Chinbeng sent a very good article and one of them is this piece by Chad Docterman who says that God is an impossibility and from his various arguments, it seems that the most weighted evidence is that one do not need to know everything to know that something won't exist. Well, I will try to refute his points as much as I can, following what apologists around the world would answer.

I do this not because I want to show that I am intellectually superior that the writer. I just want to show, lovingly that a lot of people are holding on to some assumptions, that are risen just because someone do not want to believe. Goes to show how evil a heart can be even when hard evidence is staring right in your face.

Why the Christian God is Impossible
by Chad Docterman

Introduction

Christians consider the existence of their God to be an obvious truth that no sane man could deny. I strongly disagree with this assumption not only because evidence for the existence of this presumably ubiquitous yet invisible God is lacking, but because the very nature Christians attribute to this God is self-contradictory.

Proving a Universal Negative

It is taken for granted by Christians, as well as many atheists, that a universal negative cannot be proven. In this case, that universal negative is the statement that the Christian God does not exist. One would have to have omniscience, they say, in order to prove that anything does not exist. I disagree with this position, however, because omniscience is not needed in order to prove that a thing whose nature is a self-contradiction cannot, and therefore does not exist.

I do not need a complete knowledge of the universe to prove to you that cubic spheres do not exist. Such objects have mutually-exclusive attributes which would render their existence impossible. For example, a cube, by definition, has 8 corners, while a sphere has none. These properties are completely incompatible: they cannot be held simultaneously by the same object. It is my intent to show that the supposed properties of the Christian God Yahweh, like those of a cubic sphere, are incompatible, and by so doing, to show Yahweh's existence to be an impossibility.

Wilson's Answer: The very reason why we can know that a cubic sphere cannot exist is because one can attribute a definition of what a cube is and what a sphere is. Once those definition are made clear can one really conclude that somethings are an impossibility.

Hence this is my rebuttal. How can we define God? Are our minds big enough to really know God enough to define God truly. For one to define God, one has to be bigger than God. Only when one can define God properly, in all His essence can one safely conclude that the reality do not have a being call God. On the contrary, there are many descriptions of God through the Bible and nature shouts His description. Only those who has eyes to enjoy a sunset and yet say that God do not exist is saying His eyes cannot see creation.

A very simple experiment. For you to know that somewhere has been to a place is just to see the evidence of his presence. The evidence is creation. For one to see wind do exist, even when one cannot see it, is to see the evidence of its presence: the moving reed, the rolling winds, the splashing waves...

So do we need to know everything that God exists? No. But it would be harder for someone who do not know everything to say that God don't exists...because the evidence is all around him.

Defining YHWH

Before we can discuss the existence of a thing, we must define it. Christians have endowed their God with all of the following attributes: He is eternal, all-powerful, and created everything. He created all the laws of nature and can change anything by an act of will. He is all-good, all-loving, and perfectly just. He is a personal God who experiences all of the emotions a human does. He is all-knowing. He sees everything past and future.

God's creation was originally perfect, but humans, by disobeying him, brought imperfection into the world. Humans are evil and sinful, and must suffer in this world because of their sinfulness. God gives humans the opportunity to accept forgiveness for their sin, and all who do will be rewarded with eternal bliss in heaven, but while they are on earth, they must suffer for his sake. All humans who choose not to accept this forgiveness must go to hell and be tormented for eternity.

One Bible verse which Christians are fond of quoting says that atheists are fools. I intend to show that the above concepts of God are completely incompatible and so reveal the impossibility of all of them being true. Who is the fool? The fool is the one who believes impossible things and calls them divine mysteries.

Wilson's Answer: The way I see is that the author is placing all the blame to God for human's problem with sin. What the author do not see, and failed to see is that, God gave the best expression of love by giving something that is being fought all over the world: freedom. God loves us so much He gave us FREEDOM. Unfortunately, FREEDOM means one do have the potential to sin. Despite the fact that through His ominiscene, He still create us so that He can enjoy us for all eternity through Jesus Christ.

All the happiness and sadness that we experience, most of them are caused by our decision making process, our freedom to choose. Why? Because if God is LOVE, then the very very basic ingredient to produce true love is freedom. How can love be real, if one is forced to love someone?

Because of God's wanting to have a loving relationship with us mere mortals, He would rather sacrifice His Son so we can be enjoyed by Him and we in return even though the worst nightmare, sin entered this world, has come true.

Perfection Seeks Even More Perfection

What did God do during that eternity before he created everything? If God was all that existed back then, what disturbed the eternal equilibrium and compelled him to create? Was he bored? Was he lonely? God is supposed to be perfect. If something is perfect, it is complete--it needs nothing else. We humans engage in activities because we are pursuing that elusive perfection, because there is disequilibrium caused by a difference between what we are and what we want to be. If God is perfect, there can be no disequilibrium. There is nothing he needs, nothing he desires, and nothing he must or will do. A God who is perfect does nothing except exist. A perfect creator God is impossible.

Wilson's Answer: I will ask a question. "Why would your parents choose to procreate you in the first place?" Any loving parent, would want this when they have a child is this: a family. And what a family provide? Love and acceptance. Our parents have us so that they can enjoy us, and we as their children can enjoy love.

Then the argument that if God is perfect, then there wouldn't be a need to create human beings in the first place since in perfection, nothing is lacking. It is the same saying that a couple has found each other and they love each other and that is enough.

BUT, does that mean if nothing is lacking, something cannot be better? Of course not. One can always strive for better things in life. And why God, even in his perfection, make a perfect world even more perfect? Simply because He knows it can be better. Why?

Before us human beings, God, being in trinity has the Son and the Holy Spirit. They would have been perfectly pleased in that situation. However fast forward to the New Heaven and a New Earth where multitudes of believers are resurrected, given a new body, all having a lasting relationship with Abba and our Brother, isn't that better than just having God in three essence?

God being all knowing, would simply choose a better scenario: to have more people sharing the good life with Him rather than with Himself. Hence He would rather go through the pain of sin, so that He can have more Sons and Daughters of God.

Perfection Begets Imperfection

But, for the sake of argument, let's continue. Let us suppose that this perfect God did create the universe. Humans were the crown of his creation, since they were created in God's image and have the ability to make decisions. However, these humans spoiled the original perfection by choosing to disobey God.

What!? If something is perfect, nothing imperfect can come from it. Someone once said that bad fruit cannot come from a good tree, and yet this "perfect" God created a "perfect" universe which was rendered imperfect by the "perfect" humans. The ultimate source of imperfection is God. What is perfect cannot become imperfect, so humans must have been created imperfect. What is perfect cannot create anything imperfect, so God must be imperfect to have created these imperfect humans. A perfect God who creates imperfect humans is impossible.

Wilson's Answer: The Bible did say ALL creation is Good. And if freedom is given to love, then there is freedom to choose, which by itself is a good thing. But the fact is that the chooser who is good, can choose wrongly as well. A human being can be created good...but a good thing such as free choice, can be a bad thing and Eve choose badly to eat the fruit and Adam choose badly to follow his wife.

And for those who are so against God in order to deny Him using superfluous arguments, these people would be pleased to know that it is God who gave them the power of freedom, to choose not to believe in Him. And they are exactly eating the forbidden fruit.

