Deconstructing the Monkey

Moving...

2009-08-07T00:52:00.003+08:00

Dear readers,

Thanks for taking the time to read thoughts and ideas that I've scribbled down with my keyboard. This would be my last post on this site. But i'm not saying goodbye to blogging. I'm moving to a site that someone who was kind enough to help me out. I think they call it blog hosting. I'm not a tech person just a simple guy with words and sentences to spare and share. Here is the new site of Deconstructing The Monkey. Hope to see you there!

OT (made simple): Something about Narrative 1

2009-08-04T01:47:00.003+08:00

The bulk of the OT is made up of narratives or in story form (there are alot of sticky issues but lets not go there for the moment haha). But not that it has anything to do with fairy tales for that matter. A working definition for understanding OT narrative would be, stories with a particular intent with a "retelling of historical events of the past that are intended to have meaning and direction for a given people in the present."

As mentioned above, narratives tells about things of the past. One can divide narratives into three parts:

Character: protagonist (primary character), antagonist (conflict bringer), agonist (major character who gets involved in the struggle)
Plot
Plot Resolution

Now moving on to explaining plots, lets gain some perspective in understanding the basic plot of the biblical story.

God created people in his own image and thus they became his image bearers who were given stewardship of the earth which was created for their pleasure.
Enter the enemy, and what he did was made humans conform to his 'image' instead and thus made humans to become God's enemy.
Following this is the long story of redemption of how God rescues his people from the enemies clutches and restores them back to his image and then finally restores them to the new heavens and new earth.

Reading transitions

2009-08-03T22:45:00.005+08:00

I only started reading (books that did not have pictures in them), really reading when i hit 20 and that was after my conversion (they call it) to Christianity (being a follower of Jesus). But i started reading stuff by Benny Hinn, Kenneth Hagin, Roberts Liardon to name a few. I was into all things charismatic. But when i entered bible school, the books there were not unlike any kind of books you could find in bookstores (at least where im from). My lecturers made us read systematic theology and books on OT and NT survey. Being new and just started to reading the space of 4 years, it looked an impossible feat especially with my steady diet of charismatic bent books. But it was really amazing that there was a transition from reading a somewhat dented diet of rash theology to stuff that were of substantial substance. But then it took a while for me to get my hands on stuff by N. T. Wright, Vanhoozer, Richard Hays, Miroslav Volf, Scot McKnight to name a few. Forking out money for these books was the hard part but it was something that was needed (especially in the world of theological studies). But reading theological books take a lot of work (especially for this reader), i'm still trying my best to read through Vanhoozers book (that is sort of the curse if you start reading too late!). I'm wondering if there are people out there who went through some sort of reading transition in their life as well.

A joyful crucible

2009-08-01T12:44:00.006+08:00

Each day begins as a reflection for a disciple, a constant internal wrestling of the will, a reflection of whether following Jesus means a joyful escapade of exiting adventures and lasting fulfillment or a pathway that leads to a crucible path into the scorns of afflictions.

Some say following Jesus changed their lives for the better. Some testify that having Jesus in their life has given then peace in a world raging in havoc. Some say that when they have Jesus, they are blessed materially and that life seems like a steady flow of outpouring blessing that depicts a stream flowing and steering them to paths always filled with green pastures. A life that's void of hardship and pain. After all Christ died instead of them for sins that were supposed to condemn them to the gallows of death. But now, it's all a steady flow of blessing because God ultimately sees us in Jesus.

But is this what following Jesus entails? Does this reflect a theology that is close to what it means to be a disciple of Jesus? I think too much of our teachings stem for the spring of what i mentioned above. Most of our daily inspiration and preconceived ideas are directed to a meaning or passage of blessing that entails bliss forevermore. And because of that we crucify to death the meaning of following Jesus.

I think in my own reflection, in the walk of following Jesus, the best description i can use to describe how it feels on an experience basis is a joyful crucible. It is a parody really. The meshing of joy and pain married together that we do not have enough words to convey meaning to this experience. There is really true joy and peace that one experiences when one meets Jesus and seeks to walk faithfully with him. But another side of the coin is the constant tug of pain that a complicated spheres of life can dent the best disciple to probing questions filled with angst on how to develop a hopeful trust.

That is why the only 'logical' side of understanding life is the obedient outflow of meaningless obedience that would eventually be revealed and vindicated in Jesus in the Resurrection of our bodies. As the experience of getting the tattoo above would depict it is a joyful crucible indeed.

OT: Reading with the modern mind or some other way?

2009-07-30T00:04:00.004+08:00

I'm doing a course on Old Testament survey and we were in a discussion on whether it was possible, using our modern minds to exegete the text scientifically, that is reading the text with modern bearings, that the Israelites were able to cross the Red Sea (i'll not get into details about the Reed sea debate)?

Some scholars contend that the number of Israelites, if there were millions of them, it would be impossible for them to cross the Red sea in the space of hours but it might take a week for them to do so. (Sorry I haven't got the time to cite the references of where i got these facts. I'll probably do explanation when i have free time to spare)

But let me just pose a few questions on this. Should we use modern ways to read some portions or the whole of the Old Testament? Modern as in reading them in the way we read historical books now, where facts are studied and chosen and weighed to determine whether they are real or not.

For the moment though, I lean towards trying to understand the OT in the manner how someone in that particular era understood things. Take for example missionaries who come from developed countries and they work among tribal groups who live in the jungle. If the wanted to communicate Christianity with these people, do you think it necessary for them go tell these people about the original Greek language of a certain word, or talk to these people about science and religion? I think these people would be scratching their heads and wondering what on earth these missionaries are talking about.

I think it is more rewarding to read an ancient text, not to look too much into how they relate scientifically (although in some cases this is needed), or factually (in the manner of archaeological discoveries). Another way to appreciate the ancient text is also to read them in a way that we try to dig out their theological bearings or meanings. The bible is first and foremost, after all, a book telling us about God and his story.

Scot Mcknight Interview Part 1 & 2

2009-07-24T19:55:00.003+08:00

Another side pluralism in Malaysia

2009-07-24T18:35:00.003+08:00

A blog post that talks about the religious situation in Malaysia. Interesting things to reflect and think about. Follow this link.

Jesus' Return & Hell

2009-07-19T18:29:00.006+08:00

Two blog posts that i found helpful, both written by Klyne Snodgrass on Jesus' return and hell. Here are some exerpts that should whet your appetite.

Jesus and his Return

"...I like N. T. Wright’s recent book Surprised By Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, And the Mission of the Church (HarperOne, 2008), but as with his earlier work Jesus and the Victory of God(Fortress, 1996), his view of Jesus’ eschatological teaching is unsatisfactory. In Surprised By Hope Wright states baldly that during his earthly ministry Jesus said nothing about his return. Did Wright confine himself to the Synoptics—if that were his intent—and ignore Johhn 14:3, 18, and 28?.... "

Jesus and Hell

"...My concern is to stress that we know far less from Scripture about "hell" than most Christians think. If asked if I believe in hell, I often respond that I believe in gehenna. Most NT writers never mention "hell" or even have much on judgment by fire. All of us know what the English word "hell" means, but that meaning derives from medieval sources (and Greco-Roman ideas) more than Scripture..."

Leadership as Embodying

2009-07-18T19:05:00.002+08:00

Some reflections amidst my exilic period...

I've been reading Christopher J. H. Wright's book "Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament" and it's contents has been cluttering in my mind for the last few weeks. Especially in the area of Jesus embodying God's vision for Israel. C. J. H. Wright is one of my favorite authors (along with another Wright, with the initials N. T.). Along with N. T. Wright, he also gives us a Jesus who embodied God's vision for Israel. As God's chosen messiah, Jesus did not just hold office, but became an encapsulated version of Israel, with the task of fulfilling God's call and will for the nation chosen by him. Jesus did not simply explained the kingdom in a sense but he went a step further, living what the kingdom of God required. In that way he became the obedient son whereas the called nation failed to do so. Because he was to embody Israel in being the obedient son, he also became their embodied sacrifice.

I could go on and on with this but let me just stop at that point and divert our thoughts to leadership. Reflecting on this, leadership is in a way a call to embodiment. Embodiment in a sense that the leader becomes what God desires for the church. Leaders, have to encapsulate the vision of God for the community. It is only then that the church with the picture of God's vision incarnated in the life and thoughts of the leader able to grasp God's will and ways.

This is not to mean that the leader becomes like Jesus, in a way that he is above reproach and everything he does is God's will. No, not at all. It is actually telling the leader the call upon his life and the kind of responsibility that is placed upon him; being obedient to God in serving the Church in mediating the vision.

These are at best fragmented thoughts and not a full blown description of what I'm thinking. I would appreciate comments that would help harness where i might lack clarity or erred. But the idea that Leadership is embodiment still stands and i hope to build on this in the future.

5 Views on the Historical Jesus

2009-07-18T18:47:00.004+08:00

I was alerted by Nijay K Gustapa upon reading his blog on this upcoming book from IVP entitled "The Historical Jesus: 5 Views". The list of scholars include Robert Price, John Dominic Crossan, Luke Timothy Johnson, James D. G. Dunn and Darrell Bock. This book will definately make it's way to my book shelf when it come out!

A quote from N. T. Wright

2009-07-17T02:02:00.003+08:00

I heard Bishop N. T. Wright make this statement about doctrines

"Doctrines often function as portable stories..."

Doctrines are important but they don't tell us the whole story. They function as portable stories which we unpack from our suitcase (some of these ideas are expressions of stuff Wright said) that tells fragments of the whole. In the way Scot McKnight would explain it 'wiki-stories'. They are condensed 'statements' that compliment the whole.

Reflections on being Exiled

2009-07-11T16:04:00.002+08:00

The year has not ended but there is a resounding theme that keeps banging on the doors of my thoughts, mainly the turmoil of being to some extent exiled. I think it is a resounding theme that I keep on going through and one that I seek on reflecting on constantly in many days to come. But one thing is constant when all seems lost, the hopeful expectation of an exodus.

I find that ministry and theological life in shifting Malaysia, with the parody of old school mentality combined with some western thought patters makes the journey a bumpy one at best. Some parts of Malaysia are clearly premodern in their thought patters and some parts are modern in their thought patterns. The irony is some theological students or fulltime workers do not understand these tensions. Many are still working out their sermons, teaching, ministry patterns on worn out methods (not that there is an ideal method) or doing things based on tradition (how things have always been done). Not many see the need of contextualizing their theological training or biblical preaching and teaching.

Because of this ministry and theological way of communicating becomes static to those who have no background on these issues. Now is the minister is not sensitive to this, it does not matter how biblically based your teaching might be, you stand to lose a whole generation.

I think this is the kind of thing that goes around the mind of someone in exile. A parody of anguish and hope.

What do you think of expository preaching

2009-07-03T22:58:00.003+08:00

I've been thinking about preaching for the past few days and especially in the best method used when preaching. I hear a lot of talk about the importance about expository preaching and i'm in agreement with all the emphasis on it. The need for the bible to be expounded and the bible to be taught and preached in church is vital, mainly because we do find that most of the stuff taught are mainly one line verses from the bible or sometimes a passage is read but the sermon and points or the topic have nothing to do with the passage read. So to come up with the method of expository preaching is simply great because the message and points are derived from the exposition of the chosen text.

But i do have some minor problems with just strictly sticking on with just expository sermons. One of the reasons being, some passages in the bible are not adequate enough to give meaning to a given topic. The method of expository preaching simply hits a brick wall because it simply has to derive it's points from the passage and when it deviates everything runs havoc. One has to dig in the bible and look for particular passages so that one can arrive at the juncture where a text would fit in adequately giving justice to the topic.

Although I place the above as a minor issue, i'm not at all against expository preaching. For me, we have to use a variety of methods with the intention of presenting biblical preaching as well as a message that is both relevant and understandable. Sort of like messages that Jesus gave. I'm not sure if Jesus gave an expository message to his hearers but what we do find him telling stories and occasionally expounding what we call the OT now. And at times this makes me wonder what method did the apostles use when they preached to the congregation?

So what about you? Do you have any thoughts on expository preaching? Or are there any other ways that a pastor or preacher(teacher) can use for the purpose of preaching?

Sometimes i think

2009-06-18T09:27:00.004+08:00

Sometimes i think, do people really need a spiritual centre in their lives? Because it seems like the bulk of life where people intersect on what's important and real is not really having a spiritual centre. But then the time when one will seek some sort of spiritual centre are through present crisis, mishaps, near death experience or stuff close to the description called 'bad thing happening to people'. It seems to me that the somber reality of coming to grips with thinking about God and spirituality is when we are sucked dry and looking at reality with enlightened eyes. But when all is well we forget the important stuff, when we have everything we feel invincible, when we are rich beyond measure we feel powerful. But all of these are just vain projections of what we think we need. They muffle out an important dimension to our life. Well it's just something i thought about.

What works best for you?

2009-06-17T08:39:00.004+08:00

If you are into blogging I'd like to know what works best for you, pre-written posts and scheduled posts or a daily post? You can read a better description on this matter here.

I have written and published some 200+ posts already but I have not tried doing pre-written and scheduled blog posts fully yet. I've done it a few times (by that mean a couple of times, say less then ten tries) but I haven't gotten the hang of it yet. I go through the writing process of blogging on a more daily approach at the moment. Something comes up in my mind and that somehow is constructed into a post. But for regularity sake, it would not be a good idea to stick to this routine to expand my blog in the long run. Especially when i'll be in seminary soon. So i'll see how blogging works out with studies. Here is to a new beginning!

Work

2009-06-15T10:14:00.003+08:00

Work, according to Ben Witherington on his latest blogpost here, has been largely neglected by theologians in terms of a biblical understanding or a christian approach to it. In the opening line of his post he states that "While you may be amazed at this, it is nonetheless true that when you survey the works of Biblical theology available to us, very seldom does the subject of a theology of work come up."

The common thread of thought that I often hear from Christians is that there is a sense of what is considered work that God ordains and work that is of a secular nature. With this kind of thought infiltrating a lot of the thought patterns of Christians, regular jobs that people are involved in which takes in a large part of their time and life are viewed as unimportant. But of course not all Christians have this mentality but I fear a large majority subscribes to this view of work.

Anyway I hope the link to the post by Ben Witherington is helpful to give some explanation to this. This post is also a sample to a book that Witherington is planning to release on the subject of work. It should be one to look out for!

Books for the Journey

2009-06-11T12:50:00.006+08:00

I need some help in deciding this, so i would value your comments. I'm 95% certain that I'll be attending seminary to pursue my theological studies in the coming weeks. Why 95% you may ask? I still have to turn up for an interview with a seminary representative nextweek so I guess that accounts for the other 5% ammount of 'I might not make it'. But nontheless I'm positive I'll be accepted.

So here is my question. I am a book lover and to part with my books, that's like taking me off life support. Because I wont get the luxury of bringing my collection of books with me, I'm wondering what type of books would be helpful to add in my suitcase if I go? Knowing that you might not know what books I have on my shelf I'll ask the question in a general note, "If you wre packing to another place to study theology and have to decide on the right books for the journey what books would you pack with you based on your book collection?"

Not Even God...when Disappointed

2009-06-11T08:21:00.004+08:00

I keep coming back to the chapter "Bonhoeffer on Disappointment" in a book edited by Brian Rosner entitled "Consolations of Theology". That particular chapter (the one i noted above) is the one that Rosner wrote and it was brilliantly done as he writes how Bonhoeffer dealt with disappointment. I'll probably do a post on that chapter as a whole somewhere in the distant or near future but I'd like to draw our attention on this particular passage from the book.

