An attempt to share the faith in contemporary setting

I am writing this short article as an attempt to relate the Christian faith to the non-Christians in the contemporary setting. As such, I will be tapping on some scenes in Spiderman 3, some concepts from the book "The Story We Find Ourselves In: Further Adventures of a New Kind of Christian" by Brian D. McLaren and using a non-conventional approach to convey the Christian faith. There are two main themes below: reconciliation with God and to partake in God's big story. I am not sure what kind of impact the content below will create, so I will appreciate it if you could feedback to me. Any other form of sharing is also welcomed.

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

In Spiderman 3, I am most impressed by Harry Osborn, who sacrifices his life to save Peter Parker from the fatal attack of Eddie Brock Jr. I am also touched by the need of Macko, the Sandman, to seek forgiveness from Peter Parker before he can really forgive himself for killing his uncle, Ben Parker many years ago. This reminds me of the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ on the cross two thousand years ago in order to reconcile us back to God our Creator and Redeemer. In Spiderman 3, it is in the sacrificial death of Harry Osborn that Peter Parker is fully reconciled back to his good old friend. Similarly, in the history between God and human, it is the sacrificial love of Jesus Christ that reconciles us back to God. But, what is it that we have done which require reconciliation and why would such reconciliation demands a sacrificial death of Jesus Christ? How do our individuals' life story interweave with God?

In the beginning when God created the world, everything was good. Human beings who are made in the image of God are the climax in the creation story. In the story told by the Jews to their descendants, they recount how chaos and disorder enter the world through human representatives, Adam and Eve. What Adam and Eve had done was to alienate themselves away from God, to alienate themselves from each other and from their own selves. When we alienate ourselves from our Creator, we start to disregard the boundary and limitation set by the Creator and we believe in our supreme authority to do anything that we want. Concurrently, we alienate ourselves from others and we treat them as an object instead of human being made in the pristine image of God. On top of that, we even alienate from our very selves and this becomes an inner turmoil and conflict within us. How many times do we seek our self-actualization at the expense our own conscience, at our own convenience to the extent that we know what is right and yet did not fulfil it?

If your own child or someone who you love becomes more selfish and committed dishonourable act, naturally you will feel hurt and pain. The pain and hurt are more intensive if he whom you trust so much turns against you. Whenever we refuse to accept the invitation to be reconciled back to God; whenever we inflict agony and suffering in any form onto another human being; whenever we know what is good and yet refuse to partake in it, we cause pain and hurt to God our heavenly Father. God wants to have a relationship with us, but we are too stubborn to turn to Him. We keep inflicting pains and damages to Him by going against His utmost good will for us. We alienate ourselves from Him, from one another and from our very own self; we destroy His creation by betraying ourselves, by exploiting other people and the environment. Instead of entering into a personal relationship with the rest of the creations, we objectify them and capitalize them for our own benefits. This nature is inherent in all of us!

How can we say sorry to someone whom we have caused hurt and agony? By apologizing profusely, by buying gifts and cards to appease the person’s hurt and anger or by some acts that seek to convince her that we are truly repentant and would sincerely want to be reconciled back. But how about seeking the forgiveness of God? As God is the wholly Other, or the transcendent Being who is beyond our imagination and our capacity to comprehend and the essential ground of our own being and existence, we can only seek forgiveness on His own terms and not ours! We know that we are not able to pay the penalties for the wrongs that we have perpetrated against Him and that Jesus Christ took on the penalties on Himself for all of us, on the cross two thousand years ago. It is only in Jesus Christ that the righteousness of God and the love of God are fully met. It is only on this condition laid down by God and there is no other! It is through and in Jesus Christ that God is able to forgive our trespasses and to be reconciled back to Him and to know Him as whom He has revealed Himself to be. It is similar to someone, for e.g. my wife, whom I want to know more about. I don’t want to know her through another person; I want to know her personally. But if I don’t even have a personal relationship with her in the first place, how could I know her personally? It is the same with God. If we don’t have a personal relationship with Him, how can we know Him personally? We could hear about Him through other Christians’ description of Him, we could know about Him intellectually by studying all the intellectual arguments about Him, but we won’t have a personal relationship with Him. To know Him personally, we must be reconciled back to Him through Jesus Christ and to know Him as He has revealed Himself to us through the Bible and through His creation.

