In order to learn the AI hype such as ChatGPT today, a start would be to run LLM locally. MIT published this article on doing LLM on a laptop.
Someone compares the storage needed to run these with having offline Wikipedia, which is quite comparable.
Loving this TurboScribe.AI tool after paying for the unlimited subscription ($120/year). I can do mass transcription of subtitles in many languages (Chinese, Indonesian, English, etc.) with all the audio files I have. I need to get more of Stephen Tong and other lecturers' audio files. It's tempting to get Tim Keller's $800 USB sermons.
On the technical note: The original mp3 files I feed TurboScribe do not sync up with the subtitle srt files it generated for. However, it allows for downloading the mp3 files which it apparently corrected for text sync up after upload, so that's the fix. So I have to not just download the srt files, but also the audio files to replace the original mp3 files.
7/25/2025 Friday
It's ironic that the U.S. offers China and ByteDance either sell TikTok to Americans or shutdown operation in U.S. Ironic because the U.S. has been all about free market, freedom, and Intellectual Properties, so now they want to force a company to give up its own IP rather than taking due diligence in securing social data. At least China is honest with their "Firewall", that China government controls the people's internet; while U.S. would just complain about being spied because they care so much about freedom. This is also a proof that IP doesn't exist but in the mind of delusion and greed, which is that you can make up something called IP which has ownership not according to a person's "intellect" but how deep the money $ pocket goes.
Allie Beth Stuckey interviewing Zachary Levi is a surprise. Because I had no idea Zachary Levi is more Christian (was raised Christian) leaning than Jewish. After checking Wikipedia, I get this about the name "Levi" which many would think was his last name:
Early in his career, a Hollywood agent persuaded him to change his name saying, "A guy named Zach Pugh would not be going far in Hollywood," which led him to drop his last name.[74] In a 2013 interview with New York Post, Levi said he has no Jewish ancestry.
He seems to want to be Christian, but somewhat shying away from the confession perhaps due to the same reason as Jordan Peterson. But maybe he's more humble than Peterson on this matter.
After listening to Zachary, my respect for him does grow. Not sure how well he's aligned with the Gospel, I could only assumed based on the Charismatic/Fundamentalist people around him growing up, but I would listen to him more than any of today's preachers.
There will certainly be haters: He didn't talk about Jesus, he seems like Arminian, he sounded like post-modernist: "Preach the Gospel at all times and if necessary use words", "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians", he's more like Roman Catholics: "balancing love and logic", "love is willing the good out of others", etc. Allie certainly isn't one of them haters, but she did seem defensive for Christian doctrine when the conversation went against textbook: "we must use words". She did allow Zach to explain further and then reconcile to the balance of words and work. If this interview is to be Gospel centered, the interviewer would need to really connect it from a very Gospel understanding way, i.e. "how would you deal with conflicts between religious faith", "how exclusive is Jesus/Christianity"? Without much Bible thumping on Zach. By the way, the "...Gospel...if necessary use words" quote often was attributed to St. Francis of Assisi, though nobody could source it, some, against the quote, calling it "can be a little arrogant = practice > preaching => useless dichotomy between speech and action" (which is itself a weak argument based on a self-created dichotomy on one's opponent using Strawman fallacy to cover one's own arrogance/hypocrisy/jealousy for being called out for indolence), though is not too far from the truth. Which is why when Stuckey veered the whole phrase to "Christianity is a word-based faith", she's missing the point, because Zach managed to correct her by saying "love-based faith". Word is important, but Stuckey missed the context when Zach already said "I see a lot of people talking, preaching, etc." as the context obviously transcends mere letters, for letters kill (something that a fundamentalist "reformed' Baptist wouldn't get). At the very least, she could at least try investigating what kind of "WORDS", "talking, preaching" was Zach talking about, so as to not associate the right Word with the wrong one. Nevertheless, the context is: Against hypocritical preachers who could only talk the talk but not walk the walk. And this is no time to talk about word-based faith. It's unwise to have it at the wrong time.
