My Thoughts, My World-View

    Category: Thoughts

    • Commentary on Philippians 1:18-20

      It is hard to get people to have a civil, honest conversation that does not raise barriers and irritation. We have lost the ability to agree to disagree. From my personal experiences, some would even argue from out-of-context passages and even from personal opinions that it is more noble or righteous to make a stand for your beliefs (in other words, never agree to disagree). Such one-sided insistence which plays on our natural sinful propensities to self-worship makes a person master in his or her own echo chamber. Perhaps that is the reason why many are ignorant that their practical belief in the word “peace” is actually “being happy when I am in control over things around me”. At best, a person wishes for the tranquility of the above picture – to be in a scenic place where there is just no conflict and where everything just falls in place and you have the privilege to ‘soak up’ the calm breeze and scenery around you. In a world that has been touched by the curse of Adam and Eve, this is just an impossibility. Even the person who is placed in the above scenery would find it ‘boring’ eventually – and this would trigger irrational actions that leads to unpredictable problems and conflicts.

      The ability to remain calm, composed and inwardly tranquil in the midst of an unfavourable circumstances – that would be the type of “peace” that the apostle Paul seems to be talking about in this passage. The context of this short passage is the self-centered preachers and leaders who were out to “get” Paul. One can imagine how these preachers were using their offices and the pulpit to put forth their own opinions and biases to the listeners – “Paul is a troublemaker who came all the way to cause havoc to the Roman Christians!” But notice Paul’s response – in verse 18, his focus is singular – to the glory of Christ, that Christ’ name is proclaimed and sounded to the creek and nooks of Rome itself. Paul’s heart was centered upon Christ and Christ alone – for he loved Christ. Is this not a practical truth that the Lord taught in the Gospels? For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also (Luke 12:34). Paul’s treasure that made him glad and happy was Christ because his heart is with Christ. Here is one who did not take the Lord’s words lightly – Paul abided in Christ and Christ in him – thus he loved Christ with his all, and regardless of the ill circumstances and motivations, as long as his “TREASURE” is elevated and magnified – he had no sadness but joy.

      As a parent – one gains a slight advantage in understanding this aspect. It takes an evil parent to be jealous over the achievements and successes of the son or daughter. It matters not the sweat, blood, opposition and disappointments – it is worth it when the loving parent sees the child standing tall, proud and happy. Likewise for the child and the parent: it is the same.

      Thus, we do not doubt Paul’s joy that is anchored upon His Saviour. What can make a bond that is stronger than that of parent-child bond? Answer: an eternally gracious bond that is created, sustained, sealed and guaranteed by the Everlasting One. The practicality of this can only be realised by one who has experienced such a bond. Yes, there are many professing Christian believers who talk but do not walk the talk – why? Because they obviously have not experienced this special, unique bond that Paul has with his Christ! Though this peace may be shaken, it cannot be lost completely because the bond that the Lord has with the one He died for, and saved, cannot be broken. As the apostle writes else where in Romans 8:38-39 – “For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.“

      What is the vehicle for Paul’s assurance of this bond with Christ? In verse 19 he sheds light – it is by the prayers and fellowship of fellow saints and the work of the indwelling Holy Spirit! When a Christian believer walks down the path of depression and the valley of the shadow of death, it is often caused by the neglect and the distance of the ‘community’. Certainly, the individual is responsible for his backsliding, but as Paul notes, a believer is often lifted and encouraged by the prayers of fellow believers in the faith! In a world where churches are run like corporations and man-led movements, it is no wonder Christians are quick to jettison any ‘troublemakers’ – as reflected in the modern-industry when corporate problems arise. The call given by the apostle in Galatians 6:1-3 is ignored: Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted. Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. For if anyone thinks he is something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself. Paul had the backing and support of the Philippian brethren despite the hostility given by some of the Roman brethren – this helped him, and he acknowledges it.

      The true sense and experience of union with Christ are ultimately Spirit-derived. It helps little to try to further what Paul describes in verse 19, except to confuse a young believer or to provoke differences of opinion. The Holy Spirit works to apply Christ into our heart – so that we truly feel Him in us and working our sanctification in us. If you have not tasted this, it is a good warning to check whether we truly belong to Him or that we merely appropriate an intellectual religion no different than the pagan choices.

      True spiritual encouragement that makes the believer joyous is the certainty of their life being used for God’s glory. What a small thing it is for our temporary life that has been filled with sin and washed by Christ’ blood to be used for our precious Saviour’s Name? Paul is no seer yet he knows this truth: believers glorify God whether in life or death. Our lives are meant to be a living sacrifice on the altar flamed by the passion of Christ! It is our reasonable and singular purpose (Romans 12:1-2). It matters not what manner of the affliction we go through – as long as God is glorified – that is worth it! This frames everything in the proper perspective – in whatever phase of our lives. May Paul’s mind be ours as well.