All of us have a story, a story of our own lives. This universe has a story too. The universe is called out from nothing to something. The creator of this time, space universe whom we called God weave a big story for us to partake in. It is a story that is gradually unfolding. When we pass out of this time dimension, it is not the end of our existence. God retains the memory of everyone at every moment. The past is never lost, it is all remembered, all kept in God's memory. There is a point in the future when the composite of ourselves through our whole lifetime are all gathered together in God's presence, consummated, summed up, and gathered in the mind and heart of God. All the momentary members of our life story, the 'me' of a second ago, the 'me' now, the 'me' that I will be in a second – all these members will be remembered, reunited, in God's memory. The universe that God unleashed at the beginning has run free across the field of time, and it arrives at God in the future. Everything comes home, where everything good and beautiful and true belongs. (Adapted from The Story we find ourselves in).

When we are reconciled back to God; when we continue to seek our self-actualization within the web of personal relationships with God and with His creation; when we continue to partake in the big story God has for us; then, when we meet Him face to face one day, I could image Him to say:

"Well done! You have lived well! You helped the story advance toward my creative dreams. You fed the hungry, clothed the naked, welcomed in the lonely, visited the prisoners, shared your bread with the poor. Wherever you went, you contributed love and peace, generosity and truth, courage and sacrifice, self-control and justice, faithfulness and kindness. You enriched the story, enhanced its beauty and drama and nobility. You have become someone good and beautiful and true. Your unique, creative contributions will never be forgotten, and even the smallest act of kindness will be eternally celebrated, rewarded. After naming and forgiving and forgetting your many faults and failures, I see so much substance to your character, so much to cherish, so much of value, and it will now be set free, given a new beginning in my new creation. You have an eternal place in my story! You have been harvested from this creation, and now you will enter into the joy of the new creation!" (Adapted from The Story we find ourselves in).

Would you want to know more about the Christian faith? Would you like to be reconciled back to God? Would you yearn to partake in the big story God has weaved for all of us?

Which Jesus Christ do you believe in?

Many a times, I have asked myself how I should live a life that is worthy to be called 'Christ-like'. I have gotten different answers over the past few years. When I attended a seminar on 'Teaching with Styles' by Walk Thru the Bible ministry, Jesus was cast in the light of a great teacher with many teaching styles to be emulated by us. When I had an evangelistic bible study on John 5 where Jesus had an encounter with the Samaritan woman, Jesus was cast in the light of a great apologist who not only understood the woman's deep spiritual needs but handled her question well. In some churches, there are sermons that encouraged Christians to own private properties and to generate higher incomes as such were the economic background of the early supporters of Jesus' ministry.

In books like In His Steps by Charles M. Sheldon, readers are invited to ponder upon the question of what Jesus would do in a given situation and this gave rise to 'What would Jesus do?' movement. In the history of the church, Jesus had been used as a rally point for the crusaders to redeem the 'holy land' that Jesus stepped on. In the middle of 19^th century China, Hong Xiu Quan claimed that he was the second son of God, the younger brother to Jesus, on earth with a mission to found a new kingdom. This gave him the divine basis to inspire the Taiping Revolution, which crumpled eventually. A century later, the idea of Jesus the liberator of the oppressed was used heavily in the liberation theology to support the establishment of base communities in Latin America. In the last century, Albert Schweitzer popularized the quest for the historical Jesus, followed by Rudolf Bultmann in the recent century and the Jesus Seminar in the last two decades who advocated a deconstructed Jesus. In short, I realized that Jesus could be cast in whatever light we desire, so long as we have sufficient verses from the Bible to support ourselves. How are we then to imitate Jesus Christ if we are not sure which Jesus is historical and depicted in the light of who He truly is? Ludwig Feuerbach's The Essence of Christianity concludes that God is nothing else than man: he is, so to speak, the outward projection of man's inward nature¹.

