The Boss is Right

The boss is right.
And it seems we are wired for this.
And it may well be true.
But the trouble is we may not know
who is the right boss.

Also we prefer certainty and stability
over uncertainty and change.
Again it is seemingly something natural in us.
And again there may be nothing wrong,
but in fact even a right thing to cling to the certain.
But the trouble is we just cling to anything,
even something of our own creation.

What the boss says is true.
And he has the resources, authority and influence to make it so.
And we run the peril of being denied resources if we disagree,
and be compelled or persuaded to agree.
But the trouble is no boss has any monopoly on what is true.

Why Say So

Why say come to church?

Why not be the church wherever and whenever you are, for wherever and whenever two or three are gathered in God' s name there is God in your midst, and you and the Holy Spirit are two.

Why say Lord I submit my plans to you?

Why not fear the Lord and surrender yourself to his plans for you, even if you do not know and cannot see what it is. You may have planned to save your money for that investment opportunity you can see coming soon, but there is your neighbour, here and now, who needs that money for his medical bills, and we all know that Jesus said love your neighbour.

Why say God is love, when you can love and show that God is.

Snippets

Fortune Tellers: Saw two of them asking people to have their fortune read during lunch at a coffee shop. If they can tell others' fortunes, could they not foretell their own, and know who needs fortune telling, for isnt such where their own fortunes lie?

Truth: It is seemingly politically incorrect now to say that there is absolute truth, or even that there are right and wrong things, for to say so implies there are also absolute lies, and it makes some to be liars and some to be believers of such lies, and that make these people unhappy, and it is disrespectful and insensitive to make people unhappy.

Idolatry: People say they go to church to worship God, but really they go to church to hear things that make them feel good and exalted, ie they seeked to be worshipped instead.

Unfaithfulness and Faithlessness: The former knows the truth but do not conform to it, the latter don't believe in such as truth.

Hypocrisy

" ... They spit on him, and took the staff and struck him on the head again and again. After they had mocked him, they took off the robe and put his own clothes on him. Then they led him away to crucify him." [Matt 27:30-31]

What would a peaceable man do if he is insulted?

Destroy? Burn? Kill?

Are we what we do, and not what we - and others - say we are?

And is the insult really an insult?

For is not the current behaviour simply proving that the insults are not, but rather truths?

Even if it is truly insulting, is the mad fury, the blind, unmitigated and rampant violence and terror, ever an appropriate response?

For even if justice is based on an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, the most that is justifiable - in any circumstances - is to trade insults for the perceived ones: a hurt feeling for a hurt feeling.

And is any insult so injurious and damaging, that any and every act is justifiable?

It is beyond imagination to think that riots, destruction and killing - accidentally or otherwise - are appropriate or proportional, the usual measures of just responses.

To be sure feelings are important, and people can and will die for what they feel. Feelings can move you to move mountains and swim oceans, and it is oft quoted that a scorned woman's fury is unknown in hell. But does not such willingness to wreck destruction, and even to die, for a dead man's image and name, borders on idolatry itself, something supposedly abhorred by these rioters?

Is it insulting to call someone hypocrite?

Of course I can lie or I can be wrong and mistaken. But what if it is true, that you are indeed one? Can a truth ever be insulting?

Sure I can say it differently, with or without considerations for your sensitivities, and again intentional or not. Your feelings may be hurt, but that's a different question from me being insulting.

I can speak kindly but you feel hurt, and conversely, I can intentionally speak to hurt, but you are entirely indifferent.

For if I speak or do things to you that are beneath your position or your stature does it diminish or change whatever your position or stature may be? If someone calls me a pig in anger, I can only find it amusing, and, to me, reveals his wits, or lack thereof.

And if my insult is based on a lie, is not the best response to expose my lie, especially if you demonstrate in your acts, peaceably, peacefully and incontrovertibly, that I am a liar, and not merely rant and rage and shout at me as a liar?

But if it is not a lie, even if my intention is to hurt your feelings, is it not for your good to know that the emperor has no clothes?

Or you rather continue in the comfort of your delusionary clothes, even to deny and forcibly and furiously suppress my right to say what I see and think?

Sure no rights are absolute. And my freedom to choose is curtailed to the extent it affects someone else's choices and being.

But should there ever be any restraint on truth itself? Or would you rather I not speak what I think and know to be true, but rather always concur, or at the least pretend to concur, with what to me is a lie or an untruth?

We, as fallible humans, are always vulnerable and susceptible to be wrong, and to believe a lie, and therefore should we not always welcome to be corrected and not to fall into a lie?

But on the other hand, if someone calls us a liar, because we are one, and he has found that out, then it will be our great concern that he holds such knowledge, ie if we want to continue to lie.

And then we are compelled to take appropriate actions to prevent and discourage him, and others, from knowing that truth. And certainly strong and vigorous actions, and not merely retort in words - or silence - are called for. And the more vigorous and more violent the response is, the more the better to deter and discourage, if not to entirely dispel, the knowledge of truth.

