Missions and Theology

I'm moving

2009-08-11T18:50:00.003+07:00

After giving it a good think ,I finally decided to move to Wordpress. I have been blogging there for quite sometime but I really do not have the time and energy to fully return to active posting. I already moved all of the posts there and gradually I will move all the contents of the sidebar there. All the theology blog links will be retained except for those who are no longer updating their blogs. The only setback here is that wordpress is not accepting javascript so I'll say goodbye to the sidebar widgets here.

I will be honored greatly if you will follow me there. I know, however, that at this point I already lost most of my regular readers so it doesn't matter anyway. I consider deleting this blog but I see that it is still receiving quite a number of visits and page views each day. I will leave this blog as it is and hope that some people would still find helpful materials. Here is the link to my wordpress blog. God bless to all!

Cheaper by the Dozen

2009-07-26T15:12:00.002+07:00

I haven't been updating this blog for quite a long time. I know for sure that I already lost the handful of people who read this blog. The reason is that our ministry have made a big turn about. Aside from teaching full time, we are not taking care of the 12 children. This took my time away from blogging time to put up a decent theological blog. We are also preparing for a big move this coming months. The day care center we are running will be moving to a new place. In the past two months, we have been moving a lot and had been trying our best to help people who need assistance that Narlin and I can give in our own small ways. I haven't given up blogging yet.

Now for our news update:

Rising tension between the United Wa State Army (UWSA) and Burmese government forces is reported by sources in Shan State and along the Sino-Burmese border. The Burmese army had deployed reinforcements .Wa soldiers in the southern region are stockpiling food and supplies in case armed clashes break out, according to the news agency, Wa soldiers now on leave reportedly have been called back to duty. Wives and children of Wa soldiers have been sent out of potential conflict zones. - Source: Irrawady News

The agreement between Burmese and Wa army had expired last month. The Wa people aware of the impending arm conflict start sending their children across the borders to Thailand for safety. Parents do not even know if they will see their children again.

For lack of better terms I called our ministry a "mini-orphanage" it is because our original intention is to provide a home for a limited number (not more than 8) of orphans and abandoned children. But in the light of the impending crisis, we could not reject children who came to us for shelter. Hence, we end up with twelve children from age four to eight and we know what the phrase "cheaper by the dozen" means.

The question people are asking us now is how are we going to provide for these children's daily needs knowing that we are receiving limited support. Just like George Muller who expected God's miraculous provision on a daily basis running his orphanage. We trust that God will do the same for us.

Presently, we are sending five children to a Thai school and the rest are going to Grace Home Kindergarten Center (GHKC). All of the children speak Wa except for Tina who speaks English, Thai, Burmese, Wa and Tee Lek who knows little Thai and fluent with Burmese and Wa. For the mean time, they serve as our interpreter until they learn to speak English, Thai, Burmese or Tagalog or we learn to speak Wa. Whichever comes first.

We know that it will take a miracle to provide food, shelter, clothing and education for these children but we believe that with your prayers God will accomplish the impossible.

Songkran

2009-04-24T11:07:00.003+07:00

You don’t need to live long in Thailand to know that they are living different year than the Western counterpart. It’s now 2553 here. The Thai new year celebration is also called Songkran. It is celebrated on 13-15 of April. Thai people closely follow the traditional activities during the three days. Although in some provinces the celebration last longer than three days.

The throwing of water is the most fun part of the celebration. It seems everybody in the community should join because people will look at you with disdain for spoiling the fun. Our children and their friends join in this activity. I drove them around the town on the back of a pick-up truck and splash water to every people we came across on the streets. The most fun however, was when two or three pick-up trucks crisscrossed on the street. It was like a war with water as the weapon. There was a lot of cheers and laughter. And since they are all young people and observing them from afar, it was like a hint of friendship was about to start. But of course, a few seconds of fun really don’t amount to anything in terms of relationship. However, a sense of being in one community was stronger at least for that particular moment.

On the following day, the splashing of water should be over and people should visit temples, shrines, monasteries to watch the washing of the statues of Buddha with scented water. It was also the time to offer prayers, gifts, food to the monk. Following this is the releasing of fish to the water and birds to the sky. This believe to bring good luck for everyone. Our house is just two blocks away from the temple and I saw only a handful of people observed this activity. While on the streets, the people were still having fun getting each other wet.

I’m sure for many of the younger generation, the religious significance of the Songkran have been lost. Nonetheless, isn't the fun and the sense of casual friendship and sense of community that the festival brings were enough to reflect on the goodness of God?

Unity is possible through humility

2009-03-13T11:58:00.000+07:00

Have you ever bought something that was an imitation—it looked like the real thing but lacked the quality of the original? Chances are the imitations wore out or broke before too long. There is nothing like the real thing, whether it be a cherished painting, a treasured piece of jewelry, or a precious relationship. Nothing quite meets our expectations except the real thing. But there are times in life when we are supposed to try to imitate someone—times when we want to model ourselves after an ideal or a role model. We don’t expect to be as good or perfect as the ’original,’ but it is in our best interests to try. Why? Because we have a perfect model for all we do in Jesus Christ!

Philippians 2:5-11 is one of the greatest passages ever written about Jesus Christ. It paints the perfect picture of humility—the humility of Jesus Christ. No one has ever come close to humbling himself like Jesus Christ did, and no one ever will. Yet, if the problems of the church and of the world are to ever be solved, we must humble ourselves just as Christ did. The church is too often divided. The only answer is the declaration of this passage: letting the humility of Jesus Christ flow in and out of our minds. The unity of a church depends upon every Christian walking in the humility of Jesus Christ.

I am missing the van so bad

2009-03-09T01:03:00.002+07:00

For the first time in almost four months, I missed my 25-year-old-hands-down Nissan Urvan. The van broke down last year in October and is still in the shop. Holding on for its dear life. The mechanic advised us to change it with a new second-hand engine but Narlin and I are having second thought. We think it’s not worth it. The van’s body has dent, its bronze paint is scratched and cracked, the seats upholstery are are duct taped, the ceiling is falling, the aircon is not working and the steering is not powered. However, it is the only vehicle we have and we love it.

This morning nobody picked up the children going to the church. A co-worker usually does that for us, but not this morning. In the first place, we should not be depending on somebody to bring us to church. So I have to make three trips to the church bringing the children on the motorcycle. Not that I’m complaining, in fact, sometimes I enjoy the ride. But rainy season is fast approaching and I could not do this anymore when the time comes. We need the van so badly.

The van is also being used transporting church members to the church. It is also the church’s school bus. And though I end up as the driver, I am happy that I can help the church and its school in my own small way.

So please help us pray for a new van. Some people learn about this need and express their intention to help. The children home, the church, the Bible school, the Day Care and other ministries need it.

They finished the course

2009-03-07T23:17:00.003+07:00

After six months of intensive training, we had our graduation last Thursday. Eight students were able to finish the course. Within the time that we were together, we come to know them better, their strengths and weaknesses, their great potentials. We do pray for them all the time that after the course their knowledge about the ministry from which God called them would increase by leaps and bounds.