Stephen Tong finishing the last 2 of the 5 Solas as Reformed foundation - I think this is another way to dispel those simpletons who love to say "Reformed just means Biblical". If you call yourself reformed, you must at least, be able to confess the 5 solas, this is baby Reformed 101:
＃什麼是 Sola Christos 惟獨基督❓什麼是 Soli Deo Gloria 惟獨上帝的榮耀❓（希伯來書要理問答 第776問）(此講沒有影片，而從錄音帶轉錄；品質不良，請多看文字內容）
7/24/2025 Thurs
Painting of the day: Faith and Reason United, Painted by Ludwig Seitz (1844–1908), Executed circa 1887, Fresco, Vatican Museums, Galleria dei Candelabri
From Fr. Patrick van der Vorst, on Matthew 13:10-17 The secrets of the kingdom of heaven:
Our fresco at the Galleria dei Candelabri in the Vatican Museums depicts the figures of Faith and Reason united. We see Saint Thomas Aquinas teaching in the background. Pope Leo XIII (1810-1903) who commissioned the fresco had a desire that St Thomas Aquinas and his philosophy should have centrality in Catholic theology. Pope Leo XIII, the second oldest Pope in history after Benedict XVI, is perhaps best remembered for his landmark social encyclical Rerum Novarum, which laid the foundation for modern Catholic social teaching. A man of intellectual breadth and deep pastoral concern, he sought to bridge the gap between faith and the modern world. He reached out to the scientific community, established centres for theological and biblical scholarship, and made the Vatican Archives accessible to both Catholic and non-Catholic researchers, a groundbreaking gesture of transparency and trust. Leo XIII was also the first Pontiff to actively promote ecumenical dialogue, planting seeds of unity in a divided Christian world.
It is in this rich tradition of engagement, scholarship, and bridge-building that our current Holy Father, Pope Leo XIV, has chosen to stand. In taking the name ‘Leo’, he honours that legacy: one of vision, courage, and hope for the Church in the modern age.
The translation of “DIVINARUM VERITATUM SPLENDOR ANIMO EXCEPTUS IPSAM IUVAT INTELLIGENTIAM” = “The splendor of divine truths, once received within the soul, itself assists the intellect.”
7/23/2025 Wed
Stephen Tong on the 5 Solas:
＃惟獨聖經、惟獨恩典的改教原則，如何講述基督徒不是靠行為，乃是靠上帝主權的恩典而蒙恩❓（希伯來書要理問答 第774問）(此講沒有影片，而從錄音帶轉錄；品質不良，請多看文字內容）
＃Sola Fide 惟獨信心，為何不是「因信」而是「藉信」稱義❓（希伯來書要理問答 第775問）(此講沒有影片，而從錄音帶轉錄；品質不良，請多看文字內容）
Returning home from SPG around 8pm today, I was buying the usual lamb rice by the NY Penn. Station. A "homeless" bearded guy with a backpack, not so black Muslim looking, came to me for a dollar. Someone else gave him some $, he thanked that person. Then back to me for the $. I said no. He asked again, I waved him off. He got mad, and pushed me a little. I got mad, but never touched him. I told him off. He "apologized". I ignored him and went for my food. He tried to ask for money. I said get lost. He got mad again and pushed me again. He grabbed his right pant pocket as if threatening he has weapon. I didn't care, calling his bluff. The we went our separate ways. I turned around across the street, looking for him taunting him with my tactical pen up. He looked back from the far corner. I dared him to cross the street and turned to the train station and never looked back while ready for him with my pen. I'm not even sure if I took my change ($1) after paying $10 for the combo rice. So he assaulted me twice.
I'm adding this to my fault. Because it's a fail in witnessing. With wisdom. And foolishness to sink myself to his level. I was well justified at first, for shooing him away. However, the absence of Gospel witness is disturbing to me. This shows I have been far from God. I did not do my Lord proud. I shouldn't have felt annoyed even if I could still wave him off without getting annoyed, which was why I had to respond to him with ungodly temper. I did flicked him off as did he in the end. The tactical pen gesture was also my fault. It should only be meant for self-defense. It's a bad witness to the lamb rice seller.
If I see either the seller or the punk again, I should apologize to both of them. To the seller "Have you ever seen him around often, you remember him?", for making an unrighteous scene. To the punk "You again!" for taunting him at the end (not for the dismissive wave, and I could directly indicate this to him), then a chance for the Gospel. I should reflect a lot on this, as there are many wise way to deal with folks like him: i.e. "You really meant sorry? Ok, my answer is still no." then wait for him to reflect, and give time to engage further thoughtful conversation with him. This also means that it was a sin for me to keep rushing all the time like this, poor time management. How should I work my time table, that I should have time for a thing like this? May God keep me in his mercy, Amen!
Connecting Hebrews 6 to 得救 vs. 得胜 ~ Stephen Tong
＃什麼是基督道理的開端❓歸正神學提到哪三步驟❓（希伯來書要理問答 第773問）(此講沒有影片，而從錄音帶轉錄；品質不良，請多看文字內容
7/22/2025 Tues
A tutorial on SVG
7/21/2025 Mon
Came across this Infant Baptism vs. Believers' Baptism: What's Biblical? | Ep 1213 by Allie Beth Stuckey. I generally don't bother with this debate anymore, but Allie's one of the respected Youtuber I would not just glance over when she speaks of important issues, especially when she dealt with Catholics. I've already known that she's "Reformed" Baptist, so this topic came as no surprise to me. So I'll one day take time to dissect her say on this matter, adding this entry to "Projects" Category:
A good analogy is citizenship. To vote, you must be 18 (believe) and a citizen (baptism) but it doesn't mean you can't be citizen before 18. Sacremental requirement of belivers does not affect the order.
