Tag: Religion & Spirituality

Calm and Storm


I managed 14+ km today… alas it was on the stationary bike, not treadmill. Mr G was still affecting the big toe so this morning I hopped on the bike instead. Plus I continue to feel flat and just listless. There’s a sinking feeling that somehow I have to pull myself up and deal with all of this, by myself.

Such is being a Christian. On the one hand you know God’s there and He’ll help you and whatever happens, will only happen with His sign off. So you try and pull together and go through whatever. On the other hand, I cant help but wish, quite often, than somehow there’d be some special dispensation of sorts and He’ll give me that special lift, out of nowhere.

I am reminded of past experiences where I appear to be going through a little storm, only to have Jesus sleeping in a corner on the boat. He appears to be sending a message of sorts – that I should trust him to get up and calm the storm and prevent any real harm or danger to befall me or anyone in that boat, instead of complaining that he doesn’t appear to take any action even as we face the storms.

To be fair, it isn’t quite a “stormy weather” situation for me. I just need a fillip and my take is I need to get out of my present role to have any chance of that happening and yet I need the security of my present situation, somehow. I don’t know. Maybe I am just making something out of nothing.

Related articles

Time’s Up With Church Board


After a false start, I decided yesterday, to leave the church board. It has been 4 years now. The last time I tried to leave was over 2 years ago but it was in the context of leaving the church then.

Back in 2009 I thought the church was all over the shop in its teachings and these were dished out not just over the pulpit but also during bible studies and even a funeral service. After that service in question, some leaders were standing around where the casket had stood and conducted what was called a cleansing ceremony. Other than being spooky it was also very worrying to say the least. I was starting to think there may be cloaks and candles to be pulled out next. The leader who was leading the ceremony had also started preaching funny stuff – statements like some songs were anointed and would therefore last but others weren’t (so maybe Rod Stewart and Queen were anointed) and that houses with spiders and insects meant the occupants had issues with their lives – they were “unclean”.

When leaders also allowed circus like The Elijah Challenge to excite its congregation I decide I had enough and decided to leave.

As it turned out, events unraveled and before I could formally inform the Board, other leaders were creating little tsunamis and things got hostile and the whole thing started to break down. I could not leave when it was in that state so we hung around. One positive thing out of that episode was I decided I needed to have formal training in a bible school – I’m still at BCV (MST) now.

Things have stabilised much better now and I think we have a normal healthy church with sound teaching and well intentioned leaders.

I am however, tired of being the one to raise issues. I have always envisaged a church board to be one which identifies issues, discusses them through on an open, robust and unreserved manner, so that everyone has a clear understanding and rationale for where the church is, where it wants to head, and what it needs to do. When for the most part people appear uninterested, non-engaging and greet matters raised with muted responses (at best) I am less inclined to raise issues. If that is to be the case, I might as well not be in the board.

I no longer want to be the one which raises issues, the one to ask uncomfortable questions and the one who sends long emails which people either don’t read, think they’re a nuisance or don’t respond to. They may react to these months later, without addressing the context and points raised (because they were raised long ago). Most importantly, I don’t want to be unhappy at home because of these issues.

Time with friends and family – what is the cost?


This is a busy time for most people. Periods leading up to Christmas is a hectic time for work, and prevalence of school exams  plus end of school terms also add up to mean a busy period for kids and parents. At such times, the church becomes an important source of respite, refreshments and affirmation and encouragement. Given the centrality of Sunday services, church at this time is an important factor.

This is also a time for planning for the coming year. Ministers generally embark on the planning process at this time and often lend support and momentum to the process and all who are involved in it.

Notwithstanding a long weekend (Melbourne Cup Day) therefore, the question of everyone counting on everyone else to be around on Sundays is one all church goers need to think about at this time. We cannot exhort each other, hand on heart, and expect to prop each other up, build each other and encourage each other if we are consistently away on Sundays. It becomes even more difficult when Sundays are often the only times we have where we can otherwise expect to see each other.