What then bothers me is: Are we casting Jesus in our own image? Are we projecting Jesus from our social-economic and metaphysical background?

I have been able to take comfort in books for layman like The Jesus I never knew by Philip Yancey which emphasizes on the Jewishness of Jesus Christ, The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel which uncovers empirical evidences for the crucified and resurrected Christ. As I come in touch with more literature, it dawned upon me that history could never be written objectively. It is always written by the victors, by someone who wants the readers to believe in his cause. This explains why the history book in the secondary school of Japan is different from that of Singapore in talking about the same world war.

In John 20:31 "But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name." The gospels have been written to convince the readers of the life, deeds and claims of Jesus Christ as perceived by the witnesses and preachers in the 1^st century. We who are living in the 21^st century cannot relive the historical events and have to accept what is written at face value. But we can validate the claims from verifiable evidences that we could gather. Just like a person who has not seen Confucius can only ascertain what Confucius has said and done from what has been recorded in the past and other forms of evidences to affirm the validity of it.
However, this approach has its metaphysical assumption. How do we believe in the resurrection, the healing of the disabled, the walking on water, the feeding of thousands based on few pieces of breads and fishes and other types of miracles as recorded in the gospels? This will depend whether we adopt as closed-ended universe or open-ended universe. In a closed-ended universe, we do not accept the existence of a transcendent God who can act in our system, whereas it is the reverse for an open-ended universe. For more argument about this issue, one would benefit by referring to C.S. Lewis' Miracles.

Graudally, I discovered that even if one is intellectually convinced in what the gospels said about Jesus, one may not come to accept Jesus Christ as her savior. This made me appreciate what Paul said in Ephesians 2:8-9 "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- not by works, so that no one can boast." It is ultimately the faith from God which convinces a person of the reality of sin, of her need for Jesus Christ and for her to experience the authenticity of Jesus Christ as revealed in the Bible. It is then a myth that the Bible should be read objectively! The Bible is never meant to be read objectively, it is written that we may believe in Jesus is the Christ, and that by believing we may have life in his name (Jn 20:31) and for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that we may be thoroughly equipped for every good work (2Ti 3:16-17).

Michael Polanyi, a physical chemist and a philosopher of science, wrote in his Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post Critical Philosophy that knowing is personal. He believes that all observation of the universe is personal, and is influenced by individual biases, human error, and the limits of the observer's knowledge. No human observer can remove humanity from the observation (and to formulate theories as though this were possible leads to conclusions that are absurd because they overlook the existence and influence of humanity and the scientist's biases)². In John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion, he affirmed that Scripture must be confirmed by the witness of the Spirit.
As such, I have reached the verdict that first and foremost, a person must possess faith (which is a gift from God) in order to believe in Jesus Christ as revealed in the Bible. This would then be the paradigm through which we interpret our empirical evidence to support the case for Christ and we continually affirm our faith by our experience in life and within the community (or the church and fellowship) that God has placed us in.

But if we were to accept that Jesus Christ is indeed the son of God and that we believe that it is through Him that we are reconciled back to God and have eternal life and it is in Him that we can grow fully in His image, how do we assess the validity of Jesus as being the liberator of the oppressed? Or Jesus as being the miracle worker?

We must be faithful to the testimony of the Scripture and the history of the Church in our proclamation of Jesus Christ. A faithful hermeneutics calls for the Scripture as illumined by the Holy Spirit to be the guide to lead us to an understanding of Jesus Christ. It is foolish if one was to ignore the Apostles' Creed, the Nicene Creed and the Chalcedon Creed which form the basis for us to comprehend Jesus Christ as both fully man and fully God, as one of the Trinity and in the encountering of the different heresies in the 1^st few centuries. Yet the application of the Scripture may yield different outcome in different context and in different community but all these demand that one should be trained in the exegesis of the text before one should commence teaching others about the same text.