On a subheading that reads "Popular Strategies" on dealing with disappointment Rosner mentions four ways in which people in general deal with it. The first being 'wallowing in regret' followed by 'seeking to curb desire', the third 'seeking a substitute' and the last being 'giving up hope for the thought of hope in the afterlife'. But as Rosner writes, Bonhoeffer never resorted to these popular ways in dealing with disappointment.

On the third popular startegies on dealing with disappointment, as i mentioned above, Bonhoeffer did not cave in and followed the popular way on dealing with disappointment, in that he did not seek a substitute to find momentary happiness as a consolation for unattained or unfulfilled desire or longings. Rosner writes "Seeking compensation elsewhere when our desires are frustrated also seems logical enough."(116) I find this true of how we ussually deal with disappointment, we might have a compulsion to buy things, fill ourselves with activities that are filled with 'fun', in a temporary way to combat a wounded heart. Read the following exerp from Rosner here which blew me away on what Bonhoeffer thought about this:

"With respect to seperation from love ones, aware of the pain that he may be prolonging, Bonhoeffer nontheless avers: "Some people...find compensation in short-lived pleasures that offer redier satisfactions...When we are forcibly seperated for any considarable length of time from those we love, we simply cannot, as most can, get some cheap substitute through other people- I don't mean because of moral considerations...we have to suffer unspeakably from the seperation, and feel the longing till it almost makes us ill. That is the only way...in which we can preserve unimpaired our relationship with our loved ones." He insists that "nothing can make up for the absence of someone whom we love." Not even God: "It is nonsense to say that God fills the gap; he doesn't fill it, but on the contrary, he keeps it empty and so help us to keep alive our former communion with each other, even in the cost of pain."" (116)

I wrote this in the margins of my book after reading this passage, a spur in the moment kind of thing: This third point embraces pain (longing) to the fullest/ at it's fullest level. There is absolutely no compensation for our longings...in the end they (our longings) become a drive in us (in a way that it pushes us).

What do you think of the exerpt above from the book? Or particularly the statement that said "It is nonsense to say that God fills the gap; he doesn't fill it, but on the contrary, he keeps it empty and so help us to keep alive our former communion with each other, even in the cost of pain."

Thoughts on Keller

2009-06-06T11:05:00.006+08:00

There's an article on Tim Keller and how he started in NYC. Quite an interesting read and because of that it made me think as well as gave a spark of excitement and enthusiasm inside me. An enthusiasm for ministry as well as the vigorous task of plunging into scholarship and the real world. I really respect this pastor, although i'm not so much a fan of the circle he hangs out with (Reformed) but I find Keller to be an ideal representation of what Reformed should be. Well it's just my opinion that is. Oh and he like's Wright's "Resurrection of the Son of God" (that's just an added bonus to why i like this guy, well this may this had something to do with it.) . Let me just direct your attention to two quotes i took from the artile that made me think (quotes are in italics):

Tim found Manhattan non-Christians amazingly, sometimes naïvely, curious. Though the borough's 1.6 million people were used to religious diversity, many had never talked to an evangelical. Tim's interest in art and music was an indispensable gift in communicating. His omnivorous reading also helped. New York is a city of high achievers to whom, Keller says, it made sense that a minister should be a scholar of ancient texts, exposing them to ideas and information beyond their experience. They needed someone who spoke their language, though, and Keller was a quick learner. "I saw New York mentor Tim," Sherman says. "There's something about the density of the city, the way your lives get intertwined with a secular culture."

One of the things that caught my attention here is the zeal to learn as well as being open to stuff people in general are exposed to (music, arts, etc). Pastors in the context that i live in are especially weak in these area. Again let me say that this observation does not apply to all Malaysia but the small place where i call home. So I hope that might avert some offense on my part, hopefully. Pastors here are respected to some degree (in spiritual matters) but that is about it. And pastors are those people who 'abstain' from the secular world. An example of this is those in ministry are 'forbidden' to hear any form of secular music, only the praise and worship kind are acceptable. There were times when books, the Harry Potter series or Twilight series, were publicly denounced by the church and calling for parent not to allow their children read them. There are far worse case scenarios where pastors or those in ministry were only supposed to wear slacks only and no jeans! I'm not sure if this is still ongoing but I think it still applies in some places.

Because of constrains like this pastors are hedged from knowing how to approach the 'secular' world or better how to engage in the world. And with that also the way a pastor might communicate to people might have a negative effect as well. Negative in a sense that people engaged in the world cannot understand terms used by pastors, hence there is a sort of communication breakdown. Because of communication breakdown, teachings and preachings are a dread to people in the pews.

So, what can pastors do to maintain proper communication that connect speak to people? Simply get immersed in culture, get to know what people are into, what people like for that matter. Now I'm not advocating that pastors go watch porn because people are into that. Clearly that is not what i mean! My advice to pastors is don't be too paranoid of things in the world-music, literature, art and other stuff. Learn to be curious and most of all be a learner. If you want people to know anything about the bible, why not you take time to learn the stuff that interest them?

Take Mark Robers who did a post on the Twilight novels that his daughter reads. Take some advice from him. Read it here.

Sherman relates Keller's vision to the apostle Paul. "Paul had this sense of, I really should go talk to Caesar. He's not above caring for Onesimus the slave, but somebody should go to talk to Caesar. When you go to New York, that's what you're doing. Somebody should talk to the editorial committee of The New York Times; somebody should talk to Barnard, to Columbia. Somebody should talk to Wall Street."

Reading this gave some boost of confidence which at times is sadly not evident to pastors or fulltime workers. A lot of pastors tend to be wimpy probably because they are not well versed in things their secular church members who have degrees to prove their credentials. This might be one reason but I think there are other reasons as well. But reading Keller and what he says about apostle Paul really pumped me up. That's the kind of confidance i want to have if i were a pastor or want other pastors here to have.

I have to say that as a student of theology, immersed in my culture, i find the state of embracing ministry fulltime to have a bad effect on my confidance. I see things have to change here and the mentality for that matter simply has to change. Well these are simply some thought that came to me when i read the artile. It lighted up my soul. So my mind is still fresh with it!

Deciding at the crossroads

2009-06-05T12:52:00.004+08:00

Life would turn to some new transition soon in the coming weeks or months it seems and it feels like many things are still left unanswered at the moment. It makes me want to scream with motions of pulling my hair out of my scalp if i could or would. But I'd pass up the opportunity of the hair pulling for now. I still love my hair so I'd leave that to my imagination instead. Right now I need to make some decisions and with any step I would choose to take there would be some kind of sacrifice and losing to be experienced.

At the juncture of uncertainty, how does one know God's will in terms of making decisions? What is God's will and how do we know which is God's will. Some say that we wait and pray and if we have peace on the matter of choosing a path that would be validated as God's will. There might be some truth in this. But others advise to just do something and God will guide. Like something I read from Erwin McManus. There is truth in this way as well.

But i would like to know how do you make decisions and know that if it is God's will for you?

Richard Hays speaks at the Junaluska Peace Conference, February 1, 2008

2009-05-29T18:26:00.002+08:00

The God I Don't Understand- Chapter 1

2009-05-23T18:20:00.003+08:00

Let's begin Chapter 1: The Mystery of Evil of Christopher Wright's book with some thoughts and reflection.

If you're into comics and superheroes, maybe some would agree with me that the first series of Batman movies (those that stared Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer and George Clooney) has to be said as a bad adaptation of a superhero character to the big screen. But come 'Batman Begins', I was totally blown away by the storyline. I especially like how Bruce Wayne evolved into the mysterious Batman. It was one of the ultimate origins story of a superhero adapted to the big screen and with that minimizes the mysterious character that superheroes have.

But as for evil as explained by C.H.Wright in his book, it's origin is somewhat difficult to pin point. I've heard people use texts like Isaiah 14:4-21 and Ezekiel 28:1-17 as reference points to how evil or rather Lucifer's fall from grace came about. On these two texts C.H.Wright says that "they were written originally to describe the defeat and death of historical human kings, and so it is a dubious exercise to build detailed doctrinal statements about the devil or the "underworld" upon them." (40) But although that may be the recurring fact about the two bible passages "they have a spiritual counterpart that is recognizably satanic." (40) For a more clearer description of Satan and his demons read Jude 6, 2 Peter 2:4 and Revelation 12:7-9.

So, what are we to make of trying to understand evil and let alone it's origin to get a better understanding on things? For C.H.Wright, "evil does not make sense. "Sense" is a part of our rationality that in itself is part of God's creation and God's image in us. So evil can have no sense, since sense itself is a good thing." (42) Evil is not something that has any part of anything God created so therefore evil is "an intruder, an alien presence that has made itself almost (but not finally) inextricably "at home"." (42) Because Evil is foreign it makes no sense and should stay at the point of making no sense.

I must admit that I am frustrated with not being able to understand evil and it's origin and especially when C.H.Wright tell us to park at the space where we simply embrace the fact that evil should not be understood and that it simply makes no sense. But I do see the wisdom in taking this slant to making amends to our brains that always seeks understanding.

C.H.Wright goes on to say that "...God...has chosen not to explain the orgin of evil, but rather wants to concentrate my attention on what he has done to defeat and destroy it." (43) But this does not negate our desperate emotions to ask deep and frustrating questions on the mystery of evil. We are all the more encouraged to do so.

Evil will always have the capacity to pry our emotions out in the open but we are to take comfort that we are not meant to understand it but to work with God in trusting what he did and what he is doing to defeat it.

Manglish

2009-05-21T13:39:00.003+08:00

English is a sometimes common language here in Malaysia. I say sometimes because although many Malaysians understand a substantial amount of the language, it has mutated as well. Some have called it 'Manglish'. That is a generalization in the sense of terms I might add because there are various categories of this so called 'Manglish'. It is safe to say that we have borrowed the English language and made it our own. As in what the American Idol judges always applaud those contestants that make the song their own, we Malaysian have done so with language, making English our own, although I'm not sure anyone would rave about it. Anyways here is one version of the 'Manglish' I was talking about.

The God I Don't Understand-Introduction

2009-05-20T20:12:00.004+08:00

I should state that I was drawn by the book because stuff happening in my personal life that makes me echo the title of the book "The God I Don't Understand". But i have to say that I have always been drawn to books that revolve around this type of subject matter, books like "Disappointment with God" come to mind by Yancey. These types of books explore these mysteries and questions that our heart longs in seeking answers to them. We all seek reasonable answers i might add. In bible school, i tried my take on the question but I was way off target, come to think of it. But this question keeps on nagging every time the belief in God is put up front. The question about evil and how God, if he is all good would allow suffering.

I thought I'd try something different with this particular book. After I've read a chapter, I'd blog about it. So some sort of experimentation going on here. I'd probably post something that really gripped me rather than do a blow by blow exposition on a chapter.

Christopher Wright who wrote the book wrote at the end of the introduction part of the book about what he biblical precedent he hopes to archive for this book, and he uses Psalms 73 to explain this. The psalm starts on a positive manner affirming Israel's faith in God (v.1) but moves on to the author's struggle with God's ways of handling things (v.2-14).

In the middle part of the psalm Wright explains that the author does two things. First, he explains that the psalmists although raises perplexing questions he does not go overboard for fear of "betraying God's people" (22). The second, as Wright explains again, the author of the psalm "goes to worship in the house of God with God's people. There, in the context of worship, his perspective is changed and he sees things in the light of God's ultimate will and moral government." Wright further states again that the psalmist "lets us hear both his struggling lack of understanding and his restored, worshiping faith." (23)

The part that caught my attention was when Wright mentions in the middle part of the psalm, namely the first half that is verse 15. This part raises wisdom in how we are supposed to carry out our hard fought questions especially on a public platform; books, blogs, sermons, teaching. Write states that

"There is a proper pastoral limit to the voicing of protest- as God reminded Jeremiah on one occasion (Jer 15:19) and as Isaiah warned his listeners (Isa 45:9-13). I have prayed constantly in working on this book that i may not transgress that limit. I want to explore questions that the bible itself wrestles with, but i want to build up God's people, not betray their faith." (22) (emphasis mine)

I think this does serve as a reminder for us especially in the blogspehere when we are relaying views, not necessarily on evil, suffering and God but on any other subject matter for that sake. But at points though, when i think of the psalms, there are some that push the limit, like the one where the psalmist wants God to dash the heads babies of the Babylonians. But it does make me ask what is a pastoral limit to voicing protest? Protest in a sense that asks God some deep questions on why he is not acting up to who we believe and learn that he is.

Reading through the times

2009-05-20T16:14:00.002+08:00

I went out and bought myself Christopher Wright's new book "The God I Don't Understand" and after reading the introduction and the first chapter of the book, i can safely say that it will be a pleasant read indeed. So I'll be planning a review of the book as soon as I'm done with it. I'm also reading Carl McColman's book entitled "Spirituality: A Postmodern and Interfaith Approach to Cultivating a Relationship with God" and will also come up with a review of the book thanks courtesy of TheOoze Viral Bloggers. Based on what i read, it's a good book as well. I'm still waiting for another book to come.

Trying as much to read as well as reflect on what I'm reading but it's hard when you have other things happening that kind of push you to the edge sometimes. So I hope that would not effect good thoughts and reflections as well as reviews of books that I'm reading. I'm sure i don't wan' to mess those up.

Chunk of (Senti-)Metal (value)

2009-05-17T14:05:00.005+08:00

My girlfriend asked me some few years back, "Is that your briefcase?" To which I replied, "No, that's my laptop!"

I remember my days in bible college and you know when, as a student, we all in some ways struggle with the issue of money. I was in my second year and in need of a computer, and i was desperate. I asked some people in the church whether they could help me to purchase a computer but somehow my plea came unheard. I don't blame them though. But low and behold my bible school principle met up with some former students from the college who were looking to unload their old computers, two laptops to be precise were on the 'for sale' label. I was clearly exited to hear about the news because it was something that I have been praying and waiting for. It was a godsend actually. So I went and got to see the laptops that were being displayed and after a quick look, and check through I decided that this was the laptop for me.

It cost me RM600.00 bucks from money me and my girlfriend collected together. It served me well for 2 and a half years (I think) and finally died out with all my documents and papers that I wrote (typed in this case) lost forever in the now prehistoric hard drive. So here are some cool pictures of the chunk of metal that helped me through college. I have no idea what model this thing was but it sure ain't a briefcase. Both of us had a good laugh after that.

S. F. R. J. (Thoughts & Reflections) Chp 1: Joining Mary at the Feet of Jesus

2009-05-17T00:05:00.006+08:00

Just so you know, the initials S.F.R.J stands for 'Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus'. So the time you see these initials you will know that these particular posts are ongoing discussions, reflections and thoughts on that particular book.

This chapter sets the frame on two Jewish understandings on the use of these sentences ‘sitting at his feet’ as well as ‘anointing’ (in this case Mary anointing Jesus). Using these two examples, the authors are communicating to us the importance of studying Jesus in his Jewish context. It is interesting for them to use Mary to open up the pathway of following this rabbi named Jesus and subsequently framing the depiction of discipleship to Jesus the Messiah in the two sentences I mentioned above.

