Schism in American Presbyterian church from 1741 - 1758, controversy surrounding the First Great Awakening. Also known as the Old and New Light (including Congregationalists and Baptists) debate: When denomination splits into two: Old Lights = conservatives who do not wish changes, New Lights (George Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards, Gilbert Tennent, etc.) = those who prefer the changes. The Great Awakening calls for true conversion via preaching "terrors of the law". The Old side thinks that this type of faith policing has gone too far.
Old School vs. New School:
Schism in American Presbyterian Church in 1837, lasted 20+ years.
Old School, led by Charles Hodge of Princeton Theological Seminary, conservative, did not support the the 2nd Great Awakening.
I'll place criticism of the study here, but the essence of the passage I shall place in my Proverbs entry.
@10:40 R mentioned that the Holy Spirit hadn't been given yet (I guess it was an allusion to John 7:39..."had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified", thus the answer would be both yes and no, contrasting John 3 as Jesus spoke to Nicodemus about the Holy Spirit). The pastor acknowledged that it wasn't poured out the same way in OT vs. NT but he didn't elaborate further. A good topic on this was answered by Ligonier a while back:
Horton: The pouring of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2 brings the whole world into a new era.
Derek Thomas aligned with Pak Tong when he quoted Psalm 51:11 "...take not your Holy Spirit from me" even though the old covenant saints were saved the same way as the new covenant saints: by the works of the Holy Spirit in the promised Christ (for OT).
TGC has an article, by James M. Hamilton Jr., about this as well and made it clear that the Holy Spirit did not indwell the OT believers. That kind of indwelling was in the temple and among the people. There was a need for the temple as the shadow type of Christ.
@14:23 on verse 34, the pastor asked for the definition for humility.
Pak Tong on the definition, which I think is better:
@14:58 Rd gave the answer to the definition for humility that the pastor was anticipating: "not deserving, not worthy". And the pastor then aligns with John Gill on grace comes before one exercises humility.
I would add here, more accurately, "not deserving before God", that in contrast to the Buddhists' way of humility, Christian humility is the only true one. Any other types are naturally corrupted.
@21:51 The pastor said of being humble is "not about results". I would disagree here. The disagreement would probably have to be more of the language, semantics. But important. True, we're not concerning ourselves with results as in successful great numbers of accomplishments even the whole world would recognize in their sinful state. But this result should be focused on the result of God's grace upon us. The very faithful act in us, is the result!
@22:44 Here the pastor seems to equate the disgrace of the fools to people who have no legacy, despite acknowledging the fact that some good Christians also left no legacy. I think this view is just too shallow and there's no need to further expound on it. This is different than David in Psalm 37:36 "...he could not be found" for David sought after them in a sense of the lack of eternal value. Perhaps this affected his flawed view on cathedrals (not commanded by God to built, but looks God-glorifying nonetheless).
@24:50 The pastor rightly called out the ones who would rather sit on the fence. E answered with "we must run the race". The pastor prefers: "someone who says why I would even bother, is someone who hasn't really encountered God". I think it's good because there are folks in all general churches under this judgment. But then I think he tried to give methodological examples of what one should be doing for God, which kind of defeated the purpose of the answer he gave. How can someone do those if he hasn't really encountered God? Not an easy rebuke for any church leaders to give, so at least Pastor Chris dared to bring it out in the first place, against the complacent believers.
@27:20 Phil completely went off topic from this and brought up Eric Liddell on how he gave glory to God. The pastor tried to accommodate it by "there's no a hierarchy of service to God". Then I think he was alluding also to but without mentioning the Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25:14-30). The pastor then segued into the topic of anything can be idolized or used to glorify God. Mary's spikenard was mentioned vs. Judas' criticism, as a means to view sports as God glorifying. I don't think Mary's spikenard case is coherent with sports that's God glorifying. Though there's nothing wrong with sports. "it's possible to serve needy people with the wrong heart", hearing this I was reminded of Tim Keller's Counterfeit Gods.
@30:30 F, as I may have guessed, now rebutted saying that "I would like to see what else these guys [athletes] will do, it's easy to cross the finish line...but then they go buy gold chains and Maserati..." The pastor tried to calm the atmosphere by calmly calling "it has to do with the heart, the character". I told Nadia later that, using Tim Keller, I would have responded "everything, even volunteering for food banks, helping the poor [Judas' case], can be turned into idolatry". N then tried to add that those who are wasteful will be broke in the end anyway, so they need to be money savvy. That's a soft general feedback to Frank's comment. He also added that the camera moves away the moment the athletes praise God, which I could only think it was an inaccurate fundamentalist type comment. The pastor the rightly quoted Matthew 5:16.
@34:20 G & E then acknowledged that some thinks the only way to serve God was to become pastors, preachers, etc. The same think from Keller's Counterfeit Gods can easily answer this, so I am not saying more here.
