Christian_soldiers

The End of Machiavellian Politics?

2010-12-15T16:34:00.001-08:00

PRINCES who have achieved great things have been those…who have known how to trick men with their cunning, and who, in the end, have overcome those abiding by honest principles”. The following words, written by Niccolo Machiavelli in his landmark work The Prince, are generally are taken to be the defacto standards governing a realist paradigm of international politics. The familiar saying “in politics, there are no permanent friends or foes; only permanent interests” rings true daily in the corridors of power. Deception is widely acknowledged by international diplomats and political statesmen to be part and parcel of the political game.

The revelation of US diplomatic cables then, ought not to surprise members of the political community. As a friend of mine studying at the London School of Economics quipped, “Any self-respecting academic or diplomat/defense official should know that they are the basic, core stuff of international politics. Those gossip mills and write ups - most of them marked Confidential or below Secret – are standard [fare]”. If indeed, the information that is being released are well-known secrets among those who are involved in international diplomacy, why then the political furor?

In my view, the problem is not so much the content of information that is being divulged as it is the criteria that we use in forging meaningful relationships with others – individually or internationally. In the Machiavellian world-view, the state – represented by their political leaders – is seen as the prime mover of international diplomacy and to which all other authorities that are within the geographically boundaries of the state are subservient to. The role of a diplomat then is to promote the interests of the state – at all costs – even at the expense of his own personal, inner convictions.

The idea then that one’s private opinions ought not to matter in international diplomacy is flawed for several reasons, two of which I will briefly touch on.

Firstly, ideas have consequences; to assume that political life operates only within the paradigm of economic/material interests is to severely understate the importance of ideational motivations. From jihadists to Julian Assange, financial and material renumeration seemed to matter less than their intention to propagate the superiority of their worldview and ideas. Privatized ideas have public consequences.

Secondly, as human beings, what motivate us ultimately are not the abstract ideals of nationalism or capitalism, but those that we are personally – and privately – in touch and involved with. While the advent of email and official correspondence have made the political process a technologically mediated one, no-self respecting diplomat would dare put his/her career at risk by not engaging in some form of coffee conversations or dinner diplomacy. The fact that such meetings require the presence of the diplomat suggest much more than the public face of the state is involved; the private face of the diplomat is also placed under diplomatic scrutiny – oftentimes more so than the state.

As the events of Wikileaks evinced, the cleavage between public statements and private sentiments suggest that Machiavellian politics – ostensibly state-centric – will become untenable in the long run as the number of non-state actors increase. While this is not to suggest the demise of the nation-state, it does challenge the idea that a country’s foreign policy is unequivocal – and is shared by all members of her diplomatic community. It is common knowledge among the diplomatic corp that “official statements” are often less officious – and perhaps even less veracious – than they are said to be.

Indeed if there is one key lesson Wikileaks have taught us, it is that both public and private statements matter and the greater the consistency of practice, the less the embarrassment. Perhaps it is time to rethink the Machiavellian paradigm.

Mobile Off

2010-12-10T08:07:00.000-08:00

As some of you might know, i lost my mobile phone several months ago and decided that it would be interesting to live life without a mobile connection. Obviously i got quite a bit of flak from some of my close friends and even relatives for not being contactable (of course then again, none of us are ever that indispensable - life generally goes on pretty well, and things happen whether you are contactable or not). As i've decided to retrieve my mobile line again, here are some reflection points that have crystallized over the past few months:

1. The Tyranny of Convenience: No doubt about it; mobile phones have made life extremely convenient for many of us. There were several occasions in which I was forced to use a payphone (yes, they still do exist at MRT stations) to contact my friends. Just a few days ago, i had to borrow a mobile phone from an unknown stranger (female) who looked at me as if i was from Mars on a social experiment when i requested to borrow her phone. But having said so, I do appreciate the heightened requirement of being compelled to plan when meeting with people - this includes being punctual, being true to one's words about the meeting venue. All these may sound quite trivial in nature, but in the long run, these are the things that build up trust among friends. The price of convenience is often the loss of trust.