Take ‘sitting at his feet’ for example:

“If we were first-century visitors, we would have recognized the significance of something else in that story. It was customary for rabbis to sit on low pillows or chairs while they were teaching. Their disciples would sit on the ground or on mats around them. That’s how the phrase “sit at his feet” became and idiom of for learning from a rabbi…So when Mary was described as “sitting at Jesus’ feet”, she was being described as a disciple.” (14)

Without the Jewish understanding of this particular sentence 'sit at his feet' we miss something profound and essential. A simple understanding would just depict Mary as an avid listener or willing to hear Jesus teach. These understandings might be right but coupled with Jewish eyes, the words that were once simplistic and had some sort of mundane imagery turns into a rather enlightened portrayal; discipleship.

...as well as ‘anointing’:
“By anointing him (Jesus) with expensive fragrances, Mary may well have been making a statement about who she believed Jesus was, proclaiming him as Messiah.” (16)

Anointing was clearly framed to Jews on occasions where kings and priest were put into office. It is interesting to observe that the authors link Jesus’ riding the donkey and his anointing in parallel with Solomon’s episode in 1 Kings 1:38-40. It is explained that the fragrance of Jesus being anointed by Mary would have lasted for days and that his fragrance was surely evident wherever he went. Jesus smelled like royalty. (18)

These depictions are fascinating because without cultural background of first-century Judaism, these insights would never have popped up to the imagination. Something that the authors were able to convince us at the beginning of the chapter is that there is a growing need of reading and understanding scripture in the light of its first-century background. Thinking through this chapter arouses my curiosity back again to the gospels and the deconstruction of what we have always thought certain passages meant.

There is a list of the online conversation discussing the book. Click here to see the other blogs that are discussing about the book!

World Class Apologists

2009-05-15T08:00:00.000+08:00

Kevin Vanhoozer Interview

2009-05-15T06:10:00.003+08:00

From the title I think you must have wondered that I interviewed Kevin Vanhoozer. But truth be told, I got this from another blog. Click here to follow the link. Vanhoozer is one of my favorite theologians although i'm still working out on understanding some of the things he is saying. So a tad of appreciation and frustration all jumbled up into one here. If you know some of his writings could you please guide me through some of his books. I started reading "Is there a meaning in this text" a few months back but it's definitely a hard read. I probably need some foundational knowledge to get thorough it for this time being, so if you can help me do tell me something about the book to add enthusiasm to my reading. And according to the interview that particular book, Zondervan will release a 10th anniversary addition with a new introduction by Craig Bloomberg and a 3500-word preface by Professor Vanhoozer! So if you haven't bought the book yet wait for that one to be released. Coming next year as well, two new books by Vanhoozer will be released! Details again from the interview. So a lot to look forward to!

Wright on his 'justification' book

2009-05-09T07:00:00.000+08:00

Gotta love this.

Denominational Red Tapes

2009-05-09T01:05:00.004+08:00

I have a habit of staying awake and depriving myself of sleep. It is clearly something bad but you have to blame modernity for creating things such as light bulbs that extend the role of the sun, mimicking daylight. I blame it also on reading. Sometimes i read too much. Well enough about that. As i was browsing the net and checking on blog updates, I wasn't disappointed in my findings. It got me thinking about denominations and procedures that denominations create in the matter of ordaining ministers.

Read this blog post by Adam Walker on the frustrations of his ordination process. According to the denomination that Adam is applying for his M.Div. from Princeton is not enough and he needs to do a whole years worth of courses to meet the standard requirement for him to get ordained. But to get a clearer picture of the situation, I encourage you to read the post and get a feel of what is happening.

Tony Jones, someone who is known for controversy (Emergent), has issued a petition of ordination for Adam on his blog regarding the whole fiasco. Tony is obviously pissed on what is happening as he states here, "Few things piss me off as much as the sinful bureaucratic systems of denominational Christianity. When rules and regulations trump common sense, then the shark has officially been jumped."

Reading these two blog posts, it does make me wonder whether denominations are actually hindering gifted and called people with the intention to serve the body of Christ their rightful place to minister. Sometimes it does seem like procedures can be a hindrance if there are too many red tapes to follow through to actually ordain someone. But with that on the side, I do understand that there is wisdom to have some sort of guideline or procedure to see if someone is fit for ordination.

I've had my fair share of 'denominational red tape' awhile back and I do have some '2 cent' (trying my best to sound 'humble') experience on this issue at hand. So what do you think, are there pro and cons of denominational procedures such as that is stated in the two blog posts that i linked above?

Dogs, Simplicity and feeling extraordinary

2009-05-08T09:27:00.005+08:00

"A dog has no use for fancy cars, or big homes or designer clothes. A water logged stick would do just fine. A dog didn't care if you're rich or poor or clever or dull, smart or dumb. Give him your heart and it will give you his...

...How many people can you say that about? How many people can make you feel rare and pure and special. How many people can make you feel extraordinary?"

The quote above is taken from the movie "Marley and Me". I hope i got it word for word though. Anyway, the quote above comes at the end of the movie which has a lot of meaning to it. Sometimes we think the best things in life that are worth all of our pursuits are success, riches and a having leverage because we have this great status. There are many other things as well but unlike a dog, it just values simplicity. It values love and attention and some crazy fun with its master of course. So the saying is true, "Give him your heart and it will give you his... ".

What grips me about the quote is when it comes to the last set of sentences. How many people would be capable to give their heart (selfless friendship)? How many are at least willing? How many would be so reckless to do so? "How many people can make you feel extraordinary?"

Out of context

2009-05-08T08:00:00.001+08:00

Hilarious as it may seem there is a lessen to it. The video shows that we can cut anything out and make them conform to our questions or pet theories. This will happen if we take verses without any regards of their context.

Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus (Thoughts & Reflections) Introduction

2009-05-06T17:09:00.001+08:00

Let me begin by thanking Lois Tverberg (co-author of "Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus") for being gracious enough to send me a copy of the book (especially when I'm in Malaysia, that is a considerable great distance from the States!) and giving me the opportunity to blog about it! A special shout out to Kurt as well over at Groans From Within who was thoughtful enough to recommend my blog as a possible reviewer of the book. Do follow his discussion of the book over at his blog:

Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus Intro; Can we find a more Jewish Jesus?
Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus 1; Do You have the 'anointin'?

Today I will start to do a blow by blow reflection as well as some thoughts on each chapter of the book. So if you have the time, join in the conversation. Your comments will be greeted with open arms. If you haven't been following, I have already done a review of the book here on my blog which you can see here.

Thoughts and Reflection

One of the things that has bothered me whenever I read the gospels before was the puzzling effect that it had on my mind. This has been a lifelong (well maybe not lifelong, i just tend to exaggerate sometimes) struggle for me from time to time. I had a hard time reading the Sermon on the Mount because it seemed to run counter with Paul's gospel. At some points Jesus seemed a far more striker Lord then some might want him to be; 'meek and mild'.

At points I simply get frustrated with Jesus' parables and sayings, simply foreign. Foreign might be an understatement but, foreign might be a better description for labeling Jesus' words. Why foreign? Because Jesus lived in a time when our values did not exist. He lived in a cultural background that had different thought patterns than what we might have now. Another factor to the foreignness of Jesus is, his nationality; he was a Jew.

In the introduction page, the authors says that,“The goal of this book is not so much to help you understand Judaism as to help you hear Christ’s life-changing words with greater clarity and force.” (8) With this, one could come to the conclusion that studying Jesus' Jewishness brings together clarity and force to words that would have been lifeless or sounded clueless to our ears. But some people might cringe to this proposal. Take these quotes from Piper in his book "The Future of Justification" on sources bearing in mind Jesus' cultural context,

"...the interpreter may misunderstand the first-century idea." (34)

"...while it may accurately reflect certain first-century documents, nevertheless it may reflect only one among many first-century views." (35)

"...while the New Testament writer may embrace the external idea in general, a scholar might misapply it to the biblical text." (36)

The overall view is that it is simply impossible to reach a consensus on what is true of Jesus' first-century context and therefore the probability of distorting the text is considered high. Though I am aware of the difficulty of this should navigating our way to clearly understand God's words in the context of his chosen people deter us from taking the plunge? Lois and Ann continue on to say that,

“We have also been careful to place Jesus within his first century Jewish context rather than that of later ages. We hope the end result will be of help to pastors, students, and lay people who find their reading of the bible all the more fascinating and life transforming as they come to appreciate and understand the Jewish context that shaped it.” (8)

For me, based on Lois and Ann's findings which they have projected in the book, their take on Jesus' first-century background is refreshing breath of fresh air. Although those who might be curious to find out where they got their sources could look up the page on the books that they researched through. I would not go as far as saying that they have covered all the bases on first century issues because i'm not an expert in this field yet (hopefully someday) but there is a degree of humility resonating all throughout the book.

To conclude this post, Jesus' Jewish context might be a new field of study, but non the less a minefield you might want to look at seriously simply for the fact that clarity abides there. This calls for a restructuring in how we used to view Jesus. For me personally, understanding Jesus in his Jewishness makes things more clearer.

A verse for everything?

2009-05-06T15:54:00.002+08:00

There have been times when people have asked pastors, "Where can I find a verse for when I'm facing an exam?" or "Is there a specific verse for me getting retrenched from my work?" or "Is there a verse for me to find a wife/husband?" and with those questions some go and look for these verses and give these people answers to their question.

Some bibles even come with verse support system for time like when we are worried, in fear, sad, lonely and that's just to name a few. Sometimes it feels like the bible is a book where we get answers to specific issues in life. I wonder what verse would be fitted to questions pertaining the Internet.

While the intent might be a genuine thought of wanting to apply the bible to life, this is somewhat a faulty way for us to read the bible. We take verses out of context and that will eventually lead to a degree of distortion. So if the bible is not supposed to be read in this manner, do you have any perspective on how we are to read the bible?

Simple, Concise and a Robust Gospel

2009-05-06T10:57:00.005+08:00

A few weeks back I did a post on whether we could tweet the gospel. CT actually posed the question to Rob Bell. A while after that there have been numerous blog posts talking about the possibility of tweeting the gospel. Some criticized Bell for his take on it (well his take on the gospel based on his book "Jesus Wants to Save Christians") which you could read here. And on the same site also, a few days after critiquing Bell, there was a post on "How would you present this gospel on Twitter?" and it was a contest on who could put up the best way to convey the gospel via tweets. Just a note here, i'm not posting this to say that I disapprove of them for making it into a contest, in fact i'm up for any contest that gives me a chance to win books.

Reading the post again a few days after it was posted, there were a lot of responses from people on their take on tweeting the gospel. But I was somewhat disappointed with the answers that were put up. It makes me wonder whether it is even a good idea to even think of tweeting the gospel. Because of the concise nature, a lot of things get lost, and it really makes the Christian message look kind of dour and sour. See for yourselves here.

I'm not an enemy of simplicity and concise presentations but somethings are not worth working out in simplistic forms. Why? Because we might miss some important detail. Details that might have been vital in our presentation. So what should we do, if we wanted to present a simple yet concise as well as robust gospel?

I like McKnight's take on this

"The gospel is the story of the work of the triune God (Father, Son, and Spirit) to completely restore broken image-bearers () in the context of the community of faith (Israel, Kingdom, and Church) through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and the gift of the Pentecostal Spirit, to union with God and communion with others for the good of the world." Read the rest of the article here.

To me this would be a better way at conveying simplicity, conciseness and a wider grasp of the gospel as a whole.

Are you kidding me????

2009-05-03T21:38:00.002+08:00

I've heard my fair share of bad exegesis of the text being expounded in a sermon but I simply can't tolerate this type of teaching. This is simply way off the mark. And to make it worse, why are people clapping?

Books that deconstructed the monkey

2009-05-03T11:03:00.003+08:00

I figure it would be a good idea to write a post listing some books that began the evolution of this blog as well as my thoughts and renaming it "Deconstructing the Monkey". When i started the blog the title i put up was "My Creed" (ala Jesus Creed; I'm a McKnight fan apparently) but it felt unoriginal. I think when we start something that happens. So, here is a list of books that effected my head and the ideas projected on this blog in no particular order:

There are other books, and to list them all down would take up a lot of space. So, i guess i should stop here for the moment.

iBible- the bible for the 'future'

2009-05-02T01:56:00.001+08:00

The next time you wish you could trade you paper bible for an electronic version....

The Best Christian Blogs all in one place!

2009-05-01T19:21:00.005+08:00

My Christian Blogs is a website that links some of the best Christian blogs on the Internet, and in the words on the 'About' the website page it sates that it is "a new way to track all the best blogs for Christians in one place." A good idea indeed. So check it out. And you can also apply for your blog to be linked on the site as well!

Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus (a review)

2009-04-30T22:47:00.006+08:00

I somewhat vaguely remember the time when I was able to merge the words ‘Jesus’ and ‘Jewish’ together. Jesus was always depicted as a white guy with straight blond hair, blue eyes, neatly trimmed beard and a flowing white robe. But thanks to Philip Yancey’s “The Jesus I Never Knew”, it suddenly made sense that Jesus was indeed a Jew and being a Jew, lived in a Jewish setting and a Jewish way of thinking. That was my introduction into Jesus and his Jewish context. Given the amount of understanding I had then, I had a hard time stranding the thoughts of the book together. Not that Yancey was an awful writer, but I did not have enough introductionary knowledge to jump into the conversation.

But fast forward now, authors like N. T. Wright and Scot McKnight have been authors that had helped me immensely in sojourning the field of the first-century context of Jesus. But only after reading some short introductionary articles on the web by these authors and countless others was I able to understand some of the terms and views that were presented.
To be able to dive into a certain field of study it is important for any student to start with a book detailing introductions on that certain subject. I’m happy to state now that this book, “Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus” by Ann Spangler and Lois Tverberg is a godsend because it is a helpful book in the veins of an introduction to the Jewish background of Jesus.

The book is divided into 14 chapters and with helpful Appendices pages, notes and indexes. At 272 pages, I would say the book is about the right size for an introductionary book, not too thin and it’s not too thick either (although personally I prefer another 50 or more pages.)

The authors state that they have been “careful to place Jesus within his first-century context rather than of the later ages” and hope that the book would be of help to “pastors, students and laypeople who find their reading of the bible all the more fascinating and life transforming as they come to appreciate and understand the Jewish context that shape it”. I think the authors do exceptionally well in doing what they described without getting the reader entangled with details of dates as well as myriads of views on cultural background. Their approach is concise as well as accessible. For example in chapter one on the word anointing, particularly in the passage where Mary anoints Jesus with expensive perfume, the authors state that there is another side to understanding this than just the description that Mary was only doing it, un-be-knowingly, to prepare for Jesus’ burial (Matt 26:12). Anointing carries the meaning that Jesus was the anointed one, taking the context of how anointing in Jewish eyes and senses captured the moment. Passages in the OT also are brought into attention to build on the meaning. I don’t think readers will find it difficult to strand together as well as explain. They are simply concise and informative.

That is just one of the countless examples though. Moving on, an initial observation again toward the book is its presentation of the values and customs of the Jewish people which do more than just appease the appetite of the mind. The Jews valued community more base on what I read. In a chapter on haverim, which simply means a student having a study partner for male student and haverah for female student, we get the picture that Jews look at the process of studying differently. They preferred to study in community, together with a group and debates were part of their study nature. Such a different study culture compare to my Malaysian context, especially with debate taking primal role in studying.