And so wisdom - or its lack - is proven by her actions.

On Miracles

Why are there miracles?

Simply put, miracles are a badge of authority.

It is like a policeman's badge being evidence that he is empowered by the law to enforce it. For as anyone can impersonate a policeman, so can anyone, claim to come in the name of Jesus. And there are many who easily proclaim, I do this and that, or say this and that, in the name of Jesus.

But having said that I must immediately add that such a miraculous badge is not really necessary. And this is so as it can be recognised, sooner or later, in one way or another, whether someone is truly doing or speaking on behalf of God, or for himself.

There is a similar analogy in the policeman's world. The law of the land is the law of the land. I don't have to be a policeman to tell you that you are breaking the law. And in fact the law empowers ordinary citizens to make arrest, namely citizen's arrest, or you can simple call the police. So I don't really need the badge to enforce the law on anyone, ie if I want to.

So anyone can truly do and speak on God's behalf without having to perform miracles. The question really is not of badges but of true knowledge of God and of a heart to do and speak for him.

Now the reason why such miraculous badges are not necessary is threefold.

Firstly badges can be faked. And this true certainly of policeman badges, of identity cards, and of passports, etc.

In the spiritual world, the devil have some power to do supernatural things too.

It is mentioned in prophetic books of the bible that in the end days, by miraculous signs and wonders, the devil will lead the lost astrayed.

And in the other direction in time, in history, when Moses went up to the Pharaoh to ask him to let his people go, Pharaoh demanded to know upon what authority is such a demand made.

And as you may know, Moses called upon a series of miraculous signs and wonders. But the first few, or just the first one, namely Moses changing his staff into a snake, was duplicated by Pharaoh's magicians.

Secondly it is a sign of insufficient faith to need a miracle to believe.

God have arrange so that you can know who is true and who is the liar, and who truly comes in Jesus' name and those who simple say so, from already existing human and humanly perceivably signs.

So really to need a miracle to believe is actually a sign of disbelief. It is akin to testing God, ie an attitude that says, if you say you are so and so, do this and that to prove to us, you are indeed who you are. And this testing attitude is betrayed especially when the test is a seemingly impossible one.

An example is when some people brought a man with a withered arm to Jesus on Sabbath day. Now the Sabbath day is a day when no one is supposed to work. And healing is work. So the people were trying to put Jesus in a catch-22 situation. Heal and break the law, don't heal and you cannot prove yourself. Jesus healed nonetheless saying that the law is not above compassion and love.

Back to the policeman example, do I really need me to show you a badge when I tell you that you are breaking the law? In fact the badge is entirely irrelevant. You have broken the law, and you know it yourself, without even me telling you, even far less the need for me to show you any badge.

So really to ask for a miracle is just an excuse for disbelieving.

And thirdly when you have seen the miracle, and upon that you said you believe, you are actually believing the miracle rather than God.

And the real reason for belief is that you covet the miraculous effects, rather belief in God.

And many prayers for healing and prosperity fall into this category.

And such people will go to any god or gods or goddesses, the moment they hear that these can give them their desired miracles, eg lottery numbers.

And I want to tell you about my friend here. He attends a church which is overtly very strict and regimented in obeying God's laws, for example the abhorrence of idolatry. And to him putting up a Christmas tree for Christmas is idolatry. But then he buys 4D, bets on English Premier League, and so on, he wins. And soon, he bought a feng-shui sculpture, some miniature water fountain, and placed it in the house.

Now it is not so much the sculpture or that it is feng-shui inspired that made it an idol, but it is the attitude and reason for installing it, namely that he believes it will bring him good luck. That is idolatory, to turn away from God and to put your trust and hope in something else.

But it escapes himself entirely, intentionally or otherwise, seemingly religious though he is.

And then I want to tell you about my late friend Mr. Tan as another example.

You may remember Mr. Tan. He has died, after many years of leukemia, for about half a year to date. His mother became a Christian. But really she was not as much seeking God as wanting Mr. Tan healed. And as all mothers do, they do anything for their son, even believing God, if that is what it takes.

And then Mr. Tan has a friend that works with him in the car dealing business. This friend told Mr. Tan why don't he go over to his god, some Tua Pek Kong derivative or other I think, since the Christian god is apparently not working.

And that is really the worst sort of testimony for a Christian. For instead of testifying that you believe because you know God and wants to do his will, you are instead showing the world that you believe God for his goodies. Your objective is the goodies. Who delivers the goodies may be a secondary thing.

Are you saying there are no more miracles today?

Well Mr. Tan died, despite the tons of so-called prayers prayed. But I am not saying no.

Like I said Jesus came not to remove poverty or sickness and diseases. He certainly didn't. And we have bird flu constantly threatening the world today. And he certainly didn't make the poor rich, but rather tells the rich to be poor.