I am hoping that I was able to teach them some practical skills. I didn't do Bible study with them, I taught them how to study and teach the Bible. I didn't interpret the Bible for them but I taught them how to interpret the Bible I didn't teach them theology but I taught them how to do theology. My prayer is that when they are on their own working in the field, they would learn to think for themselves. Other teachers are worried that their students would not be able stand the false teachings that they will encounter, but I am confident that my students know how to defend the fundamentals of their faith, not because of the information I have given to them, but because they had develop the skills to discern what is false and the skills to refute them. These skills with the guidance of the Holy Spirit (who are the real teacher anyway) are the assets they can use in the proclamation of the gospel of the Kingdom in wherever place God called them to be.

Who's Who in Theology: Anselm

2009-02-11T23:29:00.002+07:00

ANSELM OF CANTERBURY (1033–1109)
Archbishop of Canterbury; sometimes described as the founder of Scholasticism

Born in Aosta (northwest Italy) of noble family, Anselm was educated at the abbey of St. Leger, where the classical curriculum trained him for the clarity of expression later characteristic of his writings. Anselm’s father intended him for a political career and opposed his son’s decision to become a monk. In 1057 Anselm left home and traveled in Burgundy (France) and Normandy for two years before settling in a Benedictine monastery at Bec, Normandy, to study under the renowned theologian Lanfranc. Anselm took monastic vows and succeeded his teacher as prior in 1063, a tribute to his intellect and piety. He later became abbot of Bec (1078–1093). Under Anselm’s leadership the monastery and its school became a prominent center of learning. Once when a neighboring abbot complained that he could not improve his boys no matter how much he beat them, Anselm gently responded with what sounds like a twentieth-century question: ‘Have you tried not beating them?’ Although he could be scathing in condemnation of monks who laid up treasure on earth, he showed compassion for ordinary human weakness. His humble faith produced the prayer, ‘Grant that I may taste by love what I apprehend by knowledge, that I may feel in my heart what I touch through the Spirit.’

After the Norman conquest of England in 1066, English lands were granted by William I (‘The Conqueror’) to the monastery of Bec. Because of that property, Anselm paid three visits to England, where he made a favorable impression on the clergy during a period of reorganization in their church. When the archbishopric of Canterbury became vacant on Lanfranc’s death in 1089, the English clergy urged that the abbot of Bec should succeed him. For the gentle monk it was not an inviting prospect. William II (‘Rufus’), who had come to the English throne in 1087, was notably disinclined to appoint someone with strong views about the rights and independence of the church. Indeed, the king was reluctant to appoint anyone at all. A four-year vacancy ensued, much to Rufus’s satisfaction, for the revenues of any vacant diocese went to the Crown. No help came from Rome, since at the time an unseemly squabble was going on between two rival claimants for the papacy.

Then the dilemma was unexpectedly resolved. Anselm, in England on monastic business, was called to hear the confession of the king who had become seriously ill. The apprehensive Rufus, it is related, forced the pastoral staff into Anselm’s clenched hands. The abbot protested, ‘You have yoked an old sheep with an untamed bull to the plough of the church, which ought to be drawn by two strong oxen.’ Anselm refused to be consecrated until Rufus restored certain lands to Canterbury, recognized the archbishop as his spiritual father, and acknowledged Urban II as the rightful pope (a choice forced upon Anselm because of his Norman connections). Rufus agreed, but he recovered and was never one for keeping his promises. The yokefellows did indeed prove incompatible. Again and again Rufus, one of the most evil and rapacious of English sovereigns, thwarted Anselm’s administration of the church and his concern for the spiritual welfare of the nation. The king would not even permit the archbishop to go on a visit to Rome. Anselm would not dilute his Christian principles to satisfy a royal tyrant, but his position gradually became so untenable that he left the country in 1097. He returned only after Rufus had died in mysterious circumstances and his brother Henry I had sent an invitation to the exiled primate (1100).

By that time the Investiture Controversy was at its height, and in keeping with a papal decree of 1099 Anselm declined to pay the expected homage to the new king or to consecrate bishops who had done so. Six unhappy years passed before a compromise was reached. Anselm was never at his best in political affairs, so his early rejection of a career in politics proved to be a wise decision. Only the last two years of his primacy were spent in peace. The papacy made some amends for the halfhearted support given him in England by canonizing him a little less than a half century after his death.

As a scholar, Anselm reintroduced the spirit of Augustine into theology. Much of Anselm’s writing was done during the placid decades at Bec—notably Monologion, De veritate, and Proslogion. Anselm sought to demonstrate the existence and attributes of God by an appeal to reason alone. He spoke of an absolute norm above time and space that could be comprehended by the mind of man. That norm was God, the ultimate standard of perfection. Anselm’s so-called Ontological Argument was that the existence of the idea of God necessarily implied the objective existence of God. He always insisted, however, that faith must precede reason: ‘I do not seek to understand in order that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand.’

To him is attributed what became known as the ‘satisfaction theory’ of the atonement, which sees God as the offended party and man as the offender. That view was elaborated in a famous work Cur Deus homo? (Why Did God Become Man?), which Anselm completed in 1098 in Italy. He rejected the view of the Atonement that saw it as the settlement of a lawsuit between God and the devil. Anselm’s hypothesis was that all human beings had sinned in and with Adam. God’s honor demanded that every creature should subject itself to him so that his eternal purposes should be completed. Since finite man could never make satisfaction to the infinite God, ‘no one but one who is God-man can make the satisfaction by which man is saved.’ The voluntary death of the sinless Christ on the cross was the only way and the only acceptable satisfaction.

Acknowledged as the greatest scholar between Augustine and Aquinas, Anselm’s distinctive characteristic was his resort to intellectual reasoning rather than to biblical tests and traditional writings—while still upholding the prime place of faith. His theology has had profound influence on many modern theologians, including Karl Barth.

J. D. Douglas

Source:

WHO’S WHO IN CHRISTIAN HISTORYJ. D. Douglas and Philip W. Comfort,
EditorsDonald Mitchell, Associate Editor
Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.
WHEATON, ILLINOIS

A response to a modern-day prophecy

2009-02-06T22:59:00.002+07:00

This post is about a response to the modern-day prophecy about the Philippines. A prophecy of almost the same nature but different content for Thailand had been made last year. Lately, I had been witnessing preachers prophesying to people in the congregation. And I agree, most of those prophecies were not really about predicting what will happen in the future but sort of general statement that can always come true whatever the situation is. But I can testify that the prophecies were meant and to encourage.

Here is the email I received from my professor. I deleted some sentence that may cause security problem with those who are ministering in the restricted countries. This does not affect the main thought of this email

Dear Partners in Global Missions,

I appreciate the ‘prophecy‘ below, but there's really nothing new about it! The last time someone gave this kind of ‘prophecy‘ in the Philippines, I heard the ‘prophet‘ ran away with another woman and divorced his wife!