    • The Current Political Scene in Malaysia Amidst Covid-19 Issues

      As the country is fighting off the global pandemic (COVID-19), politicians have decided that one and a half months of ‘ceasefire’ is enough – the political news became active once more. There are just too many things to be said of Malaysia’s political scene. Accusations are thrown left, right and center. To top this off, just before the Movement Control Order was put into effect, mid-March, there were the infamous “Sheraton Move” where one of the parties that made up the ruling coalition decided to join forces with the old regime. This “move” sent panic among the political scene in Malaysia and the citizens who were in the know waited for each blow with bated breath.

      Before long, the 7th Prime Minister officially resigned – sending the formal collapse of the now old ‘new coalition – Pakatan’ – replaced by the new ‘new coalition – Perikatan’. This was also the first time the ruling coalition is fully made up of Malay political parties. A new 8th Prime Minister was officially installed. And in the past few weeks, the fight has begun anew for the power to rule over Malaysia.

      Honestly, at this point, I have to personally agree with the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (translated: supreme head or King, with a capital ‘K’) who is the constitutional monarch of Malaysia: this is really not the best time for political instability. Point: a big recession is coming as a fallout of COVID-19 pandemic throughout the world. The world will change for the next 6 months to 3 years as it seeks to control the effects of this pandemic. Yes, those naysayers who live in denial of this still mysterious virus, have no idea the effects it has on people, especially those with heart problems especially the elderly. Demand for gross products and services will fall collectively – the investment plans made in the last 5 years will not bring in an expected return. Though it is natural for new businesses to pick up where new demands are identified, this will not be fast enough – more turmoil will wreck the local economy for the immediate future. For a country to be disunited (see America in 2020 for example) is to prolong the effects of the pandemic and to deepen the troughs of recession.

      My prediction is that a hard line from the new government will come – to enforce political stability within the nation. It has happened before, ironically, in the administration of the 4th Prime Minister then. You cannot please everyone, but it is possible to at least please the rationale majority who wants to survive the start of recession. My pity is on the new batches of university graduates who has been conditioned to a positive and thriving economy landscape: this is going to shock many of them as they fight (yes, fight and struggle) to earn a living with those who may not even have the paper qualifications they have. In recession, sadly but true, paper qualifications matter little – employers will look at a person’s skill, experience, attitude and merit. If there is a good thing we can say in recessions, it is that: it is a great leveler of the privileged and unprivileged. The fittest and wittiest will survive.

      Is there a right or wrong in the “fight” between the two men pictured above? No. I have learnt a long time ago that there are more to the story than what is given through the media. Politics is like a mud pit – it is hard to distinguish who is who because of the mud, and often, it is not personal. I believe in that in the minds of each individual politician (in Malaysia) there is the belief that they are contributing to the greater good of the nation in one way or another. Whether this belief is mixed with personal motivations that benefits them personally or benefits their ideology or anything else, it is not for us to know – as is natural. But that is the reason that we should never put our hope – even if any political party uses that word “hope” – in politicians. As the psalmist puts it so eloquently in Psalms 118:8-9: It is better to take refuge in the LORD than to trust in man. It is better to take refuge in the LORD than to trust in princes.

    • Verbal versus Written Conversations

      Over the years I found myself writing a lot. From a cold start – that is without any preparation at all – I can type about 75 word per minute. That is alright. But I do know that I have averaged much higher over the years especially when I get into the “zone”. Writing takes skill, however. Anyone can write, but to write with clarity and with economy of words is truly something that takes experience and also talent. In this, my wife has the better skill in writing. I have to remind myself that everyone has their own style – some are more long-winded than others, while others are more descriptive than others, and there are those who are just very academic – dry and to the point. Is one better than the other? No – it depends on the circumstances.

      Unfortunately, there are some who have declared themselves “masters” of this craft and thinks too highly of themselves in this particular skill. I remember one who would declare boldly declare that this or that author has a lot of flowery words and long-winded – indirectly putting the person down in his ‘authoritative’ declaration – while elevating authors who shared the same writing style as himself. This is nonsense. But to an impressionable young person (that I was then), in my mind, written works had to be of a certain style.

      The truth of the matter is: literature allows for a variety of styles. Even within the academic realm, there is room for the style of Michael Porter and for the writings of John W. Creswell and of Peter Drucker. It would be extremely foolish for one to be declared better than the other. If it is a matter of preference, that is an entirely other thing.

      For myself, writing should be as close as possible to a person’s verbal style. Perhaps this is my personal preference, but I want to ‘read’ and ‘hear’ the voice of the author. I think it would be quite shocking to meet the author in person only to find that the person speaks different from the way he/she writes. That would be quite shocking (to me, at least).

      That is why I find it hard to write at times – I often wait for the ‘mood’ or the ‘circumstances to align’ before typing the first word of the article or written correspondence. When everything aligns, I find that I speed as fast as I can think. Is that good? I do not know. But the downside is that the writing suffers for lack of ‘editing’.

      This whole RMO (Restricted Movement Order) due to the Covid-19 pandemic, has made me appreciate verbal conversations. For me, speaking face-to-face is “easier” because words can always be accompanied with gestures and any other physical actions. Even the intonation of words can really convey things that cannot be conveyed on paper. To me, the main advantage that writing has over verbal is the need to think, re-think and re-think again before we finalise and send our message. That gives more meaningful food for thought rather than the easy misinterpretation of our modern means written communication (Whatsapp, Telegram, Wechat, and the like).