Trump released Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. assassination files (230,000): https://www.archives.gov/research/mlk: FBI's investigation, potential leads, James Earl Ray's former cellmate, etc.
Adding a 2nd Aquarium Youtuber, MJ Aquascaping, for my aquarium (mostly marine) learning. First one was Inappropriate Reefer.
Stephen Tong on the importance of Righteousness vs. those who only preach grace and love:
＃保羅在政要面前講什麼道❓公義的道理有何等重要❓教會文化有怎樣嚴重的偏差❓（希伯來書要理問答 第771問）
I think the American "Reformed" Christians are weak on this because there's no competing views allowed...yet...Buddhism and sometimes Islam would be such challenge as they do a lot of "righteous" works where they were more rampant. Americans, with their fundamentalist preachers prolific in kicking these cults out of their country, are therefore unaware of any needed improvement out of conflicts. Rather, the improvement they seek is only head knowledge that doesn't require true candor as an ingredient.
7/20/2025 Sunday
So the pastor decided to continue Church History into The Medieval Church (I would say 476 to 1500 AD). I don't know how to get Nadia to love church history. Teaching history is not easy, one needs to train teaching kids first. History is for everyone, but most teachers only teach it to those who care because the teachers themselves do not know how to teach otherwise.
The textbook he's been using is Nicholas Needham's 2000 Years of Christ's Power (5 Vols).
I'm glad that the pastor agrees with me that Christian Nationalism is bad. Though I don't know how far he would go with this. It's as if he's not not into any sort of politics, which would not be my stand.
What everyone can answer correctly, would be the SHOULD BE part: well studied in scripture, caring, an example, leader, etc.
What a lot answer wrong, would be the SHOULD NOT BE part: better than another church member, anyone.
This error is due to a kind of pastor-worship, idolizing leadership in churches. That the pastor should be the most caring in the church, more biblically fluent than every other church members, etc. Not only is it not possible, it defies the sense God placed in us, even non-believers can see that. Otherwise, the pastor would be burdened with impossible tasks that even defies God's statues - Encourage others to be better than oneself.
7/19/2025 Saturday
Bob led the Men's Fellowship, on Patience. I wasn't paying attention in the middle but I realized there's some great error Bob committed in the middle when he took the LOVE chapter from 1 Corinthians 13 and replace every word of "Love" with "God": God is kind, God is patience... Clyde was the one who later reflected on it and responded how he felt that was strange (I didn't even pick up on that, for some reason, because of one of the verses we read, I was looking into something else: That Ben Shapiro was wrong by having no problem with John MacArthur going to heaven according to Judaism because MacArthur, being not a Jew, did not violate the 7 Noahide laws: Do not deny God, Do not Blaspheme God, Do not Murder, Do not Engage in immoral sex, Do not Steal, Do not Eat flesh from a living animal, Establish legal system to uphold the above 6 laws. Because MacArthur would have broken the first 2 by calling Jesus God). The pastor and Phil went further in error saying that "God is not self-seeking" simply meant that the incarnate Son, Jesus, as a man, did not seek His own glory. They confused the divine and human natures, yet again. Even ChatGPT would agree with me. This is how it responded:
In Reformed Theology, what is wrong with substituting the word "love" with "God" in 1 Corinthians 13?
In Reformed theology, substituting the word “love” with “God” in 1 Corinthians 13 is generally theologically problematic, even if it might sound inspiring at first glance. Here's why:
Swapping “love” with “God” in 1 Corinthians 13 risks reversing the biblical logic — putting human virtue in place of divine personhood.
To reverse the phrase is to turn an attribute into a deity — a textbook case of idolatry.
— R.C. Sproul, “Essential Truths of the Christian Faith”“God’s love must be understood in harmony with His holiness and justice. To abstract love from His other attributes is to make an idol.”
— Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology
John Calvin, in his Commentary on 1 Corinthians, emphasizes that 1 Corinthians 13 shows what love looks like among people, not a description of God Himself.
Reformed theology warns against a sentimentalized God, which often emerges when “love” becomes the lens through which all other divine attributes are filtered.
| ❌ Wrong Idea | ✅ Reformed Correction |
|---|---|
| "Love is God" | "God is love" — but He is also holy, just, sovereign |
| 1 Corinthians 13 describes God’s nature | It describes the Christian ethic and fruit of the Spirit |
| Love as a divine replacement | Love as a result of union with the triune God |
In Reformed theology, saying “God is love” means God defines love. Saying “Love is God” reverses the source and elevates a human (or emotional) concept of love above Scripture — making it a functional idol.
John Frame — The Doctrine of God
Frame emphasizes that God’s attributes are not independent parts. To replace “love” with “God” in 1 Corinthians 13 implies God is only love, which denies His simplicity (that all His attributes are fully integrated).