But yet he did healed the sick in some cases here and there. To be sure some of them are a mark and demonstration of who he is, his identification badge.

But there were times he did not want to heal, such as the paralytic brought down to him through the hole in the roof. And yet at times he told those he healed not to talk about it. But then they did precisely the contrary and soon the whole towns were coming out to seek Jesus. But they come to seek to feed their stomachs. The seek a miracle maker and not God. They are seeking food for their stomachs and not to be reconciled to God. (See John 6)

So there may be miracles yet out of God's compassion.

But there will also be miracles of judgement, ie by very act of the miracle, God condemned their disbelief.

It will be like the case when the young nation of Israel have just left Egypt and was marching in the desert. God send down food, called manna, everyday from heaven, but they complained and said that back in Egypt they had meat.

And so God heard them. And he caused a wind to blow quails to land in the Israelites' camp. Israel ate meat, and then they died.

So should someone pray for a miracle or not? Pray, as in all prayers, in accordance to the will of God.

I am sure you are aware that anytime, anyone from some church is hospitalised, tons of SMSes will immediately flood the airwaves, asking the receipients to pray for the one sick, especially if the latter is dying.

Now surely everyone will die, one day, sooner or later, anticipated or not, and whether you are ready or not. Will praying for someone dying to live always work? Certainly not. Mr. Tan died. Some will die and maybe some will yet live, maybe for a little longer. But whether he, or even the apparently healthy, lives or die, is all in God's hand.

So if you are to ask God not to take his life this time, then you had better know why is should not be this time and in this manner. And how do you know that? For that you have to know God and be able to hear him. That is the wise way.

And even so, God may keep silent.

But then most would just blindly and mechanically go through the motions of praying, and will utter the usual words, the magic formula, the mantra - and maybe conduct some ritualistic acts with the arms or something else - just like the pastor who visited my mum in hospital.

Why We Pray What We Pray

An excerpt:

One of her visitors asked some pastor from a recently established church to come and pray for her. I happened to be there when the pastor came. And I wont go into details what he said and so on but just to tell you what is left in me after that.

And that is his gospel is the presently highly popular one, namely the wealth and health gospel, or the "name it, claim it" gospel. I talked about this some time back, in relation to testing God. And so he was claiming in Jesus name that my mum will be healed and so on, and suffer no pain, etc etc. It is kind of standard mantra that people utter at hospitals' bedside.

What's new is my realisation why people pray this way.

And what's that?

The poor and the sick will always be with us. When Jesus was on earth he did not go about to eradicate poverty or sickness. Instead he preached love. He did heal a few, because of his compassion - for example the case of the people hacking a hole in the roof to lower a paraplegic to a spot where Jesus can touch him - but that was not his primary intention.

Instead the poor and sick were given to us to love.

But we disdain such burdens, especially the burden to love. And I am sure you have felt such burdens before, either due to relationships, social customs or commitments. It is our natural self to want to be unburdened, especially that to love.

And so we pray, in seemingly caring language, that the sick be healed and the poor be blessed with work and lottery earnings and so on. But really they are praying for themselves. For if the poor can feed himself and the sick can walk, then you can love without need to demonstrate it, but just to say it, and without even your conscience accusing you of hypocrisy.

To pray for the sick to recover is really not love for the sick but to remove from yourself the obligation to love and care. It is easy to claim this and that in Jesus name, in a moment and to walk away from it, but it is not easy to stay, to love and to care, continually day after day, in silence, and in pain, and even unappreciated.

This is the most cynical view I've heard so far.

It may be so, but can you deny that it is not true? And actually this is also the short answer to why there is the poor.

The Crow

God made the crow.

Why?

The crow is raucous, loud, and unpleasant - to the eye, the ears and the mind - having a beak that seems disproportionately large, coloured entirely in an un-admirable black, and with a disgusting habit of eating carrion and other waste.

On the other hand there is the eagle, a soaring piece of perfection, of elegance, precision and efficiency. But the crow even dare to challenge the eagle in the skies.

I have seen a crow go up to a gliding circling eagle cawing loudly, noisily, and ill-temperedly. The eagle remains nonchalant, circling unaffected. But the crow persists, even though it lacks the eagle's stamina, needing to come down and rest on some high perch periodically. And it keeps harassing the eagle, till it moves out of that space in the skies.

True there is a role and place and necessity for carrion feeders in Nature. But even the vultures, equally disgusting in their habits, have some beauty yet in their appearance and design.

That seems totally absent in the crow, except that it is intelligent. It has been demonstrated that the crow can acquire on its own, without training, useful behaviour and abilities, and to make and use tools. The latter was once thought to be what defines humans.

So why did God, whose works are perfect in beauty, make a crow?

The obvious underlying analogical question is why does a good and loving God create Satan and evil? Maybe evil is necessary to judge evil and excute evil on evil, but thats a different matter from a necessary evil: it begs the question why is there an evil to be judged at all.