@36:10 In somewhat incoherency, the pastor responded G on "and the whole world just going to have people serving in soup kitchens, etc." with his famous "cathedrals" case. P: "No Christian would sincerely say that God wants these Cathedrals...a thousand years of labor and money...however who among us find it awestruck...in other words, the Lord uses people who were wrong to still glorify and serve Him". So shallowly wrong, I could easily rebut with this basis: All things can be done for glory of God, in fact, what P does now is against the argument he was trying to make before - it's about the heart. Perhaps do that to the athletes again, pastor Chris. Try "No Christians would sincerely say that God wants these medals".
The pastor's point to G was that if there were only just one thing [all serving in soup kitchens], because of such a small amount of true believers, and the fact that non-believers [indirectly from his Cathedral builders example] are around to sort of accomplish God's glory, it will still be okay. And Ez continued with (I could vague make it out, so I'm guessing this was what she said) "...and no one will ever have money to send missionaries" and all laughed. This is so bad I don't even feel like I should respond to it. The "soup kitchens can be idolized" is enough blow against any of these comments.
@38:40 F tried to fight back subtly against the pastor's Cathedral case by citing how a documentary showed the stone masons dedicated their work to God. But then F side tracked to that being an opportunity for the masons to share the gospel when a kid came and ask why you did this. The pastor tried to work around that by still trying to make it as if a "sin" to still build the cathedral because the only reason do so, according to the pastor, is that one thinks "God needs/commands such architectures". He connected this to the hubris and pride of the empire.
@39:48 D actually surprised me this time by giving a great biblical response to this cathedral case by alluding to the old testament beautiful temple. The pastor tried to go around this as well, but I don't think it's a win.
@41:15 R also brought up the fact that some may come to Christ through the beauty of these cathedrals. A minor answer, but I do agree and like it. The pastor only looked at the danger in this view (i.e. virgin Mary's statue, etc.). I told Nadia later that many of these cathedrals have the gospel story etched into the beautiful stained glass windows. Interesting here that the pastor compared this to building the Golden Calf, which would be something some of us reformed folks used for Contemporary Christian Music. He failed when he said "God can used the Golden Calf to lead someone..." because principally, this is heretical, if he meant that the golden calf can sometimes be a good thing. The golden calf is a pure result of a completely erroneous way to serve God, it's like saying God can use porn as a positive, God glorifying factor to lead someone to Christ. I personally don't think the pastor was going this way, but he's trapped himself in a language that could only lead to this conception. P: "St. Peter's Basilica is an absolute abomination". I would just go as far as the means of building the Roman basilica is an abomination.
TGC actually as an article on this, contrasting Puritan architecture view (church buildings = meetinghouses) vs. the Catholics' "the sacred space" cathedral view. "But this does not mean that it must be unattractive or drearily utilitarian...John Calvin...chief principle...decorum" How we behave is more important. Bottom line, just don't worship the building itself. This is something only those who care to understand God's aesthetic.
@42:32 Phil mentioned Mother Theresa in response, in a confused way to suggest "God is the one who judges in the end". Rob quoted Colossians 3:23 as conclusion, "no matter what work we do, as long as it's legal and not sinful..." I think it's American if not Western hubris to think that their legal laws are sinless, because to pick a tiny bone, Rob's point here would fail with not doing the kind of work that's "...illegal but not sinful...". again, play of words here, not saying that they are believing what they are saying.
@44:00 The pastor went back to the Spikenard case by saying Martha's the busy one, her heart wasn't right.
@45:10 R asked "doesn't the Bible say that the heart is wicked?" I think this was a Catholic thing and the pastor answered rightly with "the New heart".
@45:50 Not sure why N was trying to justify accountants' place in the world using Bernie Madoff. If I think what N was saying is right, then it's a very shallow argument. Of course we don't overgeneralize things.
@46:55 Nadia asked about the mentioning of Martha by P. P: "Martha was trying to impress people, show off...instead of pleasing God". Rick then gave the best answer among all, but wasn't quite heard by many I think, by saying "Martha was about work". Nadia wanted to make a case that "then what happens if everyone just sat by Jesus like Mary", the pastor couldn't respond well: "that's not the message, the message is..." Even M also asked @48:10 "Martha was showing off?" and F corrected "at least not let Martha criticize Mary".
My conclusion on this is the pastor, maybe not alone on this, perhaps due to the fundamentalist upbringing, has a very bad use of English conversation/conveying proper meaning which is from shallow thinking of matters, of logic and reasoning, as eloquent and better at vocabulary than me as he could be.
