柴玲 与 远志明

Due to time constraint, I shall enter this journal with mixed languages.

Not long ago I heard Rev. Lin mentioned about Yuan Zhi Ming's troubled case. I did not bother to investigate it because 1.) I have never fancied Yuan (含愿的星)'s ministry after examining his testimony briefly long time ago. 2.) I did not believe Rev. Lin was the kind that does her own homework to confirm the truth, rather than by the mouths of others.

Just now, I came across a facebook post from a friend who if memory serves, just unfriended (or was it the other way around) Yuan, on Yuan's alleged sex crime, in details. Normally I would still skip such news (Yuan's ministry is really not worth looking at: 1.) He believed that a good enough person can be saved/become a Christian "我奉耶稣的名保证她能信"(好人不用认罪?), 2.) He believed that science/理论 and Christianity are contradictory to each other, 3.) He believes that the ends justify the means in his ministry), but my interest in the accuser's faith drew my attention. I have heard of similar accusations  against pastors before but never was one in enough detail such as this rather than just vain or deceitful gossips.

This is a case between a Chinese Christian woman and the preacher/pastor Yuan Zhiming. Her two letters are the only sources I have:

1). Excerpt from First public letter (4/18/2014)...在事工中,2011 年, 我受罗马邀请去参加一个民主会议。我们在祷告中请神确定这是他要我做的事情。如果是的话,请神打开见Pope的门来告诉我们这是他的意愿。我们想, 如果Pope能号召全球的20亿信徒为中国祷告,神也许很快会终止这个杀了4亿孩子的政策。在聆听中,突然看到基督要我饶恕一个民运人士。他在我刚到普林 斯顿时强暴了我, 但他后来很快变成了个很有名的基督徒。 但他一直没有跟我认罪道歉, 使我19年没能信基督。 我在祷告中跟主争辩,“我怎么可以饶恕他那, 他伤害了我的身体?”但是基督很快给我看到他在十字架上受难流血的图片, 说“你看, 他们也伤害了我的身体。 但我在他们还没有认罪之前, 就饶恕了他们。”那是我伏在基督流血的脚上,带泪在心里说, “因为我爱你,我会原谅他。”

这个祷告刚做完不到30 分钟, 我们的同工高兴的冲到我的身边,“罗马回话了,我们可以见Pope。”没想到, 神回因我们的祷告因饶恕后是如此神速。...

2.) Excerpt from Second public letter (12/23/2014): In much detail:

...2011年10月底或11初的時候,我給你發過一個電郵,說我已經饒恕了你在普林斯頓強暴我的事。你馬上給我回了電話。你第一句話便問我,我有沒有把這件事跟人說。我說,我跟教會的老姐妹禱告,我決定不會把這件事說出,像大衛不會揮手擊打掃羅一樣。

你立即說,“柴玲,我讀了你的書,你把這件事跟人說,對你不會有好處。”但是我聽了,很有點生氣。

我進一步跟你說,“因為這件事,讓我19年來沒能信主。感謝主的恩典,終于在19年後通過像雲牧師這樣的人把我帶到主裡來。你還對誰做過像對我那樣 做的事,你應該去跟她們道歉,以致于她們不致像我一樣,沒有辦法信主得自由,得永生。你也知道基督所說的話,“耶穌對他的門徒們說:’那些使人絆腳的事必 然出現,不過使它出現的人有禍了。對他來說,就算脖子上拴著大磨石被丟到海裡,也比他使這些卑微人中的一個絆倒更好。(路加福音17:1-2)’”

你反而笑了,說,“柴玲,你是新基督徒。你不知道,’如果有人在基督裡,他就是新造的人;舊的已經過去,看哪,新的已經來臨”(哥林多後書5:17)

我們後來又說了幾句,就結束了。

通話後我感覺很不好,但是因為我當時忙于拯救女童的事工(我們正準備去羅馬的行程),我沒有讓我們之間的交流影響我對主的工作的專心。我是新基督徒沒錯,但心裡覺得我們的這次交流,跟像是吃了蒼蠅一樣,心裡很不舒服。