Maybe I am old schooled. Maybe my expectation that when I go to church I want to see everyone there – especially the shepherd – is misplaced, in this day and age. There is now so much emphasis on family time and time for good friends, that the cost is that of the wider community. Maybe out of necessity we focus on increasingly small groups to build relationships, especially with family, relatives and close friends. Hence if we are with these people, being with the wider community of faith becomes less important. Maybe that is acceptable now.

I guess if that is the situation it will take more effort than ever before, to build a community of faith, because the cost – that of giving up exclusive recreation time with family and close friends – gets increasingly higher and such sacrifices and priorities become increasingly harder to bear.

Related articles

Why We “Fought”


For posterity, and as a reminder of why we pursued what we did, quite strongly, more than a year ago.

Hi everyone

I like to share my personal thoughts with you as home group members, concerning the integration.

I don’t think the questions (which were raised yesterday) about what is the will of God for ICC and whether Pastor TF engagement fits that will, are questions which bother us in our home group. In any case I would like to share my thoughts with you, so that we have a (somewhat) clearly articulated position.

If you agree, then we can at least be clear in our mind about why we are doing this. We will also be better placed to share this with others in ICC.

My apologies for being “cheong heh” but if you can spare 10-15 minutes please read through. If you agree, you are welcomed to share this with others.

Finally, if you can, try to attend the prayer meetings. Apart from the integration, it is always good to pray together and to meet specifically to pray. For this integration, come together to pray as a church if you can. This is just so we can commit the matter to Him even as we plan and do the detailed work of implementing these plans.

—————————————-

Why integrate? What is the will of God? Is it simply to plan and do our best for Him?

1. ICC has not had a pastor[1] since late 2005/early 2006. In the second half of 2009, efforts to find a pastor escalated and a number of candidates were identified and considered at length.

2. Prior to 2009, efforts to find a pastor were confined to limited number of candidates namely, Rev Jeremiah Yap and Rev TT Quah. Both these candidates have current and extensive portfolios in Australia as well as overseas. They are often overseas and their current commitments preclude them from responding to our needs in the manner we expect them to.

3. The candidates we have considered in 2009 have now been narrowed down to just one, namely Pastor Tham Fuan. I will refer to him as “TF”.

4. TF graduated from the Bible College of Victoria in 1994. BCV is a seminary accredited by the Australian College of Theology. Prior to 1994 TF was serving as a lay leader in his church in Malaysia and served as a leader in student ministry in Tasmania. From 1994 to-date, TF has been serving actively as a full-time servant of God. He continued his seminary training and obtained post graduate qualifications – an MA in Ministry from BCV in 2002.

5. TF has served as a pastor (in chronological order) in Canaan Church in KL Malaysia, FGA Melbourne in Box Hill and Cornerstone Church of Christ in Oakleigh East. He has been with Cornerstone since 2006.

6. We have heard TF preach in ICC for maybe 6-8 times now. Some of us have also had the opportunity to spend time with him socially a number of times. I believe many (if not all) share the view that he is a godly man who is committed and has a passion for the work of fulfilling the Great Commission and building His church. His pulpit messages have been godly biblical expository teachings which challenge listeners to take life changing actions and decisions.

7. TF was a board member of Wycliffe Malaysia and has participated in mission work both on-field and as a support mobilising intermediary. In fact ICC first initiated contact with TF as a result of Alex’s mission network which included Beram Kumar and STAMP, whom TF also knows and worked with.

8. Additionally TF is a sole pastor in Cornerstone, a church which shares the same statements of beliefs as ICC.

9. On a personal level, TF is married to Suan Choo and they have 2 daughters, Danica who is in Year 12 and Elysia who is in Year 7. We have been to his home for meals and they are not unlike any ordinary lively and loving family making their lives in the suburbs of Melbourne. Suan Choo works as an accountant in the city and Danica and Elysia attend Oxley College.

10. In all respects therefore, there is nothing about TF, his beliefs, teachings, work ethics, values, family lives and commitment to God and His work which creates any concern for me. To me he is as good a candidate as ICC can be blessed with.