8/7/2024 The Paris 2024 Olympics boxing event had people concerned about gender identity when Imane Khelif of Algeria, being identified as female since birth, won a match against Italian Angela Carini within 46 seconds. As a result, Khelif's gender as a female was called into question due to her mainly figure. This also sparked debate on social media as IOC delays in settling the controversy. Another alleged female boxer, Lin Yu-ting of Taiwan, her gender was also called into question. The International Boxing Association (IBA)'s earlier disqualification of the two boxers in 2023 was brought up, consequently. IBA's president, Umar Kremlev, claimed that these two showed XY chromosomes in testing. It would appear that IBA is the only source of such gender information on these two boxers, but unfortunately, IBA had been barred by IOC in 2019 and in 2023 due to alleged governance of the sport, and, Kremlev's claim was never officially published. So all we have is just hearsays from some questionable officials.
I believe I first came across this from social media. People like David Tong and Alex posted opposing views. Tong was using the "XY" chromosomes as fact while Alex was focusing on accusation of Khelif being transgender as determinant of the invalidation of the fact. They both have multiple posts on Facebook. The moment I learned that Khelif's from Algeria, I already thought to myself, intentional transgenderism would be likely unlikely in Khelif's case, as Algeria's a Muslim country, it was a no brainer for me.
My conclusion is that the gender in a gender sports is ultimately determined in the most fundamental basis that we know of...the chromosomes, regardless of certain abnormality of mutations. Visible physical properties can only go so far from birth certificates to passports and so on. In this case, chromosome testing is important. However, I can also understand why the results are kept confidential in many case, because an intersex generally do not wish to be publicly known, as it results in unwanted consequences such as not able to get married due to prejudice, etc. Therefore, a lot of trust is placed on the qualifying entities. And if the entities are politically motivated (i.e. Supporting LGBTQ+), then it raises a lot of question in such trust, because now we're not talking just about genetic science, but social influence as well, as highly questionable determinant skills. If I'm not wrong, that seems to be where Alex was heading (likely due to his love of claiming to have LGBT friends), even though he is likely not supporting of LGBTQ+ since he once gave that "Because God said so!" fundamentalist answer when I suggested years ago in the Bronx Bible study, arguments from the ends in such political debate among the secular, non-Christians.
This also reminded me about Neil DeGrasse Tyson on sports at least a year ago: split people by categories, not gender, because we're not dealing with gender differences but hormone levels:
8/6/2024 Stephen Tong on how John the Baptist was greater than all prophets: All other prophets prophesied John's coming, unlike them John was able to baptize Jesus, they had to be filled by the Holy Spirit later in life, John was filled since birth, they hoped to see Christ but John became the friend of the Bridegroom, no fundraising only lived by God in the desert, not a single miracle done by him, greatest reductionist - all his words were the central essence of faith.
8/5/2024 Famous Greek composer: Manos Hadjidakis, noted from the Greek series: maestro in Blue
8/4/2024 Since what I have is mostly critiques on GCC's Bible Study, Sunday School & Sermons, I shall place my entries in the Journal of the Week entries instead of independent entries, unless under special circumstances: i.e. important topic that can be expanded.
Sunday School: Week 5, continuation of Jonathan Edwards' "The Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Spirit of God, Applied to that uncommon operation that has lately appeared on the minds of the people of New England: With a particular consideration of the extraordinary circumstances with which this work is attended"
We did I. Negative signs first weeks ago [What I would call, paradoxes]: 1. Newness 2. Physical effects 3. Strong affections for God 4. Impressions on the imagination 5. Examples 6. Imprudence 7. Errors 8. False Believers 9. Terrifying Preaching
Then II. Scriptural Evidence of a Sincere Work: 1. Leads One to Jesus Christ 2. Action Taken Against Satan's Kingdom and Worldly Desires 3. Greater love and regard for the Scriptures 4. Embracing of the truth even when it is uncomfortable, ugly, or unpopular 5. Love for the brethren and neighbor
And today we do III. Practical Inferences: 1. Using rules (Word of God) and Facts (self observation + others observations) @8:50 I guess Nadia wasn't the only one having problem with Pastor Chris' language, as B asked: I'm not familiar with that term...pit of hell (P said it so quickly it sounded like Pitahal).
Christians became more spiritually mature and joyful over 6 years in Edwards' perspective.
@11:50 P mentioned mega churches again, as usual, opposing it personally. I think mega churches are good. Unfortunately, when the great preachers of the mega churches have gone, those churches also dwindle, unless there's greater preachers continuing the work, which is incredibly rare.
2. [Basically a build from what insufficiency Gamaliel in Acts 5:34-42 said: If this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought, if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it.] Not only do not oppose, but do our utmost to promote (which I think the pastor did not touch much on as he only talked about affirming it, not promoting it) the work of God.
@23:00 Interesting that Patty brought up Oneness Pentecostal. I know of them, but I had to looked it up to confirm that this "Oneness" is really just the heresy of Modalism. The effect of it, I guess, not to mention a confused state Christianity, if you want to call it Christian, is the failure in seeing duality in Christ's natures. Thus, one would either become legalistic (There's no creaturely humanity in Christ) or extremely liberal (a limited god view) from this.