      Verbal communication is hard because it can easily get side-tracked. Our emotions can affect the way we communicate – whether we realise it or not. At times, this hampers the very purpose we intended. It is rare for younger generations to understand the unwritten rules of verbal communication – we tend to be impatient to make our points and to speed the whole conversation along. Perhaps that is the reason that the new generation detest orations and speeches – but prefer the fluidity of podcast sessions where people are constantly talking and changing topics.

      But when we master the art of verbal communication, we find that our ideas are nearly always communicated clearly – dispelling misunderstanding and encouraging cooperation. In fact, a sudden pause in the verbal communication speaks volumes in ways that the written medium just cannot encapsulate.

      I do miss verbal communications that are honest, unfiltered and unreserved. Those are almost always with people whom we can trust (non-self-righteous and hypocritical) and with those whom we can be vulnerable to. Cultivate both skills and life will be sweetened somewhat by it.

    • Commentary on Philippians 1: 1-11

      The Word of God is bristling with power. This “power” is not perceived by worldly measurements; it is of divine origin. It is such a pity that many Christians flock to the weekly meetings on the Lord’s Day (Sunday) to be revitalised (in their mind), forgetting that we have the best fuel for our soul and body in this book (see 2 Peter 1:2-3). The natural tendency for the Christian believer is to take the Word for granted – to treat it like any other book. They insist that different books within the Bible must be held down by their own made-up pillars – often by their theological leanings and experience. When Scripture is caged and locked up to only mean what we believe it MUST only mean, we have effectively created our own religion much like the Pharisees of old. That is why we must always come and approach Scripture with reverence and openness of mind. Laziness and busyness are our constant enemies in this; we must guard ourselves against it, regardless of our theological leanings.

      This is why it is refreshing to re-read the letter of Paul to Philippians. It is a letter written while Paul was suffering in both body and mind – he was waiting for the verdict of his trial in Rome. On top of that, he faced opposition from certain church leaders who saw him as a competitor rather than a brother. Uncertainty of the future is never a nice situation to be in, but Paul shows us a Christ-honouring example through it… something we all need in the challenging phases of our life.

      Notice Paul’s humility in the very start of the letter (v.1) – he declares Timothy and himself bondservants of Jesus Christ. He does not boast on his contribution or gifts to the cause of Christ – he plainly and simply paints himself as to how he has always seen himself – a willing, happy slave for his Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. This is something that I have appreciated when meeting with church leaders – the willingness and honest humility of the servant of Christ to be what he truly is: a servant of Christ and to those whom He died for! Be wary of those who are quick to shift the focus to their “history” and “achievements”. Be wary of ourselves – for such pride do not immediately show itself; it hides itself in our need for encouragement and in coping with uncertainty in the ministry. Many ministers “need” to prove to themselves that they are worth the effort, the money and the time given by the supporting church – and thus, they build up a ready-list of achievements and ‘wins’. Capping it with ‘praise the Lord’ does not immediately ‘purify’ the true intentions.

      It is worth noting as well that the greeting is given first to the “saints” in Philippi, before it is given to the elders and deacons of the church. Again, this is how Paul sees ministers – not as reverends with titles and positions, but as those who truly “come last” as the Lord Jesus constantly reminded His disciples: the greatest is the one who serves, just as He came to die for sinners.

      This thought holds true as we see Paul confessing his heart’s desire in verse 3 to 6 – his desire is for the brethren, Christian believers, to be built up and complete as the Day approaches when we see Him face-to-face. The command to love our neighbour is not a theoretical lesson but a practical action. It begins with the desire of our heart. Do we rejoice in seeing brethren? Far away brethren that we hardly meet? Paul does. It ought to cause us to be ashamed of our self-focus and our narrow view of what Christianity is about. Paul did not identify these as Gentile believers who were converted out of paganism – nor did he identify these as Jewish believers – they were merely “saints” and “believers” who are all “partakers with me of grace”. What a magnificent and challenging thought for modern Christians who are so quick to identify and preach their own “affiliations” and “groupings”, whether it is through theological leanings or by their practices.

      Whatever circumstance we may find ourselves in – whether in much or in lack – we MUST check our desires: is it for those whom Christ died for? Is it in serving the Lord with all humility, knowing how unworthy we are and how we are the least of all believers? Perhaps this week, this day, we need to pray for others and to pray that we can happily call ourselves “bondservants” of Christ – not one who is free to do as our hearts would want, but one who is moved and freed by the gracious love and act of the Holy One who gave Himself for unworthy us. Amen.