2. Seeing, hearing and knowing. Over the last few months, i had many good conversations with close friends and colleagues and its thoroughly amazing how these conversations become much more richer when technology is out of the way. All too often we see big groups of friends eating around a table and half (if not more) of them would be busily texting away! Without a phone as a mental distraction, i found myself being able to be much more observant and sensitive to human emotions and behavioral nuances. Its amazing how much more in tune with people one becomes when one learns to tune out of technology.

3. Last but not least, the use of pen and paper (to replace my mobile phone) has allowed me to better articulate my thoughts. i guess when we are busily SMSing, we don't usually learn to express ourselves clearly. Clarity of thought is now being replaced by fuzzy ambiguities. The power of the spoken word is now replaced by the effect of the SMS-text - which tends to obfuscate more than it clarifies.

I could go on...but that will be for more private conversations. In light of the above, there are few things that I hope to continue to do:

1. Switching off my mobile phone before I go to sleep (unless exigencies necessitate otherwise).

2. Not using SMS to arrange meetings. Its either calling the person to arrange or to pre-arrange in person. Sometimes we need to learn how to communicate, not just connect.

3. No using mobile phone when I am meeting with other people (SMS is an absolute nono) personally. The other person(s) deserves my undivided attention and I hope that he/she will also reciprocate. In a large anonymous environment, perhaps i might allow myself to do so - esp if the meeting is boring and I desperately need to keep awake!

4. Phone numbers to be stored in my diary instead of phone book. over the past few months, I've learnt to memorize the phone numbers of others - esp close friends. As such, i will resist keying other's phone numbers in my mobile phones. Again its the principle of convenience: the less convenient, the more valuable.

5. Limiting my SMSes to short ones. Seriously, if there is something so important to say, then one ought to say in person, or at least take the effort to make a phone call. I am hoping to keep my SMS responses to a minimum; ideally to these five words: yes, no, thanks, ok and noted. We shall see.

Some concluding words from two of my favourite writers:

"But when technique enters into every area of life, including the human, it ceases to be external to man and becomes his very substance. It is no longer face to face with man, but is integrated with him, and it progressively absorbs him" (Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society, p. 6 1964)

"New technologies alter the structure of our interests, the things we think about. They alter the character of our symbols: the things we think with. And they alter the arena of community: the arena in which thoughts develop" (Neil Postman, Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology, p. 20, 1992)

Top Five Worldview Shaping Books

2010-09-03T09:31:00.001-07:00

Its been an extremely long time since I last blogged, been really busy with various things and guess blogging hasn't really been on the list of my priorities in a while. Was thinking about the books I've read that have shaped my worldview till this day; among those, the following five ranks as the most influential (not in any particular order):

1. The Technological Society (Jacques Ellul). I was introduced to Ellul's writings by a university professor some five years ago and this book was my first acquaintance with the French sociologist-theologian. Since then, Ellul's meditations on technology have influenced me tremendously, forcing me to re-examine the relationship and impact technology has on human beings. Indeed, Ellul's prophetic power concerning the role of technology in modern life rings true to this day, and I suspect many of us are still naively optimistic, even misguided, in our understanding of technology. This book and Ellul's subsequent book, The Technological Bluff, are two of the most important books in providing a critical appraisal of technology, especially in understanding the relationship between technology and human nature.

2. The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism (Daniel Bell). This landmark study by Harvard professor Daniel Bell on a capitalist society needs little introduction. Hailed as an "intellectual tour de force that redefines how we think about the relationship among economics, culture and social change", the book provides a magisterial and probing analysis into the heart of the capitalist enterprise and forces the reader to wrestle with some deep dilemmas that result from it.

3. Modern Art and the Death of a Culture (Hans Rookmaaker). This is the first book I've read which introduced me into the world of cultural aesthetics, in turn shaping the cultural paradigm I have of the world. Written in an highly accessible and succinct manner, Rookmaaker analysis looks at modern art in a broad historical, social and philosophical context, laying bare the present despair and nihilism of our contemporary times. An absolute gem!