I find myself appreciating Jewish liturgy and their formal prayer which some are read from scripture or passed down from tradition which was refreshing. I have also gained some understanding about how Jews viewed the law as we often call it not as a set of rules but a book that God gave out of his grace to show them how to live. I think there are some things in the book that might just shake the sock off our thinking and I hope would ultimately revise of deconstruct previous held positions and reconstruct better grounded views of scriptural understanding and faith. Another thing that made the book accessible was that it had these short concise frames on the sides to explain Jewish words and terms if readers were unfamiliar with them. This sure beats the constant flipping to the back of the book which explains the terms. This book has both the side bar meanings which are concise as well as an appendix page for meaning of the words in a more detailed manner.

Overall, I was not disappointed by the book at all. I was at first skeptical when I first became aware of the book, of whether it would be able to attain to a standard that I had for a book on the subject of dating Jesus in his first-century Jewish context. I think that is the danger if we just stick to a selected group of writes in whom we trust regarding their scholarship. But I have to say that the information in this book has been very helpful, and that is to say the least. I would easily recommend the book to anyone having no background on the subject. But I would not just say this book is just for beginners, it’s for anyone curious enough to dive into the study of Jesus’ Jewish context. You will be richly bless by Ann and Lois’ insights. The book might renew also your desire in “sitting at the feet of rabbi Jesus”.

The same Review is also on amazon. See here.

And starting next week, I will be blogging my reflections and thoughts on each chapter of the book.

American Idol and Luke 14:8-11

2009-04-30T19:30:00.004+08:00

I watch a healthy dose of American Idol simply because it's fun. And with 5 contestants left on American Idol 2009, the odds were obvious to some on who were supposed to be safe. Simon was always reliable in his predictions but this week became the ‘unpredictable week’ when, out of all the contestants Adam was in the bottom three. Everyone was shocked.

What amused me was when Ryan Seacrest was parting the contestants to stand on the left and right, after placing Matt and Kris on the right and Allison and Danny on the left, Ryan asked Adam which group he belonged to. I think Adam was confident so he said based on last night’s performance, he chose the ranks of Danny and Allison. But boy was he in for a surprise when Ryan ushered him in the bottom three with Matt and Kris.

So much for confidence and being constantly praised by the judges as the runaway winner, which makes me think of climbing the theological ladder of getting the idea that we are the in thing in theological discussions as well as knowing the right perspective. Like Adam, we might be the one who knows the tricks of the trade meaning that we are wide in our knowledge and we might just be talking about the right stuff but let’s not let it get too much in our heads. Lets learn to say that we are always learning and stay humble despite the stuff we know and the position we hold.

Fame and pride, they corrode our sincerity and vision. When they seep in too much in us, and in our heads we forget what our passions were about and make it all about us; all about me. That's just wrong. Read Luke 14:8-11 for reference.

The BioLogos Foundation

2009-04-30T17:20:00.005+08:00

Website:
The BioLogos Foundation

Description:
This is a website fostering discussions on faith and science and founded by Dr Francis Collins who wrote "The Language of God". The website is seeking to "promotes the search for truth in both the natural and spiritual realms, and seeks to harmonize these different perspectives", which I find commendable because rarely do we see the engagement of faith and science converging together. One of the things that caught my attention (which is the first place i click on a website) is the resource page. There you can find links to online journals and essays, websites on science and faith, lectures and presentations, resources for those who want to teach on the subject as well as a list of relevant books on this field of study. All in all a great website.

Tweeting the Gospel

2009-04-27T16:32:00.003+08:00

I was reading through an interview between Mark Galli of Christianity Today and Rob Bell discussing his book "Jesus Want's to Save Christians" and this particular question of the interview caught my attention.

Galli asked "How would you present this gospel on Twitter?" (the context here is Rob Bell's presentation of the gospel in light of the book). But let's just reframe the question again; , would it be possible for you to present the gospel on twitter (in 140 characters)?

It's a good question to ask but thinking about it reminds me too much of gospel tracts. Which makes me ask another question, can the gospel be explained exaustively in a simple and concise way?

Resources on Atonement

2009-04-27T15:36:00.004+08:00

I find these resources/articles on atonement to be of great help for information and also helping us construct some valuable thoughts on atonement. Just click on the link.

"Why Penal Substitution doesn't work with Asian-Americans"

2009-04-27T08:41:00.005+08:00

I came across this article on penal substitution that struck a cord in me. I was especially drawn with the words "penal substitution" and "Asians". The subject matter was interesting as well; penal substitution doesn't work on Asian-Americans/ just plain Asians.

What this article shows is that Asians and Americans have different outlooks on how they view themselves. I think this has to do with context as well as values that each culture inhibits. Americans, or to put it in a general term, westerners have this guilt based complexity. What this means is westerners has this "I am good" concept wired in them. Although this is way too general to state with precision, but westerners are far more confident in their opinions, having a strong self belief in their capabilities, and a general motivation of self improvement.

Asians on the other hand struggle in these things. There is a complexity that looks at themselves as second rate or worse compared to a certain group or people in authority. In this manner Asians tend to shy away from voicing out their opinions or views by fear of rejection and criticism. They have a culture of high respect for authorities, so much so that one is obligated to accept anything or everything a high ranking official or authority figure says. This is what the author of the article calls people in a shame based complex. Again an oversimplification of descriptive projection, but the general understand of the projection is true to my experience of things.

I'm not trying to put up a summary on the article as a whole but just to show how cultural context as well as values also play in how we are to present a faithful projection of biblical teaching on certain doctrines. I am not at all saying that theology is governed only by context and culture but these two things are worth considering when we are in the business of communicating. The scripture has the capacity of being vast enough to capture the imagination of each cultural context. So with the doctrine of atonement for this matter, what we need is a more robust outlook to its meaning, i mean there are four theories that are always mentioned upon which penal substitution always gets the spotlight. To me, every theory 'works'. One does not capture the whole although some would disagree. Like for this article, some cultures might not grasp the message fully following one view. So, since the atonement can't be pinned down, it's theory, why get into all the fuss in just having one view and not use the wide biblical array of expression to capture the minds of a specific culture?

I was motivated to think through atonement because these fellow bloggers have been blogging about it the last few weeks. Check them out.

Discussing the atonement when it is no longer cool
Atonement and the warfare worldview
Penal Substitutionary Atonement

THE UNLIKELY DISCIPLE: A Sinner’s Semester at America's Holiest University

2009-04-26T09:37:00.004+08:00

This book by Kevin Roose sound interesting. The book is entitled, "THE UNLIKELY DISCIPLE: A Sinner’s Semester at America's Holiest University", which i should add does has the capacity to catch our attention. I enjoyed the video and if there was a possibility I'd get my hands on the book for sure. I'm just curious. You can check his website.

Stay tuned: "Sitting at the feet of Rabbi Jesus"

2009-04-25T02:23:00.003+08:00

One of the great things about getting involved in the blogging is having such privileges of posting reviews, reflections, thoughts on books, moreover, if you get the chance to get copies for free. So starting next week I will be posting a review and some reflections on this book entitled "Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus" by Ann Spangler and Lois Tverberg. It's a smashing book to say the least, and the main attraction about the book is it deals on issues of viewing Jesus in his Jewish context. I'll refrain from explaining more at this point though and will keep them for the coming week.

For more information about the book and also the authors go to their website at Our Rabbi Jesus. Or simply go to the Zondervan page.

A new kind of relevant

2009-04-23T21:01:00.003+08:00

Sometimes we can't help but be pulled by the currents surrounding us and telling us the latest trend setting moves, the latest gadgets, the in thing, the latest catch phrase and many more. The pressure to sound, look and think old often grip us in the nerves so much so that we become people constantly challenged to chart a pathway that looks forward. The pressures and challenges of being relevant.

Being relevant is what we want and need to chart forward but often we plow in the wrong direction way too often, more often than we want sometimes. When i say this I'm mostly reframing these thoughts on being church. I agree with the fact that we have to be relevant, we need to. With the escalating changes in the society, it's simply dumb not to be relevant, to think new things.

But all to often the church at times has charted a misleading demeanor of how to be relevant. We put our efforts of carrying the yardstick of relevance, too much I think, in the our church building's architecture, the order of service, the music we sing and how it is played, the programs we have, the order of service and some things that I could think of. We care too much in the image of being relevant so much so that it disfigures the potent witness the church could have had towards society. Being relevant has become an idol in itself and unless we are ready to admit to this that is.

So, where should we chart a progressive and 'balanced' take on being relevant? One thing is for sure though is we need to be relevant. We need fresh expressions of faith coupled with how we merge them with the progressive phase of technology for example. We need at some points facilities, if we have the means, for social engagement and connecting with people around us. In a way, being relevant tells us we are serious about our faith by adapting an ancient faith in a changing world.

We progress by our embrace of relevance but we must not let the relevant bug take total control in charting our faith and influence as a church and community. Another take on relevant is also how we see shifting priorities in people. In the western world, there is a sense of disease with modernity. Thus comes a brooding postmodern generation that are not impressed with modern meanderings. More people are seeing community, justice, environmental care, spirituality, the arts as important. The church should see these groans as a 'relevant' passage to enter in. In fact, the groans displayed are stuff the christian faith is actually relevant in how it deals with them. Stuff that christian faith is closer at home with.

So we do need to rephrase how we understand being relevant, in a church community context.

InterVarsity Press interviews Wright and a book

2009-04-22T11:10:00.003+08:00

I was browsing InterVarsity Press' web page searching for book and I stumbled on this interview that N. T. Wright had with the publishers on his book "Justification". You can check the book out on the web page by clicking here and you can download free sample chapters from the book as well.

And while I'm on this, i might direct your attention to this book entitled "The Next Evangelicalism" by Soong-Chan Rah. What caught my attention was this piece of information about the book, "In this book professor and pastor Soong-Chan Rah calls the North American church to escape its captivity to Western cultural trappings and to embrace a new evangelicalism that is diverse and multiethnic." Scot Mcknight blurbed about the book as well (although i don't think that it would cause any commotion like the one he did for Wright). So, anything that McKnight endorses is worth reading. For more information go here.

How much embodying do you do after reading?

2009-04-20T12:33:00.002+08:00

I've done my share of reading for quite a while now and a thought just occurred to me. Not that it had never popped up but this time around it jolted my senses. Books has this kind of capacity to introduce us to new vistas, ideas and they can mess with our minds in a good way as well as in a negative manner also.

But after finishing a book, fiction or non fiction, how does the ideas or proposals effect us enough to implement some sort of change in how we live? I stress much on how it effects how we live because our changed thinking leads to that ultimately as well. I mean, do you ever pick up a book and think "I wonder how this book will change how I will live".

Take motivational books for example, they share with us a whole hosts of steps to get things working, to get things moving, to make us into a success only if we follow the step by step procedures. In actual fact these writers are telling us that if you embody these ideas or steps your life will change. Some might say that fictional books are just stories but I think fictional writers have a framework of thought behind the stories they are presenting. Sometimes it makes me wonder, fictional writers grips us, our minds, in a more subtler manned. Sort of like how songs effect us. Take the "The Da Vinci Code" for that matter, a fictional tale with an intent.

Books are thought as for for the mind but they do have a capacity to change how we think and how we live, ultimately I should say. So, "How much embodying do you do after reading?"

The Prodigal Son- Explained by Kenneth E. Bailey

2009-04-18T11:15:00.002+08:00

Some important cultural context in which we should consider when we interpret this parable. Good stuff.

Chasing Francis

2009-04-18T03:32:00.003+08:00

I've just finished reading this fictional tale of a pastor getting himself acquainted with the rummaging of postmodernity and the question of how to live his faith in that brooding environment. It has a classic emergent/emerging storyline which appeals to the conversation. The book is entitled "Chasing Francis" and is written by Ian Morgan Cron. I think this book sort of echoes Brian Mclaren's book "A New Kind of Christian", although I'm just guessing this at the moment. But one thing about Cron's book is it's fascination with Francis of Assisi, whose life plays a guiding role in bringing life to the book.

The story starts with the introduction of the main character, Chase Falson, who is depicted as a successful mega church pastor. Falson soon becomes disillusioned with faith as it is played along the lines of certainty and the neat portrayal of Christianity. The death of one of his church member's child had deeply affected him and soon shatters the pretention of meaning on which he broke down in the middle of his 'certainty' and neat theological stance that he had always understood Christianity to be. This soon fueled the church board to give him time off because he was seen as abandoning faith altogether.

His laying off by the church board leads him to a journey or rather a pilgrimage to Italy where he found how it was a Christian lived. With the help of some monks they introduce Falson to the life of Francis of Assisi, someone who was "…a Catholic, an evangelical street preacher, a radical social activist, a contemplative who devoted hours to prayer, a mystic who had direct encounters with God, and someone who worshiped with all the enthusiasm and spontaneity of a Pentecostal. He was a wonderful integration of all the theological streams we have today…"(55). This brings to mind another of Mclaren's work "A Gracious Orthodoxy".

With the quote above in mind, I think I have done enough (I hope) to explain the main thrust of the book. The fictional story plays around these themes and presents a need for us to embrace a more holistic outlook of our Christian faith and engagement as followers of Jesus. It also falls along the lines of a critique of the modern church in its, all too often, narrow description of being a Christian and the church. But with that, this quote would redeem the negative critique of Christendom in a more fashionable way,

"Francis, you changed the church (in fact, you reevangelized it)-not through being critical but through forming a community that confounded it. For the last few years, I've been a self righteous critic of the church and all of Christendom, and I need to give that up. Sister Irene told me the other day that "no one else is your problem but you." Maybe I should try to live the "gospel without gloss" and keep my mouth shut?" (155)

But I would add that keeping our mouths totally shut would not also contribute to changing the status quo. I think what it means here is we have a responsibility more in living out what we believe as opposed to just a mere criticism of the present condition of church.

All in all, I enjoyed the book immensely because the story does in some ways reflect a journey I am all too familiar with. I would gladly recommend it to anyone who has time to read and reflect with an open heart and mind. You might find yourself also, like Falson, chasing Francis.

Another Notable Blog: Our Reason For Being

2009-04-17T23:31:00.004+08:00

Here is another blog that I think you would like. The blog is an exposition of reflections on the whole book of Ecclesiastes! I haven't read everything yet but I thought you all might find it helpful. The blog is Our Reason For Being.

Songs: Reaching out to the inner dimentions

2009-04-17T10:51:00.005+08:00

There is nothing that gets us down and out like a pint of emotional distress and depression. They burrow deep, deeper then just under our skins. They hide and linger but pounce you when you least expect them to come. When I'm in a rut like this, my worst moments would normal come at the break of dawn and towards the time when the sun sets and in the middle of the night. I think it is the stillness that sort of pokes us and reminds us of the bad stuff that is happening.

I've not enjoyed these bouts, i mean who would enjoy them? But it's during times like this that I found that songs helped immensely. There was this this time when i was walking, trying to out stress myself, I was listening to this song that goes "...when will I see your face again..." playing on my handphone and it suddenly warmed my heart somehow. Weird? I'm starting to think that songs have these kind of depth in them, when the lyrics and melody combine and they actually reach out in our souls. Please, let me just state here that i'm not at all talking about christian songs. All types of songs and genre have this sort of capacity.

I was actually feeling thankful that there are people who devote their time in perfecting their craft in writing quality song. Well regardless if most of them are just thinking about money! But I just wanted to say that songs play a vital part in life. They sort of journey along with us at an emotional level.