    • Psalm 1:1-3

      The psalmist proclaims the blessedness of walking upright before the LORD in the opening verses of the poetic magnum opus of the Bible. If we were to read it with a liberal mindset that is saturated with modern inclinations and belief, we would find the first verse offensive: how can the psalmist have an elevated view on such a “holy person”? There is great offence to claim that a spiritually sensitive, godward looking person is more “blessed” than a pagan person. The world we live in has unfortunately become a morally selfish and dark world – one that elevates self to godhood (even though the words may not explicitly state that). The modern man finds it dumb to acknowledge that order in this universe points to a singular Higher Being, also known as, the Creator of all things. Instead, they insist that the modern man is self-made out of randomness – they violently wipe away any possibility that randomness is merely a cope out excuse to allow for anarchy and a covering of all things under moral ambiguity.

      If we, the reader, can accept the premise that there is a God, and that God is the source of all things whether material or immaterial – then the only conclusion is “happy” or “blessed” is the person who is on the side of that Creator! To acknowledge our Creator is like a child who acknowledges his or her parent as a parent: it is just natural and right. The child who refuses to acknowledge the presence, part and position of the parent is universally identified as an errant child. How is it that anyone would fault the same logic between the creature and his or her Creator?

      The second verse posits the source for “knowing” this God or Creator. The creature is woefully unequipped to know the Maker, for it is like the finite trying to experience the infinite. In this universe, God condescends Himself – put Himself down – to our level in order to communicate His thoughts to us. Without this condescension on His part, no creature can ever know his or her Creator. Thus, the blessed man who acknowledges God finds true delight in knowing His will and thoughts. This is unlike the many who claims belief in God but finds no delight in knowing God; hypocrites who desire mere identification with the Creator, but with no real love or desire for more. This is not a harsh pronouncement, the logic is sound. Does not one rightly worries for the child that refuses any communication with the parents upon birth! What is the natural reaction for one, is also the basis for the other.

      For the sinner who confesses his or her inadequacies and looks heavenward for answers, it is normal to find rapturous delight in understanding the mind of the Creator. Not only delight but purpose, strength, conviction and direction – all important components that grow the person in his or her journey in life. The psalmist provides the most apt picture that transcends all generation – the natural picture of a tree’s dependency to its water source. A tree needs water and finds permanent sustenance from the river. The roots gravitate naturally towards the direction of the river and in time shows the proof of dependence by the bearing of fruit. Despite harsh circumstances that are unpredictable, the tree survives; whether it is famine, drought or the wars of men – the tree can survive when its root and place is by the rivers of water. Similarly, the person that abides by the purpose, direction, conviction and truths of the Creator of all, will bear the fruit of his or her existence – despite whatever opposition or unfavourable circumstances. This is what the psalmist is inspired to proclaim. Ironically, this is what the modern person needs, in a world full of noise and confusion – we need to come back to the reason for our being and to find delight in “getting it”.

    • The Failure of Practical Expository Preaching

      History is one of those subjects that are vital in developing our thought processes and our character but is commonly hated by many. There is a prevalent notion among the newer generations that the only history that we should be bothered with is the history that we make. Such responses aptly summarise the key problem with these generations: preoccupation with self.

      In the modern evangelical movement (church scene), we find similar shifts happening especially with the ‘expository preaching’ development of the last few decades. Though this may not be reflected within the academic or theoretical arena, it certainly is seen in the practice. To set the context – “expository preaching” has (surprisingly) varied definitions based on one’s theological and church background. I find Raymond’s article on “The Gospel Coalition” helpful as he does the difficult task of compiling a few sources for the definition: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/erik-raymond/what-is-expository-preaching/

      John MacArthur: The message finds its sole source in Scripture. The message is extracted from Scripture through careful exegesis. The message preparation correctly interprets Scripture in its normal sense and its context. The message clearly explains the original God-intended meaning of Scripture. The message applies the Scriptural meaning for today.

      Bryan Chappell: The main idea of an expository sermon the topic, the divisions of that idea, main points, and the development of those divisions, all come from truths the text itself contains. No significant portions of the text is ignored. In other words, expositors willingly stay within the boundaries of the text and do not leave until they have surveyed its entirety with its hearers.

      John Stott: Exposition refers to the content of the sermon (biblical truth) rather than its style (a running commentary). To expound Scripture is to bring out of the text what is there and expose it to view. The expositor opens what appears to be closed, makes plain what is obscure, unravels what is knotted, and unfolds what is tightly packed.

      Although there are nuances in the preachers’ definitions, we can see the areas of agreement. My definition would be like this: “expository preaching” is the art (skill) of examining, elaborating and clarifying the Word of God, whether it is a single verse, or a passage or large portions of Scripture, to an intended audience. If there is any ingenuity in my definition (it is not my intention) it would be the final four words – “to an intended audience” which I will explain in due time.