4. Night (Elie Wiesel). If there is one book that had caused me tremble in shock and horror, it would be this book. From the very first lines in which the author questions the very existence and goodness of God to the terrifying conclusion in which Wiesel could scarcely recognize himself, Night takes the reader through a phantasmagoric journey of suffering, pain and tragedy and acts as a poignant reminder of one of the darkest moments in human history, that of the Holocaust. This is a book that will hopefully live on in the memory of Western literature for as long as time itself.

5. Amusing OUrselves to Death (Neil Postman). During my undergraduate days as a communications major, part of our coursework required us to engage critically with media sources and to be familiar with the blind spots and limitations posed by the media. In this case, Postman's treatment of Television provides the reader with a laser-precision analysis of the fallacies and falsities of life as portrayed by television. In today's media-saturated world, Postman's warnings must be heeded if we are to wrest and redeem our young generation from the broken cisterns of make-believe reality.

2010-09-03T09:31:00.000-07:00

Test Blog

Challenge or Caricature: Recognizing Our Faith and Who We Are

2010-02-16T02:18:00.000-08:00

Now that the dust has settled on the Rony Tan controversy, here are some of my thoughts on it:

As Christians, we need to recognize the difference between challenge and caricature. I have not watched the video yet, but I was told by friends that it caricatured the Buddhist faith in a extremely poor and demeaning light. To use a Biblical parallel, the Apostle Paul, in his sermon at the Areopagus, did not trivialize the beliefs of the Athenians, but rather he made used of their texts to challenge the Athenians' beliefs and in proclaiming the truth of the Christian message.

Pastor Rony's recanting of his mistake in public is interesting, considering the kind of absolutist spirit and rhetoric in which charismatic pastors are wont to articulate their faith in. I am not sure how the members of Lighthouse Evangelism will react; though i suspect that most of them will forgive Pastor Rony for it. To what extent they will continue to trust Pastor ROny's teachings in the future though, is open to question. One can only hope members do not start leaving in droves.

As members of the Body of Christ, let us pray that God will grant us his mercy, forgiveness and wisdom as we seek to live rightly in His world.

Why I Don't Watch TV

2009-11-01T21:49:00.000-08:00

We were keeping our eye on 1984. When the year came and the prophecy didn't, thoughtful Americans sang softly in praise of themselves. The roots of liberal democracy had held. Wherever else the terror had happened, we, at least, had not been visited by Orwellian nightmares.

But we had forgotten that alongside Orwell's dark vision, there was another - slightly older, slightly less well known, equally chilling: Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. Contrary to common belief even among the educated, Huxley and Orwell did not prophesy the same thing. Orwell warns that we will be overcome by an externally imposed oppression. But in Huxley's vision, no Big Brother is required to deprive people of their autonomy, maturity and history. As he saw it, people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.

What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy. As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions". In 1984, Huxley added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we hate will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we love will ruin us.

(Quoted from Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death)

I think Huxley, not Orwell, was right.

Mahler Symphony No 2: The Resurrection (Final Movement)

2009-09-17T08:35:00.000-07:00

Among all of Mahler's works, the 2nd symphony ranks as one of the most popular and successful work (apart from the Eight Symphony) and shows forth Mahler's view concerning the beauty of life after death. The entire piece is about 80 mins long - with the final movement lasting some 30 minutes long. The final 13 minutes or so that the choir sings is the culmination of a stunning work which explores the various themes of death, despair, and finally the resurrection.

The entry of the choir with the words "Aufer Steh'n" is a tremendous moment - breaking the silence through the soft, yet sublime words conveying the call to "rise again" and reminding us all of the temporal character of death - which will be eventually conquered by the power of the resurrection. In the first portion, the choir is required to sing in pianissimo, as Mahler weaves a beautiful narrative concerning human destiny - that the seeds of death sown will eventually bloom and give rise to a harvest of life.

Juxtaposed between the first and third parts of the finale is a message of hope - sung by the soloists - thus personalizing our understanding and appreciation of the words. Indeed, the words tell us that our travails on this earth is not without vain, that what we have fought for will not be forgotten...that somewhere beyond our worldly existence lies the promise of eternity...

