsity Fellowship (IVCF, 1952), Youth for Christ (YFC, 1957), Scripture Union’s Inter-School Christian Fellowship (1958), and Fellowship of Evangelical students (1959). The Graduates’ Christian Fellowship started its witness to professionals in 1955.

Scripture Union Singapore is an inter-denominational organization. It is registered as a society in 1961 and a charity in 1990. It is an autonomous national movement of Scripture Union International which began in Wales, England in 1867. (http://www.su.org.sg/Home/History.cfm )

Theological education

As for the theological education in Singapore, the two main theological college is Trinity theological college (TTC) and Singapore Bible College (SBC). Both are inter-denominational.

(a) The Trinity theological college (TTC)

The Trinity theological college (TTC) was founded at Mount Sophia with the initial support of the Methodist, Presbyterian, and Anglican Churches on 4 Oct 1948. TTC was started so that local men and women could be trained to serve the local church.

(b) Singapore Bible College (SBC)

With the China mainland closed to evangelistic efforts & missionary activities after 1949 (due to Mao Tse Tung’s Communism), the Chinese churches here which had previously depended upon China for their supply of pastors and other workers had their source cut off. According to Bobby Sng in his In His Good Time, a local Chinese Bible school was badly needed. Though the TTC was then already in existence, “the liberal theological position of the Western scholarship failed to inspire much confidence among the more conservative leaders of the Chinese churches” (p.213). In other words, many of the leaders of the Chinese churches then did not trust TTC due to its Western-dominance, more liberal Western leadership, and more liberal theology. There are two main reason for this: (1) Many of the Chinese pastors and Christians came from Fujian Province (& other southern provinces), where Reformed theology had been dominant, so the Chinese churches then were more conservative. (2) The influence of John Sung. His unhappy experience at Union Theological Seminary, where his Christian faith had almost been destroyed, caused him to detest liberal theology. Between 31 August and 15 September 1935, there was 40 meetings at Telok Ayer Methodist Church and all the meetings were packed.

With the cooperation of Rev. Guoh Kok Moh, Rev. Yap Kok Hu, Mr Lim Yao Chang and others (mainly from the Singapore Chinese Inter-Church Union), SBC (then known as the Singapore Theological Seminary) was established in 1952 with 8 students. In the initial stage, the Chinese Nationals’ Evangelism Commission (CNEC) supplied three lecturers and sufficient funds needed for the college. The Overseas Missionary Fellowship cooperated by loaning two couples as teachers. In 1958, the English department was opened. Later, it was renamed Singapore Bible College. “By 1975, 187 students had graduated and the majority was serving God in different parts of Southeast Asia, thus fulfilling the basic aim of CNEC to train nationals to reach their own people.” (Sng, p.213)

For SBC, there seem to be a stronger Presbyterian presence though. This may be due to the larger number of Chinese-speaking congregations in the Presbyterian Church in Singapore. It should be noted that last two moderators (Rev. Tan C.H. & Rev. Phua C.S.) of the local Presbyterian Church are from the Chinese Presbytery. SBC has its 53^rd graduation ceremony on May 2006, so I think it should be about 55 years old. Besides these two “major” seminaries, there are also about 15 others seminaries, such as the East Asia School of Theology (EAST), Far Eastern Bible College (FEBC), BGST, etc. Thus, besides the more ‘mainline’ TTC, we also have several more conservative Bible colleges and seminaries.

Increasing Membership

Over the past hundred years, the both the RC and Protestant churches in Singapore experienced growth in membership. Several Charismatic and Pentecostal churches had significant numerical growth. But, Church membership does not equate to weekly worship attendance. Numerical growth does not equate to real converts! Church growth may not necessarily mean healthy church growth. Church growth is also not more important than church health.

For the established denominational church, may we not fall into dead formalism and unhealthy sectarianism. For the Charismatic and Pentecostal churches, may we not be deceived into believing that numerical growth means a healthy church. Increasingly, we heard of churches who say they want to be like the New Testament church of the bible. They want apostles, prophets, miracles and tongue speaking. However, they seem to have forgotten that the bible have many examples of New Testament churches. Not all are healthy and not all are Christ-like in all areas! May we not just strive for an external similarity, but also an internal Christ-likeness.

The Cost of Building a Church

When the first Armenian Church was built in Singapore in the 1830s, total cost of the building is recorded as 5,058.30 Spanish Dollars. This sounds cheap! …but this is more than 170 years ago! With inflation, a simple church building today in Singapore can easily cost more than 5 million dollars (and this is excluding land cost). Singapore’s most expensive church, the City Harvest Church, was built for $47.6 million (include land purchase and building construction)!

God's faithfulness

In the 19th Century, after the founding of Singapore by Raffles, Protestant and Catholic missions began work among the European residents and then the Asians. The earliest Protestant groups to arrive were the London Missionary Society (LMS), the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, and the Church Missionary Society.

As I look at God's faithfulness in the past 160+ years, we have both seen and experienced God's amazing grace. As the hymn reminds us….

Amazing grace! How sweet the sound That saved a wretch like me!I once was lost, but now am found;Was blind, but now I see. .... Through many dangers, toils and snares,I have already come;....

A book on the Reformers

2006-06-13T13:05:00.000+08:00

I am currently reading K James Stein's book Spiritual Guides for the 21st Century: Faith Stories of the Protestant Reformers (Nashville: Upper Room Books, 2000). This is the first time I'm reading a book by K J. Stein, but I think it was well written. ... ... as I had expected. In the market today, there are so many books on the biographies of Christians who lived before us. So, why did I choose this book. Firstly, I think it is non-academic. Some biographies are like history textbooks, but this is not. The next reason is that it is written by a church historian who has taught in a theological seminary (Garrett-Evanelical TS) for more than thirty years. With his wealth of experience & knowledge, I believe this would be a good book. Thirdly, the important reformers are all covered. There is Martin Luther, Ulrich Zwingli, John Calvin, Menno Simons and Thomas Cranmer. The author begins with an introductory chapter titled "The World into which the Reformation came", which provided the readers with a brief intro to the political-socioeconomic background and cultural changes of the 16th Century. In every chapter on the different reformers, there are also sections on the particular reformer's understanding of the Christian faith and his insight for Christian living. Thus, this is not just a book on the lives of the reformers, but also provided the theology these reformers believed and lived. After every chapter, there is questions for personal or group reflection. This is a feature something not commonly found in other books of Christians biographies. I love biographies (though they may not always be accurate portrayals!!), and when I read this book, as was with John Wesley, I felt my heart strangely warmed.

DVC talk at SAC

2006-06-05T13:21:00.000+08:00

The talk (1 & 2 June) by Dr Ben Witherington had been informative, yet not boring. He has the ability to keep his audience awake through humor. "Matthew, Mark, Luke & John, stick with these and you can't go wrong." What amazes me also is his ablility to preach without any notes. I think he has repeated this talk so many times he has probably memorised the whole thing! ... also, not forgetting that he has written more than a dozen books. In the 2-day talk, Dr Witherington exposed the 7 errors of the Da Vinci Code novel. As a preacher, he is certainly able to captivate the audience. ... btw. ... he looked different from his photograph at the back cover of one of his books.

God's Soverignty & Prayer

2006-05-30T08:31:00.000+08:00

Does our Prayer change God’s mind? A quick response by many would be ‘Yes!’, otherwise why did the Lord tell us to pray. On first thought, this response seems correct & logical, but is it biblical?

According to the bible, it seems that God’s does not change his mind because of our prayer. Prayer is one of the means by which God gets His will done on earth. "Effective prayer is, as John said, asking in God's will (John 15:7, “If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be given you.”). As such, our prayer should be in line with God’s mind. Of course, we don’t know the specifics of God’s mind, but we can always pray “thy will be done” as it is what Jesus had taught us.

As God is not limited by time, it seems that it is also logical to say that our Prayer does not change God’s mind. In his Monologion, Anselm had argued from God’s immutability to his timelessness. Maybe God exists outside time and sees all events simultaneously. Thus, He knows the “future” totally. God does not have the human limitations of knowledge that would require Him to change his mind because of our prayer. Thus, different from Open theism, God does not take a risk in creation. God is not only omnipotent, but also omniscient.

Though God’s does not change his mind because of our prayer, our prayer affects the outcome. This is a mystery and difficult to understand with our fallen reasoning.

If God’s does not change his mind because of our prayer. If God works all things according to the counsel of his will (Ephesians 1:11) and that He is omniscience, then what is the point of praying that anything happen? To this question, I think we need to be reminded that the aim of prayer is not to change God, but to change our mind, change us. Through prayer, we learn to listen to God, to seek God, to change our self-centeredness. In our prayer journey, we learn to persevere.

May 24, 1738- What happened at Aldersgate?

2006-05-25T16:46:00.000+08:00

In the evening I went very unwillingly to a society in Aldersgate Street, where one was reading Luther's preface to the Epistle to the Romans. About a quarter before nine, while the leader was describing the change which God works in the heart through faith in Christ, I felt my heart strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ alone for salvation; and an assurance was given me that He had taken away my sins, even mine, and saved me from the law of sin and death.---- from The Journal of John Wesley, May 24, 1738

This was John Wesley's Aldersgate experience, it happened more than 260 years ago. It was 1738 and John Wesley was at the age of 34. On May 24, 1738, he attended an evening worship service in London which moved him deeply. In his journal, Wesley described this as his "Aldersgate experience". As I reflect on John Wesley's Aldersgate experience, it can be seen that God can use anything, including a preface to change a person's heart. ... truly amazing! To those who say that reading commentary make them fall asleep, I would say that without the Holy Spirit & an interest in the study of God's Word, regardless of what we read, we would fall asleep! ... this is not just a simple change, but a significant one. How significant? It is a turning point in Wesley's life. It was said that he was able to travel 5,000 miles a year, preaching about 15 sermons a week. Wesley's energy was simply amazing. The meetings were attended by thousands. However, Wesley had not been always successful in his preaching. From his journal, we know that his mission trip to America was difficult and discouraging. While he was doing his missionary work in America (which is before his Aldersgate experience), many things didn't go right. ... ... this caused John Wesley to question his faith. John Wesley returned to England discouraged and intending to give up preaching. However, God wasn't going to allow him to give up. In his time of distress, he met Peter Böhler, a member of the German Moravian Brethren, who encourage him to "Preach faith 'til you have it, and then because you have it, you will preach faith."