      It is common to hear from the pulpits of many churches, or even in the explanations given in some weekly bulletins, that the church believes in “expository preaching”. However, when one sits in the pews, one quickly realises the opposite. The biggest problem is the lack of examining the Bible passage – usually, only the scantiest overview is given and the listener is to “put their faith” in that scanty overview of what the passage is about. Or, there is the over-elaboration of the wider passage (context) without dealing with the immediate passage under consideration. Even when the passage is dealt with, many verses are ignored or the most general meaning is presented to the listener. Sadly, the most dangerous form is the expositing of the preacher’s theology, mood, and direction rather than God’s. This is the most dangerous because it hides behind the illusion that the Word of God is actually being taught. From my past experiences, this has given rise to unhealthy beliefs, practices and even abuses that begin from an unbiblical indoctrination that claims otherwise. The effect is quite pronounced on the listeners – they begin to “want to please the preacher” or to “listen more to the preacher”, but not to the Word of God for themselves. The Berean spirit is usually not found in many cases. One can easily whip out the Macbook and type out every word that proceeds from the mouth of the preacher, and miss the true meaning that the Lord Jesus gave in Matthew 4:4 – “It is written, “‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”

      Why is it so hard to find good, simple preachers who will just spend time examining the Word of God? From my own experiences and understanding of the ministers’ struggles and process – it boils down to a few factors (which cannot fit this brief article). The chief of those would be 1) insufficient time spent in the study room, 2) over-reliance on own experiences, 3) mechanical or routine treatment in studying God’s Word, 4) aiming for “the message” rather than doing the passage justice.

      The first reason is commonly found in those “over-worked” ministers, who have a hundred and one things to do every week. This is not a critique but a simple explanation of what is. Especially among certain Asian ministers, there is the unspoken belief that the minister must justify their salaries to the congregation. This results in the minister taking up all “tasks” that come in their way, whether it is from the new visitor to neighbours, elderly, children, and countless others who have been, is part of or who will join the local church. Unfortunately, this is more often found in small churches (small in size). Is this biblical? Yes and no. The apostles made it clear in Acts 6:2-4 – And the twelve summoned the full number of the disciples and said, “It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables. Therefore, brothers, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty. But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” Certainly, the Christian believer should show love to their neighbours, especially ministers who ought to show hospitality – but their main job is “devotion” to PRAYER and the WORD. The minister who is not wrestling on their knees in prayer for their congregation will find it rare to find the congregation wrestling with the Word of God in their conscience.

      The second reason for this misdirection in exposition-emphasis is the over-reliance of the minister to their ‘knowledge of the Scriptures’. Every minister who is serious about their gifts and calling will grow their understanding of the whole counsel of God, there is no doubt about it. However, it is perplexing when ministers begin to unconsciously elevate biblical theology and systematic theology above the very Scriptures themselves. The common conservative defense is to claim that the particular systematic theology is derived from Scripture and remain adamant with their particular emphasis. This stumbles the preacher as they have already concluded before they even have begun, by stating that “this” is the goal or the message – the passage is merely a vehicle to help them enforce their “made-up view”. The end result is the preacher bringing his interpretation and views into the passage or verse, thus solidifying the preacher’s own bias or personal preferences over and against the passage’s actual meaning. Sometimes, this over-reliance is also the result of lack of time or exhaustion on the part of the preacher – the minister quickly relies on experience to expedite the ‘preparation of the sermon’.

      The third reason for the poor practice of expository preaching comes down to a “dulled spiritual sense’. This happens when we have gotten into a routine and allow ourselves to take things for granted. For example, the minister is called to handle the Beatitudes in Matthew 5, or another passage that he has done before: it is easy for the minister to assume that the points or message of the passage is the same as before. Thus, the minister does little to re-work on the passage, assuming that they have “done” the passage before. This is done more often or not – just try to listen to preachers who preach their “old” sermons – there is no difference. Sure, the wording(s) may change here and there, but the general points remain the same. Should we expect a thoroughly different message? No, but the grace that works in the heart and mind of the minister will help bring new things out of old things. An aging saint that grows older sees things with greater depth and with better skills than the younger self. Unfortunately, many allow their spiritual sense to be dulled by repetition and a “cold” walk with the Lord – often made worse by a lack of true and constant prayer with Him.

      Lastly, this often happens when ministers are faced with certain heart convictions – they attach whatever passage they are dealing with their “favourite topic”. There is the example given by the late teacher/preacher S Lewis Johnson of a Baptist minister who would always link the message to the importance of water baptism. This may seem funny until you realise how horrifying it is to give “permission” to listeners to do the same! Yet this is the sad reality of many who claim to be expository preachers. One preacher may claim not to believe in “works over faith”, but if every sermon is going to guilt, rebuke and call on “righteous works” do not be surprised if the congregants exhibit a tendency to legalism and salvation based on works. Likewise to the preacher who emphasises “evangelism” – every message preached becomes a call to action that is done out of a sense of duty devoid of passion and true conviction.