"O believe, my heart, o believe: it is not lost to you! (It) is yours, yours, yes yours, what you yearned for! Yours, what you loved for, what you fought for! (trans)

Following this, the choir responses with the call to "cease trembling" (Hor' auf zu beben) before energizing the piece with its first fortissimo call to "prepare" to wage battle against death. As the music becomes more agitated, the soloists go on ring the words of freedom ("Mit Flug-eln, die ich mir er rungen, wer de ich ent schwe-ben) in which the romantic hero, putting on wings, emerges victorious from his battle against death. The choir repeats these words in a four-part fugue culminating in a magnificent cry of "Sterben werd' ich, un zu leben (I shall die, to live!) where the entire orchestra congregates upon - signifying the death of death. But this is not the end. As the final phrase goes:

"Aufersteh'n, ja aufersteh'n wirst du, Mein Herz, in einem Nu! Was du geschlagen Zu Gott wird es dich tragen" (Arise, yes, arise again, my heart, in an instant! What you have fought for Shall lead you to God!)

The above words, which marks the climax of this piece, is where the act of resurrection is completed and where the human race receives its final liberation from death. With maximum force (mit hochster kraft) - as Mahler puts it - the message of hope and redemption is sounded, carrying the work to its highest and stunning - and emotional - conclusion. Three times the choir sings "Zu Gott" (each time, higher and higher) before concluding in a perfect E flat major cadence.

I shall post a personal reflection on this piece in a couple of days.

Mahler Symphony No 2: The Resurrection (A Subjective Interpretation)

2009-09-17T08:22:00.000-07:00

Its been a long time since my last post, have been really busy and naturally blogging would have to take a back seat.

Together with the Singapore Symphony Chorus, Bible College Chorale and several other HOS singers, we'll be performing Mahler's 2nd Symphony from 18-19 Sep under the inspirational baton of the world-renowned conductor John Nelson, founder of Soli Deo Gloria Music.

Some thoughts after today's final dress rehearsal with the SSO. But before we start, couple of disclaimers:

I shall not be discussing about the entire piece - since to do so will be way beyond my reach and scope (a google search should surface a considerable amount of good indepth analysis). In anycase, i'm not a professional musician, so it wouldnt be fair for me to comment on areas that I am not trained in.

The Passing of Michael Jackson: Some Sobering Thoughts

2009-06-26T20:12:00.000-07:00

AS the world of pop gets caught up with mourning the passing of Michael Jackson, here's an excellent article from the National Review Online.

I suspect that part of the world's adoration for MJ has got to do with the TV-saturated culture that we find ourselves in today where personality (which is what TV gives us) - instead of character - is seen as as more reliable testimony of a person's true self. None of us know Mike well enough - to venerate him to this extent says more about our ways of judging than who Mike is as a person.

I would suggest we read, and re-read Neil's Postman classic, Amusing ourselves to Death - to understand the malaise of modern TV culture - in remedying our understanding of our times.

How Should We Then Live

2009-06-20T05:57:00.000-07:00

Check out Prof Douglas Groothuis book review of Francis Schaeffer's How Should WE Then Live.
http://www.denverseminary.edu/article/how-should-we-then-live/
As some of you may know, Schaeffer's writings profoundly influenced my thinking during my undergraduate days - even up to this day.
Am currently working on a paper on Schaeffer's thoughts and its relevance to the Protestant Reformation. Its due end of the month...still got some way to go.

Reflections on Art

2009-03-22T08:44:00.000-07:00

A good friend of mine recently wrote to me concerning some of her thoughts on the relevance of art to life. Below are some of my reflections:
-----------------------

A fundamental starting point in our faith is the acknowledgment that we are created in God's image and likeness and that this imprint of the imago dei within human beings gives us the potential to realize the possibilities God has for us, and to bear his image in the cultivation of God's creation. Furthermore, if God is indeed Lord of our lives, then He must be the Lord in all of life, and not purely restricted to a particular platonic, upper story domain - a problem that much of evangelical Christianity faces these days.