Indeed, John Wesley did. At his gravestone, we can see these words:

This great light arose
(by the singular providence of God)
to enlighten these nations.
Reader, if thou art constrained
to bless the instrument,
give God the glory.

May God give us strength & determination to serve Him as John Wesley did! ... in whatever walks of life we may be in. To God be the Glory!

Further Reading

Twentieth-Century Interpretations of John Wesley's Aldersgate experience: Coherence or Cofusion? [by Kenneth J Collins]

Spirit and Form in Wesley's theology: A Response to Keefer's "John Wesley: Disciple of Early Christianity" [by Howard A Snyder]

Be Discerning through Knowing History

2006-05-23T09:32:00.000+08:00

"When you see this [The Da Vinci Code] as a historian," I asked Dr. Paul Maier, professor of ancient history at Western Michigan University, "what does that do to you?" "Well, I worry about the truth. I really do," Maier replied. "What happens if a majority of the readers of this novel will believe all the lies that are included in the second half of the book? Will this become the majority opinion? And will those historians who are really seeking the truth be crowded out in the future? Actually, I am far more furious at The Da Vinci Code as a professor of ancient history than I am as a Christian. The church has been attacked for two thousand years now. Well, what's new? But I cannot stand it when universally accepted facts of the past are falsified. This I cannot take." Then he gave the ultimate insult a college professor can offer. "If a student of mine had written something like this," he declared, "I would flunk him!" --- From Exploring the Da Vinci Code: Investigating the Issues Raised by the Book and Movie (Zondervan) by Lee Strobel and Garry Poole

“Can Jesus really be trusted as God incarnate, or was he merely a human pawn in the greatest scam in history?" --- From Lee Strobel, Exploring the Da Vinci Code (Zondervan)

Which came first?- The Bible(Canon) or the Church?

2006-05-15T15:08:00.000+08:00

Do we need opinions/advices (experts'), miracles and/or reasoning to believe in God (hmm..., I'm refering to the one as revealed in the Bible!)? Maybe yes, but they certainly can't make us believe!

“Since for unbelieving men religion seems to stand by opinion alone, they, in order not to believe anything foolishly or lightly, both wish and demand rational proof that Moses and the prophets spoke divinely. But I reply: the testimony of the Spirit is more excellent than all reason. For as God alone is a fit witness of himself in his Word, so also the Word will not find acceptance in men's hearts before it is sealed by the inward testimony of the Spirit. The same Spirit, therefore, who has spoken through the mouths of the prophets must penetrate into our hearts to persuade us that they faithfully proclaimed what had been divinely commanded ... " --John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion 1.7.5.

Thomas Watson also said something similar:

The Scripture is both the breeder and feeder of grace. How is the convert born, but by `the word of truth'? (James 1:18). How doth he grow, but by `the sincere milk of the Word.'? (1 Peter 2:2)

When we had this view of the order of how we believe in mind, it is clear that different from Catholic beliefs, Calvin knew well that the Holy Scripture has its authority from God, not from the church. Rather, the church is itself grounded upon Scripture. Calvin said that, if the Scripture depends on the decision of the Church. then the result would be that:

The truth of God would thus be subjected to the will of man.
It is insulting to the Holy Spirit.
It establishes a tyranny in the Church.
It forms a mass of errors.
It subverts conscience.
It exposes our faith to the scoffs of the profane.

In explaining that the church is itself grounded upon Scripture, Calvin said:

Paul testifies that the Church is "built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets," (Eph. 2: 20.) [The apostles and prophets constituted the foundation of the church since it was through them that
God revealed and established the church. John R. W. Stott in, The Message of Ephesians, said "In practical terms this means that the church is built on the New Testament Scriptures."] If the doctrine of the apostles and prophets is the foundation of the Church, the former must have had its certainty before the latter began to exist. Nor is there any room for the cavil, that though the Church derives her first beginning from thence, it still remains doubtful what writings are to be attributed to the apostles and prophets, until her judgement is interposed. For if the Christian Church was founded at first on the writings of the prophets, and the preaching of the apostles, that doctrine, wheresoever it may be found, was certainly ascertained and sanctioned antecedently to the Church, since, but for this, the Church herself never could have existed. Nothings therefore can be more absurd than the fiction, that the power of judging Scripture is in the Church, and that on her nod its certainty depends. When the Church receives it, and gives it the stamp of her authority, she does not make that authentic which was otherwise doubtful or controverted but, acknowledging it as the truth of God, she, as in duty bounds shows her reverence by an unhesitating assent. As to the question, How shall we be persuaded that it came from God without recurring to a decree of the Church? it is just the same as if it were asked, How shall we learn to distinguish light from darkness, white from black, sweet from bitter? Scripture bears upon the face of it as clear evidence of its truth, as white and black do of their colour, sweet and bitter of their taste. --John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion 1.7.2.

As to the question of "How shall we be persuaded that it came from God without recurring to a decree of the Church?", I think Calvin is saying that the Scripture bears its own authentication.

So, how does God enable us (this is not against our will) to believe in Him? Diagrammatically, I think a simple order would be this:

God ---> God's Word (Scripture) via apostles and prophets [together with the inward testimony of the second person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit]---> We believe ---> Formation/Beginning of a Church community

Rather than:

Apostles' and prophets' word (= God's Word [certainty??]) ---> We believe [on what basis?? No canon yet!!]
---> Formation/Beginning of the Church ---> Verify God's Word (Scripture)!!??

As I try to organise my thoughts (in the above diagram) as to how the Canon is formed, I found it very difficult to do so for the view that the Scripture has its authority from the church.

... ... just some random thoughts!

What is there to argue about?

2006-05-05T22:17:00.000+08:00

The Story …

During the medieval period, many Christians called for simplicity in following the way Jesus taught. Friars Preachers (the Dominicans) squabbled with Friars Minor (the Franciscans) about going barefoot. When Wyclif saw this, he said disparaging that there are more important things to think about in the endeavour to follow Christ. [Wyclif, Sermones, Super Evangelia Dominicalia, Sermo III, ed. J. Loserth (Wyclif Society, London, 1887), vol. I, p. 24 ]

The Question …

Should we go barefoot? On most paintings, Jesus is shown barefoot. One reason maybe that it is a symbol of peace. In ancient times, shoes predominantly served as military equipment. Therefore Isaiah announced that “For every boot of the tramping warrior in battle tumult and every garment rolled in blood will be burned as fuel for the fire.” (Isaiah 9:5, ESV), or as the NLT puts it:

In that day of peace, battle gear will no longer be issued. Never again will uniforms be bloodstained by war. All such equipment will be burned. (Isaiah 9:5)

Jesus had also advised his disciples to go out for preaching the Kingdom of God without taking along shoes (Matthew 10:9-10). In 1999, during Pope John Paul II's visit to India, he paid homage to Mahatma Gandhi, in the place where the Father of Indian independence and herald of non-violence was killed on January 30, 1948, by a Hindu extremist. As tradition requires, John Paul II entered the garden of the mausoleum barefoot. Being ‘barefoot’ has different meaning in different culture and traditions.

… … But can being barefoot prove one is more godly? Before I proceed, I would consider the historical context behind the story first.

The History behind the story

In 1209, a sermon (on Mt 10:9) which Francis heard made such an impression on him that he decided to devote himself wholly to a life of apostolic poverty. Clad in a rough garment, barefoot, and, after the Evangelical precept, without staff or scrip, he began to preach repentance. St. Francis of Assisi founded the First Order Franciscans (also called Mendicants). [The First Order Franciscans is also called the Order of Friars Minor, or the lesser brothers.] These were the men who followed Francis into a life of ministry and preaching. Originally, they were sort of itinerant, living "in the world", and not in stable places such as monasteries. The friars were wandering preachers, they were known as the people's preachers. They lived an ideal of total poverty; they possessed nothing in common or individually. Forbidden to accept money, they lived from day to day by working and begging.

However, when Francis of Assissi died, the vision of Francis also ended. A debate on ‘poverty’ then ensued which involved the whole church. Some tried to continue Francis’s vision, but others were anxious to establish a more formal institutional structure, with the inevitable move towards involvement with property and bids for power. Francis’s ‘Franciscans’ [Today, the Franciscans are classified into 3 orders.] were divided in a bitter feud which drew the church in the West into a ‘poverty controversy’ lasting some generations.

In actual fact, this controversy about poverty which extends through the first three centuries of Franciscan history began in the lifetime of the founder. From the beginning, there were disagreements about the direction the order would take. The Franciscan minister general, Saint Bonaventure, sought a balance between the Conventuals, who wanted to adapt their poverty to the needs of the time, and the Spirituals, who wanted a strict poverty. The quarrel intensified during the 14th century when some of the Spiritual Franciscans, known as the Fraticelli, were condemned (1317-18) by Pope John XXII. Disagreements about the ideal of poverty brought about various splits and divisions in the First Order.

In history of the Franciscan order, we see that those who wanted to keep to the foundational principles of the Franciscan movement, and resist the acquisition of wealth and buildings and the adoption of the institutional structures which seemed to require such possessions, became the outlaws. Those Franciscans who found it convenient to become involved with property became respectable. Those who resisted were labeled as a dangerous fringe movement and ‘excluded’. From Church history, we also know the Benedictines became rich and often corrupt as they acquired more and more property. They ran great estates.