@24:00 Second Great Awakening was brought up as a turn from Calvinism to Arminianism. Unlike the pastor, I would like to give people like Charles Finney (I don't know anything about Billy Sunday, so I'll leave this guy out, but the pastor rounded him with the ilk of the "revival", but Finney apparently has lots of credits as promoter of social reforms such as abolitionism, equal education for women and African Americans) benefit of the doubt. The Britannica added the term "...shifted from Calvinism to a PRACTICAL Arminianism..." which I think is more apt, using the word "practical". As it is complicated. As Stephen Tong would have it, "美國從前有一位芬尼牧師 （Charles Finney, l792-1875）所屬於歸正宗的教會，當他鼓勵人傳福音時，他的精神像亞米念的精神，但是當他跑到亞米念的教會要將上帝的主權告訴人時，他求上帝藉著祂的主權將恩典賜下來，他又變成歸正宗":
But one cannot deny that, the 2nd Great Awakening is more rejected than the first. It's been treated not just as Arminianism but also moralism and legalists. I think something like Charles Finney's case is illtreated more from the methodological aspect rather than his doctrinal stand. P: The cause of the Temperance Movement which lead to the Prohibition, corporate evangelism, show window Christianity, [revival tents and invitation of professional revivalists by local churches ~ Britannica]. P: their error was - take away the evil and you'll be on the right track, backwards; whereas Christ's message was get your heart right first... Not bad, but I would further to say: know the Lord personally. There were sayings about people being scared away from bars for 5 years and then come back again, scare tactic revivalism.
3. On how to promote #2. with humility: When we have great discoveries of God made to our souls, we should not shine bright in our own eyes.
@35:10 Edwards' grandson (maternally) Aaron Burr was mentioned as not a believer and chafed under a strict household, thus his heart's not in the right place. I had to look this up: Burr was known for his illegal duel with Alexander Hamilton (killing Hamilton, but Burr was never tried, I guess due to the common practice of such illegal activity) as well as the Burr Conspiracy - alleged plot to create his own countries, but was acquitted each time. I take it P meant that Burr was not a good guy in this context, not knowing Burr well myself.
@40:08 P: I think if we have a gospel of grace, it's almost impossible for someone to truly measure their level of spirituality on an objective scientific scale...what people like to do is to make everything into a science, i.e. I do not play cards, therefore I'm a better Christian. [I disagree with the use of the term science here, because then it really is not objective science is it? Thus, as I said before in another entry, bad English. A better alternatives are: just theory, personal opinion, private own understanding, self-made rules, there's no fixed formulas, etc. In this case, I think this is due to the pastor's misunderstanding of Matthew 7 on "judge not", as if we can never judge others. Speaking of science, I would say somethings are not quantifiable, however, if one is to really bring science in, then you must get your definitions of the terms correct: what do you mean by measuring this or that, then we will decide if we are truly talking about science or not. Also, I think like Nadia, probably, many such folks are incapable of dealing in probability, as part of science. When they talk about science, they want absolute numbers, not just statistical probability]
On Sunday Sermon: Revelation 2:1-7. Q1: Why is it still commendable to what is Biblically right even if it is for misguided reasons? What can help you engage for the right reasons? This question is based on Rev. 2:4, that Ephesus lost their first love despite all the earlier commendation on labor in patience, cannot bear them which are evil, tried false apostles. P: Ephesus did these for the wrong motive. [This scripture context is not about motives being wrong, for there was their first love. Wrong motives never have any love to begin with. Ephesus failed due to not faithful in their struggle in this world]
I finally got to ask Doryce of the song that she once said sounded similar to Maranatha's Make Me A Servant. She couldn't remember nor could I. But she gave me something close enough, and that's Muppet's The Rainbow Connection:
The prophet kind: Such as Stephen Tong, R.C. Sproul, etc. These are the front liners. They are the reliable ones in both God and Church. They are not afraid of challenges, seeing them as God's lesson, aligning to theology of suffering. It's possible for them to see God's rebuke on Job for what it is: Man's failure in asking question pertaining to Adam's unfallen responsibility. The more harm coming their way, the stronger they become from God. True fellowship is found with these, as it spread like fire.
The priesthood kind: Passively follow all instructions. They are only reliable in Church, if they are. Prone to the older brother's jealous character in the Lord's parable. These are many found in my life: most Redeemer's pastors under Tim Keller, CCCNY's pastor Laura Lin, etc. They are afraid of challenges, seeing them as oppositions to God, aligning to theology of complacency. It's not possible for them to see the true lesson for Job other than: Don't ask too many question. The more harm coming their way, the more blame they are towards others, if not God. True fellowship is hardly found with these. Though they may create or participate what is labeled as fellowship, the fellowship tends to turn cold over time and another form of fellowship is labeled for the sake of keeping the "family name" going.
There could be overlap between the two. Perhaps Jonah was one such.
God loves both of these and both are in His salvation plan. The extremes for each in risk of their salvation would be, for type #1.: giving into self satisfaction and abandon God. #2. thinking themselves as good as Uzzah going to places where they should not be.