But even as God is true, there is certainly wisdom in God's idea of the crow, not least by faith in God.

But I can think of only one thing at the moment.

And this is that beauty is not solely of, nor even about, physical appearances. The intelligence in the crow cause us to pause, to relook and rethink about this bird, and ponder on its Creator who made it, and not think it ugly just because it appear so. And the crow must be good and perfect and beautiful too, for God is its creator, but in a way not immediate and apparent to us humans.

The Rich and the Poor

A response to some website:

When people talk about rich and poor it is usually about money, in its various forms, from cash, assets, etc, and also access to these.

But money is not the end in itself. It is not the measure of what rich is.

For money is but a means to an end, which in the final analysis is security and a sense of control particularly of the future. If you have money you know you can get food and shelter, and all other material comforts in life, necessary or otherwise, and you rest in that assurance. And with money you can plan, and thus attain a sense of control or security, into some future, like your next holiday, or your children’s education, etc etc.

If I do not know when and how my next meal is coming from, does it make sense to appreciate the beauty in a flower or to dwell on why there is evil in the world?

So the rich is the one who is not anxious about his food and drink tomorrow, or the day after, and is not constantly and totally preoccupied with mere survival, and is able to be and become what is human and spiritual, to pursue beauty, love and truth, for example.

And such peace, assurance, and ascent from mere survival is what rich is. (And no, it is not to be happy. It is easy to be happy, just be foolish.)

And the source of such confidence and assurance need not be money. It can be God too. But some put their trust in money.

Admittedly it is easier to trust what you have in your pocket or bank account then to walk into the desert daily to collect just a day’s worth of manna. But such is the walk of faith.

And even if you are collecting manna daily you may yet faced the temptation to collect more than a day’s worth, or to test God, by yearnng and even demanding meat instead of mere manna. And these are those who have forgotten or do not know that man shall not live on bread alone.

And finally I do not see many taking Jesus’ word literally concerning the rich selling all he has to give to the poor and then following after Jesus, do we? If there are more such truly heeding Jesus, then “fighting poverty” is as natural as taking your next breathe.

And as Jesus said, we shall always have the poor. For God have made both the rich and the poor.

He made them for each other: the poor to receive from the rich, giving thanks to God, and the rich to give to the poor, learning to trust God, the source of all things, and not on money; and also that all will know that we need each other, as much as we need God.

Assuredly God loves us, each and every individual, but only we can love each other.

And God is fair, for life is NOT about being rich or poor. It is about knowing God.

And both rich and poor CAN know God, the poor perhaps being in a better position than the rich, even as it is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye than for the rich to go to heaven.

Futility

A letter:

There is nothing too dear that I cannot abandon should they prove to be lies and falsehoods.

So if you think whatever I say or think is wrong, then say so, but only let me justify why it is not. And you are most welcomed, in fact imperative upon you, to demolish my justification, for if you are successful, I have learn a truth, and I am better for it.

But to indulge in sentimentalism, to flatter to make the other merely happy, or to insult to hurt as revenge, to me is an utter waste of time, meaningless and the ultimate futility.

I do not care for happiness, I do not seek it; and I can bear all pain, for such is a necessity in life. I am unaffected by any attempts to influence or coerce me in any way by means of these. Only the truth will move me.

So I am true to what I believe, I am and be what I say. I do not put on masks, make pretenses or play social games. Sure there are time for these, but between friends is certainly not it, or else there is no need for friends.

I have no problem you walking away if you do not like what you hear. I do not speak to please, to flatter or to affect. I speak as I see it. For only when you know the truth can you truly move on in fruitful and effective ways.

And I certainly can see wrong. Do not accept whatever I say as the 'gospel truth'. Go construct within yourself with your own evidence - experiential or otherwise. And if you think I am wrong, just say so, if fact I demand that you say so.

But this is not to deny that the truth can be harsh, brutal and piercing, for that is the very nature of the truth. But to speak the truth is not the same as to be harsh, brutal and destructive of the other. But rather only when you know what is, can you go on to become what can be. Anything else is delusion, a psychological crutch and just delaying the inevitable.

So I am what I am. And you didn't know me only yesterday.

If I am irrelevant or even detrimental to you, I may not know that. But you do and you can talk with your feet. At no time are you under compulsion to hear me at all - you can even delete this email without reading it for example.

Finally everyone has some handicap, congenital or circumstantial, by our deliberate acts or otherwise. Some of these are physical and some psychological or even physiological; some are seen and some are unseen. But we all need to learn to cope with these limitations which will, by necessity, curtail us in one way or another. In some sense no one is better off than another, or anyone more deprived than another. We are all deficient in one way or another.

And you can indeed want to believe you have no, or deny that you have any, limits, and to challenge yourself to overcome whatever that is apparently limiting you. But we can only do so at a greater effort than others without the limitations, and that may cost us opportunities elsewhere.