      True expository preaching minimises such dangerous man-initiated errors. To conclude, the onus is on the listener to make sure we “listen” to God’s Word rather than man’s word. It is not enough to claim this or that person is a “man of God” and turn off our thinking and discerning faculty. The rule of our life and conscience ought to be God’s Word that is Spirit-inspired. That is why God’s Word must be properly examined, elaborated and clarified by preachers. This is not an easy task – for it demands the preacher to do these three activities for himself FIRST before he communicates the Word to the congregation. After the application of his study is done to himself (as Paul hints in Acts 20:28), the minister can then prepare to communicate the lessons to the listener. What good is ANY expository preaching that fails to be communicated to the intended audience? Thus expository preaching must incorporate the intended audience as part of its definition. Can expository preaching be done for young children? Certainly. Can expository preaching be practiced to elderly persons? Absolutely. To make it effective, one must take into consideration the listeners – are we preparing, wording, articulating, structuring and ordering the whole message so that the Word of God is properly understood by the listeners? If we look at the time of Nehemiah, it seems that the teachers did exactly that – They read from the book, from the Law of God, clearly, and they gave the sense, so that the people understood the reading (Nehemiah 8:8). How wonderful for the teachers and ministers were to give the sense of God’s Word clearly to the people (made up of different demographics)? This IS possible, but with hard work from the minister. It IS possible because God’s Spirit supplies what is lacking in the minister, and the listeners.

      There are more things to say on this topic – but for now, this will suffice. Food for thought, especially for those who truly yearn for “pure spiritual milk” (1 Peter 2:2).

    • Losing Assumptions

      Bruce Wayne in “Batman Begins”, played excellently by Christian Bale, said these words to his future arch-nemesis (but at that time hidden):

      “I needed to understand the thoughts
      and feelings of those who stand in
      the shadows…

      The first time you’re forced to
      steal not to starve…

      …you lose many assumptions about
      the simple nature of right and
      wrong.”

      Sometimes a book, a comic book or a poem strikes through the haze of your thoughts and like a ray of sun, pierces through that fog and gets straight to your heart. Occasionally, not often, something else does the same – and in this case, it is Nolan’s epic trilogy – at this particular line, delivered while Bruce Wayne’s past experience flashes onscreen.

      There is truth in these words.

      We make assumptions based on our own personal experiences and as time goes, these assumptions morph into “principles” that not actually dictate our direction, but in reality, excuses our intentions. The problem is that no one actually cares to peel off the assumptions that we have built our decision-making on. We take on these assumptions due to circumstances; sometimes because it worked in the past, or because of our companions and the seeking of approval from them, or even from our natural inclinations (personality). Whatever the reason for its introduction in our lives, we make assumptions. Sometimes, these assumptions are “pragmatic” – helps us to navigate through certain difficulties and uncomfortable situations in our lives. But often, these assumptions are “dangerous” – as it turns us into “zombies” that are myopic in their behaviour.

      The worst type of assumptions are made in religion – in the dawn of the 21st century, we are again revisiting this recurring problem. Religious tensions are higher than ever, and conflicts that are religion-motivated have become the norm. All this from the sad simple truth – we have lost the ability to step into the other person’s shoes. Not only do you see such disparity between different religious groups, but this conflict is intensified within the same religion – among the different sects and groups. This is especially true in Christendom. It does not matter whether you are Protestant, Evangelical, Conservative, Fundamental and Reformed – there will be a line or verse that will set you off (trigger). Sadly, even within the same belief system, there will be intense disagreements with a practice or an action (noted that there is a margin of acceptance in ‘disagreements’, especially in certain non-essential beliefs). Why do we find it hard to drop our assumptions?

      We are afraid of getting into the other person’s shoes. That is what fundamentally “shocks” me with “Batman’s confession” above. It is when we take the courage to literally walk into the mind of the “other person”, that we start to understand the issues. But we do not. It is frightening to be in a new situation, with a new context and unpredictable outcomes. It is terrifying to face the unknown, and to lose the comfort of familiarity and more importantly, to lose the security of control. When we perceive to be in the passenger seat rather than the driver’s – we become afraid. That is the core problem – our pride does not want to let go of what we think we have. Listen to the other side, and our pride gets a shattering blow that begins to crack our wall of assumptions!

    • Listening to God

      In a world that lacks empathy and sympathy, we find the widening gap between two groups of people – those who believes in God (a higher being – to make it as ‘general’ as possible) and those who disbelieves in the existence of God. Within the growing group of the former, we have a plethora of sub-groups – from those who believe in a single God-Creator, to those who believe in multiple gods/deities, to those who believe in a hybrid-god that is redefined and re-introduced with new terminologies. The terrifying truth is that there is no end to the gaps and conflicts that exist when we drill down the groups to their sub-groups. Especially in Christendom (I use the term very loosely), there are those who strongly believe in the sole and absolute authority of the Scriptures, and those who strongly believe that there is still a continuing ‘revelation’ from the Divine God that is not authoritative, is fallible and is inconsistent. On the conservative side, there is a strict adherence to “no compromise” in their position – no new revelation, thus no use of ‘confusing’ language like “God spoke to me”, “God told me”, etc. The other side argues the opposite and not only allows, but encourages the liberal sharing of such “divine experiences”. When we push both sides – two questions come up to the fore: 1) Does God communicate with us? 2) Is His communication relevant to us (presently and for the future)?