The Bible is clear on how a nation can prosper, and there is no need for a ‘new revelation‘ on this theme. After all, Japan, Singapore, and Hong Kong became prosperous even without a prophet prophesying about their imminent riches!

The sending of missionaries from the Philippines does not even need a ‘prophecy‘ because the Risen Lord has given this command 2,000 years ago. For one thing, God's covenant people in the Philippines need only to OBEY the Great Commission. Nowhere in the Bible can we find a text that requires a PROPHESY for fulfilling the Great Commission aside from the required OBEDIENCE necessary to fulfill it. For another, churches should promptly obey the Great Commission and enlist, train, commission, send, and support their missionaries across the nation and around the world.

When the Korean Church sent more than 20,000 missionaries to different parts of the world, believers did so out of their OBEDIENCE to the Great Commission. The Church in Myanmar (a much economically deppressed country than the Philippines) has more than 4,000 cross-border missionaries because believers simply obeyed the Great Commission even at the absence of a ‘prophesy.‘

Of course, we do not need ‘prophesy‘ to find oil reserves on our lands and shores because they are a ‘given‘ under GENERAL OR UNIVERSAL REVELATION. Our Filipino engineers only need more time to ‘discover‘ them, depending on the latest technology available. (They may, however, need ‘discernment‘ and ‘wisdom‘ where to find the reserves!)

Speaking of ‘missionaries‘ from the Philippines going to the countries mentioned in the ‘prophesy‘ below, already thousands have gone into those areas. The Philippine government used to call them OCW (Overseas Contract Workers), but we, believers, know them as Overseas Christian Workers!

Do we need ‘prophesy‘ to ‘show‘ us the existence of the PRINCIPALITY OF CORRUPTION across the Philippine archipelago? I think Filipinos are not naive on this one. We simply turn on our TV set to find ourselves watching all forms of corruption, from commercials to telenovelas!

Of course, I believe in genuine biblical prophesy. What we should be extra wary about are the so-called modern-day prophesies that sound like ‘pastoral counseling advices‘ that feature the obvious rather than the mysterious.

Remember the old hymn, ‘Standing on the Promises?‘ That's exactly how God's covenant people should live. We live each passing day according to God's promises (Psalm 119) rather than modern-day prophecies.

Tons of grace,
Terry Casino

Modern-day prophet

2009-02-04T23:04:00.003+07:00

I believe that God can use modern day prophets to reveal his will for individual and for a nation. No doubt, if God used the prophets thousand of years ago, he can still use them today. I have been receiving emails about prophecies for the Philippines and somehow I have doubts this is authentic. Below is the prophecy of Cindy Jacobs for my country. Next time I will post the response of my theology professor about this and modern-day prophecy in general.

THE NEXT TWO YEARS EXTREMELY SIGNIFICANT You know I love you Philippines . I want you to pray, the next two years, the Lord is showing me, are going to be extremely significant for the Philippines . You're kind of on the cusp of re-civilization, I want to say that, either you're gonna go into greatness, it's going to transform the nation, or I see that there's gonna be some troubled times. So PRAY, PRAY, PRAY! I know you're already praying, but this is the time God is gonna pull down the SPIRIT OF CORRUPTION, and God is going to release the Spirit of truth and righteousness into this nation, because 'Righteousness exalts a nation.' The Lord is giving MANY PROMISES for the Philippines . I mean the Philippines is going to be ONE OF THE WEALTHIEST NATIONS on the earth. You know I prophesied that there'll be oil found off the coasts of the Philippines , and there's much more to be found, there's gold, the treasures of darkness are there. I remember prophesying in Baguio City that there's going to be treasures of darkness, and it has not been found, they were saved for the Body of Christ. And remember, they found this treasure, the Japanese had buried them on the ground after World War II. That was a sign. What does God mean to do? The SPIRIT OF POVERTY will be broken. I want to say to you, mothers will be able to feed their children, there is going to be a system put in place. FOR MINDANAO Even in Mindanao, you know, I've prophesied over Mindanao, and I want to say to you again Mindanao , 'Arise, you are the blue-flamed warriors that I talked about, warriors of fire, warriors that God is going to bring with HOLINESS,' and it's gonna happen. I just see literally THOUSANDS OF MISSIONARIES going out of Mindanao , thousands, thousands. I mean to Cambodia , Vietnam , Laos , Bangladesh , even to India , Central Asia -- Kyrgystan , Kazakhstan . The Lord says, 'I'm a just God,' those places where darkness has tried to grip, where it seems there's been so much desolation, so much poverty, so much sorrow. The Lord says, ‘I, the Lion of Judah , am going to rise in those darkest places, and bring justice, and the people who were set in darkness will see a great light. But not only see a great light, but be LIGHT-BEARERS to the ends of the earth,‘ says the Lord. (In view of fighting going on in Mindanao right now) I did not know there was fighting going on in Mindanao right now. I want to say, ‘Where sin abounds, grace much more abounds.‘ You might say like Jeremiah thought in the Book of Lamentations, ‘God, You've abandoned us, where are You?‘ But the Lord say, ‘Do not lose hope and do not lose heart, because the Lord says ' Mindanao will be transformed.'‘

Satan is making a last great stand. Satan has come down with great wrath because he knows his time is short in Mindanao . So RISE UP, even though, you know, it's terrible, and everywhere you look around is devastation, ‘Out of this darkness is going to come a TRANSFORMATION MOVEMENT that will be shown and modeled around the world,‘ says the Lord. NATIONAL FAST FOR THE COMING ELECTIONS You know, the Lord shows me, over the Philippines there is a PRINCIPALITY OF CORRUPTION, and this corruption has been so systemic, and so deep, and this principality thinks it controls the Philippines . But the Lord is showing me that there will be a NATIONAL FAST, praying -- everyone, the north, the south, the east and the west, the whole church, not part of the church, STANDING UP and FASTING and PRAYING. There should not be a day that there isn't fasting going on for the Philippines . And I am calling you, wherever you are, whoever is hearing my voice, whatever pastor is hearing my voice, whatever youth movement, the Lord is saying, 'LOVE YOUR NATION.' This is a strategic nation. Fast for the elections coming up!

Fearful faith

2009-01-31T18:24:00.001+07:00

Many Christians believe that their priority as believers is to defend doctrine and teachings of God not only to the people of other faiths but more so from fellow believers inside the church. I believe though the number one priority for every Christian is to share gospel of reconciliation. Our powerful God through his Holy Spirit is able to defend himself against false teachings.

Moltmann says that if we assume a rigid defensive stance regarding our doctrine, it is actually cowardly.