2012年2月份左右,我在一個華人的教會圖書館裡面看到你們制作的紀錄片《十字架》。我看了後,也為那些基督徒的先輩的犧牲和奉獻深深感動,也在 主面前為你的這份工作獻上感恩。我也的確在2013年春天跟通過交換我的書來買十幾盤錄像,為的是讓福音更廣的傳播。我也試圖讓自己饒恕,和解。

但是2012年11月份時,在兄弟姐妹為我做醫治釋放的時候,基督突然讓我感到你在1990年在普林斯頓對我的強暴是多麼深深的傷 害著我。那時我剛剛搬進新的公寓,你說你要給我看一個電影。我聽你自己說你是《河殤》的創作人之一,也就很自然地相信了你。以為你又有什麼大作。沒想到你 拿了一片黃色電影來放給我看,當時我覺得不好意思,要你停止離開時,你抓住我,用體力強行把我按倒在地毯上強暴我,並用我掙扎中掉在地上的外衣盖住我的眼 睛。直到今天,這封信還是很難寫的原因,是我始終不能忘記那在天花板上的電燈是那樣的刺眼,我心裡是多麼的痛恨你對我的施暴……。

我的痛恨甚至到了我都不屑于再在我的記憶裡認為你是一個人,這麼多年來,每當我聽到你的名字時,我都在心裡說一句“偽君子”。只有這樣,我才能繼續生活下去。

你當時提起褲子時,似乎像個沒事人一樣,為了轉移我的注意力,你隨意地說:“柴玲,他們的天安門屠殺算什麼。你不知道中國的計劃生 育,那血淋淋的強迫墮胎,很多小孩墮下來還是活著的,護士馬上把他們的頭按到水桶裡,小孩掙扎幾下就不動了……小孩子這樣被墮掉的多的不得了。他們認為小 孩的眼球可以做藥,就把孩子的眼球挖出來,堆得像小山一樣……”

我痛苦地坐在地上,用衣服盖住我的被玷污的身體,痛苦極了。不光為我自己,也為那些不幸的母親和孩子們。

當時我萬萬沒想到,在我逃出追捕,失去家人,失去國土,失去一切,心靈身體極其破碎的時候,我會被你強暴。魔鬼在1986年秋天沒能成就的事,你在1990年卻做到了。...

In addition to the above, I also briefly skimmed through Chai Ling's website and her testimony.

I am inclined to believe Chai Ling's testimony over Yuan's (even though I have not examined Yuan's side of his story, since I cannot find one). And if what she testified about Yuan was true, not the rape part but the unrepentant part, then though Yuan would have been the rare case of a rapist turned pastor, Yuan has merely proven my points as to why his ministry is problematic (Not in a "everyone makes mistakes" way, but more of a "intentionally justifying sins" way).

However, I must point out a few of the theological errors common among Chinese believers:

1. In Chai Ling's testimony page, she appears to believe her friend's line: “No, the Lord will use what he has prepared for us in the past to complete, a task that He has designed just for each of us. Without our work, God’s plan will not be done.” ~ Reggie Little John. I have underlined the error, I need not say more, except that there is no excuse to justify it.

2. In her first letter: "因为我爱你,我会原谅他。", sounds nice, but I would correct it as "因为祢原谅我,我会原谅他". Though she mentioned repentance and asked God for forgiveness in her testimony, I cannot be sure if Chai Ling truly understood repenting her sins. Most of the times her testimony of coming to Christ is about her suffering in China, seeing others suffer, etc. and that Christ is so understanding and loving her that there can be no reason to reject Christ. This kind of emotional drama conversion is apparent everywhere since the Charismatics promotion of it: "Everyone treated me badly, except for Christ (or those nice Christians around me), so I became Christian."

3. In her second letter: "因為這件事,讓我19年來沒能信主。" This error follows the point above. Because Chai Ling based her salvation on how people are treated by "nice" Christians, this has to be her conclusion - that Yuan was to be blamed for her unbelief. What did I say about doubting her understanding of true repentance?