      I am oversimplifying the complexities of these two questions, of course. To understand and find our own conviction on these matters, one needs to be firmly grounded on the work of the Trinity, in revelation, in communication, in conviction and in action. From the little that I can discern, this is still sorely lacking from the pulpits of the common church, unless one goes to seminary and have a good time bouncing questions and discussing on it. But it is necessary. Times of crisis demands the believers convictions on this to be tested. Does one just simply live a “happy-go-lucky, come-as-they-may” life, or to adopt a more careful, cautious approach that is prone to doubts (if they are truthful and honest), and anxiety?

      Logically (and this is important as a God of order and logic has put in His creatures the ability to think logically and rationally) God reveals His Will through His own appointed means: His Word. How it is received is irrelevant – i.e. whether a person hears it, reads it, sees it (communicated graphically or visually), or some way that we have not fully understood. The important point is that this Word is “codified” – using a medium understandable to human beings. Thus, we see that Christianity encourages the translation of this “codified” Word – the Bible – into all and any language. Accuracy of translation certainly cannot be “guaranteed” as fallible creatures are at work here – but the accuracy of the main teachings and themes can be guaranteed since it is guarded by the length of the Bible. A short document with a few scribal or translation errors can cause a lot of misunderstandings. But when the document expands to a few hundred pages, we see that this problem becomes negligible.

      Based on my personal observation and experience, most problems that comes out of doctrinal disagreements or practical disagreements, stem from the over-emphasis of minor, obscure verses that are stretched beyond their original intent. Where churches focus on the clear teachings and words of God, they listen to wisdom immeasurable. This DOES NOT mean that the single proverb verse has no relevance to the individual’s living – God still uses His word (every verse) to sustain His people in accordance to His timing and circumstances. But when we come to the church as a body of Christ (local and universal), the former point stands.

      When one accepts the need to major (focus) on the clear parts of Scripture, they will grow well in the Lord – as the writer to the Hebrews state – growing from a baby to a child. Practically, all these are mere intellectual head knowledge that is useless. What about our “communion” with God? Do we listen to God? This is the very thing that we find the early church address in Acts 2. The newly converted immediately saw the necessity of hearing God’s Will and thus they gathered regularly to listen to the apostles’ teaching.

      Do you read, listen or feed yourselves with God’s Word? A child’s first entry into this world finds intense comfort in the touch, words, presence of the parents – can we expect any different with the spiritual child born? I believe there are many who does wrong when they EXPECT new converts to immediately be given in to the READING of the Bible and to cast doubts on their conversion when “reading” seems to be lacking in the person. There are many ways to examine whether the ‘newborn’ Christian is truly enraptured by their Heavenly Father’s presence and Word – is the person “listening” to God’s Word in one form or another? Whether it is through “conversations” with fellow Christians, or listening to a Bible audio book, or through consistent attendance to teaching, or the reading of sermons, the Bible, or any means that God has given in this vast world. Some would be very indignant and dismissive when the activities are broadened from “mere reading of the Bible” – but have you considered the elderly and the young who can barely read well?

      Practically, I find that most books in the Bible can be a good introduction for a new Christian convert. But every person have their “system” to start. My recommendation would be to begin with Genesis – nothing like starting from the beginning, and then with the Gospel of Mark or Matthew, and proceeding with Exodus and with another New Testament Gospel – Luke or John. Again, this is not a rule, just a guide or help.

      God speaks today through His revealed Word. He still is relevant as His Holy Spirit works to give us understanding and obedience in the regenerated heart (new nature in Christ). We can fool others with a long list of knowledge, but ultimately, our communion with God is perceived clearly through our actions and responses. The Pagan and Pharisaical will always confuse people, but the Holy Spirit never confuses the witness borne by His redemptive work.

    • Paranoia, Schism & Scepticism

      Kanye West’s latest news (as of the end of October 2019) seems divisive, especially within Christendom (a very broad scope). There are many who have expressed extreme happiness, genuine surprise, joy and on the side, scepticism, scrutiny, condemnation and nit-picking. This is exactly the problem that outlines the great division that exists in Christendom, particular in the Evangelical circles.

      Over in the Reformed camp, especially in the more “fundamental” sector, many have expressed their scepticism and have decried this as a publicity stunt of sorts. Some would back up their harsh judgments by using examples of West’s behaviour, words, or family life examples. Not content with this, they would attach verses and passages from Scripture to justify their “views” and “righteous judgments”. In their own minds, they are the sentinels of the Modern Reformation, unwittingly oblivious to their own popish behaviour that marks what is wrong with the modern wave of “Reformed” adherents.

      These are quick to pick up the pitchforks and rally the cry of “Reformation” when challenged. Gone are the introspection of humble Christians who would search out their own hearts and contextualise everything in the scope of God’s Plan and Purpose in the New Testament. No, they rest on their association with “the best church system”. There lies the problem. They look at the “body” of Christ from their own vantage point and fail to see the “Head”, which is Jesus Christ.

      The Lord Jesus was clear on His attitude to the Zacchaeus and Nicodemuses of our generation – there is the joy of receiving sinners into His Fold, knowing that only by His Grace, His Work and Sacrifice can such be saved. Sure there were warnings and strictness on some, but notice that these were to those who were “grounded” in their own religious self-righteousness rather than those who were steeped in the shackles of sin. When the true Church, made up of genuine blood-bought sinners, see and hear the conversion of one like Kanye West, they would understand and discern the difference. Here is one who openly was trapped and exposed to a fallen world in all its depravity since young, and has reached the highest peak of what that world could offer, and for such to turn around – all praise to God.