The decay of faith and its identity, through the a decline into unbelief and a different identity, forms an exact parallel to their decay through a decline into a fearful defensive faith. Faith is fearful and defensive when it begins to die inwardly, struggling to maintain itself and reaching out for security and guarantees. In so doing, it removes itself from the hand of the one who has promised to maintain it, and its own manipulations bring it to ruin. This pusillanimous faith usually occurs in the form of orthodoxy which feels threatened and is therefore more rigid than ever. It occurs wherever, in the face of the immorality of the present age, the gospel of creative love for the abandoned is replaced by the law of what supposed to be Christian morality, and by penal law.

He who is of little faith looks for support and protection for his faith because it is preyed upon by fear. Such faith tries to protect its 'most sacred things', God, Christ, doctrine and morality, because it clearly no longer believes that these are sufficiently powerful to maintain themselves. When the 'religion of fear' finds its way into the Christian church, those who regard themselves as the most vigilant guardians of faith do violence to faith and smother it.

Jurgen Moltmann, The Crucified God, pp. 11-12.

Absolute point of view

2009-01-29T15:52:00.001+07:00

Reading an academic theology book gives you a feeling that very little of the content of the book would be applicable for the ministry or at least to your present situation. You have this inkling that the author would address issues that are relevant only among professional theologians. They are those who write articles, essays and books that the ordinary minister find useless in their own teaching and preaching. For me, it is always a delight to dig up some treasures deeply buried in theological books. Or perhaps it is just me, too slow to find the connection.

It is a joy to find some passages that speak directly to me and somewhat connect to what I am experiencing personally. Moltmann's book The Crucified God (or many of his books for that matter) always does that to me. Although, I believe Moltmann himself have no idea that the words he has written would speak to somebody in Asia doing missionary works.

I am bothered endlessly by the reality that Christians who believe that salvation is by grace through faith alone, that Jesus Christ is the only way to have a loving relationship with God could not have a authentic loving relationship with each other. Sad to say that the hairline crack that ends up in breaking apart is almost always caused by differences in theological preferences, minor doctrinal differences and certain way of interpreting the word of God. This happen when people start believing that their views alone are right and the all the others are wrong. Theirs are the only absolute truth.

Moltmann says ‘that theology must include reflections upon its own point of view... an attempt to adopt an absolute point of view would be equivalent to having no point of view at all. To make one's own point of view absolute would be stupidity. This does not amount to relativism. Anyone who understand the relativity, will see himself as relative to others; but this does not mean giving up one's own position. To see one's own point of view as relative to that of others means to live in concrete relationships and to think out one's own ideas in relationship to the thought of others. To have no relationship would be death.’ (The Crucified God, 10-11).

Who's Who In Christian Theology: Athanasius

2009-01-06T13:50:00.002+07:00

ATHANASIUS (c. 295-373) Bishop of Alexandria (Egypt)

Athanasius did more than anyone else to bring about the triumph of the orthodox Nicene faith over Arianism, a struggle to which he devoted forty-five years and for which he was exiled five times.

Athanasius was born in Alexandria and was trained there as a theologian. He moved up rapidly as reader, deacon, and theological adviser for Bishop Alexander, accompanying him in 325 to the Council of Nicaea (near Constantinople, now Istanbul in modern Turkey). Athanasius succeeded Alexander as bishop upon Alexander’s death in 328.

The conflicts which necessitated the Council of Nicaea began in Alexandria. They existed when Alexander was bishop and continued throughout the life of Athanasius. The first came from a challenge by Melitius of Lycopolis to the authority which the bishop of Alexandria exercised over the whole church of Egypt. Melitius formed a schismatic church in reaction to the lenient treatment Alexander’s predecessor gave to those who had denied the faith during the persecution of Christians by the Roman emperor Diocletian. A greater conflict soon to engulf the whole church began when Arius, an Alexandrian presbyter, advocated the view that Christ was not eternal but was created by the Father Arius was condemned by Alexander in 319 at a synod in his city; but Arian views spread rapidly in the East, where prominent bishops held similar views. The Council of Nicaea was called in 325 by the Roman emperor Constantine to settle the Melitian and Arian issues and to bring unity to the church and civic peace to the area.

Condemnation of Arius by the council and even the adoption of the Nicene Creed did not bring the peace and unity which Constantine desired. There was ambiguity in the way the bishops understood the creed they had signed. As a result, Arius eventually signed the creed himself (with a few private additions). The emperor then ordered Athanasius, now bishop of Alexandria, to restore Arius. When the order arrived, Athanasius refused to readmit Arius — whereupon false charges were brought against Athanasius at the synod of Tyre (335), and Constantine exiled him.

The sanction of Arian views by the emperor threatened to turn Christianity into a philosophy mixed with pagan thought. Arians believed in a single supreme God who made contact with the world through lower creatures such as the Son and the Spirit. The Son was a suffering divine hero who was to be worshiped, very much like the hero gods of the Greeks. Since that view was so similar to paganism, Arianism made the monotheism of Christianity acceptable to many who were adopting the religion of the emperor. Athanasius recognized the danger and frequently called the Arians heathens.

As Arianism’s greatest opponent, Athanasius emphasized redemption and the necessity of the Incarnation of the Word (Christ) for man’s salvation (Oration on the Incarnation of the Word). He taught that it was necessary for the Word to be as eternal as God if he was to form the divine image in man. This was also the emphasis of his primary theological work, The Three Orations against the Arians (335 or later). In Three Orations Athanasius taught that since the Scripture describes the Son as “begotten” of the Father, he must be of the same nature as the Father, not a creature of the Father. Christ was generated spiritually, not created. In the second oration Athanasius rejected the Arians’ baptism because they did not baptize in the name of the Trinity as understood in Scripture.

Athanasius’s periods of exile spanned the rule of four emperors: Constantine, Constantius, Julian (a pagan who tried to restore the old gods), and Valens (who exiled Athanasius for only four months). His first exile lasted until Constantine’s death in 337. He returned to Alexandria only to be deposed the same year by a synod of Antioch. From 346, there was relative peace until he was again deposed in 355. The years 361 and 362 saw him back in his bishopric, but emperor Julian exiled him in the fall of the second year. He went back to Alexandria in 363, was deposed in 365, and recalled in 366. Through these trying times Athanasius struggled for the faith without yielding. He made it difficult for emperors to deal with him. At times he would delay appearing before their court, or would escape to appear before the emperor at another time and place — to the surprise of everyone. Throughout the struggles the majority of Christians in Alexandria remained devoted to him. One major benefit resulted from his two exiles in the West: the Latin church came under his influence.

There were, however, many bishops in the East who were not Arians and had no sympathy with the Arian bishops who controlled the Eastern church during the rule of Constantius. At the same time, they did not completely agree with the wording of the Nicene Creed: “the Son of God . . . of one substance with the Father.” The majority of those bishops held that the essence of the Son is “like” that of the Father. For them the creedal phrase did not make a clear distinction between Father and Son. In 359 Athanasius made a great step toward reconciliation with that majority in his Letter Concerning the Synods. He apologized to Basil of Ancyra and said that those who accepted the Nicene Creed but questioned the term “of one substance” should be treated as brothers. Athanasius went further toward reconciliation by calling a synod in Alexandria (362) during his brief return while Julian was emperor. The final step in the triumph of orthodoxy came after the death of Athanasius under the emperor Theodosius at the Council of Constantinople in 381.