DeYoung criticizes the use of 1 Corinthians 13 as a “definition of God” and reminds readers it's about how we should act.
| Question | Reformed Response |
|---|---|
| Is God love? | Yes — 1 John 4:8 clearly teaches this. |
| Is love God? | No — that’s theological inversion and leads to idolatry. |
| Can 1 Cor. 13 describe God? | It reflects God’s character in some ways, but the context is Christian ethics, not God’s essence. |
| Why not substitute “God” for “love” in 1 Cor. 13? | It wrongly equates God’s essence with one attribute and imposes an anthropocentric framework onto divine nature. |
| Error | Why It’s Problematic |
|---|---|
| Reducing God to “love” | Denies God's full nature (justice, holiness, wrath). |
| Imposing human ethics onto God | Makes God submit to our view of virtue. |
| Eisegesis of 1 Corinthians 13 | It’s not a doctrinal definition of God, but ethical guidance for Christians. |
| Violates divine simplicity | Attributes of God are not isolated or ranked. |
“God is love, but love is not God. Love is a perfection of God’s nature, not a god to be worshiped.”
— Paraphrased from Charity and Its Fruits
I think Bob has a tendency to idolize Christian ethics. The last time he seemingly attempted to idolize humility.
The pastor also erred greatly around @30:00 when Phil rightly spoke that we must strive and never to be complacent, and the pastor attempted to correct him: "It's gotta be a different understanding of striving, though, because you're not gonna outdo the Pharisees. That's his point. Unless your righteousness exceeds the Pharisees, that's not him saying, try harder..." I would temper that by saying, it is try harder. Try harder to trust in Christ, to strive by laying your burdens down with Christ. To strive by giving all glory and credit to God.
This continues with the pastor: ...That's him saying, you can't do it. So you do start at the level that you can't. But when we talk about striving, it goes hand in hand with loving the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength. It is, it is essentially not doing it by your own power, but working through faith. So when we talk about striving, there's this thing of, I've gotta reach the goal. I've gotta make the mark. I've gotta show the judges. That's not what we're doing. What we're doing is actually putting more weight on God. We're actually letting go and putting more weight on God, and then his power pushes us to work. And if you're not in that frame of mind, then you're still thinking, I've gotta outdo the Pharisees. I've heard Bible teachers who come from a more Arminian mindset say the problem with the Pharisees was they weren't trying hard enough.
My comment would simply be: that has a tendency of a strawman argument (I really wonder if there are really so many such strawmen who traumatized the pastor before, as these folks, though exist, are really scarce in my view) which is the only condition that this argument is correct, as most Christians who works hard already laid their burden on Christ, so it's try harder, but without your own credit but God's. Not focusing on yourself, but on God. So there's no "letting go". It's active, not passive. Also, just because we tell people to strive, does not always have to mean we meant "try harder" according to your own strength. To not see this is foolishness and hence low IQ.
7/18/2025
Phoebus Cartel formed by light bulb companies (Philips, International General Electrics, Tokyo Eletric, Osram, AEI, etc.) around the world to restrict the light bulb life to be shorter, so they could sell more, as in the early 1900s, the light bulb sales were dropped because of longer lasting bulbs. This Cartel fines any manufacturers breaking their agreement. This restricted the bulbs to only last up to 1000 hours. Fortunately, this Cartel was disbanded in 1939.
I asked ChatGPT about my site: What's https://nycphantom.com/journal mainly about? And the response was quite interestingly good:
The Journal section on nycphantom.com is essentially the author’s personal diary, not a formal blog or devotional. It features entries on:
It reads like a daily journal where the author (Timothy Law, aka “timlyg”) records his spiritual meditations, technical interests, creative pursuits, and personal reflections—ranging across theology, astrophotography, programming, and church life.
Let me know if you'd like a few specific entries highlighted or a deeper dive into any topic!
7/17/2025 On Eugenics: Scientists have finally tested on a 3rd person (other than the two biological parents) DNA contribution to an embryo. This concept was only imagined in the movie Twins 1988 by Arnold Schwarzenegger and Danny DeVito. This shouts "blasphemy" from fundamentalists. I could care less as far as parental biological heritage goes, because before the Creator's eyes, biological trait is not one to be idolized: Parental biological heritage is only as good as identity, not credit (which belongs solely to God), which is the cause of the fundamentalists' outburst, fearing that their biological "credit" as parents has been hijacked by a 3rd person.
7/16/2025 Paul's Justified vs. James' Justified. not the same thing ~ Stephen Tong.
Paul's justified - No longer sinners before God (clothed with Christ's righteousness).
James' justified - Reflecting God's glory before men.
