Last Week: Rev. Lin asked me to co-work with them for Dr. Tong's Coming Rally (September?)

When I heard it, 1Kings 13 strongly came to my mind. I answered, No, I'd rather do it myself, if I ever help. If I help them (Rev. Lin's "team", not referring to STEMI), I would not be associating with them at all. Why? This way I can actually bring those who matter to the rally and not have to deal with "censorship" of certain groups of people to bring.

What I should have said, to make it clear, with the same meaning was this:

"Oh no, absolutely not. Until you and your church could produce your own preachers, rally, I won't even consider."

Rev. Lin's idea of ministry is sponsoring, supporting outside preachers is a good ministry. Therefore, she rejects the idea of cultivating preachers and ministers from within the church. This is clear in many cases in her church, if there is a choice, she would opt to cultivate the nice and the famous, not the new born preachers (unless she see a great fame ahead of him), and moral over gospel. Of course, she would not make it obvious, since there's this reformed/puritan image she has to put on and believe. This is sad sad sad.

Perhaps I could even answer: "You can invite me to help, not in the hiring sense nor requiring any payment (I would tear it anyway), and I would help. But I must have no affiliation whatsoever with you or your team, again, not referring to STEMI".

Posted in Reflection, Theologization | Leave a comment

Difficulty with Palestinian Gospel

I imagine myself a Palestinian rebel. It is quite a challenge to convince me of the Gospel. After all, God did ordered the genocide of my tribe. How would that fit well with God loves me? When it appears that we are spared only because Israel broke God's command to cause our survival?

Therefore, a Palestinian would easily accept Islam over anything of the Hebrew culture. So that he does not think God loves him not.

God is not wrong. Therefore, there needs to be investigation into the history of things and analysis of the attributes of God and more.

Posted in Questions, Theologization | Leave a comment

Internet Explorer: Cannot Display the Webpage due to SSL, HTTPS

This problem occurred at NYGC, noticed by a few staffs. It only happens on Internet Explorer, and for only certain sites (google.com, yahoo.com, etc.). Works fine on Firefox and Chrome. The usual approach is to clear the browser cache, reset this browser settings, etc.

I then noticed that this only happens to SSL/secured webpages, i.e. HTTPS sites.

I thought it had to do with router, I was wrong this time. The next day (this morning) I noticed that some stations (they are basically all Windows XP) on the same network works and the difference: these are SP3; while the former ones were on SP2.

Solution: Just upgrade XP SP2 to XP SP3. Problem solved.

Since it occurred around yesterday, something must have happened to the SSL recently causing this (some kind of SSL update?)

Optional note of interest: By using EventViewer->System->see "NtServicePack", and the 2 "update.exe" processes (main ~40mb, secondary ~11mb) in Task Manager, one can track the installation in real time (especially during the last phase: finishing installation-performing cleanup). I learned it from this site, When Soraima's PC is going very slow (possibly due to bad HDD, which I intend to replace).

Posted in Technical | Leave a comment

Psalms 6: Penitentiary Psalms Part 1 of 7

There are more Psalms that are considered Penitentiary Psalms. But these 7 are the standards: 6, 32, 38, 51, 102, 130, 143.

Psalm 6

I will do direct study of the text first. Then when I have time, I will investigate the historical account of it.
Psa 6:1 To the chief Musician on Neginoth upon Sheminith, A Psalm of David. O LORD, rebuke me not in thine anger, neither chasten me in thy hot displeasure.

This is about David's sins. Our sins. God would not be anger with us if not for our sins. He disciplines those whom he loves. However, the rebuking and chastening are not desired here. When we are well, we pray conveniently for God's discipline; while in sorrow, we ask for the relieve of such, for we say that: the discipline is too heavy, or that we have learned our lesson. Here David, while admitting his corruption, appeals to God's mercy using the intended human value God has created.

"Anger" here has to do with the countenance of God. It is enough when anger is revealed upon His face, further rebuking would prove too much, though not undeserving. "Displeasure" has to do with heat. It could be greater terror than anger and thus, the chastening instead of mere rebuke. I am not certain of the importance of the order for "rebuke" and "chasten" here, however, it is clear David did not find the types of God's anger (אף & חָמא) gradually uncomfortable by degree. He is willing to face God's anger, but not the discipline, and he begs (not demands) for the relieve of these.
Psa 6:2 Have mercy upon me, O LORD; for I am weak: O LORD, heal me; for my bones are vexed.
Psa 6:3 My soul is also sore vexed: but thou, O LORD, how long?

"Weak" here is similar to sick. "Bones" maybe refer to the physical foundation of one's life. The result of a corrupt lifestyle. David is diagnosing himself from outward corruption to the inner sorrow of the soul in the next verse. Divine mercy (in all aspect of one's fallen life) and time! are crucial for this prayer.
Psa 6:4 Return, O LORD, deliver my soul: oh save me for thy mercies' sake.