      It is sad that these “fundamentalist”, “Reformed”, “Christians” are quick to judge and to disclaim. They do not realise that their church attendees are surrounded by fakery brought about by such comments, judgments, criticism, hypocrisy – and thus they “act” in a certain way, not because they want to, but because they are “forced to” – thinking that if they would lapse in one of the “rules” they will be shun, “counselled” and continually “judged” for what they are not. The Church becomes corporate, Romish, fake… without them even acknowledging it.

      The point is this: if you are continually thinking first of “doubting” a person’s salvation, finding what is “wrong” with the person in order to “separate” from them and always thinking that others are out to “corrupt” you… you are not in the Church you should be in. This is not the environment that the Lord suffered, died and resurrected for. He came to cleanse, protect and provide for His own whom He loves and continues to love. They are to emulate Him as He lives in them. They are to love, think and act as He sustains and improves them little by little.

    • Marlon Brando on “Acting & Theatre”

      The first time I had ever heard of his name was from my dear mum. She would say “Marlon Brando” with a slight emphasis on the last “o”. There was a sense of girly delight in her voice every time his name was mentioned. I could not understand it, but Marlon Brando was THE actor of her time. This was a giant in the American movie-making industry, and even today, many are in awe of his acting skills and for others, his far-sighted views on social issues that were mostly ignored by the predominantly white-dominated industry.

      After so many years of hearing about him, from articles and books that seem to have so many things to say about him, I finally took the plunge and watched interviews (rare, apparently he does not like to make them) and I watched the entire 3 hours of the much-acclaimed “Godfather”! He is a most unusual man if you take the era which he lived in: he was articulate and has strong opinions on matters. Ironically, he seems to make a clear distinction about life as a human being and life on the silver screen. He never seemed to lose sight of that distinction.

      Marlon Brando Interview with Connie Chung, in the year 1989

      He chides the interviewer (in the embedded video clip above) for not realising that mankind slips into a “projected image” of their own creation (or one that suits the person’s audience) – it is natural for mankind to be “actors” or using the Greek equivalent: to be hypocrites. Unknown to the man, who was already in his mid-60s at the time of the interview, the later generation of a mere 50 years, would truly embody the fulness of his statement. Look around us and you will see a “filtered” society that only shows what they “want” to be shown. Relationships become “controlled” by “political correctness” that is a real filter determined by “the majority”. Woe on anyone who dares come out of this “filtered life” and tell it as it is – to say and do what they truly believe in. “Truth” has been traded for “movements” and “emotions” – not the reasonable, calculated, exercise of reason – no, that is too “fake” for this new generation. Actors rule the world now, and we would not have it any other way!

      There is much to be said about Marlon’s work in The Godfather, but I just want to put down my brief thoughts on his views, particularly, on the distinction he makes between acting in theatre and in movies. He passionately explains his hatred of theatre – not because of the medium itself – but what it entails when one is contracted to do it night after night, after night; the former requires utter discipline to tamper with the actor/actress’ emotions and psyche before each and every performance – it is difficult and exacting to make that change, a few hours before the performance, regardless of what circumstances the person has been in. Has the person been grieving or happy before the performance? He has to put aside those feelings, calm the emotions and condition the mind, before stepping to the limelight of real-time performance; that is theatre. The movie actor/actress does not require such discipline – theirs is confined to the production of the movie, perhaps for the length of the movie shootings. Even method actors who maintain their characters’ moods and personality will find the relief of ending production and putting away the “role” from “reality”. At times, there is that transitioning period – which differs according to individuals.

      In some sense, this is something that is equivalent to the demands of the Christian preacher at the pulpit. The preacher (the good one who takes the calling seriously) needs to put aside all distraction and focus on the Word of God – seeking to “speak” objectively and passionately within the confines and direction of the Scriptures. When the preacher fails to rein in emotions, the message (sermon) is peppered with personal opinions and feelings that jars the listener who is seeking divine guidance. Worst, the listener is swayed by the mortal and fallen counsel of the speaker rather than divine guidance that is from above.

      Though Marlon is obviously a person whose views lean heavily to the left (politically speaking), yet here is one who can teach our generation a thing or two. It seems that such is sorely lacking in an industry that has grown by leaps and bounds, year after year.

    Powered by
    ►
    Necessary cookies enable essential site features like secure log-ins and consent preference adjustments. They do not store personal data.
    None
    ►
    Functional cookies support features like content sharing on social media, collecting feedback, and enabling third-party tools.
    None
    ►
    Analytical cookies track visitor interactions, providing insights on metrics like visitor count, bounce rate, and traffic sources.
    None
    ►
    Advertisement cookies deliver personalized ads based on your previous visits and analyze the effectiveness of ad campaigns.
    None
    Powered by