Is a normal baby perfect? Of course, he/she can eat/sleep/play/giggle...and he/she can also make decision to cry in the middle of the night/create din/cause sleepless nights just because he/she is able to.

The very fact that one can deny God means God is love.

The Freewill Argument

The Christians' objection to this argument involves freewill. They say that a being must have freewill to be happy. The omnibenevolent God did not wish to create robots, so he gave humans freewill to enable them to experience love and happiness. But the humans used this freewill to choose evil, and introduced imperfection into God's originally perfect universe. God had no control over this decision, so the blame for our imperfect universe is on the humans, not God.

Here is why the argument is weak. First, if God is omnipotent, then the assumption that freewill is necessary for happiness is false. If God could make it a rule that only beings with freewill may experience happiness, then he could just as easily have made it a rule that only robots may experience happiness. The latter option is clearly superior, since perfect robots will never make decisions which could render them or their creator unhappy, whereas beings with freewill could. A perfect and omnipotent God who creates beings capable of ruining their own happiness is impossible.

Second, even if we were to allow the necessity of freewill for happiness, God could have created humans with freewill who did not have the ability to choose evil, but to choose between several good options.

Third, God supposedly has freewill, and yet he does not make imperfect decisions. If humans are miniature images of God, our decisions should likewise be perfect. Also, the occupants of heaven, who presumably must have freewill to be happy, will never use that freewill to make imperfect decisions. Why would the originally perfect humans do differently?

The point remains: the presence of imperfections in the universe disproves the supposed perfection of its creator.

Wilson's Answer: The thing is that perfect being should have perfect decisions means only one thing. The perfect being is a robot.

So how would he know if his wife loves him unconditionally? By placing a option for her to hate him with no reasons whatsoever. Note: the author uses happiness as the reason for freewill. But I would argue this that God allows freewill so that LOVE can be tested and true LOVE will create joy and not happiness, where JOY is a greater emotional wellbeing than happiness.

That is what God is doing too. He may know who will hate Him in the future but that doesn't stop Him from creating humans that will love Him too. I believe that God will know that the new body given to us, will keep us from sin also because the blood of Jesus...that's why the author will never understand why the new perfect beings being promised will make perfect decisions.

This Bible verse will provide that answer "God will make all things work for good for those who loves Him." All things, and that includes bad decisions.

All-good God Knowingly Creates Future Suffering

God is omniscient. When he created the universe, he saw the sufferings which humans would endure as a result of the sin of those original humans. He heard the screams of the damned. Surely he would have known that it would have been better for those humans to never have been born (in fact, the Bible says this very thing), and surely this all-compassionate deity would have foregone the creation of a universe destined to imperfection in which many of the humans were doomed to eternal suffering. A perfectly compassionate being who creates beings which he knows are doomed to suffer is impossible.

Wilson's Answer: God also say that it is not His will to see people perish. But if are to look at the good side, that there will be more who will be enjoying the fruits of Heaven, I guess the greater good wins and all thanks to Jesus Sacrifice.

Infinite Punishment for Finite Sins

God is perfectly just, and yet he sentences the imperfect humans he created to infinite suffering in hell for finite sins. Clearly, a limited offense does not warrant unlimited punishment. God's sentencing of the imperfect humans to an eternity in hell for a mere mortal lifetime of sin is infinitely more unjust than this punishment. The absurd injustice of this infinite punishment is even greater when we consider that the ultimate source of human imperfection is the God who created them. A perfectly just God who sentences his imperfect creation to infinite punishment for finite sins is impossible.

Wilson's Answer: The fact is that sins are infinite. We are using human perception of justice on God's definition of justice. The thing that sins DO affect future generations. Like war...one war is all it takes for a country to suffer for many generations to come.

To say that God's justice is absurd do not know the true value of true justice until one is really wronged. And it is also because of LOVE, that God needs to be judge. So many times in our lives, we are being backstabbed, lied to, complained about, gossip with and taken advantaged off that God needs to judge those people who wronged us because HE loves us.

If we say God is unfair since He is punishing people because it was He who created the imperfect humans in the first place, then where is the justice if Jesus who has helped millions died on the cross? God is really unfair to His own Son if that's the case. But it is only by ONE's redemptive work that allows the sin of one to be wiped out from those who believed in HIM. Isn't that even more unfair? Why would the author argues one point that God has effectively shown the most unfair decision to send his SON to die so that we may live?

God is unfair...He is unfairly good!

Belief More Important Than Action

Consider all of the people who live in the remote regions of the world who have never even heard the "gospel" of Jesus Christ. Consider the people who have naturally adhered to the religion of their parents and nation as they had been taught to do since birth. If we are to believe the Christians, all of these people will perish in the eternal fire for not believing in Jesus. It does not matter how just, kind, and generous they have been with their fellow humans during their lifetime: if they do not accept the gospel of Jesus, they are condemned. No just God would ever judge a man by his beliefs rather than his actions.

Wilson's Answer: I wonder if the author has belief in anything. Like belief in the science of aerodynamics that enables him to sit on a plane and travel through the air. One do not need any actions to have belief in order to act.

The thing is that the author also understands that all do sin and believed that God is unjust by sending his creation to a world to sin so that he can punish them. This belief of an unjust God will lead to only one thing...an action to deny Him.

So for God to judge his beliefs is perfectly just because it is through beliefs that one's motivation is made clear and that motivation will lead to his actions: Just as he did in his article refuting God. He refutes because he believes in the non existence.

If belief is so strong and powerful, why is it tough to understand that a belief in Jesus as saviour would bring about salvation?

Perfection's Imperfect Revelation

The Bible is supposedly God's perfect Word. It contains instructions to humankind for avoiding the eternal fires of hell. How wonderful and kind of this God to provide us with this means of overcoming the problems for which he is ultimately responsible! The all-powerful God could have, by a mere act of will, eliminated all of the problems we humans must endure, but instead, in his infinite wisdom, he has opted to offer this indecipherable amalgam of books which is the Bible as a means for avoiding the hell which he has prepared for us. The perfect God has decided to reveal his wishes in this imperfect work, written in the imperfect language of imperfect man, translated, copied, interpreted, voted on, and related by imperfect man.

No two men will ever agree what this perfect word of God is supposed to mean, since much of it is either self- contradictory, or obscured by enigmatic symbols. And yet the perfect God expects us imperfect humans to understand this paradoxical riddle using the imperfect minds with which he has equipped us. Surely the all-wise and all-powerful God would have known that it would have been better to reveal his perfect will directly to each of us, rather than to allow it to be debased and perverted by the imperfect language and botched interpretations of man.

Wilson's Answer: Through imperfect men, through imperfect language and yet the message has not changed throughout the years. Isn't that direct enough?

Contradictory Justice

One need look to no source other than the Bible to discover its imperfections, for it contradicts itself and thus exposes its own imperfection. It contradicts itself on matters of justice, for the same just God who assures his people that sons shall not be punished for the sins of their fathers turns around and destroys an entire household for the sin of one man (he had stolen some of Yahweh's war loot). It was this same Yahweh who afflicted thousands of his innocent people with plague and death to punish their evil king David for taking a census (?!). It was this same Yahweh who allowed the humans to slaughter his son because the perfect Yahweh had botched his own creation. Consider how many have been stoned, burned, slaughtered, raped, and enslaved because of Yahweh's skewed sense of justice. The blood of innocent babies is on the perfect, just, compassionate hands of Yahweh.