So sometimes it is foolish to challenge our limitations just to demonstrate to, or delude, ourselves that there are no such limitations.

Perhaps it is better - and truly more positive - to focus on what we are, and to be that individual and being, for which we are unique, special and gifted, and, if you hold any notion of destiny, to fulfill the purpose for which you are born.

In other words it may be more fruitful to do what you can do and are good at it, then to do what you are not good at or handicapped in. The latter is really just a form of self-worship, which is also a futility.

Happiness

Something written as a letter more than a year ago:

If ignorance is bliss, why do I want to know anything?
If delusion makes me happy, why do I not delude myself?
If darkness is warm and cosy, why do I need any light?
If flattery makes me feel good, why do I want to hear the truth?

Life is to be enjoyed, to seek pleasures and happiness,
Is there anything wrong with that?
I may not know tomorrow, but I know today
And today I want to be happy not sad,
to please, be pleased and not deny myself pleasures

Why do I want to burden myself with unpleasant things?
with unnecessary sorrows, and unhappy ideas?
So be far away from me those who tell me bad news
and wants to rob me of my happiness, pleasures and comforts.

Although tomorrow, I may die,
I am already happy today and yesterday;
And tomorrow I can always continue to delude myself,
to walk away from unpleasant things and people,
or just close my eyes and dream my own dreams.

The Gospel: NOT Choose God, BUT Become Christ

A response to a contact on Flickr:

All on earth and in the heavens accomplishes God's will.

And this is so whether we know it, or not, and whether we choose to do His will, or not.

The sun, the stars and the moon proclaim God, and so do kittens, and puppies and sunflowers.

The Pharoah of Egypt, Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon, Cyrus of Persia, and the Romans, all fulfilled what God intended for Israel: to forge, destroy, restore it and finally to destroy it again.

And even when God's people have deliberately and blatantly opposed God's will, when it was revealed and made known to them in no uncertain terms, even so is God's will fulfilled.

Israel was not to have a king, but the Israelites asked God for a king, in defiance to what God said. And God listened to them and gave them Saul. And from Saul we have David. And from David, we have adultery and murder and Batheseba. And from Bathseba we have Solomon. And from Solomon we have Jesus.

We will not and cannot know what if Israel have not asked for a king. But we can be certain that we will have Jesus revealed in due time.

And so who and what are we?

We did not choose God, just as we, and nobody, chose us to be born. Even your parent didnt know its you they were making. We are who we are solely due to, and for, the will and purpose of God.

Whether we come to know of this God in our later lives, is again not of our choice. We have no say in the time, places, circumstances, and environment in which we will grow up or die.

But we know and can be assured that all accomplished God's will, even unknowingly and unwillingly, just as every ant that crawls on the earth and every wind that blows where we know not, do so too.

And we are born again, chosen to know him again solely due to, and for, the will and purpose of God.

So now that we know, what then?

Then we now know that we are children of God, and we call God our Father.

And we can reject God, but we cannot reject who we are.

And unless we become who we are, we will be like fish out of water, ontologically out-of-joint, and irrelevant and meaningless, to ourselves, and everyone else.

So we do what we do because of who we are.

We did not choose to do God's will because we seek to please him and to seek his favour and blessings. But rather we do God's will because we are part of God himself, as his children, being what we ought to be.

His love and care for us has nothing to do with what we do, or what we don't, and whether we choose to do his will, or not. He send showers and sun to shine on all the world.

But denying ourselves and turning away from our identity, who we truly are, and who we are destined to be, hurts God bad, just as a parent hurts bad, when they see the potential in their children go to waste and or remain undeveloped.

And so we ought not to preach choice. Rather we ought to preach being.

We are to be, to continually become, the children of God, taking after the Father, even as Christ takes after the Father.

The gospel is not that you can now choose God, but rather that you are all children of God, that you can call God, Father. The gospel is not Choose God, but Become Christ.

And your purpose in life is to be this child, even as Christ was and is, and to live life.

Living Word

A response to a blog:

alma said:

” ... THE GOOD SERMON IS OUR VERY OWN LIVES… “

Thanks for the affirmation, for every matter shall be established by two or three witnesses. For that was what I arrived at when I pondered on this thread and I shall now say the same thing too.

Living Word

Every member of the Body is a living Word, the Word becoming flesh in you, born again.

And this Word is read, whether or not it is spoken, whether or not intended, and at every moment and any place, for all times you are alive.

The church is not a place nor time, the church is to go to the world, and not the world to the church, the Word is as much for the ‘churched’ as for the many yet-to-be-called in the world.

And it is most glaring, and most false, and most deceitful, when what you actually say is at odds or contradicts what your lives truly speak.

We are all letters written on living, bloody and bleeding hearts.

And yes, bleeding hearts.