I'm usually a heavy rock kind of dude but I'm enjoying music by anyone that falls in the mold of singer/musician/songwriter genre. Gavin Degraw fall into this category. I'm not sure how 'religious' this post is but i see songs have a capacity to help when we are down and out. I was just wondering though if you share some similar experiences with me on this. Just curious i guess.

(Just did some minor editing!)

What if your heroes get 'slain'?

2009-04-17T09:33:00.003+08:00

I was listening to this panel of brilliant theologians reviewing and discussing N. T. Wright's new book "Justification" and it got me thinking (click here to the website). I do know there are alot of critics out there that disagree slightly, moderately and totally with N. T. Wright. And some of the descriptions are sometime disheartening to say the least. I do appreciate books like the one by John Piper on Wright's view of justification but it does nonetheless adds fuel to the fire. So here is my question:

"Would you take time to listen and read books by authors who has disagreed (at some level or another) with the author you really like?"

I ask this because i do have a tendency of disliking those who are slaying my hero. And because of that it does have some sort of effect in my mind every time their names come up or I have this preconceived notion already of their positions in what they write about. But thinking again, it would not be helpful if we do want to broaden our perspectives on ideas, theological issues and many other stuff.

People often talk about being charitable and things like that, but at times I'm not sure what view of being charitable is accounted for the meaning of the word. But let me just add that we don't normally follow this rule of conduct. I would just say that we are charitable on a certain degree (most of the time a very small degree) but the bulk of our assessment would always be on a disagreement basis. I think the only realistic solution to this is being able to take whatever criticism that is projected, respect the persons position relentlessly and present your own views. When there is a need to alter your positions, do so. The important thing is i should say, not to make it personal.

I think in things like disagreements between theologians on various issues, our duty as learners is not to take sides relentlessly. Of course we do have theologians which we resonate more to, but we do need to hear out critics as well. It simply broadens our perspectives on things. It also helps us be humble. Ideas and the revolutionary paths they can chart sometimes can cause us to think that we are in the elite. But at some points criticism brings us down to earth.

So my hope is that for me personally, if my heroes get slain with disagreements, regardless of how uncharitable their positions might be, i will have to conjure enough strength not to read their criticism in all their writings. In this world we need encouragements, affirmation form others and people who think like us for support. But on the other hand we need some sharpening along the way, in where criticism 'helps'. In the case of disagreements, I would like to be charitable to those who slay my heroes. I can learn from them too. Although my ears are red listening to their positions, I'll try as much to change the colours in time.

If qualification was the only determining factor

2009-04-14T09:47:00.005+08:00

"You're asking somebody who has invested 25 years of his life in seminary training. What I have learned about pastors of large effective churches who have not gone to seminary is that they are avid readers—insatiable in their appetite for understanding life and the world, culture, and the Bible. And a great number of them have done the equivalent of seminary education by seeking out gifted mentors who have a wealth of resources and provide guided studies. So I think many of these people—the ones that last over the long haul—have the characteristics that I've just described."

The excerpt above is taken from this interview which I found beneficial and to some degree a measure of hope to some extent for those who don't see themselves going to seminary but wanting to get involved in ministry. I have been thinking a lot on these lines lately. Especially in the area of qualification. Not necessarily on the lines of being a pastor but in general. Sometimes the pressure to attain a standard of qualification can be daunting. I have this desire to be a writer but sometimes the 'qualification' bug never seems to lay of it's biting. So I have been surfing the Internet for some guidance of sorts. Some helpful articles scattered here and there but nothing concrete I might add.

What does it take to be a writer, a pastor, a scholar, a something anyway? Reading the article, it did mention that seminary helps in the discipline of thinking in a certain way. I agree with that. Seminaries do help in that manner. My stint in bible college helped me immensely I should say. The methods and constructive way of thinking are like unseen tools that form a structure of thought especially in theological issues and the bible. I'm grateful for the training. I would say that seminary or any sort of training structures us in the formation of discipline of a certain field of knowledge or skill. It would not be the determining element that ensures 'success', but a needed element if you have it.

So then, what if one does not have the needed qualification in a certain field? One has to have desire to pursue. The excerpt that I quoted above states that the successful pastors who have no theological training never stopped reading. They kept that discipline. The continued their quest to learn. the desire to pursue guided by the constant urge to learn are essential. Another thing I liked about the quote above was the mentioning that these pastors having mentors. I would say this is an important element in progress. We need guided wisdom from experienced people helping us to chart our energy of pursuit and progressive desire of learning. I think having a mentor helps us mature, shedding of unnecessary enthusiasm, and in the process seeping in a realistic vision.

So in the end, having the necessary qualification helps (considerably at times) but it is not a determining factor of pursuing what we want to do or are called to do.

A notable Blog

2009-04-09T22:43:00.003+08:00

I thought you might like this link to a blog that i found very interesting although the subject matter of the blog is way over my area of expertise I should state. The blog is called "Narrative Ontology".

Walking Again after Blogging

2009-04-09T09:02:00.005+08:00

Let me start with a question, "How has your journey through the blogging world been?" I ask the question because, although i have enjoyed many meaningful interaction reading the comments and putting my opinions up front, there have been major turning points that have sort of plumed me down in my journey. I'm still recovering from the process though, but it has been a rough tumble nonetheless.

I've only started blogging last year. It started as something that I wanted to try out as an outlet to project my thoughts and opinion on issues regarding the christian faith. After getting the hang of it, blogging turned out to be fun whenever I read comments from people. I have to say that it is something i look forward to whenever I have just published a post. I really value the interactions. Putting up opinions is not something we do as something normal in the context of place I am in so, it was good that I had some sort of outlet to share some of my own opinions on stuff.

But as this got underway, there were complications that I faced, mainly from my 'employers' as they were somewhat disgusted with some of the post that I had put up on the blog, so much so as there we threats of taking legal action against me. I had a meeting with them and was soon relieved from my responsibilities where I worked. They even gave me an option of stepping down early from the agreed 1 year term that I served with a full payment of my salary according to the amount of month left before the contract expired, but I opted to stay on until I fulfilled my time working there. But those months were torrid as I was deprived of anymore responsibilities.

Blogging does has it's good spots where we are able to share our opinions on stuff but it can also lead to unimaginable anguish if people take these opinions on a different stance other that what they were supposed to be, just personal opinions which people can agree or disagree with. But on a side not, i have no hard feelings on the things that has happened now. It has been one of the dark chapters in my life, one that I don't think i would want to relive again. But things happen and the only way through is forward. It has been a long and winding battle to forgive, to move on and look ahead, but then that's life. I'm discerning more challenges up ahead, and the constant thought of "will they ever cease?" I doubt they will.

So here's to my experience in blogging. Bitter sweet memories. I wouldn't trade them but then again I wouldn't relive them (hurtful ones that is)! So back to the question:

"How has your journey through the blogging world been?"

Coping with Change

2009-04-08T21:20:00.004+08:00

There is one regret that i have after being involved in fulltime ministry here in the context of Malaysia that I'm in (Sarawak to be exact) and that is I should have gotten some other form of educational qualifications. Most pastors here are simply educated in one field only (theological education). Some study at most up to a bachelors level, while the bulk are simply having certificates and a diploma in theological studies. These I would say are the minimum if you want to be a fulltime pastor. Most pastors are trained to adapt to a rural setting of ministry. So most are good with their hands.

But at the juncture of the times, modernity has hit the shores of Borneo, and there is an increasing form of development that is happening. Because of this sweeping shift, it is difficult for pastors to adapt with the progress that is happening around. I'm not sure if there are others who share my views on this but I do see this as a concern, especially for fulltime pastors who have no other educational background.

With all the shifting, a lot of pastors are finding it hard to cope ministering in the urban areas because you do need other skills which the rural minded training cannot provide. Pastors are feeling the effects of being intimidated by their educated 'board' of leaders, which in turn tend to influence the direction of the church (at points in an unhealthy manner to some degree). Another factor I might add to is the financial struggle that pastors face. And being trained in the capacity of a rural setting, it is at times impossible to combat this problem.

This is why I see it is extremely important that future pastors get themselves trained as much as possible in other fields of education as well as their theological training. This would help immensely in their connectedness with their congregation in some level of interaction and respect. I don't mean in a sense that we need another form of degree to get proper respect, but what i am simply arguing here is 'the times they are a changing'. It would also help future generation pastors to acquire some needed financial aid having other skills to adapt to the urban setting.

I wish something would be done about this, but many don't really see this as a needed shift to adapt to. I guess many still love the old wineskins and don't see the need for change. It is considered a sin if a pastor does choose to work in another field, or after he has been trained in a theological setting he chooses to study something else other than theology is considered in, still a large circle of folks as apostasy or a sign that someone is acting like Jonah. Well, i do hope in a few more year these social stigmas would fade and be no more.

So as I type this post, I do intend to pursue another course of educational knowledge simply for the fact that change is needed. I'm not sure how this is in the west but as far as I can tell, i don't think this is so much a western issue as it is in my context.

What do you make of smoking?

2009-04-07T09:24:00.003+08:00

I have been reading these few blog posts and it does raise some interesting opinions on smoking. Here are the links:

Towards a Theology of Smoking
Tying Up Some Loose Ends On Smoking
Responding to R.A. Torrey On Smoking
Is Smoking Sinful?

Although the opinions take neutral ground on smoking and that it can be done for the glory of God (please bear in mind, I'm just quoting this one) the only price to pay when smoking seems to be it's effect on our health. See here.

But with that, most Christians do have their biased attitude to smoking. I know, because in my context smoking is perceived to be sinful and the quote would always be "our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit" kind of argument. But I found what Tim Challies (in the link 'Is Smoking Sinful') said to be more enlightening in him mentioning that there are many other health risk things out there other then smoking which we don't hit on for example fast food. I don't think there had been any sermon incorporating abstinence towards fast foods.

I also have a post on smoking as well which I posted here. Anyway if you have any opinions or thoughts on this I would be glad to hear them out (or rather listen to them).

Taking out the 'duty' in evangelism

2009-04-07T01:16:00.002+08:00

I think one of the perplexity that one finds in evangelism is the lack of sincerity that we often combine with reaching lost souls for Christ. A lot of the time we just reach out in a simple presentation of the gospel and then ask if a person is ready to accept Jesus in his/her life and then walk away. Evangelism with this intent is just interested in numbers, like "how many people have you turned to Christ?" where the "how many" rings out more of our real intent instead of pointing people to Jesus. Soon it becomes a duty and gets impersonal. I feel though, that there is a better way to do 'evangelism' and it takes a so called longer route in some cases.

Instead of being impersonal, lets get personal with people. Lets care about people. The fact that every person is a reflection of God's image carries much weight to this so called argument. Creating friendships are more meaningful to people rather then just talking to them about Jesus and asking them to make a decision. How will they know Jesus when we can't even reflect him? Witness comes with both words and deeds both combined to make a powerful combination that has a strong effect on people. At some points, it is this kind of connection that counts. People do smell the lack of sincerity in our actions as well as our words and this is not good.

I'm not at all saying telling people is not the way. Not at all. I'm just saying that we have to be sincere with people. We have to care enough that they are human beings and not numbered tokens that we add up for points on who wins the best converter award.

Uncertainties and the rumbles inside

2009-04-06T10:30:00.003+08:00

Uncertainties can become a perplexing time period in life. It become the strain and the pull that mimics the tides that hit you every time you want to get up. Some recover but then some never do. It is at these junctures where people need help the most, it's where they need community, where they are vulnerable, where they want people to just accept the thoughts and fears that they have. The vulnerabilities deplete as soon as they are people who try to douse the flames of perplexities with unsympathetic God talk. Sometimes i think this is unnecessary to a degree. Counseling the emotional state is a daunting task to say the least, but we do need more compassionate listeners as well as wisdom, for them to be able to give direction. Well anyway just some random stuff that I'm thinking about.

Does morality need God?

2009-03-31T09:03:00.003+08:00

There is a post by Scot McKnight entitled "Do you need God to be Moral?" which i found interesting given the nature of the post. He asks this question "How do traditional Christians explain places where there is very little religious belief but there is a clear presence of good, respectable morals and civility?"

I presume many have this idea where a place/ context/ society will become morally bankrupt if they don't have God in the picture. There is some truth to this. It is true that religion does play a big part in the belief systems of people. But i would say now that to be moral one does not need a belief in God.

To me, being moral, having a sense of right and wrong is inherent in all human beings regardless of what one believes. So regardless if one is religious, atheist, agnostic or whatever, being moral is an inherent nature in human beings. Somehow we have this sense of right and wrong.

So how would i give some sort of answer to the question posted by McKnight? Well, the possibility of a place having little religious but having a clear presence of good, respectable morals and civility is possible because we are humans that have a deep sense of right and wrong-morals. So to me it is a belief system in us that conjures up an image of society. Even the people who say that they live by no rules also ascribe to a system of beliefs that talks about how one should live and that too entails a right and wrong way to live, to put it bluntly.

What about religion. Is it bad then? Do we need it? Yes, we still do. Is being religious bad for humanity? Yes and no. I do believe that some religious beliefs suppress how we live. I would not state which though. Let me point to my tribe for example, the Kelabits. As one of the peoples group living in the jungles of Borneo, like any tribal people were animist, beliefs in spirits. Their way of life centered around this belief system. It was an oppressive belief system and gave damaging effects to the conditions of living for them. But when missionaries came they taught these people a new way of life. Teaching them proper hygiene for example. They also taught them about Christianity. In turn as life progressed, my people were living much better after they disassociated themselves from their old belief system.

What i wanted to convey was, it is the belief systems that determine the way of life we all are part of. Being religious ascribes us to a certain center, as well as the atheist system. But inherently we all function under a bigger system that is we all have an inherent moral center. Because of that we are able to live good, happy and peaceful lives.

But although I say this, I do believe that there is a bigger center that guides what we have inherently as human beings. And it is determined by following the center of human and universal existence.

Well, these are just some thoughts that I have. I don't think I have a strong argument here but it's just something worth posting i guess.

Level headed advice on discipline

2009-03-24T12:19:00.003+08:00

"Many Christians today have rejected biblical discipline and adopted a sweet, spineless love that cannot correct," Grady said. "Our grace is greasy. No matter what an offending brother does, we stroke him and pet him and nurse his wounds while we ignore the people he wounded. No matter how heinous his sin, we offer comforting platitudes because, after all, who are we to judge?"

"To be sure, God's Word commands Christians to forgive, because God has forgiven them (Col. 3:13). But this forgiveness does not trump judgment as properly exercised in church discipline. And it cannot erase the temporal consequences of sin. Character, not gifting, is a leader's most important asset. This is the means God has ordained to accomplish his ends."

Read the full article here.

Perplexing questions about self and the constant desire to be someone else

2009-03-24T06:43:00.004+08:00

There is this constant perplexity to be someone else. Something that I struggle with and I do assume that people do struggle with this. A covetous desire to take on the status and respectability of someone we admire or people we think has got it all is sort of a hard battle the soul goes through in life. The world's system has quite the influence.

There was this MTV reality series on something about people having plastic surgeries to alter their appearance to be like their favorite celebrities. People can go through this process of thinking that if they alter their appearance to be like someone famous, the inevitably change their status from being unknown rejects to people with stature and potential. It is a sad commentary to life.