My thought:

1) From the sequence of events in the medieval period, it can be seen that there was a certain inherent tension in all monastic and religious life. Outlaws and outsiders are exactly the people Christ especially encouraged his followers to love. Christ urged his people not to reject strangers and outcasts; the stranger is a guest to be entertained (Matt. 25:35). (See Leviticus 19:10, 19:33-34; Exodus 22: 21-27. Maybe more on this in the future) Today, the very same thing can be seen, when outsiders (non church members), strangers and outcasts (poorer people & people who are not as well-dressed.) enter a church, the reaction that one can observe from church members is that of contempt. To the outsiders, strangers and outcasts, the church members’ expression is often one which says “you are unworthy of my notice”. When they walked past these people, they stare straight into the air. I would say this shows that they despise them. … and this happens even though we are supposedly called to be a witness. If this is how we witness, we need to repent and may God be gracious & forgive us.

So…, in the then medieval Western Europe, rather than being loved, the ‘outcasts for God’ were ‘contained’ in the religious orders. It provided a ‘safe’ and socially respected means of following Christ’s lead without appearing a threat to society by detaching oneself from wealth and a respect for material assets.

2) For the Mendicants, within a generation of their founding at the beginning of the 13^th century, they were already competing for the most prestigious professorships in the new universities and acquiring property and influence, all of these just to be ‘successful’ …!

… It’s no wonder they say good things don’t last. In both church history & contemporary church scene, the pursuit of wealth (prestige & reputation also) is prevalent among some of the church leaders and preachers (past popes, friars, health & wealth gospel preachers, preachers of Word-faith movement, heretics). Many of the church leaders and preachers (church-goers are not excluded also) wanted to be seen as respectable, to be ‘successful’ & to be seen as ‘successful’!! Both & church leaders are not immuned.

The Word-Faith teachers such as Kenneth Hagin, Kenneth Copeland, Paul Crouch, John Avanzini, Robert Tilton, Fred Price, and Benny Hinn (who authored the best selling Christian book in America, "Good Morning, Holy Spirit") are just a few that spew out this theological vomit. This is the group that would seek to convince us that Jesus and His disciples were rich, that to be poor is a sin, to be sick is a sin, and that faith is a creative force that we can use to shape our world just like God supposedly created this world and universe that we live in through His "faith"! However, upon close biblical examination, it could be said that the Word-Faith Theology within the Charismatic Movement has a cultic origin. … … but books by these authors are sold (easily found too!) in Singapore. May God help us not to be misleaded by them.

But, doctrinal errors are not only from the West. In Seoul South Korea, we have Paul Yonggi Cho, the "pastor" of the world's largest Protestant church (Assemblies of God). Similar to the Hagin & Copeland gang, Cho teaches that God promises healing and prosperity for every believer. In fact, he considers this as part of the gospel. The church's web site presents a 'five fold gospel' -- the gospel of regeneration, the gospel of the fullness of the Holy Spirit, the gospel of divine healing, the gospel of blessing, and the gospel of the advent. But to make things worse, Cho’s method is outright occult. His teachings are an idolatrous mix of a little Biblical teaching with a lot of occult healing, prophesying, visualization, sorcery, and pagan mind techniques. Cho teaches that Christians can get anything they want by calling upon the spirit world in the "fourth dimension" and envisioning (visualizing) their felt needs, no matter how crass and gross.

…. Coming back to the question of “What is there to argue about?”, we can see that what we have here is not exactly an argument of whether a Christian can/ should go barefoot. Rather, it is an argument that shows one’s level of contentment & reliance on God’s providance. …. …. if there is one question to be argued, it would be whether we have believed in the wrong gospel. Have we believed false preachers’ twisting of the bible to fulfill our wants (or greed!)?

But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. (2 Peter 2:1, ESV)

How do the different religions view barefoot?

Many religions consider removing shoes as appropriate when approaching holy places. In Exodus, Moses had to take off his shoes before approaching the burning bush. Muslims must be unshod for prayer or to attend services in a mosque. Some Christian churches also practice barefoot pilgrimage traditions. In the Hindu religion, shoes are removed before entering temples. The preference to go barefoot elsewhere in India is in part due to the belief in cows as holy animals. (Source: Wikipedia, Barefoot))

A Biblical viewpoint?

Maybe we can start with the verse which motivated Francis of Assisi to live a different lifestyle. In Matthew 10:10, when Jesus Sends Out the Twelve Apostles, Jesus told them to go barefoot, without a staff.

9) Acquire no gold nor silver nor copper for your belts, 10) no bag for your journey, nor two tunics nor sandals nor a staff, for the laborer deserves his food. (Matthew 10:9-10, ESV)

9) Do not take along any gold or silver or copper in your belts; 10) take no bag for the journey, or extra tunic, or sandals or a staff; for the worker is worth his keep. (Matthew 10:9-10, NIV)

However, in Mark 6:8-9, Jesus told them to wear sandals and carry a staff.

He charged them to take nothing for their journey except a staff—no bread, no bag, no money in their belts— 9 but to wear sandals and not put on two tunics.(Mark 6:8-9)

In comparing these two verses, we see a difference in what to bring along & what not to. In commenting on this verse, D A Carson said: “Do not take along” more likely means “Do not procure” (Acts 1:18; 8:20;22:28). … Matthew’s account forbids “procuring” even sandals or a walking stick (Mk 6:8). Presumably this account assumes that the disciples already had certain things (one cloak, sandals, a walking stick) and probed them from “procuring” anything more. The disciples needed to learn the principle that “the worker is worth his keep” (cf. 1 Cor 9:14; 1 Tim 5:17-18) and to shun luxury while learning to rely on God’s providence through the hospitality of those who would take them in overnight, thus obviating the need for a second cloak. (NIV Bible Commentary Vol. II, Zondervan, p. 48, emphasis in bold is mine)

I don’t think Jesus would mind what we wear on our feet. Being a Spiritual Franciscans (Fraticelli) is useless if we are still proud & thinks we are better than others because of the things we do (or habits we have). What we ‘wear’ on our heart is more important! Do we ‘wear’ a heart which rely on God’s providence? Do we ‘wear’ a heart of compassion (for the lost, for the unevangelised)? What we ‘wear’ on our face is just as important! Do we ‘wear’ a proud face? …Or do we ‘wear’ a expression of joy that shows our belief in the salvation that we have in Christ?

But never mind, if one likes to go barefoot, don’t feel guilty or bad, it actually makes you healthy! Hmm, it seems like Jesus do know a two about Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM).

Makes you healthy!

In certain parts of Singapore, we have reflexology paths. If we walk on them in bare feet, the foot reflexology points of our feet would be stimulated. We will get the same benefits as a reflexology massage. “TCM have long touted the benefits of stimulating certain points along the body that correspond to specific organs or body parts. Foot reflexology is based on this theory. The reflexologists says that the bottom of your foot is covered with points that correspond to various body systems and parts. Massaging these points, either stroking them or applying pressure, releases tension and blockages that prevent the flow of energy and stimulates the circulation of blood. Reflexology also helps crush small "crystals," or deposits of lactic acid, that settle in your feet. Once they are broken up, they can be reabsorbed into the body and the waste can be eliminated by the lymph system.” (Holisticonline.com-Reflexology) So much for TCM!

As for its other benefits, some physicians who espouse natural healing traditions recommend going barefoot as a measure against flat feet, varicose veins, and dorsal pain. They believe that the potential benefits outweigh the potential risks. Currently this issue has not undergone any peer-reviewed study, the standard for a practice to be accepted by the medical establishment.

Be careful though!

However, there are some health issues connected with being barefooted. For example, parasites that can enter the body through the skin or cuts on bare feet. For instance, the intestinal parasite hookworm may infect humans who walk on soil containing hookworm larvae (typically in areas of poor sanitation).

So, should I be barefoot or not … when at beach, playing soccer, … …? So frustrated! … … barefoot & emotions.... the connection? Yes, being bare feet is also a form of expression of our feelings & emotions. In stage performances such as dancing, theatre, and opera, bare feet often express emotions, fears, vulnerability, a down-to-earth attitude, and/or familiarity. It may often alleviate a performer's sense of nervousness or anxiety in such situations, as being barefoot tends to promote physical, and by implication, mental comfort. (Source: Wikipedia, article on barefoot)

… … Just some random thought. So, What is there to argue about? Being bare feet or not, it’s just a matter of choice & preference!

Reference:

Wyclif, Sermones, Super Evangelia Dominicalia, Sermo III, ed. J. Loserth (Wyclif Society, London, 1887).

Biblical Discernment Ministries- On Paul (David) Yonggi Cho

Prayer in the OT

2006-05-04T23:08:00.000+08:00

"The mind and heart of the God are vulnerable to the pleas and the arguments of human creatures"-- Patrick D Miller, They Cried to the Lord: The Form and Theology of Biblical Prayer (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994), p. 126

Does our prayer make God change his mind?
Can our prayer cause a willingness in God to have a change of heart and turn God's anger to compassion?

What about the following bible verses?

Don't they show the trust Abraham had in regard to Sodom and Gomorrah, and of Moses in regard to the covenant people? Didn't God changed his mind because his people prayed?

So the men turned from there and went toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before the LORD. (Genesis 18:22 [Abraham Intercedes for Sodom], ESV)

Then the people cried out to Moses, and Moses prayed to the LORD, and the fire died down. (Numbers 11:2, ESV)

And the people came to Moses and said, "We have sinned, for we have spoken against the LORD and against you. Pray to the LORD, that he take away the serpents from us." So Moses prayed for the people. (Numbers 21:7, ESV)

Most often in the Genesis narratives, people speak to God and God speaks to them in term outside of the confines of liturgical times and places. More formal prayers, in the form of seeking God's guidance, is uttered by Moses during the desert wandering in a special designated tent, but even there it is not the apparatus of sacrificial liturgy that legitimates prayer. Most likely, ancint Israel always retained the notion that God could be called on by the believer, any believer, in prayer (cf. thestory of Hannah's prayer in 1 Samuel 1:1-2:10). Directness and bold speech marked in the Bible the imprecations directed to God.-- Johaanna W.H. van Wijk-Bos, Making Wise the Simple: The Torah in Christian Faith and Practice (Eerdmans, 2005), p. 51.