Well, that is not to say that I do not believe Chai Ling is a Christian. In fact, I would give her the benefit of the doubt, and say that she appears to be a devoted Christian, after examining the resources above. She was willing to forgive the worst kind of sinners. I believe she was sincere in that claim. The theological importance in her life remains to be seen. Is she just an activist who claims to be Christian, or a Christ-centered activist? But nonetheless, a Christian.

As for Yuan, if Chai Ling's testimony were true, then not only did he not truly understand what Christ's forgiveness meant (for he did not feel bad about his past sins as Zacchaeus did), but that he remains despising women deep in his heart (that women are flawed creations), and therefore revealing that he despises God in His creation, just as the one who couldn't believe that the rich and God-fearing creature, Job, could truly be faithful to God.

 

==============

Update 01/06/2015:
I didn't expect there will be so many comments or visits to this article. So, I must indicate that I have no interest to discover the truth behind the Yuan & Chai Ling's case, because based on simple Christian theology, I would not associate with Yuan in anyway.

As for investigating the case, since Ling has already testified her side of the story, there are only a few logical situations on Yuan's side to prove Chai Ling wrong:
1. Yuan did not know Chai Ling at all and/or is unaware of this accusation.
2. Yuan and Chai Ling had consensual sex (not date rape) and Ling made up the rape story.
3. Yuan did rape Chai Ling and has apologized to her but Ling denied it.

I see no other alternative to justify Yuan. Some have suggested that Ling's accusation has expired (24 hours? 24.5 hours? 3 years?), others have said that everything is past now and should be forgotten now that both are Christians (Read Zacchaeus' lesson - 路加福音 19:8).

Therefore, the above 3 points aren't hard to resolve. Point #2 maybe a bit challenging but can still easily be resolved when both sides speak until a truth is surfaced, the one refusing to speak or to speak for the truth is obviously the guilty party.

My inclination towards believing Ling's testimony is due to but not convinced by(from most relevant to least): Yuan's theology, Ling's reputation, Ling's detail testimony, and Yuan's silence. If I am wrong, then Ling's reputation is greatly jeopardized. If Yuan was innocent and remain silent in order to not hurt Ling's ministry, then both of them are wrong and Yuan's theology is more problematic than I had originally imagined.

 

===========
Update 03/03/2015

Yuan has finally responded, according to his facebook page:

致教会弟兄姐妹的信
远志明
2015年3月2日

一、我承认自己是个败坏的罪人,后来成了何等人,完全是蒙神的恩才成的。对于1990年我信主前的婚外性过犯,我再次公开地向神认罪,向当事人道歉。对由此引发的目前这场风波给教会弟兄姊妹造成的伤害和困扰,我表示深深的歉意,请求大家原谅。

二、我承认蒙恩后也有软弱的时候,是靠主恩的保守才得以站立的。

三、在神在人面前,我虽然可以默默承受不实的指控,但我不能承认我没有犯过的罪。对于针对我的强奸、诱奸未遂和性侵指控,我一概否认。

四、对于神州传播协会董事会进行的相关调查,我会积极配合。

五、我已辞去我的一切侍奉和事工,专心在主里安息,更新自己。

----------------

So now, based on the resources above, we are clear that the matter is to be processed according to my point #2 above: Yuan and Cai Ling had consensual sex (not date rape) and Ling made up the rape story. Which was the most anticipated possibility as well as the hardest to treat.

It will be more than just memory tests or polygraphs. There is also a matter of conscience: For example, one of the question Yuan must answer could be somewhat in such format - "Even if you have been proven innocent of rape, what would you say about someone else who are in very similar situation as you but have actually committed the rape (similar to Cai Ling's version), should he absolutely admit the rape or there could be some special reason that he should not admit the rape and even deny it?"