"Return" - The Lord was once in our presence and He has turned away because of our sins. In essence, we have turned away from God to our own ways. First and foremost, the salvation and deliverance of the strangled soul comes first over all other temporal material sufferings. This is not by demand. Love is not demanded, neither is mercy. God's mercy, is David's first most appeal. The second is teleological, in the next verse. Ultimately, the reconciliation of the relationship with God is the primary concern.
Psa 6:5 For in death there is no remembrance of thee: in the grave who shall give thee thanks?

The only outcome of God's continuous anger towards us is our death. Some define "death" as separation (from God). David recognizes the chief purpose of man - to praise God. Only living things are capable of giving thanks. This is not a reminder to God of what He would miss (God lacks nothing) and certainly not blackmailing God. David is admitting that he is tumbling down an unnatural path which defeats his created purpose, and he desired the recovery of such, and thus, appeal to God's mercy.
Psa 6:6 I am weary with my groaning; all the night make I my bed to swim; I water my couch with my tears.

Here David confesses his humility. He does not seek worldly pleasure to cover his sorrow, and we shouldn't. Instead, David cried in secret. One can only imagine how such a man endure sorrow in public. Was it shame? I am sure it is. Shame is required for our repentance, not just the feeling of guilt. Some have despised shame. It is embarrassing to cry in public. But without it, we would not care about the value of relationships with anyone. We would only care about a guiltless path rather than dignity in others. The only solution to shame is to confront it with tears in private with God as the only audience. All else matters not: Not proclaiming to others, the need for their sympathy (or that they need to show sympathy). When necessary, we ask for nothing more than the context of mercy from others. Shame should only be directed to God, not others, though others may inadvertently witness one's shame. For only the Creator is responsible for our chief purpose, should we repent of our ways.

Often times, people like to tell others: "You need to repent!" This often wrong because they  appear to demand shame, yet they are no God. However, they would justify themselves one way or another.
Psa 6:7 Mine eye is consumed because of grief; it waxeth old because of all mine enemies.

Here, "enemies" refers to those who justifies themselves for everything they do. So, they do not think they need mercy nor to show mercy. Perhaps David's enemies think their action against David is just due to David's sin, and he deserves no mercy, God will not hear him. Mercy is not in their dictionary. Jealousy is among many of the roots of their enmity.

David now elaborates the cause of his sorrow. God's punishment usually entails using workers of iniquity.

Psa 6:8 Depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity; for the LORD hath heard the voice of my weeping.
Psa 6:9 The LORD hath heard my supplication; the LORD will receive my prayer.

"The LORD will receive my prayer" - Hope is aligned with attributes of God. A prayer is a crucial aspect of executing our hope. The right supplication performs repentance when necessary.

"Depart from me..." Performative utterance against all obstacles is required in the process of reconciliation with God.
Psa 6:10 Let all mine enemies be ashamed and sore vexed: let them return and be ashamed suddenly.

David does not demand the shame of his enemies. He does hope for their repentance and their shame be felt at home in God's presence. The first "ashamed" is not a vengeful utterance. It is out of disappointment. The second one is out of hope for their repentance.

Posted in Projects, Reflection, Theologization | Leave a comment

The Dangers of a Christian Ministry

  1. When church members quit attendance when their favorite pastor is no longer present at the church. Great woe maybe upon this pastor.
  2. When new programs/ministries come after getting the money.
  3. When the "supporters" DO NOT the ministries they "support".
Posted in Theologization | Leave a comment

Suits - TV Series (Dilemma on what is Lawful)

In the last episode of 5th season, S05E16, Mike Ross is found NOT GUILTY, for fraud (being a fake lawyer), because of his love and ingenuity for the justice system and caring heart. This show makes a big deal about loyalty, but I think it is overrated in the show.

What is interesting for me to make an entry is this: The writers are struggling with the moral question: Can someone who breaks the law be found innocent?

And the answer given on the show is: Yes.

However, the law is the law. You would get into trouble for breaking the law, or even implying that there is any good for breaking the law of the people. And you should be afraid (unless you are a Christians, who put God's Law above human laws).

So what is the solution? Mike Ross made the mistake of assuming the worse before the verdict, which caused him being sentenced 2 years in prison. So, we think the pharisees have won with their law system.

Nonetheless, a seed is planted. Law breakers can be found innocent, in a very very legal way. Is that a good thing? Yes and no.

Without God, this world would be in chaos either way.

Posted in Reflection, Reviews | Leave a comment

Trump and Hillary

The vulgar man vs. the nonchalant woman. I don't know. Either way is a bad outcome.