11. As with all good candidates, he is presently serving in another church – Cornerstone Church of Christ. Cornerstone renewed the engagement of TF last year and under TF, the church has settled, stabilized, grown and is seeking to be even more effective for God.

12. I am glad TF is not seeking to resign from Cornerstone to come to ICC. This demonstrates his commitment to the flock he has been entrusted with. He is looking to ICC only as an expansion to provide both Cornerstone as well as another church (namely ICC) in Melbourne, with a common and enlarged platform for even greater effectiveness for God, so that we can better obey Him and be better agents of the gospel for Him.

13. We are therefore looking at engaging a pastor who has been and remains committed to the work of God as a full time pastor. There is neither any question about TF commitment to do this on a dedicated full time basis nor has there been any event in his life to render continuation of this work problematic.

14. Obviously TF will have his flaws. He is shy – we all know that. There have been remarks that he has a strong character and while I don’t see that as a flaw, let us just accept that it may be at this stage. That makes him human. However it is his good traits I am more interested in and all of these which have been identified, have no doubt been seen by Cornerstone as well. They too want him to continue serving as their pastor.

15. This brings to a logical question of whether ICC and Cornerstone can come together as one, with TF as the pastor for a new merged church.

16. To me, this requires much harder work than just engaging a pastor who doesn’t “come with a church”. However. I’d rather wear this hard work than engage a pastor who has for example, just left a church (making it necessary for us to consider why he left) or just joined the ministry (he would then lack the experience of TF) or any other circumstances which makes him available readily. The only other scenario is to get someone from overseas. This may not be the best route as such a person would have to acclimatise himself with the way churches function in Melbourne/Australia. As a relatively fresh migrant I see very different setting between churches in (say) Malaysia and in Melbourne/Australia.

17. And so we consider merger. Even as I looked closer, I begin to see why this can be a good thing.

18. Churches in Melbourne are a fragmented scene. The average number in a church in Melbourne is about 65. Every week thousands of churches some as small as 20-30 persons and most with less than 100, replicate resources and stretch what we have in order to carry out the most basic of church functions.

19. In each of those thousand of churches, we all replicate and invest time so that a church will have basic Sunday worship, prayer meetings, weekly or fortnightly bible studies and some (often annual) outreach programs. For a church of under 100 persons, these activities alone will keep most members busy.

20. Additionally, if you consider the 80-20 rule, you’d have pockets of 20 persons across Melbourne all doing the same thing – attending to the bare necessities for a church to function. Few have spare time to do more than the basic functions. If someone gets sick and needs visitation or attention then that stretches the resources of the church. If someone is moving house that stretches resources. If there is a wedding that really stretches the church resources. If a newcomer comes and needs follow up – ditto. Someone needs a lift – ditto. Someone has emotional needs – ditto. We spend our time tending to the most basic of needs to keep the church running (floating?). This is especially true in a church such as ICC, which has had no pastor for a number of years.

21. These are important functions but they must not erode the role the church has to play to fulfil the Great Commission.

22. Size isn’t everything, but it does tend to provide more resources so that efforts can be pooled and deployed more strategically. Resources must be targeted at outreach and mission work, at work which builds disciples and at work which teach and edifies members.

23. As someone has already mentioned (I think it was Pauline) Cornerstone also provides a plug to a critical demographic gap. Cornerstone comprise of a large proportion of young adults and young families. This complements the demographics of ICC. This age group is critical because it is a bridge between the 40/50+ and the youth (primary and high schoolers). Without this age group, primary and high schoolers may not have the required handles as to what sort of role models they can focus on, relate to and/or aspire to become.

24. As a merged church, I hope to see ICC (or whatever our new name may be) become better resourced to do the work of God which matters the most – outreach, evangelism and mission, and teaching each other the Word of God.

25. Pastor TF will be able to provide us with sound, biblical teachings with life changing challenges and do this consistently and systematically and members will be better placed to grow and become agents of the Great Commission and make disciples of those God place in their lives.