Of course, his only answer to "pass" my sample question is: "yes-that person should absolutely admit the rape" which might conflict with Yuan's own theology but may not necessarily prove him guilty. Any other responses or non-response will only look bad on him. But whether he is innocent or guilty, if there were not enough evidence found against him, we should give him the benefit of the doubt, by Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (presumption of innocence). If he is truly innocence, he is truly free, Cai Ling will have the Lord to answer to for making false accusation, even if it was just a "mistake" or memory problem, it lacks God's glory and would still therefore be her sin, but we must also apply presumption of innocence to Cai Ling as well. If Yuan were in fact guilty, then he shall have only his conscience to wrestle with at this point, and not to be falsely accused by the public, and Cai Ling could either seek better God-fearing counsel for proofs or leave it to God alone to justify her when the day comes which is inevitable anyway.

I supposed there could be follow-up questions to the former, if answered "yes". Such as: "Why do you answered Yes?", "What if the man could not remember his crime well enough?", etc. The purpose of which is to either further justify Yuan's stand in this matter or further convict him with his conscience.

This entry was posted in News, Theologization. Bookmark the permalink.

46 Responses to 柴玲 与 远志明

  1. kai chung says:

    Thank you for sharing. What would be your opinion on the "truth tests" that Ling did? Is it a commonly accepted way to testify someone's truthfulness?

    • timlyg says:

      You're welcome. Kai Chung.
      Personally I don't know why she even needed to take a polygraph test. Perhaps it was due to her supporters. I don't value polygraph testing much, it is just a statistical measure, not a true test.

      However, after all these evidence by Ling, if our Romeo were innocent, there is only one response from him, a short answer would be sufficient, which he appears to be dodging. The longer he avoids the case, the more suspicious his position becomes.

      I would put it this way, I don't know anything from Yuan's side of the story, but based on what I know about Yuan, I wouldn't be surprised if Ling was telling the truth. Again, not about the rape, but regarding his refusal to repent.

  2. If Yuan is truly innocent, all he needed to do is a firm and clear statement and clearly stated that he will follow with any legal means to clear his reputation if Chai insisted continuously to press her case to the public.
    In Yuan's ministry side, all churches or organizations who had ministry relationship with him should withhold any current or future co-working events with him until the steps he took (if ever happened) satisfied their mission principles.

  3. Dear Rev. Law,

    While I am quite in agreement with you on the doubts about some of Rev. Yuan's theological beliefs, I feel your points on this matter is not biblical. Please refer to the following link for some of my thoughts if you have time.

    http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_685210990102vcht.html

    In Christ

    Chris

    • timlyg says:

      First of all Chris, I am not a Reverend.
      Secondly, I can assure you that my criticism on Yuan's theology is quite certain. No doubts.
      Thirdly, you will have to point out where I was not biblical. Otherwise, it sounds like you are conflicting yourself. If you were referring to my criticism on Ling's theology, again, I am very certain of my biblical stand. Other than that, I don't see I have made any other points.

      Last but not least, it will not only be very unbiblical, but unethical, if your motive here is to publicly promote your essay. So I will not read it. However, I am very willing to engage in conversation with you on the topic, not off topic.

      • timlyg says:

        PS: You are welcome to use Chinese if that is more convenient and I shall attempt to reply you in Chinese as well.

      • Thanks for the reply and apologies for messing up your identity. I did not go through your personal profile before add that comments.

        I hope you have gone through the article I provided through the link. It is not very well written but nonetheless expresses some of my thoughts on this issue. It's in Chinese but I assume you are fine with it.

        Yes, I should be more specific when I said I felt some of your points are not biblical. My apologies for that.

        I was referring not to your theological opinions but rather your comments on the Chai/Yuan issue, which seems not to be the biblical way of dealing with disputes among Christians.

        It appears that you base all your comments on two very shaky points: 1) you don't agree with some of Yuan's theological teachings; 2) If the accusation of Chai is true.

        It appears that you are very certain about the truthfulness of your understanding to the Truth, i.e., your theology. While I actually share with you some of the points you mentioned, I won't claim I have the absolute Truth and therefore push Yuan to the heretics category. After all, these differences are relatively minor. In other word, I would treat Yuan as a brother with respect and love, not contempt. Even if he is a heretic according my theology, I won't use that as a basis for accepting an unfounded accusation on his character and therefore judging him on that.