Wilson Answer: Punishing a people for one's bad action is certainly unjust. Then consider that one good action of Christ have saved billions...that is unjust as well and yet we never complained and never appreciate God's goodness. If one can use one measurement against God's badness, then why we accept Jesus gift if it is unjust?

The thing is God has allowed ONE death to save zillions. It may be skewed justice too but it is a skewed justice for a great good. Now argue against that. God don't ask a lot...he just want you to accept Jesus so that this unjust gift can be given to you...free of charge.

Contradictory History

The Bible contradicts itself on matters of history. A person who reads and compares the contents of the Bible will be confused about exactly who Esau's wives were, whether Timnah was a concubine or a son, and whether Jesus' earthly lineage is through Solomon or his brother Nathan. These are but a few of hundreds of documented historical contradictions. If the Bible cannot confirm itself in mundane earthly matters, how are we to trust it on moral and spiritual matters?

Wilson Answer: Fact is that it was never in doubt. One name in a lineage doesn't mean the same person with the same name in another lineage.

Unfulfilled Prophecy

The Bible misinterprets its own prophecies. Read Isaiah 7 and compare it to Matthew 1 to find but one of many misinterpreted prophecies of which Christians are either passively or willfully ignorant. The fulfillment of prophecy in the Bible is cited as proof of its divine inspiration, and yet here is but one major example of a prophecy whose intended meaning has been and continues to be twisted to support subsequent absurd and false doctrines. There are no ends to which the credulous will not go to support their feeble beliefs in the face of compelling evidence against them.

The Bible is imperfect. It only takes one imperfection to destroy the supposed perfection of this alleged Word of God. Many have been found. A perfect God who reveals his perfect will in an imperfect book is impossible.

Wilson's Answer: One should only look at one prophecy: The jews and the formation of the state of Israel to know that God's word about our future is foretold accurately. It has happened, as it has happened with prophecies about Jesus. And prophecies about the end times will also come, just as predicted by the Bible.

The Omniscient Changes the Future

A God who knows the future is powerless to change it. An omniscient God who is all-powerful and freewilled is impossible.

Wilson's Answer: ... and for a good reason...He loves us enough to give us freewill.

The Omniscient is Surprised

A God who knows everything cannot have emotions. The Bible says that God experiences all of the emotions of humans, including anger, sadness, and happiness. We humans experience emotions as a result of new knowledge. A man who had formerly been ignorant of his wife's infidelity will experience the emotions of anger and sadness only after he has learned what had previously been hidden. In contrast, the omniscient God is ignorant of nothing. Nothing is hidden from him, nothing new may be revealed to him, so there is no gained knowledge to which he may emotively react.

We humans experience anger and frustration when something is wrong which we cannot fix. The perfect, omnipotent God, however, can fix anything. Humans experience longing for things we lack. The perfect God lacks nothing. An omniscient, omnipotent, and perfect God who experiences emotion is impossible.

Wilson's Answer: Is God surprised? if He is, then He won't give us prophecy. I may know that my wife is unfaithful but that does not mean that I cannot be pained by the infidelity. This is a moot point iMHO.

Interesting Quotes But Comes from the Same Email Source..

...and what does it says?

Are we the body of Christ has this sense of half-way belief/unbelief that we can't be sure what we can do in Christ?

The quotes in question that comes from the same email that i have received from a Christian website

"The Cause of the weakness of your Christian life is that you want
to work it out partly, and then have God help you. That cannot be.
You must come to be utterly helpless, to let God work. He will
work gloriously." ~ Andrew Murray

"To DIE TO SELF, or to come from under its power, IS NOT AND
CAN NOT BE DONE by any active resistance we can make
against it OR by our own power of nature. The one true way of
dying to self is the way of patience, meekness, humility, surrender
and RESIGNATION to God." ~ Andrew Murray

"We Can not please God by what we do for Him in our own human
effort, we can only please Him by surrendering and letting Him work
in and through our lives." ~John Mulinde

“I will die for my God. I will die for my faith. It's the least I can do
for Christ dying for me.” ~ Cassie Bernall, Columbine High Martyr

"We must be careful not to choose, but to let God's Holy Spirit
manage our lives; not to smooth down and explain away, but to
stir up the gift and allow God's Spirit to disturb us and disturb us
and disturb us until we yield and yield and yield and the possibility
in God's mind for us becomes an established fact in our lives,
with the rivers in evidence meeting the need of a dying world."
~Smith Wigglesworth.

Like the sesame street or electric company, the programs asked kids to pick out the item that is different from the rest.

So what is different in the above quotes?

My view is the one from Cassie. I am not saying that she has died in vain for Christ but it is the attitude behind that quote. If we are to be grateful for what Christ has done for us on the cross, then the only thing that will please Him is to believe that He died for us on the cross. Nothing we do, nothing we say can never please God if our understanding of his sacrifice and the intention of our works is in error.

That is the reason why Andrew Murray says that to die to self, that is the realisation that what we do, think, act, speak etc can never please God until we realise, that our works in evangelisation, in charity work and in volunteering for the Church must be rooted in the understanding that what we do has no power in itself to save us from ourselves.

Only when we work out that faith in us from the foundation of understanding that our salvation is already being given to us by God through Christ work on the cross, will God work in us and through us. That's the gist of what James is writing about. James is saying that the work is evident of our salvation.

That's true...but from his writing, unscrupulous reading of the bible can be construed that we ourselves need evidence of our salvation through works which I think is not the intention of James. We love because Christ first love us, and out of this love will bear fruits of works that will give glory to God, and not to condemn us.

I have said the same thing to Ms Lie, that whatever we do, it is through the foundation of the right understanding of His Grace, the unmerited favour of God, that we already have that favour in His eyes and we do things knowing our salvation is secured. So long His blood is everlasting, our salvation is ever lasting on the mercy seat.

We don't need to die for God in order to show our love to Him. We need only to believe and to surrender our propensity to rely on our own efforts to gain the salvation. Salvation can only come through faith in Christ not through our works. Salvation won't come in a feeling of being saved. Just know and belief we are saved. That's it...it is so simple and yet it took someone's glorious life to give us that simplicity.

So please don't destroy the beauty of that act by saying salvation still need our works to apply to us.

The Joy Of *fill in the blanks* In The Presence Of The Lord

Sometimes you never get to know the what the Lord can do just to get you not so pissed with the situation.

Like for instance this new job. How would a person who has both Business and IT background able to get into a Law firm doing conveyancing work? Somehow or rather I have two inklings

a) The Lord wants me to use whatever I have learn in the area of Law.

b) The Lord wants me to understand certain things when it comes to dealing with real estate.

Both of which are useful to know and definitely the Lord understands there are things that will Bless me more.

And the understanding I have after 3 weeks at Characterist is that this place is growing and growing fast but as with all organisations, there are things that will be improving soon by Grace of God through Christ.