But that aside, it is also sad if we have this constant perplexity to be someone because we see they are successful, they have everything and most of all they are way above who you see you are. This sort of comparison is venomous if let unchecked.

It is sort of like an icky feeling that pervades the soul and fill it with false expectations of how a person should be. Soon we are controlled by this constant bombarding urge to be insecure about everything. "Does it matter what people think about me? It really does I think,"is the constant thought that creeps to the mind. My mind wanders again to this poem written by Bonhoeffer. See it here.

Let me just end by quoting the few last lines of the poem:

Who am I? they mock me, these lonely questions of mine,
Whoever I am, Thou knowest, O God, I am thine!

Bible and Alcohol

2009-03-24T06:30:00.002+08:00

This is quite an interesting post by Scot McKnight. Something that I have been thinking about myself but didn't have the courage to pursue my thoughts on the blog. Lets just say that I take the position of this professor. So if you haven't read it already, here I am directing your attention to it.

Faith-Sacrifice-Testing-Faith

2009-03-21T09:40:00.004+08:00

I have been really slacking on two post series that i started (one on Peter Enns book and the other one on Virgin Birth). Sometimes you do something and the emotional pull of things that happen around you hits like a wave. At these times I'm pretty glad that i could still gather some thoughts here and there. If I'm lucky, i can think straight and come up with some worthy thinking on a post, well at least worthy to me that is.

Stuck in a rut at the moment and it really is draining my energy. Sometimes i wonder how Abraham does it. His walk of faith is remarkable not to mention the strain of years. I'm reading through Eugene Peterson's "The Jesus Way" and the chapter on Abraham is pretty amazing (although i had trouble reading the chapter on Moses. Really messed with my head. Anyone read the book? I could use your insights here.).

Let me quote some profound stuff that I read on Abraham chapter

"Untested faith does not yet qualify for faith." (57)

"The test is the catalyst in which our response to god, the raw material of faith, is formed into a life of faith. Or not. If the test dissolves whatever we were calling faith into romanticized sludge or pietistic ooze, we are blessedly rid of what will dissipate our life in self-deception."(57)

In other words, faith to be faith must be tested to examine the quality. Testings purify or more likely, sheds the unnecessary ounces that we gather to be faith. I really like what is said here. But it is another thing if we are to embody this sort of thinking. I would add another thing though. Maturity in faith is spelled 'Trust'. After all the sacrifices and testing going on and purging faith, or what you though faith was, the refines fire works through and yields a life of trust. Sometimes there is a slight wish that mature faith or trust to yield its fruit in an instant. I would like it that way. Wouldn't all of us?

The road from infant faith to maturity in faith is laden with sacrifices and testings, the things that happen in the in between of life. But yet, after we have arrived to maturity in faith, we stary another journey again. The only difference is we dont really have to struggle between the goads too much.

At the end of the chapeter Peterson brings up this line

Lk 22:42 “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.”

My initial response now would be, "Lord increase my faith." But I know he would just say, "It's not about me increasing your faith, it's about you discovering it." I'd like to think that's what he would say.

A Theology of church Extinction

2009-03-19T18:47:00.003+08:00

When I read this it got me really thinking,

"...I sometimes ask audiences how many people have ever read a book on the growth or establishment of a church, and many people raise their hands. Then I ask how many people have ever read a book on the death or extinction of a church, and virtually nobody does. But in history, church death is a very common phenomenon..."

That really blew my mind! If the small excerpt caught your attention you should read the article here.

The View from the Mastaba

2009-03-19T14:51:00.006+08:00

This article by Gary M. Burge on how the cultural context of the gospels colors our reading of the NT, in this case the Gospels, is a good reminder to us on the how we labor through find the meaning of the text with regards to what we are to consider as solid historical/cultural facts. As daunting as the task, it is nonetheless rewarding. Burge mentions a splendid book; "Jesus through Middle Eastern Eyes:Cultural Studies in the Gospels" by Kenneth E. Bailey, which is on my bookshelf. I haven't gone through it yet though. Hope you will benefit from the article.

Lenses

2009-03-15T19:36:00.005+08:00

I'm beginning to see that we read the bible with many types of lenses. I say this because Piper just can't see eye to eye on Wright's way of reading the bible. Both of them have valid points, its just that I've out grown the reformed lens of reading and understanding the Bible.

I also think that as we journey in our lives our reading of the bible also takes on a journey together with us. It make me wonder, what if I had never grown tired of reading using reformed lenses, would I still come to the same conclusions now in the way I read the bible? There is a big chance I would just stay 'reformed'.

With this comes other questions again. What made me tired of reading the bible in Piper's dimension? Was it the curiosity element? I mean there are some people who like to learn new stuff and posture their minds in that direction. But then I'm not saying that we are swept away easily by various trends. In a big way, we reason through and wrestle this new wave. Thinking, "I wonder how will this work out?"

But with this new lens in motion, brooding it's growth in me, it's pretty difficult to present this new way of reading the bible to people. My recent attempts in lending N. T. Wright's "Surprised by Hope" has been met by some disapproval, but thankfully not the heresy kind of vibe. Is reading the bible taking Wright's lens in taking the Jewish context seriously new? Maybe, to some degree.

But right now people are still happy, reading Piper (to some degree), Rich Warren (at an elevated level) and people who write about their heaven infused visitation (these books sell like hot cakes!).

Red alert...it's not biblical...or so it seems.

2009-03-14T20:01:00.003+08:00

I once heard someone in church say something like this:

"There is nowhere in the bible that talks about us having a joint account."

Obviously this person thinks that we should treat the bible as a law on what we can do and what we cannot do. In this case we are guilty of acquiring microphones for our speakers because we don't find Jesus and his apostles adjusting their mics before they spoke. I'm just weary that people can stoop so low in their handling of the bible, and this is from a leader.

Let us just be clear of something here. The bible does not talk about everything in life. Notice that it was originally written in a certain context, addressing a certain group of people on issues pertaining to their day. But with that on the side the bible is the source book on our faith. Our reflections on scripture are interpretations of the ancient text on what they meant and after that seeking application of this pathway.

With that on the side, it is simply off the mark to tell someone not to watch television because Jesus never talked about TV. Or, we are not to travel by air on an airplane because it is not biblical and the bible only talks about traveling on foot and by ships. Or, it is not biblical that we have a worship band or worship leaders because we don't find this in the NT.

Remember that not everything that the bible does not mention is a reason for us to say "it is not biblical and therefore we cannot do this". It simply might be context wise or the world we are living in now.

So get your interpretation right. Please.

On Writing

2009-03-14T15:23:00.004+08:00

I started late taking interest in books. I only started reading seriously at 20. By serious I mean, that's when I started to read books that had no pictures in them. Books were a bore, compared to music, which was my main thing.

When I said music being my main thing, it means that I treated music like religion. I play guitar so the natural instinct of playing musical instruments is to form a band. So, i used to practice my guitar playing by rewinding my cassettes until I was able to nail a song. Well, not necessarily note for note but i would say I got like 80% right. I meant to put 90% but that would be bragging. I'm an OK guitar player so saying like I got something right on a 80% scale would be a humble description. There was one that I skipped sleep for two days in a row playing guitar.

It was during this time too that I was really into song writing. I always respected band that plays their own music and writes their own songs. True artist I would call them. I liked how songs talk about something. That's when I ventured into song writing. I wrote songs in the vein of KORN, complete with the "Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics" kind of vibe to it. The lyrics were dark. My dream was to form a band and write our own songs and who knows, to be famous.

But the band thing did not materialize. Soon songwriting evolved to different perspective when I turned my life to Jesus. Sort of like songs venturing in the worship music vibe kind of song writing. But somewhere along the line I sort of 'gave up' taking song writing seriously. I guess that when my attention came to books and again back to writing. I plan to be some sort of writer someday...hopefully. Part of the writing bug has evolved into this blog. I think it is a good platform to keep my mind in focus on writing. Anyway the narrative aside here are two posts on writing that I found interesting by Donald Miller (See here and here).

4 or 5 point pamphlets or the whole biblical narrative

2009-03-14T09:50:00.005+08:00

An excerpt from Donald Miller's "Searching for God Knows What";

"Earlier the same year I had a conversation with my friend Omar, who is a student in a local college. For his humanities class, Omar was assigned to read the majority of the Bible. He asked to meet me for coffee, and when we sat down he put a bible on the table as well as a pamphlet containing the same five or six ideas Greg had mentioned. He opened the pamphlet, read the ideas, and asked if these concepts were important to the central message of Christianity. I told Omar they were critical; that, basically, this was the gospel of Jesus, the back bone of Christian faith. Omar then opened the bible and asked, "If these ideas are so important, why aren't they in this book?"
"But the scripture references are right here,"I said curiously, showing to Omar that the verses were printed next to each idea.
"I see that," he said. "But in the bible they aren't concise like they are in this pamphlet. They are spread out all over the book."
"But this pamphlet are the summations of the ideas," I clarified.
"Right," Omar continued, "but it seems like, if these if these ideas are that critical, God would have taken the time to make bullet points out of them. Instead he put some of them here and some of them there. And half the time, when Jesus is talking, he is speaking entirely in parables. It is hard to believe that whatever it is He is talking about can be summed up this simply." " (p 152)

You can go to seminary too...for free

2009-03-13T10:06:00.004+08:00

Calling all christian leaders, church members, youths and anyone interested (or those curious). If I were to make this call specifically, to all Mirians to be precise! I have been going through this website, "Biblical Training", and it is simply a breath of relief. Why so?

One of the problems we have in churches all around Miri is the lack of biblical literacy and knowledge, and this is never ever a good thing. I'm not saying that we need to be scholars. What we do need is to be at least informed. It is a pity in this day and age with all the biblical knowledge at the mercy of our finger tips (and some are even free!) Christians simply shrug off being knowledgeable of their faith. I have heard of people saying, "Theology are for pastors, not the people in the pew. All we need are straight to the point sermons with application. We want something relevant to real life." To me, hearing statements like this makes me sad.

Another problem that I see is on Christian teaching. There are many teachers of the bible but not all are biblical in their presentations and teachings. If people sitting in the pews simply gulping all the teaching that they hear because they simply trust that whosoever is standing at the pulpit is teaching 100% accurate word of God without discernment or 'some proper biblical knowledge', I can say that 90% of the time people are going to subscribe any form of biblical teaching.

My plea here is not to say that if we have some form of biblical study we will get things right all of the time but a plea that we become people who know enough to help us grow as well as discern what is good. Take this verse for example

Acts 17:11 Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.

One of the things we cal see here is that these Bereans, although taking Paul's teachings with great delight they were weighing Paul the Apostle's teaching whether it was in line with scripture! If people during the days when the apostles were still alive did this, should this responsibility not be on us as well?

Anyway rants on the side, visit Biblical Training and sign in for free, as well as learn from seasoned scholars for free as well (such as Craig Blomberg, Bill Mounce, John Piper, Thomas Schreiner, Robert Stein and many more).

Taking Jewish context into consideration

2009-03-12T09:35:00.004+08:00

I'm going through John Piper's "The Future of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright" at the moment and just arrived at chapter 3. Obviously I'm taking my time to read and think through the book. One thing that I found notable to note at the moment upon the few pages that I have just skimped through is that Piper 'disregards' reading the NT taking into consideration of it's Jewish context. Although he criticizes Wright's heavy usage of first-century thought in understanding Paul and also the NT and gives some needed warnings on leaning too much on it in our reading and understanding I'm not convinced with his argument. Reading the first chapter kind of gave way to the framing of his ideas and understanding the doctrine of justification which seems obvious taking the cover of his book into consideration.

One of the things that has attracted me to Wright's writings and thought of Jesus and the NT is namely the framework that he uses to frame the understanding. I like the stance of understanding Jesus in his Jewish context. I would say it illumines the NT to the point of understanding it better. Why so?

Let me frame this in one of the struggles I had with the bible and my christian faith. Being a new christian, one of the things that bothered me was Paul's constant use of "first for the Jew, then for the Gentile". Although I was happy being a follower of Jesus, it bothered me that reading the NT there was a lot of Jewish stuff having notable mention (I secretly wished that I was a Jew to be honest because Gentiles seemed second class citizens!). The framework of Jews working for their salvation (self righteousness) and the notion of Jesus coming to fulfill the righteous requirement of the law because we could not fulfill it was something I found incomplete. Even the gospel message that explained Genesis 1-3 where we in the beginning were supposed to have relationship with God and sin came in the was by route of the Fall. God's remedy was to send Jesus to die for our sins and we to believe in this wonderful sacrifice.

In all this framework shaping our christian faith, it seemed that there was no room for the OT, particularly in God's election of a nation, Israel, as God's plan of redemption. The gospel presentation that I was taught cut out this vital element of God's plan by simply throwing Jesus in the picture without any reference to his Jewish upbringing and thought life as a Jew. The OT and NT seemed very different reflections on God and by far miles apart.

My first encounter with taking Jesus' Jewishness seriously was Philip Yancey's "The Jesus I Never Knew". I'm sorry to say that I thought that this understanding was revolutionary, something new even. I think it shows how far we have wandered off in taking Jesus' Jewish context seriously, at least that is how I would state it. My journey in taking Jesus' Jewishness seriously was further aroused reading an article from Christianity Today (February 8, 1999 edition) with a special section entitled "The New Theologians". The article focused on 5 theologians of note; Richard Hays, Kevin Vanhoozer, Miroslav Volf, Ellen T. Charry and N. T. Wright. I like the article so much that I vowed to own and read books by these authors of whom I put as my new heroes. I can say that this was the day that I stared to think that being a scholar was cool or in the eyes of some the day I was converted to dweeb land. I can safely say that I own a substantial amount of their works in my library (I have 3 of Hays', 4 of Vanhoozer's, 1 of Volf's and Charry's and the bulk of Wright's work!). Of all the authors mentioned here it was my reading of Wright that propelled and compelled me further in really taking Jesus' Jewishness seriously.

Reading the bible after reading it 'Wrightly' has made the bible more readable in the sense that the context and framework that Wright proposes for us to gives understanding of God's big picture; His grand story of redemption (Genesis- Abraham and Israel- Jesus and the Church).

Warning to all Club minded churches

2009-03-10T00:42:00.000+08:00

Making some sense of forgiving & blessing the Enemy and responsibility

2009-03-09T23:38:00.002+08:00

Locked in inner turmoil in understanding the mandate to bless our enemies and do good to them seems to really bother me a lot. One of the things that bothered me was, if I bless this person of who has cause me much pain and inner turmoil will God simply let him go? Will God exhaust his anger and simply overlook to just turn his face upon what this person has done to me? Will this enemy of mine just take in the forgiveness that I give him and simply have no remorse about what he did? Not even lint sized remorse? Will he just take the forgiveness for granted and look at it as judgment upon me and that he deserved me to bow low to his authority without the faintest doubt that he did anything wrong?

These are things that go through my mind. These are the things that I struggle with. This is the reason I find that forgiving the enemy (a so called Christian fellow) whom has wronged me, with me obvious of my innocence. Some further questions come to mind again to propel making sense to Jesus' mandate. Let's point it specifically to a church community.

What is our call? What is the responsibility of the believer of who has been wronged?

(Most of the reflections is from the epistle of James) His responsibility is to endure through the turmoil. Keep on living a life in response to the faith... But most importantly committing oneself to God and that means much more towards leaving judgment to him. The responsibility of the believer who was wronged is to forgive the brother who has wronged him, if so his enemy and still treat him with respect (this comes as a problem if the person holds a position of status and he is actually in the wrong) in the order of blessing and doing good to our enemy.