Since the time of Abraham & Moses, God has been listening to the prayers of his people, he is also doing it now. "outside of the confines of liturgical times and places" shows us that we need not go to a church to pray to God. God is not only in the church. He is ominipresent & he can hear our prayers. The fact that God could be called on by the believer, any believer, in prayer give us comfort. We know that in times of distress, even when there is no one to pray for us, God is always there & He hears us.He is always there & He is willing to listen. We can always be assured. Amen!

Possession-Self Identity

2006-05-01T15:26:00.000+08:00

A Poll was recently conducted at the Channel News Asia website. The question asked was:

I would much rather pay more and buy a known brand because:

I need the after-sales service
I believe the product would be of better quality
I find the design and specifications are much better
I am brand conscious and can’t be associated with anything unknown

I voted (I believe the product would be of better quality) & viewed the result. I was surprised that the number of respondents who say they are brand conscious and can’t be associated with anything unknown is so low. So, I checked on the result again two days later. There were not much differences. In fact, there was a drop of 1% in the number of respondents who say they are brand conscious and can’t be associated with anything unknown is so low. Maybe the ones who visit the Channel News Asia website are not so brand conscious. We are smarter. … more concern about the design and specifications, after-sales service and the quality of the product. Hehe …Those who are brand conscious are too busy with finding money for their ‘wants’ that they have no time for concern on what’s happening around the world or locally. … or maybe they have so much money that they can afford to be always shopping for the newest brand name?!

23 Apr 2006 (6.54pm)

214 polled

I would much rather pay more and buy a known brand because:

I need the after-sales service (25%, 53 respondents)

I believe the product would be of better quality (54%, 115 respondents)

I find the design and specifications are much better (18%, 38 respondents)

I am brand conscious and can’t be associated with anything unknown (4%, 8 respondents)

25 Apr 2006 (8.27am)

248 polled

I would much rather pay more and buy a known brand because:

I need the after-sales service (24%, 60 respondents)

I believe the product would be of better quality (54%, 135 respondents)

I find the design and specifications are much better (18%, 45 respondents)

I am brand conscious and can’t be associated with anything unknown (3%, 8 respondents)

For me, I don’t believe in using brand to create a false self. If we really want to be image-conscious, we should be making sure we are concern about the right image. We should always remember that all humans are made in God’s image, how treat the people around us is thus very important. May the Lord Jesus help us to love those who are unlovable.

Aldersgate Convention 2006

2006-05-01T10:57:00.000+08:00

Methodists will again gather around their Wesleyan heritage this month when the Rev Dr M. Robert Mulholland discusses the topic, “Shaped by the Word”, during the 2006 Aldersgate Convention from May 24 to 27. This service, which is always held on the same date, regardless of when it falls during the week, commemorates the anniversary of John Wesley’s experience of assurance in 1738. Past years' speakers include Rev Dr William Abraham, Dr Ajith Fernando, and Dr Thomas Oden. For the past years, I have been attending these talks, the attendance was not very good though. Maybe the publicity was no good. Maybe some of the speakers were too 'chim' (difficult to understand). Maybe it's the location (I find it a little inconvenient) ... ... or maybe Methodist are just not interested. ...hope this is not so. Maybe it was the language barrier. ... considering that Chinese-speaking congregations make up about a third of the total Methodist membership. But the attendance for lat year's Aldersgate Service was not bad. It was held at FM church. ... maybe it was the location after all. But I do had to admit some (portions) of the talks were a little too 'chim' (dificult to understand). For the one by Rev Dr William Abraham, I had to listen real hard to understand. Maybe I wasn't smart enough, sigh...! ... ... but I think it was his accent. In comparison, Ajith Fernando was easier to understand. As for Dr Thomas Oden, I tried to pay attention as I wanted to know how an evangelical theologian who teaches at a liberal United Methodist seminary would be different in his preaching. Not to be left out is, of course, the Bishop Dr Robert Solomon who preaches with conviction and passion. These speakers have greatly enriched and given me a different perspective to my understanding of the christian life and scripture. I pray that more would be able to come for these evening talks. This year, the topic is on “The Word”. From the brochure, it sounds really interseting. Lately, I have been thinking on the issues of biblical inerrancy, divine inspiration, preservation of scripture, ..., hope this series of talks would give me some food for thought.

Aldersgate Convention 2006

This year's Aldersgate Service will now be held at Barker Road Methodist Church, ACS (Barker Road). The Rev Dr Mulholland will preach at the May 24 service beginning at 7.45 pm.

Three Evening Talks

In addition to preaching at the Aldersgate Service, the Rev Dr Mulholland will deliver three evening public talks, also at Barker Road Methodist Church, on May 25, 26 and 27. Each talk will begin at 7.45 pm.

A leading exponent of “biblical spirituality”, he will offer a series of presentations on “The Word” for the evening talks. The talk on May 25 entitled “The Word: Became Text” explores how the church understands Scripture. God’s Word became text in a way that corresponds to the affirmation that the Word became flesh in Jesus Christ.

This is important to understand, according to the Rev Dr Mulholland, in light of the prevalent Enlightenment and postmodern ideas. There is an objective quality about the reading and hearing of the Word, not just some private, subjective experience open to anyone’s interpretation. As Christians, we do not merely read Scripture. It speaks to us.

The presentation on May 26, “The Word: A Place of Transforming Encounter with God”, will explore how Scripture is a place in which people can meet God in powerful, new and transforming ways. The Rev Dr Mulholland believes that one of the principal roles of Scripture is to destroy or “deconstruct” our "conventional worlds” of perceptions, meanings and values, and summon us into a radically alternative “world”. In other words, the Word sometimes confronts us in those areas that need to change.

The last of the three evening talks on May 27, “The Word: Becomes Flesh in Us”, probes the “incarnational dimension” of Scripture. Christians do not just read and study Scripture, but embody its meaning in their lives.

Besides sound biblical teaching, the evening talks will include choir music and congregational singing, as well as opportunities for questions and answers.

The Rev Dr Mulholland, a United Methodist minister, is a professor at Asbury Theological Seminary in Kentucky.

Christianity Explored: Sign up now

AS PART of Aldersgate Convention 2006, a full-day seminar will be held on May 27 for those interested in leading the evangelistic course, Christianity Explored, in their churches.

The seminar will be held at Sophia Blackmore Hall on the 6th floor of Methodist Centre in Barker Road from 9 am to 4 pm. The Rev Rico Tice, an Associate Minister at All Souls Church in London who developed the course, and Mr Barry Cooper are the presenters.

Christianity Explored is a 10-week programme developed by All Souls Church in London. It is similar to the Alpha Course.

The course is being introduced to local Methodist churches. The DISCIPLE Agency of The Methodist Church in Singapore is working with the London course project team to finalise the launch of the programme.

The registration fee for the seminar is $65 per person. Groups of 10 will be accorded the special fee of $50 per person. The fee includes lunch, tea, and handouts.

Registration forms are available online at www.methodist.org.sg

'Christianity Explored' materials are available at SKS Warehouse.

Getting the facts right to decode the Da Vinci’s Code

2006-04-28T22:36:00.000+08:00

Dr. James L. Garlow, the coauthor of Cracking Da Vinci’s Code (has sold more than a third of a million copies), has written another very useful book refuting the Da Vinci Code. James L. Garlow's new book The Da Vinci Codebreaker: An Easy-to-Use Fact Checker (Bethany, 2006) serves as an easy-to-use fact checker which provide answers to the questions readers most often ask about The Da Vinci Code. Historically and theologically correct explanations are given for the more than 500 entries that include terms, concepts, people, locations, and events. As the book has entries arranged alphabetically, it works like a dictionary, and I think this would make it a useful reference, in case we ourselves get confused by all the facts. I think this book is a must for thoughtful readers who seek more information about the claims of the novel and Ron Howard's upcoming film. The book clearly states where in the Da Vinci’s Code Dan Brown make his dubious claims for every entry, so I think we would probably understand Dan Brown's Da Vinci’s Code better with this book in hand. ... maybe even better than those who read the book more than once! Dan Brown's Da Vinci’s Code may be just 'a cheap, skillfully constructed entertainment that is simulatenously a bitterly biased, utterly irresponsible slander of Christian tradition. ' (in the words of Michael Medved who endorsed Garlow's new book) But, when we remember that Dan Brown's claims undermine the foundation of our faith (the doctrine of the Trinity), should we still be sitting around? Or should we be doing something? If Jesus is not divine, then He could not have paid for our sins and our faith is in vain. However, if we look around, there are too many Christians who just sit back and simply don't feel nothing. We lack the the fervour the Muslims have for their faith. I am sometimes simply amazed by this calmness of Christians. When others criticise us, I believe we often get angry, and this is because we feel they are making untrue & unfair remarks. Yet, when non-Christians criticise the bible, or criticise the foundations of our faith, we are able to remain so calm. What does this show? Are we not sure of what we believe? Are we just disinterested in all things 'that is religion' and have the 'if they don't believe in Christ, that's their business' mentality'? As a recent sermon by Rev Stephen Tong “What Do We Fight For?” correctly portrays,

Christians have the habit of putting their theology in the fridge. When Mohamed was made fun of, Muslims produced social upheaval in many countries around the world. When Jesus Christ is made fun of, Christians produced another book. When we lose our fighting spirit, all knowledge becomes cold. We need to defreeze it and be set on fire again. Reformed theology is reformed theology. Movement is movement. Yet now churches only fight among themselves and do not declare war against Satan.