26. I cannot see how the above scenario can be against the will of God. I often say to others that God doesn’t lead us just by the weird and unusual stuff – ie dreams, visions, “word” etc.

27. God by and large leads and guides us by providing us with logical thoughts and preparing us to put those thoughts into perspective by making us go through a range of experiences. God is an orderly and logical being as evidenced by His creation. Why would He lead us in ways other than in an orderly and logical fashion? Why are we not confident that when we think logically and plan in an orderly fashion it isn’t being lead by God? Against those thoughts and plans, I’d pray and search the scriptures. The Word of God ultimately has to be the arbiter of whether it is against the will of God for us to be doing something.

28. If what we have logically and orderly sought the Lord, planned and determined – and therefore confident God has lead us in an orderly and logical way – cannot be refuted by any biblical principles, then we should be confident to move on. We cannot orderly and logically plan for example, to kill, steal or hurt our neighbours. Where what we have committed to the Lord and thought and prayed through and considered all facts and circumstances in a responsible, engaging and wise manner, and there has been no biblical principle adduced to suggest otherwise, we should be confident to move ahead.

Related articles

Truth? No Longer Fashionable?


There were a couple of stories in The Age this week about the involvement of Access Ministries in schools. Other than the qualifications of volunteer teachers working through Access Ministries, especially in the CRE program, the chief concern was proselytizing. I guess the idea that proselytizing is unacceptable is based on the idea that everyone’s religion is right to him or her and one has no right to try to convince the other to switch his religious affinity.

I think therein lies the danger of downplaying the emphasis on truth. One should not poke fun at the importance of right and wrong, of truth and falsehood. Too many contemporary Christian teachers want so much to be ecumenical or perhaps more accurately, to accept religious plurality. It has become unfashionable to say “what you are saying is wrong”.  I understand the need to be accepting and to bridge any gaps between groups to overcome differences and achieve a harmonious society but that must be done by accepting differences, not glossing over them or refusing to analyse the truth or veracity of an idea, a proposition or a teaching.

When the focus on accepting each other becomes more important than an examination of whether something is true or false or whether it is right or wrong, then I think that form of acceptance is not one which builds up. Acceptance can become a problem for true construction of a body, instead of a solution. If numbers in church and vibrancy in services are more important elements than people being taught the right stuff, then I also think we have a problem. It is not about how many are responding to church services, it is also about what they are responding to and what church goers are vibrant and excited about. Truth should never be sacrificed or compromised for the sake of being fashionable.

Related articles

“Speak Life, Speak Healing”… Hmmm….


“…go, plunge yourself in the Godhead‘s deepest sea; be lost in his immensity; and you shall come forth as from a couch of rest, refreshed and invigorated. I know nothing which can so comfort the soul; so calm the swelling billows of sorrow and grief; so speak peace to the winds of trial, as a devout musing upon the subject of the Godhead…”

That was Spurgeon, as cited by JI Packer.

Recently a speaker in church urged the congregation to shun the issue of right and wrong, but to choose life instead. I wondered about  that. There was a ribbing of the grey matter, of theology. We were asked to opt for life, not the choice between right and wrong.

I thought that was weird. For it is in knowing who God is – knowing what is right and knowing what is wrong about the teaching of God – that we can have life. It is a personal relationship with God and an aknowledgement of His lordhip and sovereignty over us, which gives us life. How can we acknowledge Him and His lordhip if we don’t know basic facts and truths about Him?

Anyway, I’m again grateful I am brought to this spot where I am again given the opportunity to learn and grow in Him.

And another thing…

I was just reading Erickson Millard again and this phrase jumped out at me:

“The idea that God is simply something to be used or to solve our problems and meet our needs is not religion. Such attempts to harness him belong rather to the realm of magic or technology”

I cant help but think of the “name it and claim it” branch of teaching. “Speak healing”, “healing is yours, claim it” and the likes… to me these phrases are a lot like harnessing God to solve our needs or problems. It is as though He is there to be used, so why not use it. It really sounds like magic or technology.