For any heart alive will be pierced by the pain, the sorrow, the agonies, the sufferings, and all the evil that is all around us, unless you are not of this world or evil itself.

But yet the heart lives, yet not it, but the Word.

And thus Christ is resurrected in our hearts for all to see.

And that is the best sermon: Christ in you, the Word, alive.

"I respect what you say, but ... "

A response to some blog:

I am sorry but I have to say I find this constant phrase gnawing, irritating, and annoying, namely, "I respect this and that, but ... "

Does "respect" mean anything in such a phrase?

If you want to say you disagree, why don't you just say you disagree. Why need to preface it with "I respect but ..."? Did I say anything less just saying, "I disagree"?

It is clear that we all have different opinions. So what do you mean when you say, you respect his opnion but you disagree?

Do you mean that you think his opinion wrong, baseless, flawed, but nonetheless it was becoming, proper and fitting of the opinion holder, and so deserving your "respect"?

Or are you saying that you disagreeing just to his opinions but not disagreeable to the person of the opinion holder? ie you respect the person or persons (even if you dont know who they are personally) but not his/their opinions.

Or are you saying his opinion is his opinion, it does not bother you, has no effect or impact on you, and you hold another, different, and even opposing one, and that it wont bother you to change his either. Then respect here means that you do not intend to interfere to try to change what his opinions are. He can keep his opinion but dont try to push it on me.

Or it is just the soothing stroke before you deliver the slap, and that respectful delusion is necessary because it comforts you that you have "respected" the person? And you can slap him the harder for it.

So what do you mean when you say you respect this and that, but ....

I am sorry. I respect what you guys are saying BUT I am perplexed, befuddled and entirely disrepectful! And please respect my opinions. Thank you.

Natural Disasters

A response to some blog:

I think I mentioned somewhere here after Katrina that more 'natural' disasters are to come.

No, no I am not a prophet, I am just being scientific.

Yes really, it is entirely predictable.

It is something called extrapolation from past events and given the 'nature' of things, such as earthquakes and hurricanes and unknown diseases. All scientists (and actuarists too) do that don't they?

So it is obvious that we can see.

It is also obvious that we do not know nor able to control everything, and that there is a 'power' out there seemingly beyond our domination, or at least for now.

But the human spirit is certainly strong and resolute and will strive ever harder to put these elements under control, as humans have subjected other natural elements in the past, eg nuclear energy, smallpox, gravity, to name a few. Mankind are now left with only a few small things, such as tsunamis, earthquakes, hurricanes, global warming, bird flu, ebola, poverty, the damned terrorists and travel to the stars of course.

But then if you think - and not too hard - about it, when we say all these 'natural disasters are caused by 'Nature' are we not really resorting to the natural 'god-of-the-gaps' fallacy?

That is we really don't know what 'caused' it, and we are simply calling an unknown X with an undefined Y. It does not really changed anything: we know just as much, ie nothing.

And in 'natural' events we can substitute our ignorance with Nature or Tau Pek Kong or Allah or karma or Fate or Mother Earth or Satan. You can choose what you like, for whatever reasons.

But can you really choose what you like? Is it simply a matter of choice? ie what you choose is what is? Or that you have no choice: if you choose wrong you are damned? Well you may choose to think or say I am speaking rubbish too, and Ctrl-Alt-Del all I said. Sure, no prob.

But if you say 'Nature' is simply 'what is' then you are unwittingly acknowledging and calling 'it' the God of the bible, the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob, the God of Moses.

For when Moses asked God His name, God said, "I AM I AM", ie God is the very essence of existence and being itself, everything that is, is God, including Nature, and hurricanes and earthquakes and bird flu and those damned terrorists too.

So that makes God a wicked and cruel and vegeneful God? Or on contrary a loving, patient and and forgiving God?

Think about it.

Oldest noodles unearthed in China

From a BBC website:

The remains of the world's oldest noodles have been unearthed in China.

The 50cm-long, yellow strands were found in a pot that had probably been buried during a catastrophic flood.

Radiocarbon dating of the material taken from the Lajia archaeological site on the Yellow River indicates the food was about 4,000 years old.

No, I am not talking about noodles.

Continuing,

Professor Houyuan Lu said: "Prior to the discovery of noodles at Lajia, the earliest written record of noodles is traced to a book written during the East Han Dynasty sometime between AD 25 and 220, although it remained a subject of debate whether the Chinese, the Italians, or the Arabs invented it first.

"Our discovery indicates that noodles were first produced in China," the researcher from the Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, explained to BBC News.

Well so we think.

Until someone else discover some older noodles somewhere else.

Really we never will know who invented noodles and when.

My point here is that we do not know what we do not know.

What we know is only what we know.

Truth is more than what we know, or even knowable to us.

What we know can only reveal falsehood but not fully uncover the truth.

Is the Ability to Choose, Freedom?

No.

To choose just means that there are choices, at least two.