Trump did promise a lot. A lot of fixes to problems we are facing in this country.

Hillary shows how tough she could be, as if it needs to be proven.

Therefore, if I really have to, I would pick Trump. Not because he is better. Business man like him is known to be shrewd, cunning. Promises could mean nothing to him in the end. But it would appear worse, if Hillary had been the president. Not because she is a woman president, but because she wants to show woman can be president. I simply don't care about the gender of president. Hillary, apparently, does care. And the cost of that care, is going to ruin America. One would have to break a lot of natural laws to get what one wants. Whatever problems she has to need to prove herself worthy to the world, appear to gain successful support.

The polls to date shows pretty close match between Trump and Hillary, with Hillary on the top. I would not be surprised if Hillary became president, as unfortunate as that may be.

Possible outcomes:
President H. Clinton: The country will officially despise and hate Christians (the real kind), hate God.
President D. Trump: Country may be on the brink or the cause of future wars: Civil or World War.

Either bad outcomes, I would prefer Trump's. Necessary evil. But I can handle Clinton's. As long as I'm on God's side.

But then, I'm not an American citizen. This is not my country, as much work as I would put into this land, I am doing it for God. Unlike the formal citizens of this country, I am not burdened with the responsibility the way the citizens are on paper and by birthright. I am simply exercising my duty as a human and a foreigner citizen. Giving grace to this country. I do not speak of foreign in terms of God's kingdom, for that is understood by default. I speak of foreign as a Malaysian.

Now that I have relieved my mind of this menial cause, I will put my thoughts in more important matters.

Posted in News | Leave a comment

Need to Serve vs. Serving the Needy

The need to serve is sinful, unbiblical, wrong.

It is not the same as serving the needy.

This is nothing new. Theologians like Tim Keller has noted this kind of sin. Yet, many, not limited within the Chinese American churches, fall prey to this problem.

The need to serve is a desire to be wanted, but a proud and selfish one. I want people to know that I am good at helping people. I need to show someone I am helpful. I need to show myself. All these place the self in the center.

Those who justify this, their excuses, are in this same pattern: As long as you do something, it is better than not doing anything. But is it really better? Sure it is, because as long as I do something to help, regardless of my pride, my wrong beliefs or the outcome, God cannot punish me. I have put in MY effort and MY time into it, if God not only does not reward me (even though I don't care about rewards), if God has to discredit my effort, then God is not a good God.

There you are, you have your rebellion against God. You judge God according to your standard, not God's.

This sums up the issue.

Serve the Lord with Fear, Rejoice with trembling. (Psalm 2)

Posted in Theologization | Leave a comment

Drexel University - The Blood Sucker

I cursed the day I enrolled in this school.

This is a money school that builds its reputation from the Engineering department and perhaps by being neighbor with UPenn. The rest is about how to take as much money from students as possible, including using lawsuits. Check their court files online, they rank top in number of court cases, far outnumbered most good schools.

Posted in Faults, Reflection | Leave a comment

Is it true God won't give you more than you can bear?

I've just come across this article on ChristianToday by Patrick Regan. He wrote another pertaining to "is it ok to be angry with God". From the conclusion of the later, "it is ok to be angry [at] God", I can tell that Regan's very confused in faith. He's part of the category of those who is more about "me" rather than God.

So, predictably, he denies that 1 Corinthians 10:13 is a proof text for trusting and obeying God. In the two articles, all I can gather is that Regan's motto is "God loves you as you are". This view of love is classic heresy.

Regan concluded that if 1Cor 10:13 is true that God won't suffer us more than we can bear, then He must be a cruel God. He does seem to understand discipline and punishment from God in His love. We as sinners must recognize that we must seek after His righteousness, which is more of a revelation from the Bible than simply an emotional instinct that is often error-prone (which I think people like Regan depend more on).

Regan appears to be ignorant of the state of a sinner before God. He might be an example of those becoming Christians without going through honest repentance before God. Their foundation is more like: "Oh God is real and great and He loves me? Cool, I'll be a Christian! - Yea, I admit I'm a sinner, nobody is perfect, God's love will forgive me anyway!" What's missing? Repentance.

Repentance involves not just guilt, but shame as well. Today, there may be a new wave of emergent movement calling a repentance of only guilt, devoid of any embarrassment or shameful feeling. However, without shame, how can one repent humbly? This is why many compensations for mistakes are done pathetically merely in the form of statements like "we are sorry...", "I apologize for...". Nothing more. No wonder ChristianToday.Com often titles its articles in such form "the Pope condemns this", "the Church condemns that". As if there needs confirmation that rape is wrong or something. A cheapened pursuit of holiness.

Posted in Theologization | Leave a comment