Some thoughts come to mind…how do we actually pray for our enemies? How do we bless those who persecute us? This is a big question mark to me but I am still struggling through it. This is simply a different code of ethic. At this point I think the common knowledge here is simply; we are mere humans and judgment of determining right and wrong belongs to God. If we trust in a God who is impartial, who helps the poor and those in the position of injustice we can take the forgiveness route because we trust one that will bring no partiality in how judgment is supposed to be executed.

I think the key element here is trusting a God that is just. The struggle is waiting for judgment to happen or to be executed. Trusting God is living in this tension.

I think most of the explanation here leans on the part where the person wronged and he can do nothing about it already.

What is the responsibility of the leadership of the church of knowing the issue at hand?

Given the responsibility of shepherding the church and keeping the unity of the community, the church cannot simply sweep matters arising under the rug and make hasty decisions out of anger and without much digging in the facts. The church leadership cannot also just listen to one side of the story and simply believe without question the situation at hand.

Here is what I believe the church leadership's responsibility lays. They are to be the neutral ground in keeping the peace of the community. Possible horrible mistakes that they can either lean to is making decisions without bringing both opposing parties to hear out their views, to judge by status, to simply pursue 'reconciliation' of both opposing parties without even settling out the issue because they want to arrive to making peace and keeping the community in tack with a simple exhortation that says both have to accept God's mandate of forgiving one another.

To me all the above really does not solve the issue because the body where justice should be 'executed' because the church leadership simply does not want to struggle with the issue. Matters are not solved, justice is not served and a false sense of reconciliation although goes on a peaceful stride for some time, will eventually break and go back to the same lane.

I believe the church leadership cannot simply seek instant measures of reconciliation; they have to struggle through the things at hand and do all possible to seek a worthy decision. Taking a route that calls for instant magic is simply a adulteration of their responsibility.

Where is God in all the decisions; justice?

Sometimes I wonder why God doesn't act swiftly at what he sees. Sometimes I wonder why he doesn't simply pry open the eyes of church leaders who seem blind to the things happening around them. The big question is why does God relent to act? I found the quote below challenging as well as helpful:

If God were not angry at injustice and deception and did not make a final end to violence - that God would not be worthy of worship … The only means of prohibiting all recourse to violence by ourselves is to insist that violence is legitimate only when it comes from God … My thesis that the practice of non-violence requires a belief in divine vengeance will be unpopular with many … in the West … (But) it takes the quiet of a suburban home for the birth of the thesis that human non-violence (results from the belief in) God's refusal to judge. In a sun-scorched land, soaked in the blood of the innocent, it will invariably die … (with) other pleasant captivities of the liberal mind.- Miroslav Volf, Exclusion and Embrace

This has been a long post over a period of a short hiatus from blogging. These things are still fresh in my head as well as my heart. Do let me know what you think.

The heavens are mute and in shock!

2009-03-09T22:38:00.004+08:00

I think Jesus did more then what the picture above is depicting. It says here "Jn 1:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us." Jesus identified and also rubbed dirt with us.

I had this thought in my head a few days back. A man walks up to someone on the streets and talks to him about the love of God. The basic track content of explaining how someone is reconciled back to God and avoids heaven (the four spiritual laws for example).

After some time going through the tract the man soon ask the guy on the street, lets say this guy is some poor homeless guy, asks him whether he wants to accept Jesus into his life because if he does he will experience God's blessing on his life. So the homeless guy does what he is told to do from this man and prays the sinners prayer.

After that the man lights up after leading someone to Christ, thinking to himself the ecstatic cheers and applause happening in heaven over a soul that is saved. Having done his job, he leaves the 'gospel' tract with the homeless guy and a bible. The man tells him just to follow the steps found on the back of the tract where it says "Now that you are a Christian...", and then leaves smiling while the homeless guy is still in his same condition; homeless, hungry and poor. Well, at least he is saved right?

Do you think the angels and God will approve of this?

I doubt it though.

Reading, Studying, Reflecting, Meditating...and now Listening to James

2009-03-05T10:29:00.003+08:00

These few days have been a constant 'dark night of the soul' kind of experience. I think I will be taking a break from blogging until the storm has resided. My thoughts are fluctuating like waves and it is sort of hard to maneuver concrete and meaningful ideas. I'm going through the epistle of James these few days. Blame Scot McKnight's blog for my fascination in this epistle. James has not had a fair hearing amongst people (namely because of the being justified by work issues). Well I used to be one of those people, struggling with this epistle. Here is James being read using the NET bible version Chapter 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Or simply go to this site.

Who owns the name?

2009-02-27T21:36:00.003+08:00

Malaysia as it is ascribed by it's leaders; a democratic country which ravels in unity. As a heading in a news paper I read today it says "Malaysia not perfect, but example of unity". Although not claiming to be a perfect reflection of unity one leader says "but we do have something to show for our unity and tolerance for each other, as an example of diversity does not mean disunity".

While there are some truth in the designation ascribed to Malaysia, internally there are some shaky issues that is threatening "unity in diversity". But just so I am 'fair' in my views at hand I must applaud the stability in terms of living in such a peaceful country, I simply can't imagine being born elsewhere.

In the news today, a headline reads "Malaysia Catholic paper wins right to use 'Allah' ". The government were initially trying to ban Christians from using 'Allah' for God. Apparently it is said that "The government had earlier decreed that non-Muslims could not even use the word as it would inflame the sensibilities of Muslim Malays, who make up 60 percent of the 27 million population. Indians and Chinese make up the rest . The ban had been aimed at a Catholic newspaper that circulates in Sabah and Sarawak on Borneo Island, where most tribal people converted to Christianity more than a century ago."

The fear is that Muslims might get confused and think that Christians are talking about the same God as them. Although the ban seems to have been lifted, it is just a softening on the initial ban as publications carry a disclaimer saying that the material is not meant for Muslims.

Sure I agree that Malaysia is diverse in terms of having many kinds of ethnic groups, diverse in the manner that people are free to practice their own religion. I can't say that I have ever experienced riots in the state that I am living in Malaysia. There is truth in saying that the notion of peace, tolerance and unity is evident in Malaysia. But the bad fruit come in when religious issues come to the fore. Such is the religious climate in a pluralistic country here.

For another helpful link on this go here.

I will be reading...

2009-02-25T22:26:00.010+08:00

I has been worth the wait; the arrival of Wright's new book "Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision" in the mail today prompted me to get Piper's "The Future of Justification: A response to N. T. Wright". Two books that are making headlines, especially Wright's book which has 'the most debated about blurb in the blogsphere', plunging into the great Justification debate. I'm not really sure whether I will be blogging on the two books but lets see how it goes.

But one book that I will blog about is this one...

...a book written by a local pastor detailing the revival that changed a small, animistic tribal group in the jungles of Borneo called the Kelabits. Actually I am a full blooded Kelabit, so this would be exiting to share about. The book is called "The Bario Revival" and is written by Rev. Solomon Bulan and his sister Lillian Bulan-Dorai. Here is a link with a short description of the book.

Eating For the Glory of God

2009-02-25T21:38:00.003+08:00

The picture you are seeing above is a local delicacy among Malaysians (at least in Borneo); chicken feet. Me and my dad were cooking dinner and one of the main dishes was chicken feet, prepared by deep frying and after that thrown into the pressure cooker for a couple of minutes so that it's nice and soft. I usually frequent other blogs that display food that were bought and rarely food that were cooked. Have you ever tasted chicken feet?

Anyway while eating I remembered the time when I was in bible school and at the end of each semester we were posted to different places in the state, mostly rural areas. There was this one time, during my first year, I was sent to minister in a oil palm plantation area. I stayed with the pastor who was ministering among the people there for three weeks. I got a few shots at preaching in Bahasa Malaysia (our national language) although people there preferred another local dialect (Iban).

The highlight of the three weeks of ministry was where I had to 'eat for the glory of God'. Although being Malaysian, I can't say that I eat everything a native Malaysian eats. I got a chance of trying out a monitor lizard dish. And like I always hear in TV about how stuff taste like, the lizard tasted like chicken. (the picture below was not the actual picture of the lizard).

OK, I had no problem eating the lizard but the challenge came when some Indonesian workers prepared a special dish for me. Prepared with spices, cooked to look like a Malaysian dish called rendang (see the picture below to see how rendang looks like; usually people cook rendang using beef or chicken but for )...

...So the Indonesian brothers in Christ made it clear to me what they were going to prepare; an Indonesian dish prepared that had the 'rendang' look only differing in substance used. Instead of beef or chicken they used dog meat! According to them a dog with infected skin disease is the perfect candidate for the pan but thankfully the one they prepared had none of that, I think (I never saw how exactly they prepared it or the dog). What they did was beat the dog to death after putting 'man's best friend' in a sack. Cruel.

As far as I can say, the taste of the dish was like any rendang that I tasted (spicy) but I can't seem to get the thought of eating dog meat. Well for the sake of these wonderful Christian brethren who went to great lengths to prepare this for me I simply couldn't turn them down. Echoing the heading of the post, there are times where we simply have to eat for the glory of God!

The Possibility of Faithful Exegesis without Historical/ Linguistic Knowledge?

2009-02-24T09:27:00.005+08:00

I have been struggling with this issue at hand for a couple of years now. I think I started thinking of this when I was in the middle of my studies in bible school.

Is there a possibility/ any possibility that one can do proper exegesis/ interpretation of the biblical text if one does not have any or has limited knowledge of the historical background and the original language of the biblical text?

Blog Worth?

2009-02-23T02:29:00.002+08:00

It says here that this is how much my blog is worth. I probably have to work harder at it to make it worth more. Haha.

My blog is worth $2,822.70.
How much is your blog worth?

How Do we stretch ourselves to get more of God this year?

2009-02-23T01:04:00.006+08:00

I heard this being said today, "How Do we stretch ourselves to get more of God this year?"

1. We stretch ourselves by adding time to our prayer life.
2. We stretch ourselves by making ourselves available doing church ministry.
3. We stretch ourselves by getting ourselves involved in a particular ministry.

Getting more of God is seen here as doing more, going the second mile. Sure there is some truth here but if you look at the points being presented, are they not confined in the vicinity of what Christians do in a context familiar to them?

Take prayer for example. Prayer is an integral and important part of the Christian life. There is no question about this. But is simply getting more of God done by stretching our prayer time?

Take doing or getting ourselves involved in church ministry for example. Ministry is integral, important even for the community context of practicing our faith. But should we confine doing ministry only in the vicinity of the Sunday service space or during a Christian program/function?

This is how some churches/leaders/pastors/teachers here understand how we stretch ourselves to get more of God. It is irritating to hear and this sort of teaching is constantly being repeated to people. It is simply a narrow understanding of a person being 'intoxicated' by God.

With this, how does someone then stretch himself/herself to get more of God in ones life? I think this question would be better answered in this manner:

To really stretch ourselves to get more of God in life this particular year, what we have to do is be more God conscious. Lets get something straight, since God is everywhere and we also believe that God in Jesus is the ruler of this world and not just our lives, it gives an implication that whatever we do matters to God. This simply beats having just a fixed prayer time where we understand that we are making time for God. Lets make our prayer life spill from the small confinement of solitude to a more wider field; life itself. Lets make our small time of being God conscious effect our walk outside.

As for ministry, lets not confine ministry to the four walls of the church building, to a certain day called Sunday, to certain christian function. Lets give ministry a more wider field. All of life for example. Are you not doing a certain/ specific ministry in the world outside where you work or study? To be honest christian ministry is not something that is confined, otherwise we might come out thinking that there is only one side to ministry and it is done in church, on Sunday, and also other Christian functions. This simply confines the possibility of influencing the world as a whole.

So lets widen our perspective. To get more of God we simply have to let God himself invade our lives. Let him have every corner, be it our inward walk, our secular walk, and our church community walk.

To get more of God we simply have to be God conscious.

Blurb ruckus- Labeling that has created a Blogexplosion

2009-02-20T20:51:00.003+08:00

I don't think I have ever seen, in the history of blurbing (mind the exaggeration), a blurb getting so much attention. So much so that it is riding the waves of N. T. Wright's new book called "Justification: God's Plan, Paul's Vision". But on the other hand I hope all the talk generated by the label that Scot McKnight called NeoReformed would spur people to read Wright's book whether you agree with him or not. Heck I'm even going to buy Piper's book (I have my reservations on him but that does not mean he has nothing to offer me theologically) just for the sake of being generous and fair. Though I'm a Wright fan it does not put me in a position of being on the right side (although at time I do feel that way, mind the bias).

Anyway back to the labeling stuff. I don't have any specific discussion stuff in my head on this because there are literally numerous discussions about it in the blogspere and I don't think I have the capacity to plunge into the discussion. There are many more informed people who can do that and I'm enjoying their comments.

One of the things that I notice though is, people seem to want McKnight to name names of who he is labeling NeoReformed. Apparently some are saying that McKnight should come clean and name some names. I got this from a comment in the blogspere

"Scot McKnight is erecting and then burning strawmen. Not naming names of who he labels as "neo-reformed" is moral cowardice."

Whether it would appease their curiosity or judgement if names are revealed, I have a feeling that fingers are going to be pointed right into McKnight's face that he is simply being uncharitable with his labeling. I hope McKnight, or I believe he will not bring up the names. I like and agree with his definition of those whom he calls the NeoReformed. Much of what McKnight is saying is true in my opinion that is. And to put it further quoting from a book written by Tim Stafford on the qualities of Jesus when he warned people was that "...he (Jesus) never singled out individuals". That implies that Jesus also used labels. I think Jesus would make much more blog discussions with his labeling compared to McKnight :). Which brings us also to the implication that McKnight follows on the same stream as well.

But much more credit also in him mentioning Horton. Horton's explanation of evangelicism is spot on to me

One of my favorite Reformed theologians is Michael Horton. We don't agree on theology but I like this guy and I like to read his stuff. Michael recently wrote a piece that uses a different image than the big tent image above. He says evangelicalism is like the village green of early American communities. It was where folks, all folks, gathered to chat and share commonalities. He says evangelicalism is the village green but evangelicalism is not the church. Churches have confessions, and his confession is Reformed. He says we need to worship in our churches and that the village green is not enough; it is where we join with Christians most like us. The key point I make here is the distinction between being evangelical and being Reformed. Michael Horton, I am assuming, thinks the best form of evangelicalism is Reformed; and he probably thinks Arminians and Anabaptists are wrong at some important points. Fine. (I think the same of Reformed, and I think they are sometimes wrong at central points.) But Michael Horton knows that a local church (or denomination) is not the village green. I agree with him 100%.

Echoing McKnight on this, I too agree with him 100%.

A plea for Theologizing...a Malaysian Context

2009-02-19T22:02:00.005+08:00

One of my pastime stuff to do is probably typing down titles of books on the search engine to search for reviews, either on blogs or online publications, I just dig doing this. My girlfriend thinks I'm weird for my unorthodox ways for relaxing and having fun (but she love me though warts and all).

I came across this sort of review about this new IVP dictionary entitled "Global Dictionary of Theology". Released in 2008, the title captured my attention, especially the word 'Global' which denotes theology that transcends the realm of the western world. I love western theology and it's literature, mainly because my theological education requires me to learn them. The other part is because tend to understand books using English language rather then Bahasa Malaysia (Malaysia's national language). I hope Malaysians will forgive me for this.

