From now on, I should remind myself whenever I get pujian after doing something really simple like following up with some paperworks and things like that: Wah, Tim you hebat!
My response: No, it's either you're lazy to do it or your English is too bad to accomplish it.
Of course, I cannot say this to the employers, they have every right.
It is common for the Evangelicals to emphasize preaching to a point do is better than nothing. Not that I say they despise theological study, but when they uphold the act of preaching, quantity has replaced quality.
True theological study leads to preaching. Many failed to see that. Those who are knowledgeable do not preach, because they are not really pursuing the core of theology. Those who are lazy, not able to discern true value of theology themselves instead of observing others' result, loving praises of men, preach but do not study.
Hence it is said, it is better for the preachers of today to NOT preach but study instead. There, this would shut up those who love to ask around for others to preach like them. For that is God's calling. Men's duty is to give no more instructions than that is in theology.
For those who preach without calling, are definitely damned.
For those who preach without studying, there is no urgency in making Jesus known, for there are others, the Mormons, the Jehovah's witnesses, etc. They are preaching Jesus, albeit the wrong one but it is His name nonetheless. This, I do not say that I'm identifying the Christian Cults with us, but merely point out that if one thinks he's preaching because the world is so in need of people like that and saying that it's what Jesus commanded which is contrary to Scripture's core, he is no better than the most enthusiastic cult. Christ's name is known through them, but not in them, as God's grace allows.
So, as I once put it, it is better to be used by God WITHIN His grace, I will say here:
It is better to have our Lord's name known in us, than merely through us. This is what every preacher must pray for before they preach. And in such way, I pray for all preachers of the world.
I will just note down the version my church, CCCNY, uses:
1. 我信上帝，全能的父，创造天地的主；
2. 我信我主耶稣基督，上帝独生的子；
3. 因圣灵感孕，由童贞女马利亚所生；
4. 在本丢彼拉多手下受难，被钉于十字架，受
死，埋葬；
5. 降在阴间，第三天从死人中复活；
6. 升天，坐在全能父上帝的右边；
7. 将来必从那里降临，审判活人死人。
8. 我信圣灵；
9. 我信圣而公之教会；我信圣徒相通；
10. 我信罪得赦免；
11. 我信身体复活；
12. 我信永生。
阿们。
(source: http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BD%BF%E5%BE%92%E4%BF%A1%E7%B6%93)
English Version of CCCNY, using Church of England's Book of Common Prayer 1662:
(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles%27_Creed)
As for the Thanksgiving After communion responses:
It is Psalms 103:1-5 & 8-13
Finally, I know how small it is: roughly 1mm, with cable just like the mechanical pencil lead.
Now, I just wonder about the price and the light problem.
T: Every time I passed the 42nd Research Library, aggressive modern hippies carrying a writing board, wearing a t-shirt or badge, stopping people on the streets to ask for donation for the children of poverty. I had initially stressed to one of them the importance of spiritual, instead of merely physical need. It is obvious, many of these organizations of the West(if they really exist legitimately) is not Christian centric or theocentric, but anthropocentric, whether they were formerly of Christian organizations or not.
V: Have a heart...it's too bad, people on the street, walking by busy with their lives, as if they were really that busy. No time? Not even for saving the children?
S: Saving what children?
V: So many in poor countries...no food, no medicine and so on!
T: It is quite a judgmental attitude you guys are putting out on the street...firstly, that you assume no one cares or donates through other means, secondly, you justify yourselves of your own responsibility by spending time soliciting from others. Take my advice, be an example yourself before you expect people to listen to you.
S: But surely their presence must count...otherwise who do we donate to?
T: Well, churches who do these kind of services for one. Surely these people must see their organizations are more strangers to the streets than churches, and they still want to push their self-righteous judgment on others.
<To be adjourned>
At times, it is mysteriously shocking how Stephen Tong and John MacArthur preach alike.
Interesting musical turn from the modern: The Reformed Rap.
What drew my interest was this quote by Anthony Bradley:
Reformed hip-hop is a theologically driven masculinity movement. It says no to the prom songs to Jesus in CCM, no to whiny emo Christian music for hipsters, and no to empty, shallow, individualistic Christian music lacking theological content produced out of Nashville.
And then I thought of those orthodox churches (not the Eastern Orthodox), which gradually surrender their music to the very songs they've once called shallow...they would be no better than shallow, beginning it emotionally until it spread through the whole essence of a man.
Though hip-hop rap is very wordy than others, providing the advantage of content building, I am not too impressed when I browsed through an example of Curtis Allen's Heidelberg Catechism song, which is more repetition of the title than anything theological. How would one over come the aggressive masculinity obsession in a style whose essence comes from it.
I would put it in the Entertainment-Education category, still, it is very distracting, especially when I try to be serious in focusing on the meaning of the Westminster's Catechism when it's sung by Curtis. And the speed of Marcus Gray's Who Can Pluck Us, while I may try to keep up, is tempting me for unecessary aggression, I doubt it is possible to have a pious "music" in this way.
However, I'll give them credit for being calvinist...perhaps a tool I'll throw into the modern Christians who's so crazy about pop Christian songs to sink them to a point of turning around, though not for myself.
Prom songs to Jesus...ha...that is certainly a fresh term for the CCM.
Finally, after 10 years, the CIA has killed Osama. Everyone's getting very emotional, especially in America.
Well, I supposed Obama's next term is secured.
And some, like Trump, would want proof of body, no doubt.
My only questions are:
Are there collateral damage?
How was Osama killed? Or was it just a simple firefight?
Why is any time needed to invade any terrorist compound? Money? or are we just interested in Osama?
What is Bush thinking? I mean really thinking inside...That's all.
While listening to MacArthur's "Fundamental Priorities of a Good Church", I heard two "puritan" preachers mentioned without names. Thus, I was unable to learn about the incidents in more detail.
After some search, I believe I've found one, but while the major background is similar, some minor details differ, unless it's the wrong guy, which I doubt.
1. Charles Simeon, a preacher who has often found church locking door and pew against him (10-12 years) simply because he wanted to preach directly from the Bible. He allowed the Word to change the people despite the fact that he's got a legal order to force open doors which he didn't use.
2. Still unknown to me: There was another Puritan who came to a church in New England and said he was going to preach through Isaiah. He preached there over 25 years and died in chapter 8. That's too slow.
First thought across my mind: Why was he in Texas?
David Wilkerson, famed "The Cross and the Switchblade" protagonist in real life then, well respected as the preacher who turned whorehouses and gangs (ie. the gangster-turn-evangelist Nicky Cruz) of New York City around, passed just like that in a car crash.
Time Square Church (based in an old theater house) megachurch while being non-denomination (I thought it was "inter-denomination"), is very charismatic in style: music-wise and having a prominent healing center in the basement. It is probably the only pentecostal type church I don't mind re-visiting, mainly because of how all of their pastors have to sit on the stage and listen during the sermon, instead of running around doing their own thing - a method towards good elder relationship, I presume.