Interestingly, it's possible for type #1. to be saved, if they sinned a little bit like Uzzah, as long as return to the Lord upon shameful rebuke from the lowliest being (or else, they would seek the risky road of disappearing themselves once their service is over, hiding in denial masking their shame). And for type #2. to give in to self satisfaction, to seek comfort from demanding task, as long as they hold on to God, God's rebuke would be most effectively severe in their heart while the others, especially the type #1., blinded by the meaning of such rebuke, for it is never meant for the type #1. as it is beyond their mental capacity as well, could only see that as a gentle but twisted form of either comfort or God-on-the-high-horse (Do not ask questions) for themselves, instead of as loving but stern rebuke of God on his beloved prophets (type #2).
Conclusion, though both maybe saved, #1. is not recommended.
v.7: Here it begins the negative: fools despise wisdom and instruction.
My son... v.8: Father's instruction, listen; Mother's torah/law/teaching, forsake not. Forsake not = leaning towards memorization of the law; listen = pondering/theologize/deep thinking the instruction. Father/mother is more about honoring thy father and mother here, and less to do with God the Father/church, but the latter view is not uncommon among church fathers (Didymus the Blind, Bede, etc.). The two advice will be your...
v.10: Consent not: Before rejecting/not standing in the way of sinners, recognize first their enticement.
v.11: Lay in wait, lurk privily, reminiscent of Psalm 10:8. But this is not just about the most wicked whom even the pagans and secular could identify, this is also about those who think they are justified for taking advantage of the weak and poor, they think they are justified because they believe they have exercised their version of the law, as if they are on the righteous side and assumed the losers to the deal they craftily made with them are due to their own stupidity and not the slyness of the contract drafters.
v.13-14: This enticement is motivated by the strength in majority. A self-centered one. So it is not about trickery against the weak, as many would think they are justified for not following down this path. But it is about whether the ultimate goal is a self-centered one or not: We, our, join us.
My son...
v.15: from not consenting (v.10) to walk not in their footsteps. First it's outward relational (consent between two people, joining with sinners), now it's inward relational (self contemplation vs. curiosity, considering the ways of sinners).
v.17-19 is interesting. For the English versions all agree that it is in vain to throw the net by announcing first to your prey that you will throw the net. The Chinese version however, 网罗设在眼前仍不躲避, meaning even in the face of danger, one still lives in ignorant. Though I lean towards the English, but the meaning of the Chinese is not completely off rail. The Chinese calls them fools who fail to see the judgment of God in their selfishness. However, the Chinese is turning this into inconsistency. It makes more sense for the agents that cast the net are the sinners themselves, and neither Satan nor God. As shown in v.18. And v.19 concluded this a greediness.
Wisdom personified (v.20-33):
v.20-25: reminiscent of Jesus crying against the ignorant ones often times. (Chorazin & Bethsaida in Matthew 11:21, Jerusalem in Matthew 23:37)
v.26-32: Consequence of sinners. Wisdom/the Lord, turning away from the fools.
v.28: The sinners are smart enough to realize they need help, but the Lord/Wisdom is not there.
v.29: The cause of the rejection by the Lord/Wisdom is not because the sinners were too late, but because of the lack of fear of YHWH, which is the requirement for the beginning of the knowledge that they hate. Interesting, that the author placed knowledge before fear here. So there's a circular causation here: True love for knowledge will bring one to the fear of the Lord, which would in turn increase in knowledge. Thus, those who fear the Lord, already loved knowledge to begin with.
v.32: Complacency of fools (愚顽人安逸) is interestingly added. For here it seems to allude to the fact that wickedness is not just those who are satisfied in their wickedness, but satisfied also in their peacefulness, prosperity, etc. in a selfish way. Such is folly.
v.33: ...dwell secure, at ease, without dread of disaster (必安然居住，得享安静，不怕灾祸). Without fear of harm doesn't necessarily just mean no temporal challenge will come, but this challenge is nothing to be feared for. So first, wisdom takes us away from intentionally walking into harm's way, but it also place our mind in the fear of eternal God instead of the dread of temporal harm.
Chapter 2
My son...
v.1-5: Reiterating 1:29's circular causation, starting with seeking and cherishing the father's commandments to wisdom, resulting in the true fear of the Lord, getting true knowledge, that of God.
Chapter 3
v.31 "Do not envy a man of violence..." ESV. For his happiness comes in falsehood and its days are numbered.
v32 "...but his secret is with the righteous" KJV or "the upright are in his confidence" ESV. God is willing to reveal His secret to his servants and prophets (Amos 3:7, Job 29:4). Such is the Gospel (~Gill).
v.33 curse is on the house of the wicked (1 Samuel 5: The Philistines took the ark and were struck with illness); Obed-Edom had the ark and was blessed (2 Samuel 6). The very blessings of the wicked are curses (Gill).
v.34 on the humble: "those who are made truly sensible of sin and lie low in their own sight on account of it...submit to the righteousness of Christ...own the deficiency of their duties...think the worst of themselves and the best of others...patient under every adverse dispensation of Providence, God first gives grace to these...to make them thus humble and lowly which they are not naturally, and then more grace - James 4:6, " ~Gill.