＃保羅講的「稱義」，與雅各有何不同（希伯來書要理問答 第764問）（此講原始影音嚴重不良，請多看文字內容）
Stephen Tong on Perfected Perfection, though I have a feeling this clip wasn't quite complete:
＃〈來61〉說「竭力進到完全的地步」，所以完全還有可能更完全嗎（希伯來書要理問答 第766問）（此講沒有影片，而從錄音帶轉錄；品質不良，請多看文字內容）
Stephen Tong on The House of God is House of Prayer vs. of Prophecy/Teaching:
＃《聖經》如何講明上帝的殿更是講道的地方?為何有靈恩運動宣稱不需要講道呢?（希伯來書要理問答 第767問）（此講沒有影片，而從錄音帶轉錄；品質不良，請多看文字內容）
7/15/2025
Youtube and Meta (Facebook) finally have issues with those reposting others' contents with no originality at all. Cracking down on unoriginality. That's good, especially if this involves monetization.
7/14/2025
On Hebrews 6:1, this is so important from Stephen Tong: Because Martin Luther's focus on Sola Gratia, the Lutherans 100 years later mistaken good works for granted, no holy life, worst than even gentiles. Tong spoke of a triumphant Christianity, which is our responsibility, no longer about Sola Gratia. If one still stuck at Sola Gratia, one is just a baby. Sola Gratia MUST produce good works!
＃好行為能買救恩嗎?得救以後為何一定要有好行為?（希伯來書要理問答 第765問）（此講原始影音嚴重不良，請多看文字內容）
7/13/2025
Today the missionary couple, Hillary of Ghana, visited our church and talked in our Sunday School. I asked him a day before (at Flaming Grill) and after the Sunday service on demonic possessions. Seems like he had quite an experience on it personally. Although, I sensed from his sharing that he was more into the strangeness of the possessions than the deliverance of it them. A typical Charismatics interest. Nevertheless, his dealings with those seem sound on the most part.
I also spoke to Frances, the new family I was able to talk to last week. I learned that they went from non-denominational (Charismatics?) to interested in Reformed after watching the documentary: American Gospel (2 movies free on Archive, totaling 5 hours). Hence they searched for Presbyterian church in the neighborhood and found us.
Here's my summary on this interesting article:
The author, Clara Collier, sees these old universities as relic, contrasting research centers which were separate institutes from the universities at the time (pre-1800).
Early modern universities have four traditional faculties: Theology, law, medicine, and philosophy. The last one just means: everything from modern arts to sciences, from poetry to physics. And this last category was the least prestigious and worst attended: Professors were the least paid in this and only for lecturing. Research was done in their own time. For the sciences, one needs to go to the British Royal Society or the French Académie des sciences.
From the 16th century, starting with astronomy, such interest was pursued outside of universities. Copernicus, Brahe, Galileo all left their teaching job in universities for civil servants or court astronomers which paid more. Kepler had it worst as devout Lutheran yet excommunicated by Lutherans for taking Calvinistic view on the Eucharist, so he was never able to secure a university chair at all. Government-funded facilities were more successful than universities which became less popular in this field.
German universities were seen as factories during the second half (18th century) of the Age of Enlightenment. From an intellectual res publica to Immanuel Kant's fabrikenmäßig (in a factory). Cameralism (the science of public administration) was the goal. But this system eventually failed because professors (of whom many are incompetent) prefer their own hiring politics rather than handing the meritocratic decision to outsiders. This results in the state founded universities such as the University of Göttingen by George II of Britain and Hanover in the 1730s. These universities hired famous professors and were liberal in non-traditional subjects like modern history or applied mathematics. Göttingen had a modern academic research library, the largest in the world at the time, featuring breakthroughs such as organizing books on shelves by subjects with reference to a catalogue. Göttingen came to define the Enlightenment university.
Hanover prime minister, Gerlach Adolph von Münchhausen, was most responsible for introducing a new criterion for academic advancement: the publication record: Professors either publish or perish. Göttingen was for training ministers and attracting rich students from other German states who would come to spend money in Hanover. Fame was its cameralist currency and it worked very well.
Kant in his 1786 book The Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science, “A doctrine/system is a complete understanding organized according to principles, then it's called science (Wissenschaft = science, systematic knowledge: [a German-language term that embraces scholarship, research, study, higher education, and academia]).” With the classicists, we get the seminar (in the field of classical philology, 1738, at Göttingen). The first seminar was state-funded specialized institutes for teacher training, following Prussia's pedagogical seminars. Teachers were trained to teach Latin and Greek at Gymnasien (advanced secondary schools). Then seminars evolved into collegia (introduced by classicist and archeologist Christian Gottlob Heyne) — private classes professors would teach to small groups of students for extra fees. Unlike formal university classes which were just lectures, collegia demanded active student participation. traditional practice of disputation was done as written assignments and critiqued by class peers. This novel approach in 1763 became the standard practice in Germany academia by the 19th century. More universities established philology seminars on the Göttingen model — Wittenberg, Erlangen, Kiel, Helmsted, and Halle.