In addition to contributing to the defeat of Arianism, Athanasius helped shape the Christian ideal of monasticism. He brought monasticism out of isolation in Egypt with his book, The Life of Antony. Athanasius knew the desert hermit monk personally and through his writing made the pattern of Antony’s life the ideal in the East. The Life of Antony also had an impact on many in the West.--J. Newton

Source:
WHO’S WHO IN CHRISTIAN HISTORY
J. D. Douglas and Philip W. Comfort,
EditorsDonald Mitchell, Associate Editor
Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.
WHEATON, ILLINOIS

Hoping for a fruitful year

2009-01-03T00:40:00.001+07:00

Hope I could write: "The year 2008 was the busiest year we had here in the mission field. The year 2009 is the beginning of our fourth year here in Thailand. Ministries are starting to take off and the day care is growing. Teaching at the Bible school is taking much of my time. The actual teaching takes two hours but the preparation and making the lessons easy to translate takes a lot of hard work. I prepare the lesson using Powepoint because I find it very helpful if you are teaching with an interpreter. It makes the translation a lot easier.

This year, I have to divide my time in teaching, preaching, writing, working around the house, gardening and driving the school bus plus the fact that I am a husband and a father of three home schooled children.

This year I need to move forward with the paper so I will be reading and write a few sentences each day as I had been doing before the tragedy happened.

I will read The Crucified God by Jurgen Moltmann for a start this year and I am hoping to accomplish something this year. Sigh

Meanwhile here is an interesting quote from Moltmann from CG, page 8.

Fundamentalism fossilizes the Bible into an unquestionable authority. Dogmatism freezes living Christian tradition solid. The habitual conservatism of religion makes the liturgy inflexible, and Christian morality--often against its better knowledge and conscience--becomes a deadening legalism.

Happy New Year

2008-12-28T21:13:00.001+07:00

Last night I took the courage to upgrade my Mac OS X from Panther 10.3.9 to Tiger 10.4.11. The happy results are I was able to install Missingsync 4.04 and the latest version of Journler. Missingsync makes it possible for me to synchronized my Mac with my (actually borrowed) Windows Mobile Toshiba e380. Journler on the other hand makes it possible for me to write my journal and other stuff. This enables me to to post offline which is the usual situation I am in right now.

This year, I need to spend a lot of times writing my paper. Hopefully, I can also blog regularly.

I preached in the church this morning and upon seeing that there were more locals than the internationals who attended the worship service, I requested Isaac (our official translator in the Jubilee Bible School) to translate for me. It has been a while since I preached with translator and I still found it uncomfortable.

Anyways, last night as I was preparing the sermon and I was looking for a good illustration to the introduction. I found this prayer from e-sword illustration tools.

May this be our prayer for the new year as well.

Lord, I confess before You that:

I have had longings and nudges from You which I did not translate into action.

I have made decisions without consulting You, then have blamed You when things went wrong.

I have said that I trusted You, yet have not turned my affairs over to You.
I have been greedy for present delights and pleasures, unwilling to wait for those joys which time and discipline alone can give.

I have often sought the easy way and have consistently drawn back from the road that is hard.

I have been fond of giving myself to dreams of which I am going to do sometime, yet have been so slow in getting started to do them.

Forgive me for all the intentions that were born and somehow never lived.

And now I claim Your promise to change me. Do for me what I cannot do for myself. Lead me into a new tomorrow with a new spirit. Cleanse my heart; create within me new attitudes and new ideas, as only You can. Amen.

Dela Paz November Update

2008-12-02T20:17:00.000+07:00

Here is our latest newsletter. I hope somebody is still reading this blog.

The van broke down

2008-11-28T23:23:00.003+07:00

The van spewed engine oil on the road on my way to the church when I was bringing the people to the church last Sunday. I wasn't aware of it until I picked up some church members on our way and told me that the van was spilling a lot of oil on the road.

I really felt bad about it. First because I still had to bring my family yet to the church and second the spilled oil was fatal for hundreds of motorcycles that pass on the road. I stopped on the red light in a turn and I left a pool of spilled oil there. The police found out about it and they put sand on it.

Maybe ten months ago, I noticed the leak from the engine and asked the mechanic to do something about it. He put new gaskets and oil seal, but after a week the oil started to leak again. I mentioned it to him and he started to reason out about the cylinder being loose. Although I think that a loose piston would not cause oil leaks, I didn't argue. It was hard argue with someone you don't understand and can't understand you. So when I called him last Sunday, he was kinda apologetic for doing a bad job.

Anyways, the van broke and the good side of it is I have a break doing the bus run. And it feels good. When I volunteer to do the bus run for the church's school and the nursery I thought it would be a relaxing drive and therapeutic at times. But the school grew and the number of students doubled within six months. This results to an unexpectedly long drive that took two hours in the morning and two hours in the afternoon. It becomes really a serious difficult work. Not that I am complaining.

The van broke down, but it feels good. I almost praying that the repair will take longer. But again, I have to think about the children being driven dangerously in a motorcycle to the school.

The blogger's word verification and typing the characters you see in the picture to post this still annoys me.

So little time, so much to do

2008-11-18T23:27:00.002+07:00

I'm falling behind with my blogging. The main reason is we have been very busy in the training center. We had hosted a week of church planting seminar and another week of Condensed World Mission Course. These activities did not only involved teaching but lots of errands and food preparations. I hope to catch up with blogging soon. Also I can't post offline using MarsEdit because of blogger's word verification. This is very annoying.

Reading biblical narratives

2008-10-14T20:39:00.003+07:00

Big percentage of the Biblical materials is narrative. Narrative is a literary form characterized by sequential action involving plot, setting and characters. The meaning of the narrative derives primarily from the actions of its characters. Rather than telling us how to live or how not live, stories teach us the same through the actions of the characters.

The purpose of these stories is theological. God uses them to teach us theology. The Bible gives us examples how to teach profound truth through stories and I believe we can use it to teach our people too.

Why did God choose narrative literature to communicate theological truth to us? Why didn't he communicate everything through essays or law? Think for a moment about these questions. Here Duvall and Hays list some of the advantages and disadvantages of using narrative to communicate theological truth.

Advantages of Using Narrative to Communicate Theological Truth

Narratives are interesting, both to children and to adults.
Narratives pull us out into the action of the story.
Narratives usually depicts real life and are thus easy to relate to. We find ourselves asking what we would have done in that situation.
Narratives are easy to remember.
Narratives portray the ambiguities and complexities of life.
God can include himself as one of the characters in the narrative. Thus he can teach us about himself by what he says and does in specific contexts.
Narratives are holistic; we see characters struggle, but we also often see resolution of their struggles. We see the entire character.
Narratives relates short incidents and events to a bigger overall story.