Very often, we have failed to ask ourselves "Why do we believe what we believe?". Dan Brown's Da Vinci’s Code can be a "危机" (crisis) to the historic faith of Christianity (though I think this is impossible, since God is in control of everything! ), but as the Chinese saying goes, "危机就是时机" (a time of crisis is also a time of opportunity). But we need to be quick, as "时机" (opportunities) don't last forever. Be quick for evangelism. Even if we may not have the opprtunities to use the DVC to lead people to faith, Garlow's new book The Da Vinci Codebreaker would also serve as an interesting 1000 bible facts type of book. It is an good opportunity of learning in areas of Arts (exploring Leonardo Da VInci's paintings such as the 'Madonna of the Rocks'), archaeology (To find out about the Nag Hammadi Documents.), church history (Learning about how the canon of the NT bible was formed. Finding out whether Constantine had the gospels changed & re-written. What really happened at the Council of Nicea?) and theology (Explore the biblical truths in areas of doctrine of scripture, Christology and the Incarnation). May we use this chance to deepen our faith & not be sweep by the postmodernism hidden in the DVC.

Below is an excerpt from James L. Garlow's new book The Da Vinci Codebreaker: An Easy-to-Use Fact Checker.

Holy Grail, The -- Many today consider the Holy Grail to be the cup used by Jesus and his disciples during the Last Supper; some also believe Joseph of Arimathea held the cup to catch the blood from Jesus' side as he died.

In 1170, Frenchman Chretien de Troyes wrote a poem called Perceval, seemingly based on Celtic myths, in which the grail is simply a jeweled dish. As the story was retold and rewritten, a distinctive theme emerged. Before the twelfth century, there were no legends about the grail; by the thirteenth century the tale had become intertwined with Arthurian legends, the characters from Chretien's story developed into supposed historical figures from the Gospels, and the grail had become the Holy Grail.

The Da Vinci Code's Leigh Teabing says that the French word for "Holy Grail," Sangreal, is actually an incorrect rendering of the words Sang Real, which would mean "Royal Blood." This idea is based on a suggestion made in Holy Blood, Holy Grail that at one point the word may have been miscopied and divided in the wrong place; the writers admit this is an unlikely possibility.

The pieces begin to fall into place for The Da Vinci Code characters once they begin to consider ancient pagan symbols for females (chalice) and males (blade). However, there is no historical evidence to connect the ancient chalice and the Holy Grail, since the grail's concept can only be traced back as far as the twelfth century (DVC, 162, 238, 250). See also Holy Blood, Holy Grail.

Age of Pisces, The -- Greek, fish; since from ancient times the fish has been used as a Christian symbol, some see the arrival of the Aquarian Age as signaling the passing of Christianity. The Da Vinci Code describes the current Piscean Age as one of passivity--accordingly, Dan Brown says, people have been easily controlled by the Roman Catholic Church for the past two thousand years (DVC, 267). See also Age of Aquarius; astrology; zodiac.

Mary Magdalene -- According to the New Testament, Mary Magdalene was a disciple of Jesus from whom he cast "seven demons"; she followed him throughout his ministry, witnessed the crucifixion, and, with two other female disciples, discovered the empty tomb. Mary was probably from Magdala, a village on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee.

The Da Vinci Code alleges that the New Testament excludes an important fact: "The marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene is part of the historical record" (245). In fact, there is not one scrap of evidence in any first-century record that implies a sexual or marital relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Additionally, even if Jesus had married--again, a proposition for which there is no reliable evidence--it wouldn't be disastrous for Christian faith (as Dan Brown implies), for the Scriptures neither affirm nor deny that Jesus was married. In addition to being completely divine, Jesus was completely human (John 1:18; 1 John 4:2); if he'd had children, they would also have been completely human.

The Da Vinci Code notes that Mary Magdalene was not a prostitute: "That unfortunate misconception is the legacy of a smear campaign launched by the early church. The church needed to defame Mary Magdalene to cover up her dangerous secret [i.e., Mary's role as the spouse of Jesus]" (244).

This is partly correct: she was probably not a prostitute. Jesus cast seven demons out of Mary (Luke 8:2), but there is no evidence to suggest she was sexually immoral. At the same time, there is also no evidence to suggest that anyone instituted a "smear campaign" to discredit her. A tradition arose in the third and fourth centuries that she was the sinful woman mentioned in Luke 7:36-50 and, perhaps, the woman caught in adultery in John 7:53-8:11; in 591, Pope Gregory I included this teaching in a sermon. Although such identifications were probably mistaken, they are far from a slander crusade launched to hide a dangerous secret. See also Benjamin, tribe of; Gospel of Philip; Gospel of Mary; marriage, Jewish.

How should We Respond to the Da Vinci Code?

2006-04-26T08:53:00.000+08:00

I was reading Dr Ben Witherington's blog and found his advice on how we can & should respond to the Da Vinci Code very useful. Dr Witherington wrote this blog entry The Da Vinci Code Movie--- Are You Ready to Rumble? two days ago. Here are some of the points:

1) if you are a mature Christian well grounded in your faith and you haven't read the novel and don't really know the issues, then read it.

2) Read as well one or two of the critique books on the novel;

3) Have Sunday school lessons on the issues in the novel--- ranging from, when did the church first believe Jesus was the divine Son of God, to when was the canon formed, to what should we think of Gnosticism, to was Jesus married, and does it matter in terms of Christian doctrine?

4) Have special seminars on these subjects

5) provide congregations with hand outs or guides to read the novel by.

6) Preachers should offer topical messages of relevance on the subject.

7) Get ready for next year-- the sequel novel will be out sometime in 2007.

And if we think the Da VInci Code is not worthy of our attention, he reminds us that:

1) This novel sold 43 million in hardcopy--- a record.
2) the paperback which came out in March has already sold 6 million.
3) in 2004 this novel outsold the Bible in

America

Contentment-Possession-Self Identity

2006-04-25T21:46:00.000+08:00

Recently, a 17-year-old Joe Van Holsbeek was killed on April 12 by two youths after his MP3 player. This lead to a 80,000 demonstrators on Sunday in Brussels. (Read news article: 80,000 march in Brussels to honor youth killed for MP3 player) () Last year, a 15-year-old, Christopher, was killed in Brooklyn during a fight over an iPod. Christopher was with three friends when a group of teenagers (about a dozen) attacked the four boys, beat them and stole their valuables, which included an iPod. During the fight, one of the teenagers stabbed Christopher twice in his chest, killing him. Apart from the iPod, the boys who attacked Christopher and his friends stole tennis shoes and a cell phone. City authorities have noted a rise in subway crime, driven principally by thefts of cell phones and iPods. (Read news article:Steve Jobs calls family of teenager killed for iPod) According to statistics by the Singapore Police Force, Robbery and theft cases involving handphones taken remain a key area of concern for the Police. The number of such cases increased significantly by 1,414 cases, from 3,411 to 4,825 cases in 2005.Handphone crimes increased most notably for theft in dwelling (excluding shop theft) from 832 to 1,119 cases (+287 cases), and for other thefts (from 1,096 to 1,837 cases in 2005). According to the site, the increase in handphone crime may be due to the rise in mobile phone penetration rate in Singapore indicating a larger pool of potential victims. According to the Infocommunications Development Authority (IDA), the handphone penetration rate in Singapore is 97.8% in Dec 2005.

Why do some youths and teenagers of today place so much value on possessions such as MP3 player & the lastest handphone. Is this the result of the consumer culture? Or is it because of the problem of self-identity? Are they using these possessions to define their self-identity? What really define our self-identity? Is it by our possessions such as iPod, the lastest Nokia 3G handphones, number of degrees, income level, brand name, the number of 'successful' children we have, ... ... Having these can be helpful, but are they more of needs or wants?

In the bible, we have the story of Sarah. We know that for a woman to be childless in the Bible was to be ‘barren’ of life - to lack identity. However, God doesn't see it it this way. In the case of Sarah we are told that 'God has kept me from having children' (Gen. 16:2), but we know that God had its time & purpose for doing so. Author Carolyn Custis James had this very well said:

If Sarah had gone to God's family wall, she would have found her portrait hanging alongside her brothers. It had been there all along. If she thought her frame was empty until the day she had a baby, she couldn't have been more mistaken. Sarah was part of God's family, a true daughter—not an in-law?born to bear God's image, born to advance his cause. Her identity as a woman was anchored to God, and nothing could ever take that away from her. She was encircled in his love every bit as much as Abraham, only she was so distracted by her barrenness, she couldn't see how much she mattered to God.

From Lost Women of the Bible: Finding Strength & Significance through Their Stories
by Carolyn Custis James

On the question of Self and Identity, I did a bit of reading up. According to article “Self and Identity in Everyday Life” (the International Society for Self and Identity) by Dr Rick H. Hoyle ),

1. The self is reflexive--it can become the object of its own attention (from various perspectives)--and this reflexiveness underlies many of the activities of the self.
2. Most of our understanding of the world (e.g., other people, things we read or see) is filtered through our understanding of self.

Our 'reflexiveness underlies many of the activities of the self', does this mean that if we give ourselves too much attention, or wanting others to give us attention, we may result in doing some undesirable thing? ... or chasing after our wants rather than our needs. From this writing, it also seems that if we do not understand where our real value lies, our understanding of the world (e.g., other people, things we read or see) can become flawed! I think our understanding of the self needs to have the bible as its foundation. Our value lies in that we are created in his image.(imago Dei). This is a privilege. Non christians may think this view is crazy. ... 'What privilege? Does it make any difference?' they may ask. Yes, it does. Being created in the imago Dei means that our inherent value is firmly established in direct relation to our being created in the image of an absolutely perfect and loving God. God loves us for what we are. God does not love us more because we tithe more, or we are better looking. Moreover, modern psychology has not been very helpful in enabling us to understand what the self is. To quote again from the article “Self and Identity in Everyday Life”, “there are some fundamental things we do not know about the human self”. The effect of the culture on the self cannot be underestimated. Consumer culture is affecting almost everyone. Even the most 'holy' thing of buying a bible is not unaffected. ... If not, why are new editions of the bible appearing so often? We may not kill/steal to get ourselves a MP3 player or the lastest handphone, but many of us are chasing after many more things.... either visible or invisible. However, we know that our self is also much shaped by our experience. Throughout church history, countless individuals had given witness to the joyful experience of living in Christ. Are we also able to do that? A joyful experience/gladness can create a positive self. So..., are we contented with what we have? Or do we think that God is shortchanging us? ...