Duke Karl August of Saxe-Weimar was a modern, enlightened ruler with a passion for acquiring famous intellectuals (at this point, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe was one of his ministers). Around 1798, he started to recruit a new crop of brilliant young scholars to his university: the playwright Friedrich Schiller, theologian Ernst Schleiermacher, philosophers Johann Gottlieb Fichte, G.W.F. Hegel, and F.W.J. Schelling, and the polymathic brothers Friedrich and August Wilhelm Schlegel. There's up and down (i.e. Schiller was bad at lecturing, Fichte was popular but resigned for being an atheist, etc.).
In the Romantic worldview, the goal of education was not to memorize facts but rather to train the capacity to notice connections between them and incorporate new information into the same systematic framework. As Schelling wrote, “knowledge of the organic whole of all sciences must therefore precede a particular education focused on a single specialty.” Thus, the university which spread the universal pursuit of knowledge was to be preserved over specialized schools. Fichte's central idea was that universities should foster personal self-development (Bildung) as thinkers and scholars, but also as moral beings.
The university, Fichte’s friend Schleiermacher, the theologian wrote, “forms the transition between the time when a young man is first prepared for systematic knowledge, by his own studying and by acquiring a knowledge base, and the time when, in the prime of his intellectual life, he expands the field or adds on a beautiful new wing to the edifice of knowledge through his own research.” To Schleiermacher, academies of science are centers of research production, not universities.
By the end of the 18th century, the Napoleonic wars (subjugation of Prussia by Napoleon Bonaparte) killed off the old university system with all things French (utilitarian over medieval institutions). half of all German universities shut down. Halle, the centerpiece of Prussian academia, closed in 1806. Wilhelm von Humboldt, Prussian educational administrator, from 1809 to 1810, developed a plan for an institution (synthesizing universities and seminars) to be built in Berlin, modeled on the pedagogical vision of Schelling, Fichte, and Schleiermacher, but also inspired by his own alma mater, Göttingen. Thus, the University of Berlin was founded in 1810. It was like Göttingen but with philosophy, one of the four faculties, elevated to a more central intellectual role, however, students in the career-oriented law, theology, and medical faculties still outnumbered the philosophers.
Berlin also marked an important transition: from fraternity violence to paeans to the life of the mind. The Romanticism era. Berlin Ph.D.: Fichte not only insisted on offering the degree, but added two novel requirements: candidates needed to write their own dissertations — and they needed to be works of original research. This was a very big change. Like seminars, dissertations have their roots in the medieval disputation. Starting in the 16th century, German doctoral candidates would hold a disputation as part of their graduation ceremony. In these disputations, they would defend a set of theses — written by the presiding professor. Professors would produce tens of thousands of these — before journals were common, they were the predominant form of academic publication. However, they typically weren’t new contributions to human knowledge. The dissertation was a test of a candidate's ability to defend their mentor's work. The work itself didn’t have to be new.
True Bildung happened in lectures or seminar discussions where students and teachers could learn together directly. Schleiermacher was even opposed to writing down lecture notes in advance, since this would get in the way of the students “directly observing the activity of intelligence producing knowledge.”
The Americans: The founders of Johns Hopkins and the University of Chicago were explicitly built on German models. Charles Eliot, the president of Harvard from 1869 to 1909, was a committed Germanophile, and reformed Harvard’s graduate school along German lines. The whole institutional structure of American graduate education is German, from academic departments (an outgrowth of the seminar) to doctoral dissertations. It’s Humboldt’s world, and we’re just living in it.
Without [this history], German universities might well have been hollowed out and replaced with professional schools, as they were in France.
My conclusion: So basically, the Germans were responsible for universities/colleges today for not turning into mere trade schools. But I don't agree with the author that it is a good thing that the research university's real contribution is a world where scholars don’t have to be originals or geniuses to add their bricks to the edifice of human knowledge (though I’m sure it helps), as this actually degrades the research university: everyone gets an A as long as you put in the time, nobody will fail even if you are not mentally capable of it. True, there was greater reliance on unique few scholars outside of universities, and synthesizing specialization with such is a good introduction of great researches into universities; However, emphasizing system over individual risks encouraging mediocrity and bureaucracy. The author does, as Deepseek AI concurs, appear to be a pragmatic anti-elitist. Nevertheless, this is a good history lesson overall.
A few days ago, Rev. Lin of CCCNY asked me to be Stephen Tong's translator, because he is coming to CCCNY to preach this Sunday, due to the Concert Tour of GRII/STEMI. I thanked her for the honor but I rejected the offer due the fact that I've already promised Stephen (of my church at Grace) to take over the sound system for this week's service.