There is something to be said about experiencing God but there is a lot more to be said about knowing our God in all sense, as He should be known.

Related articles

Preaching – Pole Position


When asked if he thought the contemporary evangelical Christian tends to have a lazy mind, John Stott said he agreed. He continues: I

t has been characteristic of much evangelicalism (but even more of Pentecostalism). There are notable exceptions, and thank God for them. I think we need to encourage each other in the proper use of the mind.

Preachers are still the key people; the church is always a reflection of the preaching it receives.

It is not an exaggeration to say that the low standards of Christian living throughout the world are due more than anything else to the low standards of Christian preaching and teaching.

If we can recover true expository preaching as being not only exegesis but an exposition and application of the Word of God, then congregations will learn it from us preachers and go and do the same thing themselves.

We need to help our congregations to grasp and use the hermeneutical principles that we are using ourselves. We need to be so careful in the development of our evangelical hermeneutic that the congregation says, “Yes, I see it. That is what the text means, and it couldn’t mean anything else.”

The worst kind of preaching allows people to say, “Well, I’m sorry, I don’t agree with you. I think you’re twisting the Scripture.”

Related Articles

Second Experience? Hmmm


We have been doing a series on fundamental Christian beliefs in church and a couple of weeks ago we looked at the topic of the Holy Spirit. Unsurprisingly, the issue of a second experience (of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit I guess) came up, albeit cursorily. I was thinking about it when preparing some thoughts for cell discussion on Friday and continued thinking about it on the periphery. A short while ago I came across these statements:

1. The baptism with the Holy Spirit occurs the moment a person is saved. It is not the same experience as salvation but happens at the time of salvation. It is not a second experience following conversion.

2. God has given believers everything in Christ. When we are saved we are complete in Him. We lack nothing. There is nothing else for Him to give to us.

3. Nowhere are believers commanded to receive any second blessing that would give them power. All power is already available.

4. The power of the Holy Spirit working in a persons life is something that should be desired. Some who have legitimately experienced the Spirit’s power label the encounter as the baptism with the Holy Spirit whereas the Scripture calls this experience the filling of the Holy Spirit. previously mentioned, everything has been provided for us upon conversion. We only need to appropriate what God has already done for us.

I think I agree with these statements and am reasonably at peace with not having a second experience, although who is to limit God – He can show me otherwise.

 

In the meantime, I have to contend with the historicity of the Messianic Jesus seen through the incident of the Triumphant Entry…sigh indeed….

Related Articles

Healed By His Stripes? Eh???


I still don’t understand Isaiah 53:5. Maybe it’s others’ reading of it that I don’t understand. Yet again, last Sunday, someone said all of our illnesses and diseases would be healed “by his stripes (or wounds)”. Someone mentioned it for a pre-communion message and the main speaker echoed this in his sermon. In fact the speaker went on to cite an example of a physical healing, to say “by His stripes we are healed”, in clear reference to Isaiah 53:5. In fact he referred to the pre-communion message and said he agreed with that.

Next time I hear this I will ask the person who makes that statement, to explain why he or she thought that verse meant physical healing. Everything in that verse suggests it refers to our spiritual healing.

“He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed.” The whole context of that verse was on our spiritual healing. Our disease and illness was rejection of God which leaves us on the road to eternal separation from God, ie death. Jesus came to cure that – He came to bear our sins and die in our place. By His wounds, we are healed.

The problem with saying we are physically healed by His wounds is: the Scriptures doesn’t say that. Also, Jesus’ death and sacrifice is the perfect solution for its purpose, ie redemption of our soul and restoration of our relationship with God – that is  the “illness” it heals, not physical ailments. Very often we have unhealed diseases. Many suffer physical ailments for an extended period of time, without ever getting healed. Some go to their graves with their ailments. Does it mean Jesus’ stripes/wounds are inadequate in their case? Is Jesus’ death and suffering imperfect for our bodies? I sincerely believe this teaching is wrong. I am only a little a little guy – a puny one – when it comes to theology. This one however, is clearly problematic.

Related Articles