Talk on Decoding the Da Vinci Code (in Chinese)

2006-04-25T09:32:00.000+08:00

Besides the talk by Dr Christopher Lee (of Singapore Bible College) at Providence Presbyterian Church in May, there is also another talk on decoding the Da Vinci Code (in Chinese) at the Queenstown Chinese Methodist Church (next to Commonwealth MRT Station). This talk is on this Saturday 29/4/06, from 4-6pm. Admission to the talk is also free. The talk is organized by the Chinese Annual Conference of the Methodist Church in Singapore. Details are as follows:

卫理公会华人年议会华语讲座

讲题：解读《达芬奇密码》

讲员：张克复牧师

(金链灵修神学院教务主任)

日期：4月29日(星期六)

地点：卫理公会女皇镇堂

时间：下午4时正至6时正

入场免费

A Godward life results in a happy marriage!

2006-04-24T08:38:00.000+08:00

Numerous studies suggest that couples who frequently pray together are twice as likely as those who pray less often to describe their marriages as being highly romantic. Also, those who practice their religion are less likely to divorce, have higher levels of marital satisfaction, and higher levels of commitment. Having a shared belief system binds you together in the midst of dealing with problems and day-in, day-out living and loving. -- David Arp and Claudia Arp, 10 Great Dates for Empty Nesters (Zondervan)

Who says Chrisitianity is no longer relevant to our everyday life? If we truly live a Godward life (to use the title of John Piper's book), I think everything tends to happen more smoothly, isn't it? Even if it isn't smooth, one would also be able to find strength to mkae it smooth again! ... and the source of this strength is of course non other than our Lord, Jesus Christ. Amen!

The Da Vinci Code-Some thoughts(2)

2006-04-23T21:22:00.000+08:00

Some interesting quotes (from Albert Mohler) to think about concerning the book The Da Vinci Code:

What about the atheists--the rationalist opponents of Christianity? What about the liberal theologians who dismiss the deity of Christ as mythological baggage? They must be greeting The Da Vinci Code with excitement, right? Not hardly. The strange and unsustainable logic of this conspiracy theory has not impressed the skeptics.

The book's thesis requires the reader to believe that virtually every major work of western art includes an embedded code, and that this code is evident all around us if we will just see it. Of course, to pull this off Brown has to see symbols (especially phallic symbols) everywhere. Freud was a rank amateur.

Those who want to believe the heresies of The Da Vinci Code will hold to them tenaciously--whatever the evidence. Clearly, the book attacks the Gospel, but the truth is unshaken.

G. K. Chesterton reminded us that orthodoxy is not only true; it is infinitely more interesting than heresy. It is alive and compelling and life-changing. Heresies come and go by fashion. The truth is unchanged and unchangeable. Caveat Emptor.

Source: Albert Mohler. Deciphering 'The Da Vinci Code' (12 Apr 2006. Orinigally published 29 July 2003)

Da Vinci Code-Talk in Chinese at PPC

2006-04-22T21:40:00.000+08:00

There would be a talk on 'Decoding the Da Vinci Code' in conducted in Chinese this coming May.

Topic: 破解《达文西密码》讲座 [Decoding the Da Vinci Code].

Date (日期)： 6/5/06（Saturday）时间: 7-9pm

Speaker (讲师)：李振群博士 [Dean, SBC School of Theology, Chinese, PhD (Westminster, USA).]

Currently a Lecturer of Singapore Bible College. As Dr Lee specialises in church history & historical theology, I believe he would be able to help us decode the DVC. Having read his 4 volumes《透視二千年》published by 協傳 (2000), I must say Dr Lee is able to make boring(I no longer think so!) church history come alive.

Place (地点)：乌节路长老会 [Providence Presbyterian Church. The Church is conveniently located opposite Dhoby Ghaut MRT station.]

基督徒当如何从正确的角度来回应这本歪曲了基督教信仰却畅销全世界的著作。

公开讲座，免费入场，欢迎参加! [Admission to the talk is free.]

Earth Day: The Earth is the Lord's

2006-04-22T14:35:00.000+08:00

Today is Eath Day. Evangelical Environmental Network (EEN)is encouraging churches to celebrate Creation Sunday (this year, they are suggesting April 23). According to the website, based on the Word of God, we are called to "declare the Lordship of Christ over all creation" (see Col. 1:15-20; Jn 1:1-4; Heb. 1:2-3). We are called to participate by being ministers of Christ's reconciliation (2 Cor. 5:18). Colossians 1:20 proclaims something wonderful and profound - that the blood of our Savior Jesus has not only reconciled us as individuals to God, but has in fact reconciled all of creation to God.

"Creation-care"-A biblical perspective

The Earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof (Psalm 24:1)

15He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 17He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.( Colossians 1:15-20,NIV)

2but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. 3The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.( Hebrews 1:2-3,NIV)

3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4In him was life, and that life was the light of men.( John 1:1-4, NIV)

We should be remindered that the Earth is the Lord's

Col. 1:16b: "all things were created by him (Christ) and for him."

Heb. 1:2: "In these last days He has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe."

I Cor. 10:26: "'The earth is the Lord's, and everything in it.'"

Ps. 24:1: "The earth is the Lord's, and everything in it."

Lev. 25:23 "'The land must not be sold permanently, because the land is mine and you are but aliens and my tenants.'"

Deut. 10:14: "To the LORD your God belong the heavens, even the highest heavens, the earth and everything in it."

I Chron. 29:11-12: "Yours, O LORD, is the greatness and the power and the glory and the majesty and the splendor, for everything in heaven and earth is yours. Yours, O LORD, is the kingdom; you are exalted as head over all. Wealth and honor come from you; you are the ruler of all things. In your hands are strength and power to exalt and give strength to all."

Neh. 9:6: "You alone are the LORD. You made the heavens, even the highest heavens, and all their starry host, the earth and all that is on it, the seas and all that is in them. You give life to everything, and the multitudes of heaven worship you."

Isa. 66:1-2: "This is what the LORD says: 'Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool . . . Has not my hand made all these things, and so they came into being?' declares the LORD."

The Evangelical Environmental Network has also provided a An Evangelical Declaration on the Care of Creation ,which I think is useful to help us think about Christian's responsiblity towards the environment. It begins with a series of reasons why should protect the environment.

As followers of Jesus Christ, committed to the full authority of the Scriptures, and aware of the ways we have degraded creation, we believe that biblical faith is essential to the solution of our ecological problems.

Because we worship and honor the Creator, we seek to cherish and care for the creation.

Because we have sinned, we have failed in our stewardship of creation. Therefore we repent of the way we have polluted, distorted, or destroyed so much of the Creator's work.

Because in Christ God has healed our alienation from God and extended to us the first fruits of the reconciliation of all things, we commit ourselves to working in the power of the Holy Spirit to share the Good News of Christ in word and deed, to work for the reconciliation of all people in Christ, and to extend Christ's healing to suffering creation.

Because we await the time when even the groaning creation will be restored to wholeness, we commit ourselves to work vigorously to protect and heal that creation for the honor and glory of the Creator---whom we know dimly through creation, but meet fully through Scripture and in Christ. We and our children face a growing crisis in the health of the creation in which we are embedded, and through which, by God's grace, we are sustained. Yet we continue to degrade that creation.

Then it goes on to say how biblical Christians can respond.

As followers of Jesus Christ, we believe that the Bible calls us to respond in four ways:

First, God calls us to confess and repent of attitudes which devalue creation, and which twist or ignore biblical revelation to support our misuse of it. Forgetting that "the earth is the Lord's," we have often simply used creation and forgotten our responsibility to care for it.

Second, our actions and attitudes toward the earth need to proceed from the center of our faith, and be rooted in the fullness of God's revelation in Christ and the Scriptures. We resist both ideologies which would presume the Gospel has nothing to do with the care of non-human creation and also ideologies which would reduce the Gospel to nothing more than the care of that creation.

Third, we seek carefully to learn all that the Bible tells us about the Creator, creation, and the human task. In our life and words we declare that full good news for all creation which is still waiting "with eager longing for the revealing of the children of God," (Rom. 8:19).

Fourth, we seek to understand what creation reveals about God's divinity, sustaining presence, and everlasting power, and what creation teaches us of its God-given order and the principles by which it works.

Thus we call on all those who are committed to the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ to affirm the following principles of biblical faith, and to seek ways of living out these principles in our personal lives, our churches, and society.

I think the ending is rather good and sound advice which is worthy of our attention:

We urge individual Christians and churches to be centers of creation's care and renewal, both delighting in creation as God's gift, and enjoying it as God's provision, in ways which sustain and heal the damaged fabric of the creation which God has entrusted to us.

We recall Jesus' words that our lives do not consist in the abundance of our possessions, and therefore we urge followers of Jesus to resist the allure of wastefulness and overconsumption by making personal lifestyle choices that express humility, forbearance, self restraint and frugality.

We call on all Christians to work for godly, just, and sustainable economies which reflect God's sovereign economy and enable men, women and children to flourish along with all the diversity of creation. We recognize that poverty forces people to degrade creation in order to survive; therefore we support the development of just, free economies which empower the poor and create abundance without diminishing creation's bounty.

We commit ourselves to work for responsible public policies which embody the principles of biblical stewardship of creation.

We invite Christians--individuals, congregations and organizations--to join with us in this evangelical declaration on the environment, becoming a covenant people in an ever-widening circle of biblical care for creation.

We call upon Christians to listen to and work with all those who are concerned about the healing of creation, with an eagerness both to learn from them and also to share with them our conviction that the God whom all people sense in creation (Acts 17:27) is known fully only in the Word made flesh in Christ the living God who made and sustains all things.