I do wonder, if Pak Tong was the one requesting to preach or Rev. Lin was the one asking him to. The latter seems more plausible, so this entry will presuppose that. If it's the former, it still wouldn't excuse the latter, for Rev. Lin could easily persuade otherwise, if she has any sense of preparation for the Glory instead of conservation of her buried talents: "Look Lord, this church still has its name after so many decades, lo, there thou hast that is thine." (Matthew 25:25)
At his age, Stephen Tong would still not mind to preach, even though he has said that he's done and it's time for new blood and for him to focus on using other means such as music for the glory of God. So I don't think he's at his prime to preach anymore according to his last rally here. Moreover, his goal this time is the concert, not preaching. A bad true cannot bear good fruit (Matthew 7:18). Therefore, not only would Rev. Lin not produce any heir (pun intended) for the new generation of preachers over all these years, she has no shame in asking an old retired man to preach, making Stephen Tong work double shifts (preach by morning, conduct by night). This shows how little she cares actually for the Kingdom of God. I mean, who asks her visiting 85 year old grandpa to mow the lawn when she had 40 years prior to prepare for it?
Nadia and I have left the church for more than a decade now, yet no one from that church even bothered to ask why. What sort of ministerial leadership is this in a church? They would rather conclude their own slander: "They left because Nadia doesn't understand Chinese" even though she's been there fore 4 years prior. Rev. Lin couldn't even get it right as to whose the one who decided the leave: I or Nadia.
One telltale sign of such hired hands (John 10:12), in today's churches, is to see what does the minister do when a church member leaves all of a sudden. The common hired hands response would be: "They left us because they have been seduced by Satan, by the world". As if the minister's own church is truer than anywhere else. Very self-centered isn't it? This seems to be a very common American Reformed church habit. So it's not just on Laura Lin. But Tim Ferguson of Westfield OPC, Paul Murphy of NYC MERF, etc. Murphy maybe worse than Lin on this as he would justify himself: "Well, if you didn't become our official member, why should I care about you? That's not in my job description, that's not what I'm paid for." According to the logic from some of his sermons. Ferguson would at least give a "holier than thou" call: "Are you coming back to church, no? ok. Bye". Murphy (above my paygrade justification) and Lin ("Oh it must be because Nadia making you leave our church right?" - slander justification) could compete with each other to see who wins the trophy of the most convincing hired hand.
Another sign is that they have no zeal for bringing the Gospel themselves to others outside of the church. They would love to support evangelical groups. Rev. Lin is the worst kind I've seen, that doing the gospel is an "undesirable" labor that is done in obedience, and such "unpleasant" command will be rewarded one day, due to the fulfilment of such "unwanted" task. Instead of emmanuel, reward is the ultimate goal in life for people like her. Some may not support (not called to do so, allegedly) gospel ministries themselves but at least they would affirm its importance, that we must do with pleasure, this is already a very low bar, bordering unconverted ministry, so Rev. Laura Lin's even worse than this, turning her church CCCNY into a church that essentially praises man over Christ.
Of course, what people like her will always convince themselves is: "But I have given my life for the Lord, oh Lord, Lord, have I not done all these in my life, for your NAME?!" (Matthew 7:22)
It signifies a marital relationship marked by mutual respect and harmony.
From China's 4 ugliest women story:
解：將放置飯菜的木盤高舉，與眉平齊，為東漢孟光對其夫梁鴻敬愛的表示。＃典出《東觀漢記．卷一八．梁鴻列傳》。後用「舉案齊眉」比喻夫妻相敬如賓。
Every so often I would come across some command lines instructions for certain features in Android phones. I've never paid attention to it, until now. Thanks to this site. I may just try it for fun. I had always thought that I am missing something but not too essential.
7/11/2025
Stephen Tong: Paul vs. James on Faith and Work. Paul's faith is not the same as James'; James' work (James 2) and Paul's is also not the same.
Paul's "work" in Romans, is referring to the self-righteous work. Alluding to the pharisaic righteousness (Romans 3, 4, 8), which Jesus commanded us to exceed.
James' "work" is the fruit of life.
＃＃關於「行為」，羅馬書與雅各書的定義如何不同❓為何我們當謙卑學習❓（希伯來書要理問答 第761問）（此講原始影音嚴重不良，請多看文字內容）
James' "faith" is a fake one, an imitation, not related to grace nor salvation:
為何雅各說的信心是假信心，不同於保羅所講的真信心❓（希伯來書要理問答 第763問）（此講原始影音嚴重不良，請多看文字內容）
Therefore, do not also think that Paul's and James' were supplement to each other, because their terminologies are though same words used, but different meaning.