And the best part of it all is that Temasek Poly just signed a MOU with ST-Eng(info-sec) to provide a diploma in Digital Forensics. Yes it is a mouthful but it is essentially to safeguard IT resources or ensuring IT evidences can be admitted to the Court of Law during litigation. Something I would not have thought of if I am just focusing on Marketing in IT firms which I have been doing for quite some time.

So what's left is still to trust God in the sea of uncertainties.

Assume good things to come for the Lord has redeemed us from the curse of the Law. So we are now in the Law because Christ has fulfilled what has been demanded by the law 2000 years ago.

It is certainly a weird way to enter a law firm but who can make crooked a path that the Lord has straightened for?

Its Being A Long Time.

I only get to say this because for the past 2 years, it was a financial nightmare akin to the people of God wandering in the desert for 40 years. Yes I know, comparing 2 years to 40 years is a bit of a stretch but Praise the Lord, He is a shepherd that no other shepherd can compare to.

In short, thank God for a job. My criteria for jobs now is simple. Able to feed myself and family, and have time for my love of photography and a family time and lastly, feel that work place not such a drag. I wouldn't know about the last point but seriously, I have the positive expectation that Jesus in is the office.

Now just don't worry. Receive the peace that Jesus bestow upon God's children.

Inception: The power of an idea

This movie is seriously as though provocating as the Matrix. Why it will become one the best movie is because the premise is that whenever we are awake, we assume that the world around us is the truth. And as Pontius Pilate asked Jesus "What is the truth?" we are also struggling to understand the complexity of our being, of our existence and of our reason for being here. Hence our truth is really what we think, what we believe and what we perceive things to be.

So what is truth? Truth is the person of Christ? See the subtlety of the question mark. It is an idea to question a statement, a belief so that we can grow and can believe even more or reject a false notion. But that subtlety is the weapon that the devil has used to create doubt and then slowly replace the conviction in Christ with a false notion, or another god or mammon.

The idea or in another word, suggestion, makes us to ponder the possibility of another alternative possibility to the one reality we are holding on. And that idea is definitely as dangerous as a weapon in one's hand. The power of an idea will lead to the inception of one's belief that will lead to the transformation of a person through the perception of the world around that person.

But how can an idea become so powerful especially in the absence of prove. Why do atheists held the belief, the idea that we come from apes when apes are still around? Why do the buddhist think that there is an everlasting wheel of life, or reincarnation and of kharma? Why do we Christians think that Jesus Christ is the saviour? When did the idea of sin comes in? How can we be sure? An idea, a question, a doubt will lead to either hope or despair...

That's why Apostle Paul says

¹⁴Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, ¹⁵and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. ¹⁶In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. ¹⁷Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. (Ephesians 6)

Why do we need to put on the helmet of salvation? Why not the breastplate of salvation?

Instead Paul said the head needed to be protected by the truth of our eternal salvation, and in an instance, we all know that the idea, that we will lose our salvation, is pretty real in this world. Didn't Paul says that NOTHING can separate us from the love of God? But still a lot of people are duped by the idea that we, the real children of God, can lose our salvation.

The notion of an idea, that it can be planted as in the movie, can either grow into a strong tree or wilt under strong persecution. The idea, that Christ is the redeemer, is something that the devil and the world at large is very much against. Look after that idea, and water it with faith by stepping out in faith, will make that idea, the reality.

And what is the reality that is important? We are the children of God.

And as Pastor Joseph Prince says "Right believing leads to Right Living" and may I add that the right believing needs the right idea, the right suggestion and the ability to fight alternative ideas to our hope of our salvation.

This time, the top will drop because our reality is Christ reality and our salvation is real salvation.

An Affirmative Love of A Father Leads to Greater Motivation

I thought that IRON Man 2 does speaks not just personal versus strength of technology, but also about the affirmation of a father's love and our own relationship with our earthly fathers and our heavenly Abba.

The turning point for me in the whole movie was when Tony Start continued to see his father's movie clip for the Stark Convention and witnessed his father's admonition towards him when little Tony Stark played with the model thereby 'wasting' the film footage.

As Tony continue to watch the footage, he actually saw the funny side of his father (that's where he got his off the cuff humour from) and then his father's own personal message to his son, affirming Tony of his ability to see his father's secret work and to tell him, he built up all these for him.

Another image of father's love is when the nemesis, whiplashes' father apologises to his son and with a heavy heart bequeth whip-lash the technology he shared with senior stark.

My feel is that the real story behind the iron man, is not what we wear or show on the outside but what we has on the inside, that made us a man in the eyes of men. Not because our physical attributes but the spirit we have in us.

Hence, it is appropriate that the man in our lives, the fathers and brothers are the people who make us men, is given a fair airing in the show It is really time to show, that fathers ARE important to a child's life and a positive father figure, make ordinary men into iron men.

The other thing we should really see, is also the love our of fathers, especially the love of our Abba in heaven. As senior stark shows Tony what he has done for him, so has our father in heaven, show us the promises of heaven on earth as it is in heaven, the blessings He gave us through the sacrifice of His Son, so that He can call us His sons and His men!

Our Father in Heaven has affirmed us by loving us. Now we do not live in condemnation but under the unmerited favour of God!

Translations: Missing Verses is a big issue?

Today I was forwarded a website that teaches about the the problems of other translations and the purported reference to the view that KJV is the only accurate translation of the Bible.

To put things into perspective, I have always have the understanding that the content of the message is more important than the language to bring about the understanding of the content.

That means, if a meaning of a passage has being distorted to a point because of the lack of a few words, then it is definitely a very very serious issue. At this point, I would also want to say that to quote an 'accurate' verse from the Bible but out of its context, is as bad as taking the few words out of the Bible. The reason is simple. If the REAL meaning is lost, then we have misrepresented God and I will say there are a lot of people who has quoted Bible verses out of context too.

To me, so long the Bible verses are very close to what the original Bibles are saying and say what it means, that is the Hebrew Bible and the Greek Translation of the Hebrew Bible the Septuagint, then it is a Bible through and through (the inspired word of God). If a translation is purported to lead Christians away from the true meaning of being a Christian or has lead some Christians to misunderstand the true love and Blessings of the Lord, then that translation can be said to originate from the pit of hell.

Do you know that the hebrew language and also greek has deeper meaning than what English language can hold. For example the word 'Peace' in English which is used to translate from the Hebrew word 'Shalom'.

Here's some meaning from the word 'Peace' (just Google 'define:peace')

• harmonious relations; freedom from disputes; "the roommates lived in peace together"
• the absence of mental stress or anxiety

And here is the definition of the the word 'Shalom'

(Hebrew, `peace'). Common Hebrew greeting. `Shalom' indicates security, contentment, good health, prosperity, friendship, and tranquility of heart and mind.

From just the definition of the word 'peace' to the word 'shalom' in the actual usage of the language of Jesus time (Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek), then you can see, the Hebrew word has much more meaning than what the word 'peace' is ascribed to.

So does that mean KJV is wrong to translate the Bible as such since it has changed the meaning of Shalom into a meaning that is much shallower and much poorer as in peace? Would that make KJV a mistranslated Bible as well?