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
v.1: This security, some call it a vouching, we can also consider this as a kind of recommendation, putting our reputation on the line for someone.
verses 6-11 (lazy/no initiatives) should contrast the first 5 verses (over initiatives).
Chapter 7
Chapter 8
v.31: Christ loves to dwell among His people, His brothers. Stephen Tong links those who see this wisdom (敬虔的奥秘 mystery of godliness: incarnation, virgin birth, union of two natures ~ Gill) are those living in godliness, 1Tim 3:16:
They are as easy as typing a question in a box and let them work wonders. I've tested all of them and they do prove to be very useful and are good for cross-referencing results as well since they run on independent LLM.
Thus far, only Copilot does image creation, of all 4 listed above.
The potential of these are great. I've used them to convert a messy list of items into well organized spreadsheet for my manager. Used it to create instructions and write essays and such.
Since I came to Grace Church (Bridgewater), there's these sayings going around: "Life is not science", "The math folks won't get this", "You can't explain this with mathematical equations", etc.
I think these stupid phrases come not from this church alone. It's perhaps my beginning personal encounter of the shallowest fundamentalist influenced kind of Christians. It's likely they've failed math and science. They cannot define terminologies properly. Their guru is probably Ken Ham and the likes. I have yet to pin point the source of these quotes of theirs. So I'll leave this in the Questions category as well.
Recognizing, lots of Bible study verses they touched on are beyond their (only them in most cases) own understanding, they would rather conclude that these are something the science folks (instead of themselves) cannot figure out/understand. Yet, I looked at those verses, I don't see any problem with a rational interpretation of them, especially most of these verses have to do with the aesthetics, artistic literature.
What they actually meant, is "lean not on your own understanding".
The Reformation influenced some of them a bit, or else they would place faith and science mutually exclusive. But they still do not truly grasp the distinction between general and special revelations. They do not see that we are mere interpreters of both revelations, that is, if they get what revelation truly is at all. The rest of their consequent failure is just out of pride and jealousy.
In general, rationality, logic, Math and science are just what we do to make sense of ALL God's revelations. Since these are God's given tools, they can never be wrong, but the users themselves can be wrong.
You can say that God or faith is beyond rationality, supra-rational. If there's something beyond mathematics, for example: love, all mathematicians know this is not something you use mathematics or science for. You cannot say that there's even a slightest chance for faith to contra-reason. To be fair, to say that "this doesn't fit the mathematical equation" can be seen as the insufficiency of human reasoning, which would be correct, however, the folks I was referring to above do not treat it that way. They are implying that either nobody else can figure/understand what they themselves cannot understand or math can be wrong, which has nothing to do with the insufficiency of our own understanding. To say that there is a chance for any of God gifted tools to be wrong is to call God a liar.
The only way to cure them, I think, is to keep fixating on "lean not on your own understanding" instead of "this is not an math equation" (because maybe it is and you just can't figure it out), which is bad English, bad reasoning and bad science. I can try to brainwash them out of this error subtly with care or harsher when needed.
The Company that's owned by its employees. This concept is new to me. When SP started this, I just saw it as some sort of internal IPO stocks. From the point of stocks, that's great, from the point of employees become the boss, that sounds like the union. But now TLDR has this article "Every company should be owned by its employees" by ELLE GRIFFIN:
The American/Western fundamentalists do not get this. They are easily turned off by the Scientism folks and embraced a kind of spirituality that is devoid of rationality. They would try not to be anti-rational, if they could, but they really do not wish to follow the rational path because they have lost their wits not the scientism, but to anyone who are smarter than them in rationality. Their jealousy pushed their pride to finding refuge in fake humility which is taken as their new found spirituality, not realizing that they've already fallen into the theological errors practiced in the far East for thousands of years.
That is the second part of the quote. The first part of the quote is obvious, that we do not just think, but we have live it, in Christ, taking us not against, but beyond rationality. So the faithful saints will not need to fall to pride when facing rational opponents who are smarter. In fact, they would show true humility and desire to learn if possible.
8/3/2024 So the bathtub overflow cap broke off upstairs when Nadia was doing some cleaning. Apparently there are various overflow pipe, found this diagram from Amazon, red check is the one we have upstairs, I guess it corresponds with BIG-3SHO, but problem is, the screw is broken in the screw hole and I have no clue how the broken piece in there looks like the screw came from the other side in as the broken side seems sharp and well threaded, was it modified by whoever trying to repair this before?:
This company (BlueVue) sells all kinds of gaskets/brackets for the tub overflow.