Disadvantages of Using Narrative to Communicate Theological Truth

The meaning of the narrative can be subtle or ambiguous and not clearly stated; the casual reader may miss it altogether.
The reader may get enthralled with the narrative as a story and miss its meaning.
The reader may assume that since literature is narrative, it deals only with history and not theology.
The reader may read too much theology in the narrative (allegorizing).

Here the pros outweigh the cons. The authors of the Bible thought the same. I agree with Duvall and Hays that God chose to use the literary device known as narrative as major way to communicate his big story precisely because the biblical narratives engage us in such a powerful way. They challenge us, interest us, rebuke, puzzle us, and entertain us. They stick in our memory. They make us think and reflect. They involve us emotionally as well as intellectually. They teach us about God and his plan for his people. They teach us about all kinds of people--good ones and bad ones, faithful, obedient ones and mule-headed, disobedient ones. They teach us about life in all its complexities and ambiguities.

Duvall & Hays, Grasping the God’s Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading and Interpreting, and Applying the Bible, pp. 288-294

Interpreting Revelation

2008-10-12T21:46:00.005+07:00

Reading Duvall & Hays' Grasping God's Word has been a fascinating experience for me. The book provides me with the latest method in biblical studies. They are reinforcing the traditional methods that scholars find to be still valid. They also present some of the more effective approach to studying the different literary genres of the books of the Bible.

Here Duvall and Hays suggest specific principles in interpreting Revelation. The following are mostly direct quotes from their book:

Read Revelation with humility. We should resist "Revelation-made easy" approaches. Revelation is not easy. People who must satisfy their curiosity or people who are unwilling to live with any uncertainty are those most likely to read into Revelation things that are not there. Beware of interpreters who appear to have all the answers to even the smallest questions. "Experts who claim absolute knowledge about every minute detail of Revelation should be held in suspicion. Reading with a humble mind means that we are willing to admit that our interpretation could be wrong and to change our view when biblical evidence points in a different direction.

Try to discover the message to the original readers. Discovering the message to the original audience is top priority with any book of the Bible, but especially with this one. When it comes to reading Revelation, the tendency is to ignore the first Christians and jump directly to God's message to us. Some people use today's newspapers as the key to interpreting Revelation. But as Keener notes, this approach does not fit well with a high view of Scripture.

The best place to begin is with the question: What was John trying to communicate to his audience?" If our interpretation makes no sense for original readers, we have probably missed the meaning of the passage. Fee and Stuart remind us of how important it is to discover the message to the original audience: As with the Epistles, the primary meaning of the Revelation is what John intended it to mean, which in turn must also have been something his readers could have understood it to mean.

Don't try to discover a strict chronological map of the future events. Don't look for Revelation to progress in a neat linear fashion. The book is filled prophetic-apocalyptic visions that serve to make a dramatic impact on the reader than to present a precise chronological sequence of future events.

Take Revelation seriously, but don't always take it literally. Some who say we should interpret Scripture symbolically do so in order to deny the reality of scriptural truth or a historical event. When they say that something is figurative or symbolic, they mean that it is not real or that it never happened. That is not the intention of this book. We insist that picture language with its symbols, images, and figures is capable of conveying literal truth and describing literal events. Picture language is just another language vehicle, another way of communicating reality. In our way of thinking, Revelation uses picture language to emphasize historical reality rather than to deny or diminish it.

Pay attention when John identifies an image. When John himself provides a clue to the interpretation of an image, we should take notice. In other words, we should pay close attention when John identifies or defines the images for his readers. We can not assume that images like lampstands would always refer to the churches. John may use the same image to refer to different things.

Look to the Old Testament and historical context when interpreting images and symbols. Revelation uses language at several different levels:

Text level: words written on the page
Vision level: the picture that the words paint
Referent level: what the vision refers to in real life

One of the most difficult aspects of reading Revelation is knowing what the images and symbols refer to. Even when we understand what is happening at the text and vision levels, we may not know what Revelation is saying, but we are often not sure what it is talking about.

The two places to go for answers are to the first-century historical context. Revelation uses much of Old Testament imagery. The book is filled with echoes and allusions to the Old Testament. In fact, Revelation contains more Old Testament references than any other New Testament book, with the Old Testament appearing in almost 70 percent of Revelation's verses. Psalms, Isaiah, Daniel, and Ezekiel make the most important contribution to Revelation.

Above all, focus on the main idea and don't press all the details. This last interpretive guideline is perhaps the most important of all. With most literary genres in the Bible, we begin with the details and build our way toward an understanding of the whole. With revelation, however, we should start with the big picture and work toward an understanding of the details. As we seek to identify the theological principles, we should focus on the main ideas.

The details of any particular section will heighten the impact on the reader but will not change the main idea. Resist the temptation to focus on the details so that you miss the main idea. Don't let the main point of each section or vision fade from view. As has been said, when reading Revelation, the main thing is to make the main thing the main thing.

*The image is from Meta-Logic Cafe'.

Duvall & Hays, Grasping the God’s Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading and Interpreting, and Applying the Bible, pp. 288-294

Common errors in word study

2008-10-12T19:14:00.004+07:00

When we study the Bible, it is necessary for us to do word studies. The aim of word study according to New Testament scholar, Gordon Fee is “to try to understand as precisely as possible what the author was trying to convey by his use of this word in this context.” We as readers should not be the one who determine the meaning of biblical words; instead, we discover what the biblical writer meant when he used a particular word. Duvall and Hays insist that we should always keep in mind the distinction between determining the meaning and discovering the meaning.

Even though we do not know the original biblical languages, Hebrew and Greek, we can still do word studies. The use of exhaustive concordance like the Zondervan NIV Exhaustive Concordance is very helpful. The idea here is to use a concordance that matches the version of the Bible you are using.

Duvall and Hays mention the most common word study fallacies that we tend to make when we do our Bible study.

English-Only Fallacy. We all know that the Bible was not written in English and even though we might think that a particular version is closer to the original, it is not the original. Here are some of the problems that may occur. First, a word in Hebrew or Greek is often translated into English by a number of different English words. The other is that we may not be aware that different words in Hebrew or Greek can be translated into English using the same English word. This error happens when we base our word study on the English word rather than the underlying Greek or Hebrew word, as a result gives us a unreliable or misleading conclusions. Looking up the word in an English dictionary would help us in understanding the word in a passage, but it will not in anyway gives us the right understanding and might lead us to a wrong interpretation. Any Bible teacher should have a working knowledge of the original language or learn to use the Hebrew and Greek tools.

Root Fallacy. We have this idea that the original root of the word determines the meaning of the word. I heard preacher who discussed the root of a word and used that meaning every time that word occurs in his sermon. Think about how silly it is in English to use the root of the word to understand the meaning of a “butterfly.” This is also true in biblical language. Just because we can recognize the root words of a Greek word does not mean we have discovered the “real meaning” of the word. It is true that the individual parts may accurately portray its meaning, but only if the context supports such a meaning. The context should give priority over etymology.