That's the thing about language. We cannot fathom to enormity of certain words in Hebrew and we have lost a lot of the gifts of God and don't understand the enormity of Jesus sacrifice on the cross because of lost meanings. Isn't that worse than taking out some verses that does nothing to change the meaning of the message?

I have this page to recommend for people to read:
http://www.bibletranslation.ws/kjv.html

The very best test is to ask yourself after reading the NIV, am I still a Christian, that is a person that do not the deity of Christ, who is the Son of the Most High? Do I believe that I have been born again as a Christian and my sense of shame and sin is nailed on the cross with Christ? Do I believe that I will be given a new life and become a new creation through Christ?

If the answer is yes to anything of the above, then you are touched by God through His Word and has become His sons and daughters despite the 'shortcomings' of the translations.

To me, the most important thing we should look out for, is the condemnation that springs out from the misinterpretation (not translation alone) of the Bible verses, to chain people to the yoke of the Law whom our Lord has set us free from. And secondly, we as Christian brothers and sisters should do the right thing, to preach God and His Gospel as Paul is preaching....to point to the benefits of Christ sacrifice on the cross.


Please go back to this page (http://www.hissheep.org/kjv/a_comparison_of_the_kjv_niv.html) and then ask yourself, did the translation of a passage actually changes the fundamental meaning of the Bible? Did the missing verses cause you to lose your salvation? In all battles, fight the right ones and win it through Christ's understanding.


I just take out some of the purported verses from the website for some comments:

Matthew 6:13 KJV "And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen." NIV "And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one." The NIV leaves out "For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory for ever. Amen." Everything pertaining to His Kingdom and Deity is left out."

Wilson's Refrain: Does leaving that part out changes God's diety in anyway?

Matthew 8:29 KJV "And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?" NIV "'What do you want with us, Son of God?' they shouted. '"Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?'" NIV leaves out "Jesus, thou", degrading the power of the verse concerning His deity.

Wilson's Refrain: Read the NIV passage agin. Did it not the demons are talking to Jesus Himself? So why the elimination of "Jesus, thou" degrade Jesus power since the demons has acknowledge Him in the first place?

Matthew 9:18 KJV ". . there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him. ." NIV "While he was saying this, a ruler came and knelt before him and said, 'My daughter has just died. But come and put your hand on her, and she will live.'" NIV changes "worshipped" to "knelt before." Men kneel before their own kings and queens, but they do not worship them.

Wilson's Refrain: Yes, people kneel before Kings and Queens and they do not worship them. The thing is this, what difference would it make to you as a reader? It is the following act of reviving the daughter that is most important, He did the miracle of resurrection! Do you become a believer because the Bible say the ruler worshipped Jesus or because you believed that He did resurrect the girl?

Besides, the KJV can said to be translating from the perspective of someone who has already received Christ as Lord and can easily use the word worship if the people involved has knelt down. The fact is that the people did kneel, they worship him or not is the contention. But this contention doesn't deny the fact that people did ask Jesus for help and the very fact Jesus was asked, shows He did has an awesome power and that fact is the fact we should bring out of the passages as a witness to His power.

So if NIV is a newspaper, then using the word 'knelt' is a correct way of describing what has happened since it is describe as an action. To put the word 'worshipped' can be seen as a form of prejudice (that means putting meaning behind an action that may not be there in the first place) and thus also another form of mistranslation.

Matthew 16:20 KJV "Then charged He his disciples that they should tell no man that He was Jesus the Christ." NIV "Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ." NIV leaves out "Jesus," as it does in numerous verses.

Wilson's Refrain: Without the word 'Jesus', would you as a reader understand that the verses is refering to Jesus as well? I guess many of us would so this is really an unnecessary accusation. I would also use this verse to comment about leaving the word 'Lord' to denote that Jesus' deity is being denied. What utter nonsense.

Mark 1:14 KJV "Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God." NIV "After John was put in prison, Jesus went into Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God." NIV says "the good news" and leaves out "the gospel of the kingdom of God."

Wilson's Refrain: In the first place, the word 'Gospel' means 'Good news'. So what is the problem? The author is basically finding saw dust in the eye of NIV when the author fails to see the log in his!

Luke 11:2 KJV "And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth." NIV "He said to them, "When you pray, say: "'Father, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come." He isn't "Our Father" but just Father, and He isn't in Heaven, because that tells you something of who He is and points to Him as the Heavenly Father, so both references to heaven are removed. He must be here on earth. The reason for this is that the New Agers and Catholics believe in the "universal fatherhood" of God. My Father or Our Father becomes "The Father." This can be seen in some of the verses below: John 10:30,32; 14:28, etc. He is Father to all, and with it is the "Brotherhood of man." Then what happened to doing His will? Most people today want to do their own will, and justify it, and say that is the way it is supposed to be. But that is not the way it is supposed to be. We are to say "If the Lord will. . ." James 4:15 KJV "For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that." Satan wants you to do his will, and not the Father's.

Wilson's Refrain: This is another lame excuse to demonise the translation. Would the expulsion of 'Our' robbed us of the meaning that God is our Father? Jesus is teaching His disciples how to pray. By telling them to say 'Father' is as good as telling His disciples to accept God as their Father as in ABBA!! A VERY intimate term...like papa! It has NOTHING to do about Universal fatherhood as the author puts it. No way taking out the word 'Our' constitute the meaning 'THE' Father! Obviously the author is trying to accuse/condemn the translation out of thin air!

Angels are also sons of God. But Angels are NOT sons of God through Christ Jesus, THE Son of God.

I 'love' the last part where he says leaving out the works 'If the Lord will,' means we are doing Satan's work. Gosh...this is going by the word but not the SPIRIT of the meaning of the word.

Luke 11:4 KJV "And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil." NIV "Forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone who sins against us. And lead us not into temptation. '" Even Satanists and Eastern Mysticists desire cleansing from sin, and Satan desires to masquerade as the sin forgiver and destroyer. Example: From the Complete Book of Magic and Witchcraft, part of a Satanic ritual states: "Grant that I may be cleansed by this water from all my sins." So Satan doesn't take this part out. Think about it: why don't they want you to be delivered from evil? This is all part of the conspiracy. First they deny the existence of Satan. They say that Satan is not a person, but merely a "power of evil." Then they assert that Lucifer and the Devil are separate and distinct entities. Satan tries to hide his real identity, and hide behind other names. New Agers say that Satan is a figment of Christians’ imaginations. They point out that Lucifer means 'day-star' or 'light giver' and say that Lucifer is the brightest of God's angels. Albert Pike said, "Lucifer is God." That's the next step in the deception: claiming that Lucifer is a good angel or even God or Christ Himself.

Wilson's Refrain: This is another lame accusation. So if one do not pray 'but deliver us from evil', that means God's redemptive work on the cross did not happen? God forbid!! And to say Satan left that part out means the NIV is of Satan's work!! Goodness! The venom of the author!!

Fact: God HAS delivered us from Evil! And praying or not praying about it doesn't deny you the fact that God HAS ALREADY SAVED YOU~! So what is the author trying to say? Whatever he is attacking has nothing to do with the verse in question!! In fact, I question his faith...is it in the words or in the works of Christ?