        Bible teaches clearly that "Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses. (1 Timothy 5:19). Chai has absolutely no witness in this case and the incident occurred 24 years ago according to her account, and yet and you sadly accept it with due diligence of doubt check and derived your own accusation based on a big "IF", i.e., if this is true, then ...

        The bible specifically warn against brothers accusing each other in front of unbelievers (1 Corinthians 6:6). This is exactly what Chai is doing and yet she got a big applause from you for so doing. And you joined the team of accusers by posting something like this in the public domain.

        • Yuan kept silent on this matter. He could have very good reasons to do so if he is innocent to all or most of the accusations. And yet you judged to your judgement right way while the Lord clearly taught us not to judge.

          I take this as an opportunity for a brotherly discussion and have been straight forward in my wording. No offensive intended. As you can tell, English is not my first langue, which may also causing some misunderstanding. Please let me know if you feel be offended. I will try to explain and offer my apologies in such scenarios.

          • "judged to your judgement" should be "jumped to your judgement".

          • Yuan kept silent on this matter. He could have very good reasons to do so if he is innocent to all or most of the accusations. And yet you jumped to your judgement right way while the Lord clearly taught us not to judge.

            I take this as an opportunity for a brotherly discussion and have been straightforward in my wording. No offensive intended. As you can tell, English is not my first langue, which may also be the source of some misunderstandings. Please let me know if you feel offended. I will try to explain and offer my apologies in such scenarios.

            Blessings

            Chris

        • timlyg says:

          I admire your courage to respond, many usually shy away.

          I shall remind you that my article has nothing to do with accusing Yuan of his recently alleged problem. So, most of your previous comments are invalid.

          As for Yuan's theology, it is a serious case. I would advice you to study theology from proper sources, look up reformed theology. Based on what you said, it looks like you have much to learn before you talk about absolute truth. I can almost be certain that you don't think anything is heretic - You probably think that Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc. are great Christians in their own rights - Do enlighten me if I'm wrong, I give you a chance to easily refute at least one of my claims.

          As a reward for your courage, I'll give you a starting point:
          Yuan believed that a person who is good enough will certainly becomes Christian. This is a serious heresy. That means Yuan believed that a person is not saved by grace, but by one's own merit/work. Such person cannot be expected to understand true repentance.

          • timlyg says:

            "while the Lord clearly taught us not to judge."
            Twist not the word of God, lest ye be like Satan ~ Paul Washer.

            And again, I did not jump to any conclusion about Ling's case, you seem to be unable to understand that.

            "Yuan kept silent on this matter. He could have very good reasons to do so if he is innocent to all or most of the accusations."
            Wrong. In this case, there is no reason to be silent, unless he's living under a rock or in a cave.
            All it takes is for him to answer when asked. So far, since nobody has asked, I will give him the benefit of doubt that he hasn't gotten the chance to answer. However, if he is asked and be silent, it is not a good reason to do so, in fact, it is very unbiblical. No truth can remain hidden. He will not be glorifying God by not saying "No, I didn't do it".

          • Well, it seems to be your habit to judge people at the first instant. I do consider Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses as heresies but accept Catholics and Orthodox Christians as my brothers in the Lord. That's not to say I will reject all the teaching of the Witness (for instance, their rigidness on the exact date of Christ's birth) or do not have serious problems with some important aspects of the Catholic and Orthodox teachings.

            If you think Yuan's theological teaching are serious heresy, you should stand up and criticize his heretic teachings rather than finding comfort in this finally-a-rumor-confirmed-my-righteousness way.

          • timlyg says:

            "Well, it seems to be your habit to judge people at the first instant."
            The important thing is to judge rightly. Nothing wrong with judging people at the first instant, everyone, including you, do it all the time with friends, business partners, etc., I am sure.

            "you should stand up and criticize his heretic teachings"
            I have stood up and said it. And you can also search for my earlier posts about Yuan. You obviously misjudged me here. But thank you for sharing your judging: "rather than finding comfort in this finally-a-rumor-confirmed-my-righteousness way." I don't know what that is supposed to mean but I find it very funny.