Time-Frame Fallacy. This error occurs when we try to tie a late meaning to the word and read it back to the Bible, or when we insist that an early word meaning still holds when in fact it has since become obsolete. I guess this also happens when we try to assign a very late idea to a related word that the first century Christians would not even had the faintest idea. D.A. Carson gives as an example when translators use the word “dynamite” for the Greek word dynamis to illustrate this kind of fallacy. He says, “I do not know how many times I have heard preachers offer some such rendering of Romans 1:16 as this ‘I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the dynamite”… did Paul think of dynamite when he penned the word?”

Overload Fallacy. We commit this error when we include all the possible meanings a word could have. Any preacher should not take the same words from another book and apply its meaning to the word he is studying. The word may be the same but the context determines the meaning of the word.

Word-count Fallacy. We make this mistake when we insist that a word must have the same meaning every time it occurs. For example, if we are confident that a word carries a certain meaning in seven of its eight occurrences in Scripture, we might assume that it must have the same meaning in its eighth occurrence. Again word meanings are determined by context, not word counts.

Word-Concept Fallacy. We fall in this error when we assume that once we have studied the word, we have studied the entire concept. It would be a mistake to assume that we can know everything about the church just in studying the word “church” (ekklesia). This word study will certainly give us important information but the concept of the church or any concept for that matter is bigger than any one word.

Selective-Evidence Fallacy. When we teach we usually cite verses that supports our favored interpretation and we tend to ignore if not dismissed the passages that seems to argue against our view. This is selective-evidence fallacy. This error is dangerous because we do this mistake intentionally whereas we might commit other fallacies unintentionally. Although we want the Bible to support our convictions in every case, there will be times when its message confronts us for our own good. When that happens, we should be willing to change our view rather than twist or ignore the evidence found in the Scripture.

Duvall & Hays, Grasping the God’s Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading and Interpreting, and Applying the Bible, pp. 133-135

Who's who: Arius

2008-09-29T13:58:00.004+07:00

Arius had been trained at Antioch, with which city Alexandria had long been in dispute, notably about the way Scripture should be handled. About 318 Arius accused Bishop Alexander of Alexandria of subscribing to Sabellianism (the view that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were merely roles or modes assumed in turn by God). Though Alexander had probably been guilty of no more than an incautious use of language, Arius was concerned to emphasize the oneness of God.
Unhappily, he went to the other extreme. If the Father was absolutely one, where did the Son come in? Arius explained it thus: "The Father existed before the Son. There was a time when the Son did not exist. Therefore, the Son was created by the Father. Therefore, although the Son was the highest of all creatures, he was not of the essence of God."

This was no mere exercise in semantics, but an attack on the doctrine of God and a challenge to the very foundation of Christianity, which holds that Jesus is really and truly God. Alexander, who until then had had a high regard for Arius as an expert logician, brought him to meet with some of the diocesan clergy. Alexander himself chaired the discussion. Arius defended his position, but the others (joined belatedly by Alexander) contended that the Son is consubstantial and coeternal with the Father. The bishop commanded Arius to receive this doctrine and to reject his former opinions.

Arius was not prepared to do so, and in 319 he was officially anathematized, as were all others who made "shameless avowal of these heresies." There the matter might have rested, but Arius was cunning and persuasive. The emperor Constantine had been at first inclined to dismiss the theological differences as "of a truly insignificant character," but he was less concerned about the unity of God (which he imperfectly understood) than about the unity of his empire. The churchmen persisted, however, and Constantine convened the first ecumenical council of the Church, held at Nicea in a.d. 325.

Almost three hundred bishops were present, predominantly from the East. Arianism was the major item on the agenda. Arius and his supporters were given every opportunity to make their case and seemed confident of success. To their dismay, both Arianism and a compromise viewpoint were rejected, and the council produced a creed that upheld the orthodox position. Its crucial point was its insistence on Christ's being of the same essence with the Father, rather than of similar essence (a view the Arians would have accepted). The difference in Greek centered around the presence or absence of the letter Greek letter iota (i) ó i.e., whether it should be homoousios (of the same essence) or homoiousios (of similar essence). The orthodox at Nicea, notably the young Athanasius who was an invaluable aide to Bishop Alexander, rightly saw that this was not merely a battle over a letter, but that true Christian doctrine was at stake.

At the end of the council Arius was excommunicated, but within two years he deceived Constantine into thinking he was orthodox at heart. Athanasius, who became bishop of Alexandria in 328, would not have Arius back in the city, and this became a source of unrest, fully exploited by Athanasius' enemies. Even when the exasperated Constantine sent Athanasius into exile, Arius was refused Communion in the diocese and returned to Constantinople, where he soon died. Arianism was not dead, however, but persisted (often among the highly placed) until its final condemnation at the Council of Constantinople in 381.

J. D. Douglas in Who's Who in Christian History. Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.

Presupposition

2008-09-22T23:01:00.005+07:00

Every people group of different cultures brings their preunderstanding to the biblical text they are reading. But we could not help it, it just the way we are. However, we should never allow our culture to dictate the meaning of the Word of God. But if we talk to Christians from different cultures it is evident that their understanding of the scripture varies from one another. We judge the correctness (or the wrongness) of their interpretation from our own culture (more often western which more often than not is also based in our preunderstanding).

Presunderstanding like culture is not inherently bad. But it is a baggage that we bring to the text that causes us to color our interpretation and leads us to the path of misinterpretation. We could not abandon our preunderstanding and throw it into the trash when we encounter biblical passages that contradict it.

Duvall and Hays say that what we do want to do is to submit our preunderstanding, throwing all of our previous encounters with the text, placing it under the text rather than over the text. We must be able to identify our preunderstanding and then be open to changing it in accordance with a true serious study of the text. That is, after we have studied the text thoroughly, we must then evaluate our preunderstanding and modify it appropriately in the light of our current study.

However, nobody can approach bible study in a neutral manner. Total objectivity is impossible when we study the Bible. I remember being taught at the Seminary that we could only have unbiased and truthful interpretation if we approach the text with total objectivity. As Christians we serve the living God and we have the Hoy Spirit living with us. Our relationship with God is the most important aspect when we read the Bible and this relationship is what greatly impacts our interpretation of the text.

Duvall and Hays call this inherent quality among Christians as presuppositions. Presupposition is not something we want to renegotiate as we read the text. It is different from preunderstanding that need to be changed. Presuppositions should not change at all. We have several presuppositions about the Bible itself that develop out of our relationship with Christ.

Several presuppositions about Scriptures that evangelical Christians generally hold are as follows:

First, the Bible is the Word of God. Although God worked through people to produce it, it is nonetheless inspired by the Holy Spirit and is God’s Word to us.

Second, the Bible is trustworthy and true.

Third, God has entered into human history; thus the supernatural does occur.

Finally, the Bible is not contradictory; it is unified, yet diverse. Nevertheless, God is bigger that we are, and he is not always easy to comprehend. Thus the Bible has tension and mystery to it.