Acts 2:30 KJV "Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;" NIV "But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne." NIV replaces "Christ" with "one of his descendants," which could be anybody.

Wilson's Refrain: The fact of the matter is that 'Christ' is a title (Christ is the English term for the Greek Χριστός (Khristós) meaning "the anointed one". It is a translation of the Hebrew. Or messiah: any expected deliverer ) And this title of the anointed one, can also be anyone, not just Jesus. The fact of the matter is that in Acts 2, Peter is establishing the credentials of Jesus....so even if you put Christ or 'one of his descendants' in the passage, we would conclude very clearly that Jesus is destined for the throne of David.

Romans 16:24 KJV "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen." NIV leaves out the entire verse.

Wilson's Refrain: So what if it was left out? What does it do to the meaning of the book of Romans?

Romans 14:10 KJV ". .for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ." NIV "For we will all stand before God's judgment seat." NIV does away with Christ and His authority in judgment.

Wilson's Refrain: What if I say NIV is acknowledging that Christ is with God and thus He is God and therefore putting Christ or God is of no consequence? Of course it has no consequence because there will be a judgment by God as in the triune God...so it doesn't matter if it is Christ, Abba Father or Holy Spirit!!

Matthew 25:13 KJV "Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh." NIV "Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour." NIV leaves out "wherein the Son of man cometh," changing the whole meaning of the verse.

Wilson's Refrain: The fact is this: IT DOES NOT CHANGE THE MEANING OF THE VERSE..heck...if did not change the meaning of the whole message!! The word 'Therefore' means that there are prior verses to this that need to be read, to justify the last sentence...so taking it out DOES NOT change the meaning of the verse.

I guess I would stop here because just these few verses, you would see the real agenda of the author. It has nothing to do with the real problem problem of translation. If people wants to receive the Lord, they WILL receive the Lord. The meaning of the word of God is still in NIV so much so it will convict people of their sin and lead them to Christ. That means the meaning is correct, the Word as portrayed in NIV is the Word of God.

Even if the Bible is correctly translated but the real meaning was lost, then what good is that translation?

Conclusion:

Brothers and Sisters, there are more important things in the Christian walk. The Bible that you have in front of you, be it NIV, KJV or even Young's Literal Translation, they are water to a parched soul, the Word's of hope and of encouragment. What I want to say is that NIV translation has brought people to Jesus and to God and hence has no real issues at all to deem it as a mistranslation.

If one's salvation is rested on the translation of the Bible, then the Work of Christ of the Cross is of no value at all. But the fact that NIV DID announce the Lordship of Jesus Christ and proclaim the finished work of the Lord, it has done its job to pronounce the Gospel to the World.

In true scholarship, one does not only rely on one translation, but of many. Even KJV do not grasp the full meaning of the greek Septuagint or even the Hebrew Bible, the Tanakh so one can even argue KJV is mistranslated as well. So who wins from this debate? The devil.

I would really want you to read this website and to put everything into correct perspective.

http://www.bibletranslation.ws/kjv.html

And Again...Now Pastor Rony Tan Part II

I have now watched the videos in question. The content says as much why non-Christians, especially the Buddhist would be offended with the title "Pastor Ronny Tan Blasts Buddhism" for the video.

I want to really see this video as a whole and here are my comments:

Pastor Tan's 'humour' may have robbed the message's true power with the examples he has used. No doubt, the examples are logical conclusion based on Buddhism teachings but by joking or trying to put it on a lighter side of things has instead shifted the audiences' focus on the Buddhism system of kharma, reincarnation and nirvana (in short, buddhists way of obtaining a very good life) to the 'insults' of being reincarnated to cows, cockroaches and women.

I guess the best approach I have seen or read so far is from Mr Ravi Zacharias' "The Lotus And The Cross" where there is an imagined scenario where Jesus Christ discusses Buddha's teaching with the Buddha himself.

My comments on certain parts of the videos:

1. Is chanting and chanting alone able to bring one towards Nirvana?

My view is that if my history has caused me to be human again, that means my past mistakes that has REAL actions and REAL consequences will affect my 'report card' when I die.

So how would chanting and obtaining the state of Nirvana (which means 'nothingness') being nothing it and of itself with no REAL actions and no REAL consequence able to help me to gain eternal life?

2. The sharing of the episode where the woman in question has 'confirmation' that she has 5 past lives with a tibetan monk.

What it shows that there IS a spiritual force as the Holy Spirit Himself is also a Spiritual force. But there is a good and bad spiritual force that will either lead a person towards eternal life or eternal damnation. So the onus is on the person to understand what he/she is believing.

There will be 'confirmation' for certain beliefs, the issue is the truthfulness of that belief. When you believe in something that is false and get 'confirmation', what you believe is still false unfortunately.

Put an example. I believe in Jesus Christ and in my personal life, there are 'coincidences' in my life that helps and confirms in my belief in Christ Jesus. But to be intellectually fair to myself, I have also read about people's rejection in the historicity of Jesus and the arguments for and against Christ. After I am satisfied that Christ is true, then my confirmation is established on something firm. The question remains "What confirmation does Buddhism possess?"

My own brush with arguments with Buddhism happens with a great friend from Monah Photography Club. We did argue into the night and up to a point we both are red-eyed (we are sleepy). It goes to show the amount of conviction we have with regards to our beliefs.

The outcome of that argument I realised 3 points that Buddhism do not address:

- The reality of a superior being
- The arbitrator/judge of the kharmic system. i.e. who decides who gets nirvana or not? who decides what/who someone is reincarnated into?
- where is the start of a person's life if I believe in reincarnation? who started the life in the first place?

As you can see from above, the role of a creator/judge was not addressed properly in Buddhism.

Simple questions to debunk reincarnation:

"If reincarnation is true then where is the starting point of all life?"

"How can Buddhism explain the increase in human population but yet the moral fabric of all society has broken down more over the years, judging by the amount of hate/war/disease that people on this earth has suffered. If the teachings of Buddhism is true, then the reincarnated human beings should have enough kharma to know what is right and wrong and all reborn people should know better to build better societies. Furthermore, we should then see LESS people as years go by because not all human beings are saints. But we see more people. Why?"

Fact
- As God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob has predicted, human beings will degrade because of the presence of sin
- The presence of sin means there is something that was done wrong.
- How to right the wrong? If the previous generations still has not get it right after thousands of years has passed, then what hope do we have in human endeavours?
- God is the start of all things even giving each and everyone of us a UNIQUE personality. The population growth is due to God's gift of our souls.

Buddhism has some serious questions to answer and those practising it, as in head monks, still cannot answer pertinent, basic questions about their faith in a human system.

By the way, Buddhism is a Philosophy...not a religion.

Modern Miracles

Modern Miracles

After reading the above, it is really a confirmation of sorts that what we go through is not because God is evil, but God has prevented us from greater tragedy. It did not take a Christian but a Jewish rabbi to really understand that God's miracles is in the coincidences we face everyday and/or the luck that was bestowed upon us.

On hindsight, God gave me on Christmas, 4 brand new tyres, not just any model but the best street tyre from none other than bridgestone. God has also blessed me with a tiger decal for the car. Seems like God's hands is on the car even though it has suffered an accident, having to change the hood and the bumper just 2 months after I got the car.