In trying to concretize how I can imitate Jesus Christ, I would want to follow in His footsteps in identifying with the needs of others. To use Paul Tillich's term, Jesus Christ was able to participate in the existence of other beings. To further expand on this point, I shall extract from Paul Tillich's Communicating the Christian Message: A Question to Christian Ministers and Teachers.

But the Divine Being is not a being beside others. It is the power of being conquering non-being. It is eternity conquering temporality. It is grace conquering sin. It is ultimate reality conquering doubt. From the point of view of the New Being it is the ground of being, and therefore the creator of the New Being. And out of this ground we can get the courage to affirm being, even in a state of doubt, even in anxiety and despair. The New Being includes a new approach to God which is possible even to those who are under the despair of doubt and don't know the way out.

Not only is Jesus Christ the New Being, he identifies with the whole of the fallen humankind. In another extract, this time by
Huston Smith's The World's Religions:

How is the boundary of the self to be defined? Not, certainly, by the amount of physical space our bodies occupy, the amount of water we displace in the bathtub. It makes more sense to gauge our being by the size of our spirits, the range of reality with which they identify. A man who identifies with his family, finding his joys in theirs, would have that much reality; a woman who could identify with humankind would be that much, greater. By this criterion people who could identify with being as a whole would be unlimited.

By this measure, Jesus Christ has no boundary of the self and he has sacrificed Himself for the whole of humankind. This is a strong reminder for me to learn how to empathize with others and for me to learn to participate in the existence of other beings.
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Andreas_Feuerbach
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Polanyi

Elegance inscribed in the law of nature

Recently, I came across an article that describes how our nature seems to exhibit sheer beauty in the elegance of some physics equations and I can't help but to recall the one of the Psalms: "The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they display knowledge." (Ps 19:1-2) The article which I am including below traces the development of an equation in modern physics and how it leads one to be amazed at God's creation if we presuppose that the world is created by Him. Of course, an atheist or agnostic with different presupposition may be inclined to think that it is all co-incidence and using the framework by David Hume, he would say that all these are orders imposed by our minds on the nature. But that would be another issue that would be addressed in another posting. In the meanwhile, may you enjoy reading the article below.

8Apr2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The remarkable advances made in spectroscopy (the branch of science concerned with the investigation and measurement of spectra produced when matter interacts with or emits electromagnetic radiation) during the nineteenth century allowed the spectrum of the sun to he examined for the first time, with results which proved to be of foundational importance. The presence of a hitherto unknown yellow line in that spectrum, without any known terrestrial parallel, led to the discovery of helium. Over the period 1859–60, the frequencies of a series of four lines observed in the solar spectrum were measured with what, for those days, was amazing accuracy – roughly one part in ten thousand (Angstrom 1868). The precision of these measurements of the visible line spectrum of atomic hydrogen led to the development of a new science: "spectral numerology" (Pais 1991, 142). This was an attempt to account for the relationship of the observed spectral lines with some fundamental mathematical equation.

The breakthrough, when it came, was simple and elegant. Working only on the basis of the four frequencies reported by Angstrom, J. J. Balmer found that he could exactly reproduce the frequencies by means of the following formula:
v = R (1/b² – 1/a²)
where R is a constant now known as the "Rydberg constant" (3.29163 x 10¹⁵), b = 2, and a = 3, 4, 5 and 6 respectively. It must be stressed that this was an exact fit, not an approximation! Balmer (who was then a teacher in a Basle high school) mentioned his observations to the professor of physics at the University of Basle. By this time (1885), 12 more frequencies had been established, although this was unknown to Balmer. On learning of them from his colleague, Balmer found that they could all be fitted into his equation – again, exactly – without any difficulty, by setting a = 2 and b = 5, 6, ... 15, and 16. In fact, Balmer's formula allows an entire series of spectral lines to be predicted (one of which is now known by his name), as follows:
b = 1, a = 2, 3 . . . Lyman series (ultraviolet)
b = 2, a = 3, 4 ... Balmer series (visible)
b = 3, a = 4, 5 ... Paschen series (infrared)
b = 4, a = 5, 6 . . . Brackett series (far infrared)
b = 5, a = 6, 7 . . . Pfund series (far infrared)
b = 6, a = 7, 8 ... Humphreys series (far infrared)

The sheer beauty of the equation – matched, it has to be said, by experimental evidence, both retrodictive (i.e., accounting for something which was already known) and predictive....