Immediately it can be discerned that your 'freedom' is already curtailed by these choices, ie you cannot make a choice other than these choices.

And then even if you can choose, ie select one of the choices, it does not mean that you are choosing freely.

For you may be already predisposed or conditioned in one way or another, internally or externally, rational or otherwise, physically, physiologically or psychologically, to prefer one over another.

Even without the overt threat of physical harm or denial to access to resources such as food or money, you can be tempted by the promised outcomes, perceived or real, of your choices, valued in terms valuable to you, be it money, prestige, power, principles, or whatever that matters to you.

To choose freely means you can be completely indifferent to the choices and any arbitrary choice is just as good, or as bad, as the other. (Or is it?)

So the real source of freedom and of power is that which is able to influence and condition your decision about choices.

It could be a belief, for example a belief in rationality and the maximisation of benefits accrued to oneself.

If so then choosing means accessing knowledge and data to compute the outcomes of your choices and ranking these outcomes according to some value. And not to be free then means either not having the knowledge and data, or the inability to compute the outcome and make the evaluations correctly.

Or it could be a belief that the outcome must be 'good', not only to you but to all; or it is a belief that the outcome must be one that pleases God, or god or gods, or just someone or something else.

But then you are truly not free at all. For these beliefs hold you captive, in that you cannot abandon them, and you apply them consistently, consciously or not, and even that you cannot choose if you have none of them.

And then also no one really have complete knowledge to compute outcomes or to evaluate them. There will always be unknowns and unknowables that will make all such forecasts uncertain, if not even meaningless, ie you may have done just as 'well' making a random choice.

To take a political example, merely being democratic does not mean you are free. It only mean you can choose. And your choice is entirely influenced and manipulated by the promises of the politicians. They will make promises valued in terms that are valuable to you. For example the Republicans in the US promised 'Christian values' to tempt the 'Christians' to vote them. And the 'Christians' fell for it.

In effect what really happened at the polls is that you are taken captive by the democratic illusion that you are free if you can vote. The reality is that you are just giving legitimacy to one with the majority vote to possess and exercise power over all the land.

So what then in true freedom?

That is another question altogether, and may have nothing to do with choosing altogether.

I Love You

A letter:

Look up! Look out! See the light! See the BIG picture.

Life is not just about eating and drinking and getting the best fuck. You are wasting your life in futile chase after nothing in the chat rooms, on fridae and in the spas, and where else I do not know.

Are you sure you know what you are doing?

And am I the one wasting my time or you, truly, are wasting yours?

Look up! Look up! Look and see!

There are tsunamis, there are earthquakes, there are hurricanes, there are wars, there is global warming, there is bird flu, and many more will come.

Thousands died. Millions of lives are uprooted and turned topsy turvy, and just as many are in pain, sorrow and anguish.

Why, why do such things happen?

They dont matter to you?

Perhaps.

They dont touch you, for now. But surely you know of some who are here today and gone tomorrow.

All you care about is your gluttony, undisciplined abandon to sensual pleasures, wanton gratification of your horniness, without care for who you are. You may know how to care for your flesh and its carnal needs but do you really know how to take care of your true person?

But there is a reason for everything that happened in the world..

Please get out of your hole and get into the light.

The bus is still waiting for you at the bus-stop. The bus driver is God. He is waiting.

As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. "Tell us," they said, "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?"

Jesus answered: "Watch out that no one deceives you. For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Christ,' and will deceive many. You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of birth pains.

I love you.

Thoughts on Words

A response to some 'Christian' blog:

Words kill and words give life.

Then surely some were murdered here. And I wonder if any dead were made alive.

And not counting the numerous non-Christians who read this site and see all the squabbling, the abuse of Christianity for political power, the ego trips, the pride, the stupidity, the superstitions, etc etc

Has anyone blessed anyone here?

And then can that God has blessed be cursed, and that cursed be blessed?

How can I curse
those whom God has not cursed?
How can I denounce
those whom the LORD has not denounced?
[Num 23:8]

So it is only God who bless or curse. How much less can anyone speak to change it?

“... how can you who are evil say anything good?”, Jesus

But if it is God’s word, then it is only good, and the only proper response is Amen!

Only the wicked and evil refuses to acknowledge God’s word. And we have the example of Jacob and his sons who refuses to accept God’s word as revealed to Joseph in his dreams, not once but twice.

Now has anyone heard a donkey speak?

Well at least metaphorically speaking, in that you recognised that the word is of God, despite the lack of credentials or credibility on the part of the speaker, be it another human or any other thing.

So the liar can sometimes speak the truth too, if the listener hears truly and not judge.

And on the other hand the truth may not always be. Job’s friends were certainly speaking the truth.

Going To Church

My reponse to some blog:

If I may just sneak in a few more words.

Lets THINK purely (Phil 4:8) with the mind of Christ and not as you have been cultured by the things in this world – and churches – of these end days.

And lets think about “going to” in contrast to “being”.