            You said you "consider Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses as heresies [heretics]", but you also accept some of their stuff. I understand what you said you accept, but I am having a hard time understanding why you consider them heretics? Is it because you don't want to be considered a heretic yourself, or is there something you know they are wrong about? So far, all I know is you are only against people (except for yourself) who judge others.

  4. Since the Mormons go as far as claiming the Holy Bible being the lesser authoritative teachings than something else (in their case the Book of Mormon and the the case of Islam the Koran), I don't consider their teachings worthy of examining as I don't have the burden to spread the gospel to the Mormons at present.

    • timlyg says:

      Excellent points. I'll give you that. Very good judgement. You are not as liberal as many others that talk like you. I'll admit I'm wrong about that.

      But since they are heretics, here's a fair lesson for you:
      Don't say you accept or not reject or do not have serious problem with some of their teachings (It is common sense that some criminals wear nice clothing). But say that some of their teachings align with the Protestant/Reformation teachings. Otherwise, you'll be giving the idea that even though some of their teachings are different than the Protestant/Reformation teachings, they are still right and acceptable. That's like saying these people are heretics but some of their heresies are acceptable. Another illogical statement, which would annul my wrong and justify my previous judgment of you.

  5. I meant to say "Our difference may not be ..." Sorry about that. It would be great if you could delete some of the repeated posts to save some memories. 🙂

  6. timlyg says:

    Good chat. But Yuan Zhiming's theology is too far off, I would never associate myself with him unless he changes his theology and makes it clear and certain, otherwise, I don't really care if I call him a brother in Christ or not at this point, but again, this has nothing to do with Ling's accusation.

    I'll give you another stunning lesson:
    I have and know the absolute truth, because he is my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. You shouldn't doubt the absolute truth if he lives in your heart.

    • Hmm, it appears that you did not understand what I meant when I said "you seems to be certain that you have the absolute Truth" and that you found comfort in using a rumor to confirm your righteous. To me, it is not but I have the Truth but rather to Truth has me. I do not have the absolute Truth but the Truth absolutely has me. I am submitted to the Truth but not the other way round. You appear to me that you feel that since you have the absolute truth, so you feel free to twist the Truth and judge people.

      I do judge people like you do, quite often to be frank. The difference is, however, I consider it a sin because it is against the teaching of the Lord. Self-righteousness is also a sin because only God is righteous.

      Hope the above clarifies a few thoughts of mine.

      Blessings

  7. timlyg says:

    That is ok. I encourage people to look up the original source and I cannot go to every websites asking them to make corrections.

  8. Hmm, it appears that you did not understand what I meant when I said "you seems to be certain that you have the absolute Truth" and that you found comfort in using a rumor to confirm your righteousness. To me, it is not that I have the Truth but rather the Truth has me, i.e., I do not have the absolute Truth but the Truth absolutely has me. I am submitted to the Truth but not the other way round. You appear to me that you feel that since you have the absolute Truth, so you feel free to twist the Truth and judge people.

    I do judge people like you do, quite often to be frank. The difference is, however, I consider it a sin because it is against the clear teaching of the Lord. Self-righteousness is also a sin because only God is righteous.

    Hope the above clarifies a few thoughts of mine.

    Blessings

    • timlyg says:

      "Hmm, it appears that you did not understand what I meant when I said "you seems to be certain that you have the absolute Truth""
      Actually I am well aware of what you meant. I was just giving you a chance to not be accused of twisting my words to mean that I AM/OWN the Absolute Truth or I know everything!...which you just did. You just couldn't take a lesson humbly, could you?

      So you are saying I don't submit to the truth and that I twist the truth and am self-righteous? All this based on the fact that you are right because you claim to submit to the Truth and that you follow Christ's teaching while saying that I do not? Wow, who's judging now...and again...judging incorrectly. And to say that I claim to own Christ and not the other around, like I'm the boss of Christ...Wow, who is twisting the truth now?