Stephen Tong incorrectly sourced this quote "Faith is the acceptance of acceptance" to Martin Luther. But it was actually Paul Tillich who said that in his sermon "You are Accepted", then published in his book "The Shaking of the Foundations" in 1948. "You are accepted, accepted by that which is greater than you, and the name of which you do not know... Simply accept the fact that you are accepted!" ~ Perplexity.ai
＃保羅所講的信心是什麼意思❓馬丁路德有何獨到的見地❓（希伯來書要理問答 第762問）（此講原始影音嚴重不良，請多看文字內容）
7/9/2025 我今站在主的言語上 詩歌 short children's hymn. Also, if there's bad recording in Stephen Tong's series, STEMI Taiwan's youtube channel maybe a good place to find recovery, such as this one, on Hebrews 5
＃站在上帝話語上而永不退卻、永不妥協的心，有多重要❓（希伯來書要理問答 第759問）（因此講原始影音嚴重不良，請多看文字內容。）: Isaiah 56:7 House of Prayer vs. Sermon Preaching in the Church (minister of the Word)
＃為何馬丁路德以不妥協的精神，強調行為與救恩不能相提並論❓（希伯來書要理問答 第760問）（因此講原始影音嚴重不良，請多看文字內容。）Why by grace alone (Sola Gratia) and yet I am working so hard? Tong: Many churches do not realize this, that Martin Luther though in shallowness, looked down on the book of James because of its emphasis on WORK, but in motive, Luther was greatly important to do so because our work has absolutely no part in the Gospel in God's grace. Because of Luther, the Catholics adjusted (for the better) their theology to put more emphasis on grace, though they still require work in salvation. Unfortunately, a couple hundred years later, the Lutheran also adjusted (for the worse) their theology, seeing that the book of James is also God's revelation, a sort of balancing act of God using James' notion of work and Paul's faith together.
Paraphrased from Perplexity.ai: Of course, the Catholics wouldn't admit that they "adjusted" their theology because of Luther, but rather: "Clarified" and "Reaffirmed" their own doctrine of grace and justification, in the Council of Trent (1545-1563), the counter-reformation movement: Though it affirms the necessity of grace, it conflates justification with sanctification in order to credit man's work. I would say that the Reformed compatibilism view trump this.
我今站在主的言语上， 虽世界过去或灭亡。 主的言语永远必长存， 我今站在主的言语上
7/8/2025 TUES Came across lots of shocking news (to me at least) regarding Ruby Franke, former youtuber of 8 Passengers channel. A mormon mother who shared her family life on Youtube. She's now imprisoned, and apparently estranged from all her children and especially her oldest daughter, Shari, who wrote a book (The House of My Mother, A Daughter's Quest for Freedom, apparently the book was actually written by the ghost writer Caroline Ryder) about it. I would probably expand any detail of this here instead of creating a new entry. Also, this is a reminder to me that it is crucial to really download any important/interesting/good Youtube videos, because Youtube really would just ban/delete/remove/cancel videos they don't like at any time.
There are tons of videos about this news, even movies and TV documentary series made.
After watching the Hulu Series: Devil in the Family - The Fall of Ruby Franke. I think it's possible that Jodi Hildebrandt was truly possessed by demons and Ruby fell for it.
7/7/2025 Mon
Charlie Kirk mentioned ESOP to a guy in Che Guevara (Argentinian/Cuban Marxist) T-shirt, after asking Kirk about the Mondragon Corporation in Spain (founded by a priest) which Kirk criticized as "widely inefficient". ESOP is what my company SP has started using a couple of years back. This was after dealing with the Marxist audience with the concept of ESPP (Employee Stock Purchase Program) being practiced in Florida already by Publix (grocery store).
Another interesting public exchange by Charlie Kirk is the one labeled "Can you Be a Christian and a Nationalist". This has been a particularly interesting topic for me due to the recent debate between Stephen Wolfe (proponent of Christian Nationalism) and Chris Gordon.
My take: Charlie Kirk is good, but he actually lost this one in general. His fundamentalist mentality cause him to make false accusations here and there of his interlocutor, without deeper thinking (viz. low IQ).
In this case Nick wins the general argument. I'm not sure if Nick's a lefty or a Catholic, but his argument is more reformed than Kirk's. Kirk argued as if America = the Church. He miscited (he said in City of God, 3rd Chapter) Augustine's Just War Theory. He misinterpreted ekklesia (Matthew 16:18) as government instead of church, an apparently fundamentalist low IQ view of Israel/nation vs. the Church. Nick should have stuck to Israel being the shadow type of the Church. And that Christian Nationalism is simply man's work, rather than God's work to bring God's kingdom to Earth.
7/6/2025 Sun
2nd time a new family visited our church today. Orlando was the one I spoke to first. I believe the one called 伊莎贝拉, is the wife, whose sister is 娜塔莉 (Thanks to Nadia for helping me remember), whose husband, 弗朗西斯, whose little boy is Calvin. Chinese transliteration for privacy.