I really hope I won't need to drill extra holes.
Step one: Try extraction of the broken screw.
Stephen Tong on where the Apocrypha came from: (from the great historical afflictions of the Jews in the 400 years between OT & NT where there's no prophets) Wikipedia dated them to 200BC - 100AD.
Stephen Tong on Jewish Christology: Unlike others, Tong would not deny the Jews of believing the right Messiah/Christology. That they are not completely wrong about their version of Messiah, because it is biblical. However, what they got wrong is the process 程序 of Christology.
The Procedure/Order of Christ that was lacking among the Jews: 先受苦，后得荣耀； 先死，后复活； 先降卑，后得尊贵；
Why Jews cannot accept Christ: They only accept the glorified Christ, not the suffering Christ.
Therefore: Masada became a stumbling block for Jews to believe Jesus is the Messiah? "Never Masada/shame again!"
8/2/2024The Gender issue has finally come to the Paris Olympics when XY-chromosome (male) Imane Khelif of Algeria easily won the women's boxing match. Khelif had been barred before in Algeria but IOC (International Olympic Committee) allowed "her" to compete as a female, since "her" passport and birth certificate indicated female, in spite of chromosome test showing XY, instead of XX. "She" was treated as female since birth because of underdeveloped penis deformity that made it looked like a vagina. I was brought to this news from David Tong's FB and it interested me to look it up. Based on these facts, this is clearly a rare birth deformity that would label him as an intersex or even hermaphrodite. However, in sports where there's clear distinction of male and female because of genetical differences/advantage, it should at least be genetical based. I suppose sports is where the most foundational basis of gender is clearly defined today.
Alex Tseng & David Tong had some interesting exchanges on this topic: A, D.
AI that splits voice and instrument. I think I stumbled upon it in Facebook or something but I can't remember the name of that AI. However, a quick google search lists a few: https://www.lalal.ai/ which I tested using Mozart's Magic Flute Queen of the Night aria, and it was 90% impressive. I do not doubt that unlike the extraordinary piece written for soprano, most songs can easily be split by this technology now. I'm very eagerly awaiting the split between lecturer and translator, that would really reduce lots of Stephen Tong's lectures/sermons by half as I really do not need to listen to the Cantonese/English translations.
Selective Perception, good phrase to remember as vocabulary. Tong used it on the Jews' view towards Jesus - They cannot accept that "...for the suffering of death..." to be applied to their Messiah:
8/1/2024 My comment on our church's Bible study on Proverbs 3, probably verse 19. We were late about 5 mins, they were discussing about how God knows everything, a shallow accounts, as if the pastor worried that there are some whose definition of God is a kind of God that may not know everything: "theories put out as fact", "God doesn't know what's going on with the Bermuda Triangle", etc.
N: "You can't do evolution with science", alluding to the scientific method, which is in itself flawed, because it is only as good as its controls. Already evolution fails even in theory, you don't need experiments to prove it. And then he moved on to strawman arguments against Big Bang, Dark Matter, etc. N then said that these gave science a bad name. I would push back that they don't give science a bad name, because they are not science. That's like saying the Mormons gave Christianity a bad name.
I say shallow because the pastor only went as far as "pursuing the knowledge of the world is a good thing", which is understatement. But more importantly, as Tong would agree with me, not pursuing the knowledge of the world is sinful, it was commanded by God in Genesis, and very clearly in the last chapters of Job. I am not sure if pastor Chris would agree to this one because he's using the excuse with the verse "all in God's time - discoveries, and such".
Then the pastor moved on to suggesting that Solomon did not know how rain drops, not completely wrong. But, to be accurate, I would say we don't know that for sure, whether Solomon knew or not.
@11:10 For verse 24, not sure the need why the pastor divided fear into various aspects: Theological (your soul is secure), Imaginative (considering the what if's), Literal. I think it is unnecessary to do all these if your relationship with God is right. I-Thou, not I-It.
@16:00 Talks of "Universe" in place of God, also shallow. Because they fail to realize that the reason the secular culture gets uncomfortable with the word "God", is lots of time due to fundamentalists' twisting of the meaning God. This does not happen in other cultures that never twisted the word "God" as the Western influenced fundamentalists.
@19:00 Testimony of some miracle was brought up where two girls weren't raped by rapists in the German war as they walked right in front of the rapists as if the rapists were blinded. Patty responded by asking if this was due to the girls have more faith. Pastor refuted that rightly, calling it a form of bargaining. However, I would go as far as saying that, on the contrary, the ones with more faith are usually the ones who do not need such miracles, it is often times, the ones that lack faith, these miracles are given. The pastor fail in this probably due to Charismatics influence in America.