We make this declaration knowing that until Christ returns to reconcile all things, we are called to be faithful stewards of God's good garden, our earthly home.

Another thing that makes this An Evangelical Declaration on the Care of Creation worthy of our attention is that it is signed by many prominent evangelical theologians/Christians, among which includes Dr. Anthony Campolo (Professor of Sociology, Eastern College), Dr. Cornelius Plantinga (Jr., Author, Dean of the Chapel, Calvin College), Dr. Stanley Hauerwas (Professor, Duke Divinity School), Dr. J. I. Packer (Professor, Regent College), Dr. Raymond C. Ortlund (President, Haven of Rest Radio), Dr. Thomas Oden (Professor, Drew University), Dr. Richard Mouw (President, Fuller Theological Seminary) and Dr. Alister McGrath (Principal, Wycliffe Hall, Oxford University, England).

Caring for the environment is not a difficult thing. For example, recycling just require some efforts from us. Or we can write on both sides of the paper. Copy our sermon notes in the Church bulletin instead of expensive notebooks! Share our books with friends. We don’t need every new edition of the bible on the book store’s shelf. We read books, not collect books. Ultimately we have a choice. We read books, not collect books. When we collect books, the books collect dust! We end up buying more furniture (book shelves), and ahh .… before we know it, the forest is gone!! As mentioned by the EEN, the choice before us is quite similar to the one Moses set before the children of Israel: "Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach ... I have set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction ... Now choose life, so that you and your children may live" (Deut. 30:11, 15, 19b).

Which Word? (4)

2006-04-22T13:24:00.000+08:00

This is a continuation of a series of writing titled "Which Word?", which explores what Dao (Tao) is. My first article on this subject was written more than two months ago (Feb 2006). It started with an exploration of John 1:1-4. With John 1:1-4 as a foundation, I went on to discribe the differences and similarities btw the dao of the bible (as described by John in the opening of his gospel) and the dao of Lao Zi. There, I described Dao's characteristics. My original goal of this blog was to do a systematic study of the bible, starting with studying who Jesus is, or should I say how he can be perceived/understood by the Chinese as it relates to their culture & ancient writings. To stay with the original goal of this blog, I think I shall not venture too far. Lately, I know I have been writing all sorts of entry, like "Chap Cai" (in case one is not familiar with this term, it is a chinese dialect term for mixed vegetable) ...Hmm, not focused enough, but never mind. Today, I am examining John 14:6 to see how it relates to Dao De Jing, Chapter 25.

3) Dao as Truth

Some views see Daoism as insisting that all values have only subjective and relative standards. But, when read carefully and as a whole, Lao Zi’s view is that dao is the single underlying unity of all things.

Man conforms to Earth

Earth conforms to Heaven

Heaven conforms to Dào

Dào conforms to itself. (Dao De Jing, Chapter 25)

人法地，地法天，天法道，道法自然。

3.1) To conform to Dao

Some Comment on the Text: In this text, there is a series of "conforms to". To "conform to" is "to act or be in accord or agreement; comply". The original Chinese "法" has the meaning of 'model after' and 'follow the example of' (仿效，学习), and especially of others' good points. Another English translation has it as:

Humans model themselves on earth,
Earth on heaven,
Heaven on the Way,
And the way on that which is naturally so.

It says 'Heaven conforms to Dào', I think this is true from a biblical standpoint. As it is clearly expressed in The Nicene Creed, God is the The maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible; And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten from the Father before all ages, light from light, true God from True God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father. By Him all things were made." God created the Heaven & the Earth, so in a way we can say that they 'conforms to' God. However, one thing different is that I don't think the Scripture says that humans should model themselves on earth. The reason why Lao Zi says that 'Humans model themselves on earth' is, I suppose, because he proposes a return to the more natural state.

God made humans superior to the rest of creation. For the Muslims, they believe that this means humans have been given everything on earth to care for and look after. Muslims see submission as a way of life. In fact, the very name of their religion, Islam, means “to submit.” For them, religion rules every aspect of life—the food that is eaten, the clothes that are worn, even the time taken for breaks at work. Nearly every phrase uttered regarding future plans begins with “Glory to Allah” and ends with “If Allah wills,” and any activity is interrupted if necessary for the five daily prayers.

So..., what about Christians (bible-beliving ones)? What's our standard? I have several points here (exhaustuve? hmm... i think the main ones should be these):

a) Conform to God's way

We should pay heed to His council and always be ready to change our own ways to conform to His. For instance, in Haggai 1 (NIV), we read:

5 Now this is what the LORD Almighty says: "Give careful thought to your ways. 6 You have planted much, but have harvested little. You eat, but never have enough. You drink, but never have your fill. You put on clothes, but are not warm. You earn wages, only to put them in a purse with holes in it." 7 This is what the LORD Almighty says: "Give careful thought to your ways.

Or as the NASB phrase it, “Consider your ways!”

Consider also Exodus 19:3-6 (NIV) which reads:

3 Then Moses went up to God, and the LORD called to him from the mountain and said, "This is what you are to say to the house of Jacob and what you are to tell the people of Israel: 4 'You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt, and how I carried you on eagles' wings and brought you to myself. 5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, 6 you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.' These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites."

b) Conform to God's Law

but no..., I'm not advocating legalism. In Legalism, one believes that (1) one can use one's free will to earn the favor of God. (2) good works generated with the Spirit's help is what enables them to maintian their salvation. However, we should also not be anti-law. Legalism and antinomianism are two sides of the same coin, they are both errors. A misunderstanding of the doctrine of grace and justification, has (I think) resulted in antinomianism (anti-Law). The Gnostics, in the first centuries of the Christian era, discounted the moral law because they felt it came from the Demiurge, not the true God. (Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 57) We know this is not true, so we shouldn't commit the same mistake again.

c) Conform to God's will

Our values and standards must change to conform to God's kingdom. "What is highly valued among men is detestable in God's sight" (Lk 16:15). In the book of James, after encouraging Christians to submit to God, James gave these comforting words: “Draw near to God and He will draw near to you” (James 4:8).

d) Conform to God's holy character/ image

The bible clearly writes that Sin is anything that does not conform to God's holy character or his righteous commands (as described in the Bible). Since man is made in the personal image of God, man is a moral being whom God has given a responsibility to live in a good and ethical way.We should be holy, set apart for this purpose. What's our response? Do we want to look and live like the world or conform to God's ideal image of us? Is our self-perception based on someone else's opinion of us or God's opinion?

3.2) Why should we conform to the Dao?

All things are measured in the light of conformity with Dào, as it is the truth. Lao Zi sees the Dào as the ultimate standard of truth in all things. Jesus said in the gospel of John, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me”. (John 14:6, NASB) Here, we have the answer why we should conform to Dao. Though Lao Zi acknowledges the Dào as truth, he did not know who Jesus is, but it can be seen from Lao Zi’s writing Dao De Jing that Jesus as the Dao (Word Incarnate) has been acknowledged by we Chinese as the Truth more than 2000 years ago. The only difference is that Lao Zi did not know Jesus was the Dao. The Dào has always been a central concept, something of importance to the Chinese.

Here, Jesus Declares Himself to Be the Way to the Father. The three terms way, truth and life are simply linked together with "and" in the Greek (kai). But the central term is way (道路), because that was the subject of the question (vv. 4-5). Thomas had asked Jesus, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, how do we know the way?" (John 14:4-5, NASB) Jesus is the way (道路), truth（真理） and life（生命）. The second half of the verse John 14:6 speaks of coming to the Father through Jesus. A little confusing, but that's how the Trinity works.

What does being an 'Evangelical' mean?

2006-04-21T11:45:00.000+08:00

What does being an 'Evangelical' mean? This is not a new question. However, considering that "many of evangelicalism's elder statesmen — most notably, the Rev. Billy Graham — are retiring, and a new generation of leaders is vying to define its center" [The New York Times article, "Evangelicals Debate the Meaning of 'Evangelical' "(April 16, 2006)], I think it is time again to rethink & ponder this question.

"vying"? Why should this be so? Why does it matter? Over issues like whether the movement should get involved in the debates over global warming and immigration? Or Whether evangelicalism should be a big tent, open to more divergent views, or a smaller, purer theology?

According to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, evangelicals can be separated into three camps, traditionalist, centrist and modernist.

But as Donald A. Carson pointed out, "There are many people today who call themselves evangelical whom no person would call an evangelical 40 years ago." So, I suppose the categorizing by Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life is just a rough guide to helping us what's happening in evangelicalism.

Maybe, this is why some " vying to define its center" is really needed!! ... so that evangelicalism would remain orthodox!?

After the reading the article, I had this question: Which of the following issues do you think Jesus would be more concerned with? ... for me, I have no answers. It's really hard to decide! Anyone have His email, fax number, mobile phone number?? ... oops, not "mobile phone number", God is suppose to be transcendent.

Climate change (global warming)
Immigration issues
fighting poverty and AIDS (such as in Africa)
Abortion Issues
Gay marriage
The orthodoxy of the "emerging church" movement
Theological liberalism in the mainline Protestant denominations
The cultural separatism of the fundamentalist movement

... though I do not know which above issues Jesus would be more concerned with, I don't think He would be very concerned whether what we call ourselves evangelical, classic Christians or historic orthodox Christians.

Lee Strobel's Exploring the Da Vinci Code

2006-04-19T22:35:00.000+08:00

"The Da Vinci Code-Some thoughtsto help Christians and seekers wrestle with key issues raised by The Da Vinci Code book and movie, gently leading them toward conclusions that are consistent with historic Christianity.

: Investigating the Issues Raised by the Book and Movie (Willow Creek Resources) (Zondervan, 2006)

Description of book: Exploring the Da Vinci Code takes you on a fascinating journey to London, Paris, and California with Lee Strobel and Garry Poole as they investigate the claims made by Dan Brown in his novel, The Da Vinci Code. It provides quick, straightforward answers to the most troubling aspects of the popular novel and major motion picture, which is scheduled to release in theatres May 19, 2006.