Though there are other presuppositions about the Bible that we Christians have. These are the most central ones. And I agree with Duvall and Hays that “these presuppositions have to do with how we view the entire Bible and serve as foundations on which to build our method of study.”

Duvall and Hays, Grasping God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible, pp. 94-95.

Which translation is best?

2008-09-15T12:38:00.000+07:00

Duvall and Hays suggest guidelines for choosing a translation. This is a direct quote from their book, Grasping God’s Word, which I find to be readable and practical and at the same time scholarly.

First, choose a translation that uses modern English. The whole point of making a translation is to move the message to the original to a language you can understand. History teaches us that languages change over time, and English is no exception. The English of John Wycliffe’s day or of 1611 is simply not the same as the English of the twenty-first century. There is little to be gained by translating a Greek or Hebrew text into a kind of English that you no longer use and can no longer comprehend. For that reason, we recommend that you choose among the many good translations that have appeared within 50 years.

Second, choose a translation that is based on the standard Hebrew and Greek text. The standard for the Old Testament is the Biblica Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS). For the New Testament the standard text is reflected in the latest edition of the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament (GNT) or the Nestle-Aland’s Novum Testamentum Graece. Along with the majority of scholars, we much prefer an ecletic original text rather than the Textus Receptus used by KJV and the NKJV.

Third, give preference to a translation by a committee over against a translation by individual. Translating requires an enormous amount of knowledge and skill. A group of qualified translators will certainly possess more expertise than any one translator possibly could. In addition, a group of scholars will usually guard against the tendency of individual scholars to read their own personal biases into their translation.

Lastly, choose a translation that is appropriate for your own particular purpose at the time. When you want to read devotionally or read to children, consider a simplified, functional translation such as the New Living Translation or the New Century Version. If you are reading to nontraditional or unchurched people, consider the Contemporary English Version or The Message. If you are reading to people with English as a second language, consider the Good News Bible. If you are reading to a “King –James-only” church, consider the New King James. But for your own personal study, we suggest the New American Standard Bible, the New International Version, Today’s International Version, the New Revised Standard Version, the English Standard Version, the Holman Christian Standard Bible, or the NET Bible.

English-speaking people have rich resources before them to compare different translations and have better opportunity to look at the best possible meaning of a particular passage according to its context. Bible translations in other languages remain limited to one or two translations. Only those who know English could point out the nuances and the discrepancies of the Bible’s translations in their own language. This makes it necessary to teach the students to learn at least English if not Hebrew or Greek. This is one of the many struggles of a Bible teacher trying to teach the local people to interpret the Bible.

King James Only?

2008-09-12T09:54:00.002+07:00

I believe that the King James Version is the only trustworthy English translation. I found this declaration in many statement of faith I browsed in the Internet. They think that other versions of the Bible especially the modern ones are perversion of the word of God. They doggedly hold to this belief that trying to explain to them that KJV translators worked from an inferior Greek text constructed from a few late Old and New Testament manuscripts and that the later versions are based from older manuscripts that more likely reflect the original text would more likely to be ignored.

The irony here is that their fixation with KJV actually violate the intent of the translators who wanted to continue the ongoing ministry of making the Bible understandable to ordinary people.

They themselves expected opposition from those who refused to break with the tradition. They wrote:

For was anything ever undertaken with a touch of newness or improvement about it that didn’t run into storms of argument or opposition?... [King James] was well aware that whoever attempts anything for the public, especially if it has to do with religion or with making the word of God accessible and understandable, sets himself up to be frowned upon by every evil eye, and casts himself headlong on a row of pikes, to be stabbed by every sharp tongue.

So the church should always be ready with translations to avoid the same kind of emergencies [i.e., the inability to understand because of a language barriers.] Translation is what opens the window, to let the light in. It breaks the shell, so that we may eat the kernel. It pulls the curtain aside, so that we may look into the most holy place. It removes the cover from the well, so that we may get to the water…In fact, without a translation in the common language, most people are like the children at Jacob’s well (which was deep) without a bucket or something to draw the water with….

Furthermore, Duval and Hays in their book Grasping God’s Word mention two major obstacles contemporary readers are facing when they are using the KJV.

First as I mentioned earlier is that the translators of the KJV worked from inferior Greek text constructed from a few, late New Testament manuscript. Since the KJV first appeared, many older manuscripts have been discovered, and scholars contend that these older manuscripts are much more likely to reflect the original text. In contrast to the Greek text on which the KJV is based, scholars today are able to translate from a Greek text that draws back on more than five thousand New Testament manuscripts, some dating back to the second century.

Second, KJV is using archaic English words and phrases. In addition to the use of obselete terms such as “aforetime,” must needs,” howbeit,” “holden,” peradventure,” and “whereto,” the KJV is filled with out-of-date expressions that either fail to communicate with contemporary readers or mislead them entirely.

Undoubtedly, KJV was a good translation for the early 1600s because it was written for people during that time. But I think that many people who are using this version know KJV was revision. Everybody would have a hard time understanding even a page of the original 1611 version for its archaic English that used different spelling in our modern day English.

People who are using the 1769 KJV edition are unknowingly admitting the necessity to revise a translation. Thousand of changes had been made between the 1611 and 1769 version that they are literally different Bibles.

Why not continue the process of revision by drawing on the latest in biblical scholarship and using language that today’s readers can understand? Anything less seems to violate the intent of those who translated the original King James Version.

Duvall and Hays, Grasping the Word of God: A Hands On Approach to Reading, Interpreting and Applying the Word of God, 163-64.

True Spirituality

2008-09-10T00:59:00.001+07:00

I joined hands with a friend who is openly Pentecostal in starting a Bible school . I am not a Pentecostal myself but I have had spiritual experiences in my journey of faith. However, as a believers I find realy joy by being quiet and meditative. I am more comfortable when I do enjoy quiet moments with God. And I find myself preferring this than the ecstatic emotional experiences of my friends which I also do have from time to time. I just hope that people would see me as less spirit-filled because of this.

Bloesch rightly says that "true spirituality does not involve aspiring after extraordinary experiences of God or the Spirit. At the same time, we should earnestly pray that fruits of the Spirit might be manifested in our daily walk. If we serve Christ and our neighbor in love and diligently hold up the name of Christ before the world, we can have the assurance that we have indeed been baptized by the Spirit into the service of the kingdom of God. If we seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness (Matt. 6:33) even before our own happiness and security, we then have firm grounds for believing that we have indeed been born again from above, that the truth of the Spirit resides within us."

Faith must not be reduced to experience, but faith will entail experience--not only of God in his awesome holiness but also of God in his inexpressible joy and abounding love. Yet faith will always point us beyond our experiences; it will finally take us out ourselves into the service of God in the darkness of the world. The evidence of our new birth by the Spirit of God lies in the depths of our devotion to the gospel of God in our daily lives.

Donald Bloesh, The Holy Spirit: Gifts & Works, 16-7