Of course right now I am in the midst of finding myself, trying to really understand what I am going through now after years of finding the path that God promised, the path of Shalom peace where the Abba has set before me in order to bless me and my family.

I don't believe in coincidences. I don't believe that I said something stupid because I am stupid. Angry yes, stupid no. Romans 8:28 says God will turn ALL things for good for those who love God. Honestly if by our own flesh, how do we really love God? So it is through the fact that we are now New creation through Christ Jesus that enables us to love God. And if we love God that means Romans 8:28 holds true. And how do God knows we love Him? Simply by coming to Christ in faith, not works. And if we rely on the finished work of Christ, then Romans 8:28 holds true...all things will be made good for us!!

So I screwed up, and I got into shitty position now as those two young men has thought to themselves when they lost their fiance and girlfriend. They think they cannot go on, and I honestly feel now I am so tired I can be thought of being suicidal too. It is really depressing, really demoralising. But what happened next, they got married to better people and have beautiful families.

I am also lead in a way to marry the woman who is sleeping in bed now. Only God knows what is good for us, we only knew when we look back at our lives. My wife is the living testimony about how God is true and real in my life and still I am so banged up over my job situation.

If that is the case, then it is only fair for God and for myself, to hold true the expectation of good from God (the HOPE of God).

IF I know there's no such thing as luck and coincidences, then hold fast to the faith and believe that God will provide the good stuff.

A Good Article On Tithing

"Thy Kingdom Come" - Zac Poonen

In Mathew 6:5-15, the Lord taught us to pray “Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever.

The man who prays, "Thy kingdom come" is one who has set his mind and his affection and his desires on things above. He's not one who has put on a dress of Christianity and holiness. His spirituality is not superficial. It goes right through to the very fibre of his being. He is more interested in laying up treasures in heaven than treasures on this earth.

A Christian's attitude to money is one of the clearest tests of his spiritual level, and of whether he is really longing for the kingdom of God to come or not.

I remember hearing a stor! y of a f armer who told his wife one day, "Our cow has just given birth to two calves, a white one and a brown one. And I thought that when they've grown up, we should give one of them to the Lord." His wife asked him, "Which one are you going to give to the Lord, the brown one or the white one?" He replied, "Well, we can decide that later when they grow up." The calves grew up and they became fatter and fatter. One day the farmer came home with a sad face and told his wife, "I've got sad news for you. The Lord's calf just died." And his wife said, "But how did you know which was going to be the Lord's calf? You hadn't decided on that yet." He said, "Oh well, all along I had it in my mind to give the brown calf to the Lord; and it just died this morning." It is like that with most believers. It's always the Lord's calf that dies! They give God what's left over after all their own needs have been met. And because they're not "rich towards God" they remain spiritually poor all their lives (Lk. 12:21).

In the Old Testament God had made a law that the Israelites had to give their "choice firstfruits" to the Lord (Exod. 23:19). This was the only way they could "honour the Lord" (Prov. 3:9). It's the same today. We cannot honour the Lord if we don't give Him our best.

What do we find in our life? Is there always some excuse why we cannot give the best to God. Then it shows where our heart really is. Where a man's treasure is, there will his heart be also. But the man who prays, "Thy kingdom come," is a man who has been delivered from the love of money and material things. He lives for God and for eternity now.

The kingdom of God means the government of God, the absolute rulership of God. It means making Jesus Christ absolute Lord over every area of our life. If we want the kingdom of God to come, it must first come in our hearts, in our homes, and in our churches. In these places we must give no place to Satan or to the flesh. Our longing should be that the kingdom of God should so fill our hearts, our homes and our churches that there will be no room there for anything else.

The Holy Spirit came to bring "the kingdom of God with power" to earth (Mark. 9:1). Our local churches should be a demonstration to the world today of what the kingdom of God is like - that which will one day cover the whole earth. Here is where we have failed the Lord.

When Jesus told us to seek God's kingdom first and not to be anxious about earthly things, what He meant was that if we really wanted to be anxious about something, we should be anxious that the kingdom of God should come on earth as it is in heaven (Matt. 6:33). How many of us are burdened with that type of anxiety - for the purity of the church and the coming of Go! d's king dom? May God find many among us who will seek His kingdom first.

Evangelism and The Iran Threat

Today is another piece of news about Teheran's move to continue with the uranium enrichment program. Goes to show, when global events as predicted by the Lord is going to happen, Obama's appeasement move won't go anywhere.

Abba has already made tons of announcement with regards to Iran's involvement in the battle of Gog and Magog and all these news about nuclear proliferation just highlights the need to be mindful of the events as dictated in the End Times Prophecies.

Coupled with the fact that the more powerful Singapore Churches, namely New Creation Church due to its construction of a multi million church complex, City Harvest because of its glamorous Pastor Sun and Lighthouse Church due to her Pastor's involvement of being careless with words, are now under some spiritual attacks to undermine the power of evangelism of these churches.

The attacks wants to draw attention away from their evangelistic works for Christ and focus on these areas so as to create an environment of distrust amongst the unsaved.

With IRAN making all the warmongering moves, and evil spiritual forces trying to stop the gospel message by any means necessary including undermining the credibility of the Singapore churches all points to the fact that something is boiling rapidly.

Furthermore, popular culture has disaster movies such as 2012, Armaggedon, Sudden Impact, The Day After Tomorrow to name a few that has everyone abuzz about with the current world events. I would suggest that it is the current state of affairs that gives creative impetus to the movies above. It is certainly the sign of times, that second coming is really near.

Accordingly to the scriptures, the second coming will come like a thief in the night for those who are not of God, very much like the bridesmaid who has no oil and was barred from entering into the wedding feast. This is a picture that is coming really rapidly into reality.

As believers we will all say

"Maranatha!!"

And Again...Now Pastor Rony Tan

Just when Pastor Sun has rocked the boat with her dressing, Pastor Rony Tan of Lighthouse rocks the boat with his words. But one thing is for sure: the Christian faith is to rock one's beliefs about the world and also about the spiritual systems that surround this world.

The Christian faith is an intellectually defendable faith. But before even we can convince people to consider the faith, it is always to do it with utmost respect about people's belief system and sought to convince them of the alternative by allowing them to think it through themselves.

But how to get a person to think when a person has outrightly abuse the recipient of the message? How can one convince the love of Abba God, when the messenger cuts down the person listening to the message?

Agreed. Jesus has called the Pharisees 'a brood of vipers' and 'whitewashed tombs'. But do consider the circumstances surrounding His outrage. Jesus has performed miracles after miracles, teaching people about His message but the Pharisees just go against Him for the sake of their pride, based on their religious works.

I believe we, as evangelists of Jesus' love, should also be sensitive apologists with the likes of Ravi Zacharias. I particularly like Brother Ravi's 'Great Conversations' series where he imagine how Jesus would rebutt political, social and religious debate. The one I admire most is the book "Lotus and The Cross" that talks about the religious thinking and practices of the Buddhist faith.