      So you are saying that I am self-righteous because I believe I am right as a follower of Christ and you are not self-righteous because you said you are right as a follower of Christ. Hmmm...I think I understood you perfectly here.

      Another lesson for you is: To have something, doesn't mean to own something. I "have" parents, my parents "have" me. It's a logical thing, not really a language thing, so don't say you didn't understand the English here: 我 “有” 个 老板,etc. So, I have the Truth, means I have my Lord and Savior, who is the TRUTH. By Him I know what is right, what is wrong. That is not to say I know everything, but that also doesn't mean I don't have or understand the absolute truth. I will stop here, because I think you need time to keep up. But if you just want to twist the meaning, then you can forget about this lesson.

      • See, it does not feel good to be judged on and the judgement imposed by the other person is usually wrong, right? Well, you might be a special one since your judgement is ALWAYS the right judgement. 🙂

        No wonder the Lord teaches us not to judge, lest we be judged (on the same scale)!

        • timlyg says:

          "See, it does not feel good to be judged on"
          Maybe for you. But we must learn to be humble and learn from right judgment.

          "and the judgement imposed by the other person is usually wrong, right?"
          Only if that person doesn't care about right judgments. Which you and Yuan have repeatedly proven to do such thus far.

          "since your judgement is ALWAYS the right judgement."
          Wrong. 这种诬告只有小人才会下的。
          I have specified where you are wrong and you continue to repeat it...I don't know how else to teach you, but when I say 1+1 is always 2, and if you say it can sometimes be 4 or 5, I believe I am ALWAYS right on something like that, whether you like it or not.

  9. timlyg says:

    Another lesson you must heed and find biblical verses on them as your homework:
    Judging is not a sin, judging others with the exception of yourself is sinful. (Matthew 7)
    Judging incorrectly is a sin.

    • Basically, you are claiming that you can make judgement on people while the Lord said even He will not judge but His words will judge in the judgement day.

      One fundamental question, do you really think you can make RIGHT judgement?

      • "Mathew 7:7 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."

        Did the Lord say "do not judge wrongly"?

        You know why? Because we as limited human beings can not judge a person rightfully. It takes the all-knowing and righteous Lord who examines man's heart and soul to make the right judgement!

      • timlyg says:

        "One fundamental question, do you really think you can make RIGHT judgement?"
        I can and I have made right judgments. One of my best judgments: 1+1 = 2, and I am so absolutely sure about this that if you say I'm wrong, you will need to...well...go back to kindergarten.

        "while the Lord said even He will not judge but His words will judge in the judgement day. "
        I think you are a very confused young man, joining different passages of the Bible out of context to suit your meaning. If I am not mistaken, you are chopping off parts of John 8:15 and John 12:48 to make a sentence of your own motive. I will not feel very good if you chop my words to make it look like I'm saying: "rape...(cut)...(cut)...is the right thing to do...".

        Contrary to what you said, Jesus did judge the Pharisees and so on (eg. "You hypocrites...", "Get behind me Satan", etc.) But there is a final judgment in the judgment day for the ultimate office of The Judge, which Jesus was refraining Himself from.

    • "Mathew 7:7 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."

      Did the Lord say "do not judge wrongly"?

      You know why? Because we as limited human beings can not judge a person rightfully. It takes the all-knowing and righteous Lord who examines man's heart and soul to make the right judgement!

      • timlyg says:

        Did the Lord say "do not judge wrongly"?
        Yes, Go read John 7:24

        ""Mathew 7:7 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."
        Don't forget to finish reading from verse 1 to 5 (read verse 5 three times!!!). 7:7 is about something else.

        Again, I cannot perfectly judge a person, I've never said otherwise. But when someone is wrong, I think we can tell and have the right to speak out, as you are apparently doing it right now, though under the wrong judgment repeatedly ignoring correction, and ...self-righteously? (since you've, not me, called judging a sin but yet you have somehow approved yourself of committing it)

        You said: "I do judge people like you do, quite often to be frank. The difference is, however, I consider it a sin because it is against the teaching of the Lord. "
        That's like saying rape is a sin but since I know it is a sin, it is ok for me to rape because that's the difference between me and the rapists who don't think it is a sin...wha?!?!...what is that!?...
        ...btw, I hope you didn't rape (date rape & thought rape included) anyone and think it is alright. Seriously, it doesn't matter whether you raped someone before or after your conversion (or whether you believe it to be sinful or not), rape is still wrong and must be repented of to both the victim and God.