I am not sure “going to” is biblical at all. But I am absolutely certain that we are called to be the church, as one part, as a unique, vital, and essential member of this living body.

And each, the temple of the Holy Spirit, is to contribute in ways gifted, to the world, and not just to your “church”.

(And in the city of Jerusalem, every building is a temple.)

And each is to do so, in whatever ways, large or small, seen or unseen, in his or own situation and circumstances, constantly, as God have placed you in accordance with his sovereign will and purpose, in all His inscrutable wisdom.

We – ie anyone who is living, feeding daily, if not constantly, on the Word – are the church whenever, wherever we are, and also anytime, everytime, all the time. So is there a need to go anywhere?

And we have only one Father, one Teacher, and one Head in this church.

And yes some members are to preach, and those so called will preach: here or there, now or later, to one person, or to many, in the day or in the night, in the dank, dark, dirty street corners, or in a brightly lighted auditorium, in letters, in speeches, or in acts, virtually or face to face, anywhere, anytime, even beyond death, as the Spirit compels, and not only in “church”.

But all, rest assured, will be fed. For if your evil earthly father will not see you go hungry, how much more your heavenly Father.

And is not the church to be the light and the salt of the earth? Is not the church to go to the rest of the world, instead of something to go to? Is there such a thing to go to at all?

The “thing” you go to is just but one of many ways to be the true church.

Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things.
[Phil 4:8]

Christian Government

Something I wrote as a comment to some blog:

Some of my thoughts, a little lengthy, and not entirely complete yet.

All power is God’s

All governments of the world are here to administer power, which fulfils God’s purposes on earth, all for the sake of the predestined and the elected. (Yes past tense, as God have chosen them, even before creation itself: You can’t choose God, God chose you.)

It does not matter who or what is the government. God is not captive nor hostage to human institutions.

Some examples: Egypt and Joseph, Babylon and Nebuchadnezzar, Persia and Esther, Persia and Cyrus. In all these instances, God showed how real power is exercised, and the agencies again need not be so-called Christian. Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus are the obvious cases where secular power secularly administered serves God’s purposes, as it was ordained.

Christian President and pro-Christianity President.

There is a difference.

The former walks with God in the office of the Presidency, striving to maintain his personal witness, as everyone who is called does so, wherever he is, and whatever he is doing, within his ‘neighbourhood’ as given to him by God.

The latter sets himself out to be a champion for Christianity. Now it really does not matter whether or not the latter is a Christian to proclaim such, only that he is seen as one; it is all a matter of political expediency, as in whether, for example, Karl Rove thinks its necessary for the spin and to win the vote, eg Bush’s anti-gay stance was entirely politics.

The Republicans are really more pro-Christians than pro-Christianity. They needed the “Christian” votes.

God’s Champion is Called, not Voted

God have shown he has no need for any human to champion him or to exercise power for him. Even so, that role is not for anyone to say, even less for the masses to vote for, but only God to call, and it certainly need not be the President.

Perhaps being President disqualifies you from the role altogether, not unlike David barred from building the temple.

USA is not a Christian nation

It is obvious that USA is not doing Christianity a favour at all, for isn’t vengeance God’s and instead Christians are to turn your cheek and continue to love.

Can the USA as a nation demonstrates such true Christian value? No President will be elected nor remain in office if he does so. On this evidence alone, one can conclude that Christianity have been abused and exploited as political capital to gain votes and to get power, for its own sake, i.e. politics in another cloak.

The USA is certainly no Christian nation. No other nation can be, but only the church, the true catholic church in the world, and only it.

Balaam

The sin of Balaam is one of the sins of the end days (See Revelations). It is the sin of abusing God’s gift, akin to the sin of using God’s name in vain.

Balaam abused his God-given gift for commercial and political benefits and influence. He prophesised for whoever that pays him, perhaps in prestige, recognition or money or all of them. Whereas God’s prophets is to speak God’s word to whomever, whenever and wherever God wants his word spoken to. Samuel seeking David is an example.

Balaam is Alive

Campaigning on the basis of pro-Christianity tantamount to the sin of Balaam, for it abuses Christianity for political power.

And both the power-to-be that made this its platform and the voters who vote for it, sin. Both parties are doing it for their own power’s sake and less, if at all, for God’s. God was only in name, vainly.

So Balaam continues to live in the modern world. And no one will listen to a donkey, will they?

Anti-Christ’s Strategy

Finally how more devious and evil a plan to subvert the church can there be than for the devil to be a christian and to lead the church, or the one seemingly so, from within.

It is not for nothing the beast is called the anti-Christ. Like a reflection in a mirror, the image is completely true to the subject but differs only in one aspect, that it is false and not true.

Christianity in the USA may now be more political than Christian, eg unable to distinguish Bush’s anti-gay stance as political and mistaking it for ‘Christian values’, and therefore it is seemingly strange to separate church from state.