While I was in bible school I remember my lecturer saying something like this, "...this book (forgot the name of the book) is helpful but some of the things said can't really be applied fully here. This author is mainly writing from a western perspective...". That caught my attention and made me think of the possibilities of having a Malaysian/ Asian perspective view on theology.

Back to the review...I was reading through and this quote caught my attention (follow this link to the post)

"I once heard of a Karl Barth conference that was held in Germany several years ago. The conference organisers had invited a Japanese theologian to participate, but they were somewhat dismayed to find that their Japanese scholar had no interest in theologising his own national context – he was entirely preoccupied with the questions and problems of modern German thought! Presumably the conference organisers had expected their guest to provide a more exotic “oriental” perspective."

I think, this is reminder for me. I view theology to be very important for a christian, because we are in actual fact always and constantly theologizing whether we realize this or not. One of my passions is of course to study theology and make it understandable. This has always been something that I see myself doing. I don't want to sound corny in stating this though.

But one problem I find is, not many Malaysians see theology as something a christian does. Many think theology is meant only for pastors or students in bible school. Many Malaysians don't seem to mind that preachers can just preach mediocre exposition of the bible as long as it is simple and done with a preachers charisma to entertain. Many Malaysians don't seem to mind what a preacher teaches as long as they are known as pastors. And many Malaysians don't seem to see the importance of education, especially in the field of theology because the only thing that counts is practical ministry. I would further convey that many pastors in Malaysia doesn't even care to read any theological books because it takes too much of their time.
Don't get me wrong though. I love Malaysia, its my country and I was born in Malaysia, a full blooded Malaysian. The Malaysian layered criticism is one that I am in contact with and not a thorough assessment of Malaysia as a whole.

I wish Malaysians would see that they do have a voice in theology. That they will do well in charting some of their own conversations. Because only Malaysians themselves know their context and understand their cultural background. And because of that Malaysians need to think and create their own voice in understanding the bible and theology to fit to their own context. I wish that there would be more Malaysian contextualized books by Malaysians. I wish also that someday Malaysians can broaden the theological perspective in the global scene being a voice that widens the theological conversation. At the moment though, this is still a distant reality but nonetheless a worthy undertaking to plow in, one that I am willing to work at.

Are there any agreements if you are a Malaysian/ disagreements with what I said? Are there things that I missed out? I need your thoughts.

Michael Wittmer on Contemporary Theology

2009-02-18T11:00:00.003+08:00

Michael Wittmer is another important voice in theology and he predicts that the pendulum shift in the direction of theology is on the awfulness of the fall after stating that before that, the challenge was on addressing and affirming the goodness of creation. I have not read his books yet but I have a hunch his latest book "Don't Stop Believing: Why Living like Jesus is not Enough" address the issue of 'awefulness of the fall' and his other book "Heaven is a Place on Earth: Why Everything you do Matters to God" addresses the goodness of creation. And I have to thank Mason for directing me to this theologian!

Any thoughts on this video?

Explaining Emergent Churches - Inner Compass (Peter Rollins)

2009-02-17T01:44:00.003+08:00

Peter Rollins is a guy that I would call as someone who thinks outside of the box. He never seems to be out of analogies, parables and explanations that keeps you gawking while you pick up your thoughts. Be forewarned though, his explanations would be deemed unorthodox (even heresy) by some. Others (like me), take them as brilliant. Nevertheless, lets not put labels on before we open our ears to listen, widen the horizons of our beliefs and discernment and undertake the task of critique only after all that. Enjoy...

Explaining Emergent Churches - Inner Compass from Calvin College on Vimeo.

Stuff Worth waiting for...They will eventually arrive ...soon

2009-02-16T23:32:00.006+08:00

King and Messiah as Son of God by by Adela Yarbro Collins & John J. Collins

Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision by N. T. Wright

My Own Prison,Death by Paper Cuts and Philemon

2009-02-15T15:38:00.007+08:00

My Own Prison

A court is in session, a verdict is in
No appeal on the docket today
Just my own sin
The walls are cold and pale
The cage made of steel
Screams fill the room
Alone I drop and kneel
Silence now the sound
My breath the only motion around
Demons cluttering around
My face showing no emotion
Shackled by my sentence
Expecting no return
Here there is no penance
My skin begins to burn
So I held my head up high
Hiding hate that burns inside
Which only fuels their selfish pride
We're all held captive
Out from the sun
A sun that shines on only some
We the meek are all in one
I hear a thunder in the distance
See a vision of a cross
I feel the pain that was given
On that sad day of loss
A lion roars in the darkness
Only he holds the key
A light to free me from my burden
And grant me life eternally
Should have been dead
On a Sunday morning
Banging my head
No time for mourning
Ain't got no time
I cry out to God
Seeking only his decision
Gabriel stands and confirms
I've created my own prison

Creed's debut album "My Own Prison" made headlines somewhere in 1997 as a promising band and statistics aside they were one of the greatest bands around. There were alot of spiritual overtones generated from their lyrics which I could really relate with. Even at this time now, after the break up of the band I continue to listen to them (though I can't help thanking their break up for the birth of my fave band Alter Bridge). One song that's resonating now is "My Own Prison".

The lyrics of the song (if I still remember correctly) was written about their friend who had committed suicide.To me it talks about the realization that there is a point of escape but only on realizing the accusations are ours alone. The depiction of the person in the song is one that doesn't want to get up and take responsibility of their life and move on. A person that mirrors the past defining the future and never pulling him/herself through the ruckus. In a nutshell, to me, the song talks about taking responsibility.

I would like to convey what I'm going through literally but that would be revealing too much (I have taken much heat of writing too literally on my opinions and feelings in the past). I can only say that today marks the day when "my own prison" that was killing me by "paper cuts" is being challenged to the new possibility of "the reconciling love of God in Christ " (Philemon 1 and this post).

Death by Paper Cuts

2009-02-14T08:32:00.004+08:00

This article by Skye Jethani raises my level of respect for Rob Bell. I remember a few months ago I introduced my brother with this hip Pastor named Rob Bell. When I said introduced, it was in the form of introducing him to his material (wish it was in person though), two DVDs which I purchased ("Everything is Spiritual" & "The Gods aren't Angry"). I was glad my brother liked the guy and saw him looking him up in the internet. My brother was surprised why people are so critical of him. I explained some issues which people seem to poke him on but I must say some are quite harsh. I am not defending Bell here but I found the article above really explains the depth to this pastor. In the article you will find pastors can get hurt by criticism, Rob is no exception. You will also find how Rob deals with this.

Any thoughts about the article?

How important is the Virgin Birth? (2)

2009-02-13T14:25:00.004+08:00

This is a reflection of N. T. Wright's explanation of the Virgin Birth in the book he co-authored with Marcus J. Borg entitled "The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions", found in chapter 11 (pg 171-178).

Far too much attention is given towards Jesus' birth than "it's role in the New Testament warrants". A song noted by Wright simply says "Man will live forevermore because of Christmas Day", a song popularized by Bony M (if I am not mistaken), further enhances Wright's argument. According to the NT however it is the explanation of "Calvary, Easter and Pentecost" which looms as the highlight of New Testament theology. It is not possible to construct a meaningful NT theology minus the death and resurrection.

In the NT, the virgin birth account can only be found in Matthew and Luke but nowhere in Mark and John. The rest of the NT writers did not bother to mention it to support the understanding that Jesus is divine or is the Messiah who is to come. As Wright notes, "One can be justified by faith with no knowledge of it."

According to Wright "it has become a test case in various controversies" noting arguments such as accepting miracles, biblical truth, views of sexuality and incarnation being cases made for the authoritative case for the virgin birth. Wright being ever so right, nails these test cases of their freedom to fly by stating, "None of these arguments bears much relation to what either Matthew or Luke actually say."

It seems like these test cases are just vain reflections of authoritative fallacy. Which brings us to the question of 'what does Matthew and Luke actually say?'. The next post will deal on this issue.

Seminary...not just for Pastors.

2009-02-13T11:14:00.003+08:00

When I was in bible school there were conversations budding around a common thought pattern that theological training/seminary/bible school will always and definitely lead to full time ministry. Deviating from this would be heresy and some even assume that a person will be cursed by God. Strong sentiments but none are true, biblical or even Christian! I don't know where/how these sort of explanations were formed but I think because not many here would want to pursue being a pastor as an ideal 'job'. Because of that those who do enter bible school forced to embrace this, no questions asked.

I liked the conversation that was generated by that post I did entitled "Should Theological Training always lead to ministry". I found the comments helpful and I believe that some of my friends in bible school benefiting from it. Anyway there is an article on Christianity Today talking about the same issue but on a slightly different angle. I found it helpful in my plight to open the eyes of those who seem ignorant to understanding our dilemma here. May we be able to take off the eyes of tradition/familiarity to see a bigger picture ahead.

Mind not Needed

2009-02-13T00:45:00.005+08:00

This is a story that might have theological leanings and a dab of sarcasm.

A farmer, who also happens to be a recent, faithful church goer was musing as he was taking a break from working on his farm. Sitting under a tree, thoughts surfaced like popping clouds, i guess you could say that he had a comic character experience. Thoughts like 'what is a christian?' or 'what are the marks of a christian?' or ' the things that defines a christian person?'. Being a farmer as he was (not all farmers are illiterate but in this fictional story this one is) he couldn't care less about theological issues and stuff like that. In fact because he was new to the faith he didn't know much about the bible. So because of that he wanted to find answers to his questions.

It just so happens that one of the elders of the church he was attending came by to make a visit. The farmer told the elder that he was happy that the Lord had led them to meet because he believed that just at the point as he was in deep thought and questionings, the Lord was good enough to send his servant to answer his questions.

As he cleared his throat, processing the right words to use because obviously he didn't want to sound stupid, he asked the elder, "Having been a christian and being an Elder in church, I would like to know from your vast experience in Christendom, What do you think are the marks of a christian?" Obviously the farmer had heard the word 'Christendom' being used somewhere and thought it would somehow impress his elder with the intention not to look silly in asking a silly question.

The elder, pleased to be asked to give his opinion based on his 'vast experience in Christendom' answered, "This is a good question, and one that people have benefited from my answer. Well, the marks of a Christian are, a person who faithfully attends church and it's numerous meetings, tithes and gives his/her offerings faithfully, doesn't curse, doesn't drink, doesn't go to the pub, doesn't smoke, doesn't listen to 'secular music' but only christian songs, dresses his best on Sunday, reads the bible, faithfully prays, active in church no matter how occupied you are with your work because it is in church where you really serve God and well that's all that there is to it i think. I think that sums up the marks of a Christian. I hope that answers your question."

The farmer thinking the elder as an anointed man of God believed his definitive answer to what a christian should look like. Although he, at points he did not fully agree with the elder nevertheless he reasoned that since this man is an elder, his experience and status coupled with being an 'anointed leader' were enough to be authoritative basis for these explanations.

-End-

Christians often leave their reasoning minds when it come to faith. I find that we normally leave our minds at the point of entry into the church building. We leave our reasoning at the door, when we talk to an 'anointed' pastor, preacher or elder/deacon. We let them define everything for us while we pose with our bibles, merely being a fashion statement for christian church goers. And most of all we assume everything that we learn are true because we learn them in 'church' without further examining the scriptures. I respect church leaders and stuff taught in our churches, what I am asking is that we too have to be responsible Christians to study and differentiate between tradition/unbiblical positions and what is biblically faithful.

Proper Treatment of Monsters according to a 3year Old

2009-02-12T12:01:00.002+08:00

Our Clothes reflect our heart's condition

2009-02-11T03:02:00.003+08:00

This is a conversation that took place between a pastor and a young man. The context of this story is mine of course. The conversation is about dress codes, which is a sign of your spiritual condition according to many spiritual leaders here.

Pastor: The thing you talked about, that dress codes are not important is misleading.

Young man: What I meant was dress codes are not to be an issue of...

Pastor: You try to do your own church with people wearing torn jeans and stuff like that. Dress codes are important. For example, When a minister comes over or we go over to see that VIP, we wouldn't want to go and meet him in shabby looking clothes do we? No. We have to dress our best. Because of that we also have to dress our best when we go to church. We are coming to meet the king of kings. So that equals showing God respect.

Young Man: If our dress codes show that we respect God, how would we approach God at home? What about when we sing praise in the shower, or get up form sleep and pray? Do we still need to dress up because God is omnipresent!

Pastor: ..........(long pause)......(longer pause)......

The conversation continues on...but I will skip to the the conversation below

Pastor: You see what you wear shows your heart. It is the reflection of who you are inside good and bad.
Young Man: I don't agree with you on this. For me a person's heart is shown by his lifestyle not the clothes he wears.

How important is the Virgin Birth?

2009-02-11T01:49:00.003+08:00

In Mark Driscoll's book 'Vintage Jesus' he has a chapter on the virgin birth entitled "Why Jesus' Mom Needs to be a Virgin". Here is a quote that I'd like us to look at:

"...can a true Christian deny the virgin birth? Dr.Al Mohler has said: "The answer to that question must be a decisive No....Christians must face the fact that a denial of the virgin birth is a denial of Jesus as the Christ. The Savior who died for our sins was none other than the baby who was conceived of the Holy Spirit, and born of a virgin. The virgin birth does not stand alone as a biblical doctrine [;] it is an irreducible part of the biblical revelation about the person and work of Jesus Christ. With it the Gospel stands or falls." (97)

Slightly taking this doctrine on different end is Rob Bell which Driscoll takes a quote form his book "Velvet Elvis" :

"...Rob Bell speculates that if "Jesus had a real, earthly, biological father named Larry, and archaeologists find Larry's tomb and do DNA samples and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that that virgin birth was really just a bit of mythologizing the gospel writers threw in to appeal to the followers of the Mithra and Dionysian religious cults that were hugely popular at the time," we would essentially not loose any significant part of our faith because it is more about how we live. To be fair, Bell does not deny that virgin conception of Jesus, but rather he does deny that it is of any notable theological importance." (97)

Based on the quotes above two ideas are being projected:
1) The Virgin Birth is important; with it the Gospel stands or falls.
2) The Virgin birth is not so much an essential in the sense that the Gospel stands and falls.

What do you think about the quotes? And with that how important is the virgin conception to our faith? I would like to hear your thoughts on this.

I will post N. T. Wright's take on this tomorrow because I'm too tired to think at the moment. I need sleep.

Postchristianity.com

2009-02-09T17:06:00.005+08:00

I was on the internet, surfing around and found out that a post of mine being on a post-christian site (you can see it here). Here is a little excerpt about the site

"Postchristianity.com exists to document the secularization of America from the perspective of former Christians. We believe this cultural shift to be natural and positive and see the recent shedding of our religious beliefs as an opportunity to form and unify our transitional generation."

There are some interesting stuff on the site. It is mainly a critique done by those who were apart of the christian scene on Christianity hence post-christian (for those who don't know about post-Christianity). I'm not promoting the site (so that you don't misinterpret me). But for those who want a feel of what former Christians are critiquing Christianity it's a place to discover their arguments.

Anyway I was just wondering how on earth one of my post out of the millions got picked. And for starters I'm not an American for them to reflect on my views (I'm not complaining though :) ). The oddities! Well, I will be on the site to generate some comments.