  10. Nice chatting but I get to go. May the Lord keeps you in His peace and grace!

  11. I have since written the article several time and feel it is ok now. Would appreciate it if you could have a look and leave some comments/counterarguments. Blessings.

    http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_685210990102vcht.html

  12. allan zhang says:

    There are some suspicious. 1) Why Chai did not stand up before when she was not a Christian. Yuan has been well known for a long time. It is more logical to disclose the story many years ago. 2) It seemed like Yuan had some other affairs with others before from Chai's letter. Why there was no body said anything?
    my opinion is that one of them has mental problem.

    • timlyg says:

      Easily answered (provided the case is true):
      1) Why Chai did not stand up before when she was not a Christian. Yuan has been well known for a long time. It is more logical to disclose the story many years ago.
      ans: Cai Ling just wanted to forget her shame until she was "forced" to see his face again, this kind of silence from the victim is nothing new, do your own homework (多读点书,多看点新闻,然后再来问问题). If you really care about this kind of question, you should start reading about "women trafficking" and maybe get involve with the prevention program.

      2) It seemed like Yuan had some other affairs with others before from Chai's letter. Why there was no body said anything?
      ans: Same question as 1) which is being answered. Looks like you have a mental blockade.

  13. Susan Song says:

    I can't believe I spent this long time reading all these during working hours...
    I found your article good and to the point, almost shared it to your cell group (someone shared an article about the Chai/Yuan case earlier, which has 4 cases in total), until I read the comments below.
    I am not sure how old you are but you really sounds like a 热血青年.
    I just want to suggest you to tone down a bit when discussing sensitive topics such as this. I find your tone sometimes really aggressive. And that may not be helpful for our brothers such as Christopher. He seems to be either really a Yuan fan or just opposing you for the seek of it now.
    Sorry for all the broken English.

    • timlyg says:

      Actually I believe I was not aggressive enough. How we respond to people depends on the attitude of the questioners. It is never always to be non-aggressive. Sometimes being aggressive is good and important. And I don't think age has anything to do with being aggressive.

      • Susan Song says:

        "How we respond to people depends on the attitude of the questioners."

        Galatians 6:1-3 ESV

        Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted. Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. For if anyone thinks he is something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself.

        I thought it is common perception that younger person tends to be more aggressive/easier to be triggered. But you have every right to think what you think.

        • timlyg says:

          I think you are getting off topic now. But yes, we must remember Galatians 6 well when we deal with those who are in the Lord that stumbled.

          The best way to learn aggression is from the saints of the Bible and chiefly Jesus' example. There is no other way, not young people, not politicians, etc. But if you are talking about one should never be aggressive, then I'm sorry, I'm not a Buddhist monk, you're talking to the wrong person.

  14. Susan Song says:

    I actually bothered to read your about me page to get to understand your background better.
    I did not say anything like "one should NEVER be aggressive". And I really don't think you should bring other religion into discussion just like this.
    If you really wish "God shines through me as His vessel", then I suggest you try to at least appear more humble.
    There are many people who are from different background, different religion (or no religion), who are new Christians or Christians under wrong teaching. If your theology is solid then that is by God's mercy not your merit. You should be here to share and guide others in spirit of gentleness and bring them to the light.
    Otherwise you may only find yourself being a stumbling block rather than the vessel you want to be.

  15. Cathy says:

    Wow, I finished reading all the posts! Really interesting discussions and I admire the logics displayed in the discussions. Also thanks for the reminder to read Matthew 7:5 and the rest of the chpater. I've been dodging from making all kinds of judgements (in public) and now I feel that is not, pehaps not, right. Cheers to All who participated in the discussions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.