Patty then continued to ask if it's sinful to fear, since Jesus said fear not. I think this question caught the pastor off guard, based on his response. He compared Patty's question to Jesus sweating blood as a kind of "fear", the kind that we "have no control over, due to chemical reaction", which was why N taking further with the error of defining fear with different levels: being shocked/startled = as types of fear as well. The pastor also wrongly assumed that everyone would fear a gun pointed at them, regardless of their faith. But I think this was due to him trying to balance pastoral care, so that people like Patty would not take it too harshly. Dirk was better at bringing Daniel's friends for not being afraid.
There also seeks to be some confusion between fear and being alert. @25:25 when the pastor spoke of using the dread kind of fear in battles as a good thing.
Verse 27 was badly dealt with @27:00. The pastor prefers to treat this as referring to known neighbors rather than strangers. This way of interpretation won't work well in NYC nor in evangelism. He then used the strawman of someone trying to safe the entire continent of Africa. "...to whom it is due..." commentaries and Tim Keller nailed this "due" to the original text meaning that this was owed. So it's far from the direction of the strawman argument.
@30:25 Mary then wrongly thought that only Christians do selfless charity works. A lack of a global knowledge.
@32:15 D suggested that it's better to immediately pray for someone right in front of them when they shared their troubles. I think not everyone would like that, though in most cases, that might work. One needs to assess the motive and true need, lest making vain prayers and thus worse testimony.
@39:40 On verse 29, the shaking dust off the feet was mentioned and Nadia seemed developed an annoyance against it. I think I ought to tell her to focus on the true meaning of "shaking dust off the feet", because the pastor used the verse correctly here: when facing aggressor, just leave, do not engage.
@40:00 B asked about one denomination if all are faithful. The pastor responded "probably". He failed to understand the problem of the One and the Many. But he still answered the denomination question better than most, that there's no way to avoid denomination on this side of glory. I don't think I would use "this side of glory" much in my own talks, it's a western jargon, if not American, which I don't find useful.
@43:00 Eleni got it wrong by quoting union in God as Jesus' intent against denominations. The pastor was at least able to retort that with a quick rebuttal: But there must be organizations, etc. I definitely applaud the pastor for daring to say "I believe other denominations are wrong", though I'm not sure how far I would agree with him on his context. I believe the best way to answer that is just the sound bite: Even the non-denomination is a denomination.
7/31/2024 Alex gave a good critique on Christian criticism of the Paris Olympics 2024 opening ceremony, depicting either Leonardo DaVinci's Last Supper or The Feast of the Olympus Gods (or of Dionysus, the Greek god of festivities and wine), by Dutch artist Jan van Bijlert. David Tong also shared his own view about it, which is similar to the popular conservative Catholics and evangelicals. Unlike David Tong, who criticized it harsher, Alex tried to find a middle way about it with the Gospel instead of criticism, calling it clothing these naked French with Christ instead of stripping them of their last "fig leave", after Alex presented a history of the why's between Germany (Lutheran influence) and France (hypocrisies of king and pope). I for one just think that the word Olympics already gave a hint, that it was originally to honor the Olympus Greek god Zeus, so why get so upset about it as if the Olympics is a Christian thing. If the art is intentionally mocking Christianity, then there are many more anti-Christian movements to be of our concern. You don't talk to the slaves but the master for any conflicts.
7/30/2024 Running One-man SaaS, Healthchecks.io, 9 Years In: since 2016, now, in 2024, he has 652 paying customers with monthly revenue of $14,043USD. This SaaS monitors cron jobs. He's kind enough to share his experience. I should come up with something as it's good money.
7/26/2024 Stephen Tong on Paradox (反合性), using Christ's dual nature. And also using the paradox of "humility": Are you humble? The more you deny it, the more humble you are - And if you disagree with this statement, you are even more humble.
Chinese Translation of PARADOX that weren't satisfactory by Tong: 吊诡性, 逆反性, 似非而是性 (much better because it's not 似是而非, better, qualitatively speaking):
Also, Tong interestingly brought up Hebrews 2:5 as the proof text that when man lost his place to have dominion over the world, angels were not the one supposed to be in charge.
7/25/2024FAANG refers to the 5 Big Tech giants: Facebook (Meta), Apple, Amazon, Netflix, Google (Alphabet). And this forum discusses about benefits being better from FAANG than non-FAANG tech companies. More stable, relaxing as well.
Last week we harvested our sweet corns (bought from the now recently closed down Dieker's Farm on Bordentown Ave.), half were slightly too old. So the lesson is to harvest early in the future, perhaps before July.
With President Biden stepping down, the table may have turned, despite Trump's near death experience. Vance's rhetoric on foreign diplomacy is shallow at best, especially with the "China slavery" exaggeration as an excuse for tariff. Unfortunately, as much of a clown as Kamala is, her opposition might underestimate her enough to lose to her, if they remain obtuse. I posted this on my FB in response to Kishore Mahbubani's short clip for fun. Mahbubani was the Indian geopolitical commentator my dad introduced me when we were on our way to Koh Lipe last year. I thought he should be a great resource for me from being trapped by American/Western political propaganda.