By March 6, 1913, the Danish physicist Niels Bohr realized the significance of what Balmer had uncovered (Pais 1991, 143–55). On the basis of a quantum mechanical interpretation of the hydrogen atom, Bohr was able to derive Balmer's formula in two manners. For the first time, it became clear that Balmer's formula corresponded to aspects of the fundamental structure of the hydrogen atom.

The discovery opened the way to rapid development. Once more, the concept of "beauty" played an important part. During the period 1925–6, Werner Heisenberg and Erwin Schrodinger were both working on ways of describing atomic events (Pais 1991, 267–89), especially in the light of the work of Louis de Broglie. Their younger colleague Paul Dirac describes their different approaches as follows (Dirac 1963, 46–7):

Heisenberg worked keeping close to the experimental evidence about spectra .. . Schrodinger worked from a more mathematical point of view, trying to find a beautiful theory for describing atomic events . . . He was able to extend de Broglie's ideas and to get a very beautiful equation, known as Schrodinger's wave equation, for describing atomic processes. Schrodinger got this equation by pure thought, looking for some beautiful generalization of de Broglie's ideas, and not by keeping close to the experimental development of the subject in the way Heisenberg did.

The differences in approach are highly significant. Heisenberg worked outwards from the experimental evidence; Schrodinger sought an elegant theory which would then account for that evidence. The two, as it proved, converged. The quest for beauty and the quest for truth met at a common point. This point is clearly hinted at in Heisenberg's reflections on his work (Heisenberg 1971, 59, 68):

I had the feeling that, through the surface of atomic phenomena, I was looking at a strangely beautiful interior, and felt almost giddy at the thought that I now had to probe this wealth of mathematical structures nature had so generously spread out before me . . . If nature leads to mathematical forms of great simplicity and beauty – coherent systems of hypotheses, axioms, etc...we cannot help thinking that they are "true," that they reveal genuine features of beauty.

The general drift of this analysis will be clear. A strong doctrine of creation (such as that associated with Christianity) leads to the expectation of a fundamental convergence of truth and beauty in the investigation and explanation of the world, precisely on account of the grounding of that world in the nature of God. The correlation in question is not arbitrary or accidental, but corresponds to the reflection of the nature of the creator in the ordering and regularity of creation.

Extracted from:
Alister E. McGrath, The Foundations of Dialogue in Science & Religion, Blackwell, 1998, pp. 77-79

父母与孩子之间的沟通

以下是我在30/12/2006， 恩泽长老会中心的功课加油站-结业礼，与60多位家长们所分享的信息内容。

父母与孩子之间的沟通

1）引言


2）父母的沟通方式

例子：你吃饱了吗？/你冲凉了吗？/你功课做完了吗？

你认为孩子会怎样回答？


3）孩子的沟通方式

例子：我能不能买脚踏车？/我明天能不能跟朋友出去？

你认为父母会怎样回答？


观察：
我们假设孩子最关心的是学业，饮食，零用钱够用。所以我们问孩子的问题都环绕在这些课题。

父母很少认识孩子的内心世界，孩子也很少接触父母的内心世界。我们都是以我们的假设来与孩子对话。父母与孩子不能沟通，会带来很多的误会及伤害。当孩子很难与我们沟通时，我们都认为问题出在孩子身上。孩子却认为问题出在我们身上。