It is in the spirit of gentleness and love that we ought to emulate in order to engage the world around us. Belittling and doing 'crude' jokes ain't getting us any respect from the very people we try to save.

Ho Yao Sun Did It Again.

Pastor Sun has just attracted unnecessary attention to herself and cause much grieve to the Christian community in Singapore by putting on a revealing dress for the Grammy's red carpet so much so a slit ran across her right breast and the breast line can be seen.

My reaction?

I have seen tons of people revealing unnecessary parts of their body for no reason whatsoever but to gain some 10 seconds of stardom on some deprived nerd's PC. I do enjoy the sight of beautiful women since God is really a great creator and said, "Praise The Lord! She's really beautiful!"

A beautiful woman, it is a gift of God to the person whom that lady is to marry (and one of them happened to be my wife) and it is no crime to be sexy, pretty and exudes sexual charm.

BUT when to shoot that electricity from your eyes to men and when men starts to day dream (or night dream), there's a line being crossed. Am I guilty as I charged others? I admit to that and therefore I do not want to judge a person since God is the best judge there is. Furthermore, God The Abba has judged that I am righteous through Christ, therefore I shall not judge others unless I see them as Holy and Righteous.

So why am I writing this since I said I should not judge? True but we all do have something to say just to understand what we hold as truths.

So here I go.

Is it alright to go naked and therefore there is no such thing as 'revealing dresses' or 'wardrobe malfunctions'? Of course it is ok to be naked because Adam came into this world full of God's glory hence there isn't a reason to have clothes in the first place. But only when Adam and Eve sinned that the clothes became necessary as the Glory left us. In other words, clothes is actually a testament to our sinful nature.

So being dressed appropriately is the mark of a wise man. Why? Simply because we understand clothing is now necessary not to cause discomfort to others and being disrobed, in a way is also a positive statement of oneness in the context of sexual relationship within a marriage.

But when disrobing or even a hint of flesh that has gone overboard that creates the necessary situation for the man to go haywire and the women to go ballistic on their husbands, then one do not act in the understanding of brotherly love i.e. not to create harm by one's actions.

So a person's action is by itself should affect the person alone but in fact, affect the people around them as well. And since we are Christians, then it is only fair that we are mindful of others so as to bring about salvation to all. Isn't that our mission for Christ on this earth?

Apostle Paul has said in Romans 14 that all food is good but if one believes that only certain food is allowed, then help the one with the weaker faith by not offending him. Only when the believer has grown and mature in the faith, then one would realise that food can be sanctified by the Lord and that what we wear has no bearings on how Abba God loves us.

But we ought to be mindful of immature and young Christians and more still of those who are conservative and have yet believed in the Lord's plan of salvation. The Law of Love, means we should not stumble others in the pursuit of one's aims or wants even when those aims and wants would not separate us from the love of God!

So to Pastor Sun: No doubt your dress is talk of the town and personally, even as I am a Christian, I find that it is not really 'fleshing' to the point of being tasteless (Lady Ga Ga is unnecessarily loud). BUT in view of the Law of Love, that's when you ought to reconsider your actions.

Then there's the other extreme, where by a man's thoughts is dictated by what a woman wears. I find it really stupid that in the argument for man's place in religion in other Abrahamic faiths, one has to use a law, to stop a woman from doing a perfectly normal thing just to stop the men from lusting. Doesn't that say that man is unable to fulfill the law of not being lustful since He cannot stop thinking and have to force the women not to wear revealing clothes?

Wouldn't that just show that man is powerless in restraining their thoughts and place that responsibility of the inability to follow law on the hapless women? OH! Isn't that what Adam has done to his wife Eve when Adam says it is Eve's fault when he cannot follow God's instruction?

I say this:

Women, you are attractive because the glory of God has come upon you through Christ. The loveliness of Jesus is upon you. You are beautiful because God has to power to transform what is physical to something that is much more wholesome, more thorough and more 'magnetism'.

Men. We are sexual beings. Accept that and check your thoughts. It is OK to have 'lust' for your wife (not girlfriend and certain not other girls of other status) but when you blame the ladies for your own stupidity and inability to control your tool of sex, you have just lost the mandate of being the man of any house.

Today read the reply from government MFA about their donation. Am really sadden by how calculative our government is when it comes to compassion.

I guess it is time for Singaporeans to wake up and ask oneself. Why are we so self serving? Why are we as a nation has come to a point that no one except oneself should benefit from anything? What has happened to the kampong spirit?

For goodness sake Haiti as a nation is as good as destroyed by one earthquake and our dear friends in government sees 50K is good enough because Haiti does nothing to our economy and our political environment.

In contrast, Nissan, a Japanese car company can donate $100,000 though Haiti is not their most important customer nor does the company has huge dealings with the country and yet we, as a nation, with MFA representing the whole of Singapore gave a paltry sum of $50,000?

If we are Haiti and Haiti is wealthy country and we got hit by Tsunami would we be so smug to say the same thing?

For your info, this is the full text from today's forum reply:

Disaster relief – the S’pore way

I REFER to last Saturday’s commentary, ‘Is Singapore doing too little for Haiti?’ by Ms Chua Mui Hoong. She criticised the Singapore Government for not making a bigger contribution to Haiti after the earthquake when we had contributed far more to disaster relief and humanitarian assistance efforts after the 2004 tsunami, the 2005 Pakistan earthquake and the 2008 Sichuan earthquake.

As a responsible member of the international community, the Singapore Government has consistently made contributions to international humanitarian assistance and disaster relief efforts in our region and beyond. Singaporeans are familiar with the contributions we have made over the years, especially to the many countries hit by the tsunami in 2004, and after the Sichuan earthquake.

Last year, we provided humanitarian assistance in the form of cash, supplies and equipment after Typhoon Morakot in Taiwan; Cyclone Aila in Bhutan; Typhoon Ketsana in the Philippines, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia; the Padang earthquake in Indonesia; the cyclone in Fiji; the earthquake and tsunami in Samoa and Tonga; as well as for victims of the civil war in Sri Lanka; and food aid for internally displaced people in Pakistan.

As a responsible government, we have to examine the considerations and priorities when deciding how much and what type of assistance Singapore can provide after each disaster. Singapore is not in the league of major donor countries, nor do we aspire to be one. Among other things, we have to consider the nature of our relations with the affected country and whether we can provide aid which will add value to the relief efforts when deciding what to contribute, as we have limited resources and cannot respond to every disaster in the same way.

Hence, we had responded with more significant contributions when Indonesia suffered the devastation of the tsunami and various earthquakes – because it is a neighbour with longstanding and close ties and we were in the position to deploy our military and civil defence assets so that they could carry out effective missions.

The amount or type of humanitarian assistance given by the Singapore Government is not intended to match the scale of a disaster. In the case of massive disasters in countries beyond our own region, our contributions often cannot be more than a show of moral support and a gesture of sympathy to the affected country.

The support from Singapore for Haiti need not be demonstrated just by the Government. Singaporeans who want to make a contribution can do so through the Red Cross and other groups, and indeed many have. The Singaporeans who have gone to Haiti on relief missions amply demonstrate their compassion for the victims of the earthquake.

Sudesh Maniar
Director, Public Affairs
Ministry of Foreign Affairs