This outreach book is designed so readers can give multiple copies to friends, family, coworkers—anyone who may be struggling with the misconceptions fostered by The Da Vinci Code.

By the way, if one is able to form a class to discuss the issues raised by DVC, there is also the "Discussing the Da Vinci Code Curriculum Kit: Examining the Issues Raised by the Book and Movie" (Willow Creek Resources/Includes 4-Session DVD, 4-Session Discussion Guide), Written by: Garry Poole, Lee Strobel. The four sessions in the DVD address the following questions:

1. What Can History Really Tell Us?
2. Can We Trust the Four Gospels?
3. What’s the Role of Women in Christianity?
4. Is Jesus the Son of God?

This DVD-guided small group forum is designed for use with an accompanying discussion guide that includes questions, sidebar information, background material, Bible verses, and relevant quotes. Each session includes interviews with experts and concludes with facilitator Lee Strobel’s perspective.

"Give Dan Brown credit for being one of the most successful novelists of all time, but there is simply no rational reason to believe his book's audacious rewriting of Christianity."-Lee Strobel, Exploring the Da Vinci Code

Miracles(1): Its Meaning & Relevance

2006-04-19T19:45:00.000+08:00

At the FCBC website, I found this write-up at their "Happenings" column Miracles begin with asking.

The column begin with a verse from Matthew 7:7 - 8, "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened." Then it goes on to say that it is "Amazingly simple? Apparently yes." I don't quite get what it is meant by this. Simple to do what? "Apparently yes"to what? Does it mean that God would give us everything we ask for?

The column goes on to say this: "In the book of Acts, God provided the answers whenever the disciples of Christ prayed. From boldness in preaching (4:24) to the baptism of the Holy Spirit (8:15), and from raising the dead (9:40) to the release of Apostle Peter from prison (12:5), the disciples prayed and God answered."

While I believe the account as recorded in Acts, the use of these verses in the book of the Acts to the Apostles to prove God always answer our request is not really appropriate. A greater appreciation of the context and content of these prayers is needed. However, as I read on, it becomes a little clearer. The "Amazingly simple? Apparently yes." refers to reaching out to the multitudes. It is indeed true that "When we realise that all it takes is prayer and intercession, it stirs the little faith that we have within."

This his write-up at their "Happenings" column is actually to ask members of FCBC to tell them that reaching out to the multitudes is not difficult, members should invite 12 people to the Miracle Weekend on 24 and 25 June is just a matter of simply asking.

I agree that inviting people to Church is just a matter of simply asking, but to a "Miracle Weekend"? Does God only work on 24 and 25 June? Of course, FCBC is not alone in this, many other churches in Singapore do this. Many of the traditional mainline denominational churches are 'guilty' of this too. Do we really need miracles to convince non-believers? Doesn’t Romans 1:16 says that the gospel is “the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes”. Can’t the Gospel alone converts people – brings them to faith and repentance? Doesn’t Romans 10:17 says, "So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ." And 1 Peter 1:23-25 says, "You have been born again not of seed which is perishable but imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God. . . . And this is the word which was preached to you." So it is true that we are born of God and converted by means of hearing the powerful word of God, the gospel.

Another article "The call for revival" I read at the Agora Forums wrote this:

God promised the outpouring of His Spirit in the last days. That means to say that, God's Spirit will be more evident in the last days. We will see more and more people, prophesying, sharing their vision, performing healing and miracles etc. When we see these things happening more and more, we can say that the Lord is coming soon and that His work is being increased so that more people will know Him and that His church will be ready for His coming. (emphasis in bold is mine)

A cursory reading of what he wrote seems to make sense, but on a closer reading, there is some problem with it. (I must say that I do agree with him on certain points. ... but whether I agree is not important! If they are biblical, they are biblical.) Yes, we live in the last days. The Bible makes it clear that the last days began when Jesus arrived. "Last Days" refers to the entire period between the first and second advents of our Lord Jesus Christ. If this were the case, we would have been hearing a lot about miracles for the last 2000 years. From Church history, we see that this is not true! Maybe, he's saying that we are living in the latter portion of the last days before our Lord Jesus returns. ... His argument that there would be more miracles is not very convincing.

"When we see these things happening more and more, we can say that the Lord is coming soon and that His work is being increased so that more people will know Him and that His church will be ready for His coming."

This statement disturbs me. Is the work ("more and more people, prophesying, sharing their vision, performing healing and miracles etc.") being increased "so that more people will know Him"? Doesn't we know God by his words alone? Isn’t the Word of God alone enough? Doesn’t Romans 10:17 says that as we hear (or read) it, it is able to develop faith in our hearts, and this it does through the evidence it presents (cf. Jn 20:30-31)? As I read, I found the writer's reasoning not only unsound but also worrying. Does this reflect the general view of Charismatic Christians in Singapore? If so, the problem is not a small one, if one were to consider their numbers. [By the way, big doesn't mean better. If one were to say that the fact that they are bigger churches means that God is blessing them, I would disagree. Many cults are also growing, for example Mormons continues its rapid growth. According to the The Charlotte Observer (February 26, 2005), Mormons are the fastest-growing church in the United States and had rose to No. 4 of the country's top 10 churches, according to annual church membership figures compiled by the National Council of Churches. In fact, Mormons (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) with a membership of 5.5 million, has even overtaken many of the country's mainline Protestant churches in terms of numbers. According to wikipedia,from 1990 to 2001, the Mormons enjoyed a numerical growth of 12.1%. Even the Seventh Day Adventist had a numerical growth of 8.4%. In the same period, Pentecostal/ Charismatics had a numerical growth of 381%. ]

Should it be used as evangelistic tool today?

1) Not simply acts designed to stir wonder in the observers

According to Charles Hodge the systematic theologian, he explained that the word "miracle" comes "from 'miror', 'to wonder', and therefore signifies that which excites wonder (Systematic Theology, Vol I, pg. 617). We know that God has worked supernaturally, but his supernatural workings, which we call miracles, are not simply acts designed to stir wonder in the observers.

2) It can't convince the stubborn and unbelieving

From the Scripture, it can be seen that Miracles are not simply acts of wonder performed to convince the stubborn and unbelieving. It should be remembered that very few conversions are recorded of the many who observed the biblical miracles. Egypt saw Moses lead his people out after the great plagues (Exodus 7:20-21;8:6,17,24; 9:6,10) and the death of the first born. They saw God appear in the pillar and the cloud (Exodus 13:20-22). They saw the Red Sea close in over their powerful army (Exodus 14:21-22, 26-28). Yet Egypt did not repent as a nation and come to a true faith in Jehovah.

Should it be used at rallies? Should it be used to convince non-Christians of God? From the above two points, I think the biblical viewpoint is a "no".

So, why did miracles occur? What is the meaning of miracles? What's its purpose?

If one were to note when each miracle took place in the bible, we can see that in each case(period), there is a clear pattern where God's plan of redemption is advanced significantly, and the truth of it is explained by direct revelation through specific chosen spokesmen sent by God. At those times, miracles were performed to authenticate the human delivering the revelation as a true representative of God.

B. B. Warfield wrote that miracles "... belong to revelation periods, and appear only when God is speaking to His people through accredited messengers, declaring His gracious purposes." (Miracles, p. 25) Geerhardus Vos explains that associated with major events in God's work of redemption, a period of special revelation occurs to explain the event. He points out that such "objective-central acts" are "never entirely left to speak for themselves; they are preceded and followed by word-revelation." (Biblical Theology, pp. 14-15)

In the Gospels, we see that it was not the miracles alone which brought men to faith. It was belief in what our Lord said. In the final analysis, one must respond by faith to the works of our Lord as writted in the four gospels. One must place their faith in the Person of Jesus Christ who came to bear the penalty for our sins and to provide the righteousness which God requires for salvation. Ultimately, it is the condition of our heart that determines our response to Jesus Christ and not the spectacular works which He performed.

In Luke 16:30-31, we read: " 'No, father Abraham,' he said, 'but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.' "He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "

As B. B. Warfield (1851-1921) writes,God does not, "deal with men atomistically, and reveal himself and his will to each individual... this is the mystic's dream. It has not, however, been God's way. He has chosen rather to deal with the race in its entirety." The miracles have a larger purpose than the immediate benefits they may extend to the individuals directly involved (Miracles p. 26). (emphasis in bold is mine)

Does all this mean that God does not perform miraculous things today? Of course not. Miracles still happens today. Dr. Reymond, of Covenant Theological Seminary, writes, "I do not deny that miracles of grace and remarkable answers to prayer occur today. I do however question the occurrence today of what are referred to as genuine miracles of power." (What About Continuing Revelations... P. 43) By "miracles of power", it means the deeds done by God's power over his creation beyond the way he made it to ordinarily operate. In other words, miraculous activity and gifts, as they are being promoted today, have always been the exception and not the general rule. Historically, these signs and wonders as seen in the early church had simply ceased. There were occasional occurrences, but this was not the norm. Even giants of the faith, men like Spurgeon who experienced some phenomenal things, did not believe in the continuation of signs and wonders as they are seen in the NT.

May our Lord grant us a faith which does not rely on what can be seen(miracles), but on Him, Jesus Christ.

References:

Benjamin B. Warfield, Counterfeit Miracles. (London: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1996). pp.326.

Berkhoff, Louis, Systematic Theology. (London, The Banner of Truth Trust, 1971).

Hodge, Charles. Systematic Theology. 3 Vols. Reprint Edition. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993).

Reymond, Robert L. What About Continuing Revelations and Miracles in the Presbyterian Church Today? (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1977).

R. C. Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998).

Ridderbos, H. The Gospel According to Matthew (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987).

Vos, Geerhardus. Biblical Theology - Old and New Testaments. Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1996.