4）孩子的自信心

在孩子的成长过程中，他们的自信心会建立在学业，朋友及父母的肯定。

- 孩子会在学业的成绩上肯定自己的价值。学业好，就有更多的推动力，自己的形象与学业成绩挂钩。

- 另一个建立自信心的管道是透过朋友的肯定。朋友是孩子生活中很重要的一环。

- 父母在这三项管道中，是最重要的一环。孩子自幼就从父母的言语举止中得到自我肯定。假若孩子与父母很难沟通，孩子就无法从父母那里得到肯定与得到心灵的健康成长。


5）加强孩子的自信心

表达你对他的肯定
基本要表达的是：“父母很爱你，不管你学业好不好，不管你懂不懂事，父母都一样爱你。不会因为你学业不好而少爱你一点。不会因为你不懂事而少爱你一点。因为你是我的孩子，我对你的爱是没有附带任何条件。”


- 若学业好，也很懂事/听话
比较容易被你肯定，也比较容易对他说：“父母爱你。”
但是千万不要贬低他的自信心。好像拿他的成绩跟比较好的人相比。

- 若学业不好，但很懂事/听话
如果你是以学业来肯定他的价值，你就很难向他说：“父母还是很爱你。”他就会从朋友那里肯定他的价值。学业不好有很多因素。最大的因素是读书方法不对。在这方面，父母需要跟学校老师一起关心孩子，也可能透过其他老师帮助这孩子。但是父母要继续给于支持与鼓励。


- 若学业好，但不是很懂事/听话
如果你是以学业来肯定他的价值，你可能会纵容他。你比较会透过物质的方式来肯定你对他的爱。这会带来错误的价值观。

学业尽责本来就是应该的。学业好本身就会有很大的满足感。但如果他却很叛逆，很可能是因为得不到父母的爱，需要你对他的肯定。不是透过物质上对他的肯定，而是在你所付出的时间上及你的沟通方式。


- 若学业不好，也不是很懂事/听话
最头痛。他的自信心很低。若你还不肯定他的价值，他最可能从朋友那里肯定他的价值。他若在这状况，他最需要你对他的肯定，他在这时刻最需要你的爱。因为他在寻找自己的到底价值在哪里。

即使是个很叛逆的孩子，他也会认为叛逆是对的。帮助他认识他的叛逆对你也对周围爱他的人造成伤害。千万不要硬碰硬。（一个有关叛逆学生的分享。他是如何被感动。）叛逆的孩子最需要爱，而且很多例子都显示叛逆是个过渡期。孩子到一个阶段会开始明白懂事。


基本要表达的是：“父母很爱你，不管你学业好不好，不管你懂不懂事，父母都一样爱你。不会因为你学业不好而少爱你一点。不会因为你不懂事而少爱你一点。因为你是我的孩子，我对你的爱是没有附带任何条件。”


6）愿意尝试改变沟通方式吗？
听了以上的分享，不知你会如何改变你对孩子的沟通方式？你是否愿意每一个星期，不管工作多忙，都要花时间与孩子坐下来谈谈。不再以“你吃饱了吗？/你冲凉了吗？/你功课做完了吗？”来敷衍关心的表达。你是否愿意去了解他今天的生活怎么样。你是否愿意跟孩子一起做下来一起看电视，一起讨论电视内容，内心世界是什么；他也能知道你在想什么，内心世界是什么。又或者，愿意跟孩子一起出去？不是孩子陪你去你要去的地方，而是你们一起去你们要去的地方，一起享受在一起的时间。

我要请你们现在花几分钟时间想想你过去是如何与孩子沟通。现在我希望你把你心中的对孩子的感言写下来。或许你从来没对你的孩子说过：“妈妈很爱你，你是知道的。”或许你从来没对你的孩子说过：“不管你学业好不好，妈妈都不会少爱你一点。” 或许你从来没对你的孩子说过：“爸爸很少花时间陪你。但是你知道我是非常在乎你的。” 或许你心中还有其他感触是你想让你孩子知道的，请你们把它写下来。圣诞节刚过去。不知你给孩子什么样的礼物。新的一年将到来。过两天就是新的一年了。把你心中的感言写下来，当成一份新年礼物送给你的孩子。


总结
自己的个人经历。