To quote the 17th century scientist Francis Bacon, "Man by the Fall fell at the same time from his state of innocence and from his dominion over nature. Both of these losses, however can even in this life be in some part repaired: the former by religion and faith, the latter by the arts and sciences". Francis Schaeffer adds that "for a Christian, redeemed by the work of Christ and living within the norms of Scripture and under the leadership of the Holy Spirit, the Lordship of Christ should include an interest in the arts...[using] these arts to the glory of God - not just as tracts, but as things of beauty to the praise of God". As such, the knowledge of art history is certainly a matter of no small significance!

In his book "Art and the Bible", Schaeffer has listed some key perspectives that we could use in understanding our endeavour within the field of art. He makes two key points:

1. A work of art has a value in itself. In other words, art - as with music - is not something we merely analyse or value for its intellectual content. It is something that we can and should enjoy. This is because a work of art is a work of creativity, and creativity has value because God is the Creator. Creativity is intrinsic to our "mannishness" and that art works - rightly appropriated - are expressions of the mannishness of man himself.

2. Art forms add strength to the world-view which shows through, no matter what the world-view is or whether the worldview is true or false. Similar with literature, the effect of any proposition, whether true or false, can be heightened if it is expressed in poetry or in artistic prose rather than in bald, formulaic statement. For instance, saying "its raining cats and dogs" is different from saying "its raining" - even though in reality, both statements could be use to describe the weather.

Furthermore, art has also been instrumental in shaping the face of society. While art may or may not stimulate action, it can be prophetic in reflecting reactions to social and political events, which in their turn provoke action (think of the fury exhibited by the Muslims over caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad). If as Christians, we are careless and haphazard with our understanding and expression of art, then we are certainly not being the salt and light of the earth.

Art also express and reflect the insights and beliefs of the culture in which they play their part. Art make explicit and visible the manner in which people look at things, what and how they see; art reveals both directly and indirectly what is considered to be relevant and important as well as what is not worthy of being expressed or depicted.

Art also creates the symbols of and for a society; for instance, during the time of the French revolution, the tricolore represented the ideals of liberty, fraternity and equality while Jacques-Lois David's Oath of the Horatii and The Death of Marat were also representative of the ideas of their times.

Some books that I have found extremely helpful in shaping my thinking about art within a Reformed Christian position. They are:

- Francis Schaeffer, Art and the Bible
- Hans Rookmaaker (Complete Works, 6 volumes). He's a close friend of Schaeffer and a art historian. This entire series can be found in the reference section of the Hong Kong Central Library. I know it because I found it there the other time (two years ago though:)
- Jeremy Begbie, Voicing Creation's Praise: Towards a Theology of the Arts.
- Nicholas Wolterstorff, Art in Action (this book is considerably denser than Schaeffer's work, but its brilliant, especially in its arguments for art as having a legitimate, even necessary place in everyday life).
- Dorothy Sayers, The Mind of the Maker (first-rate work examining the nature of art, particularly within literature, and its relevance to human existence, the image of God, the Trinity, free will and evil!)
- Gene Edward Veith, State of the Arts (a good primer for starters, simple yet thought-provoking)

Brahms Requiem: A Subjective Interpretation (Movement Seven)

2008-11-12T15:30:00.000-08:00

Words:

Selig sind die Toten, die in dem Herren sterben, von nun an. Ja der Geist spricht, daß sie ruhen von ihrer Arbeit; denn ihre Werke folgen ihnen nach.

Translation:

Blessed are the dead, which die in the Lord, from henceforth. Yea, says the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them

To some, the Seventh Movement may feel slightly anti-climatic, following the high notes hit in Movement Six. Why didn't Requeim end on the final C major chord played in the Sixth Movement? Well, to do so - in my opinion - would not close the loop. Like all grand narratives, a closure is necessary - and such closures are usually linked back to the beginning. Movement Seven is one such example.

Performed in F major - which is also the dominant chord of Movement One - the seventh movement is a work of self-reflectivity as the key themes of life and death, in which Requeim opens with, are brought to mind. Both the sopranos and tenors play key roles in this final episode in articulating the soulful words "Selig sind die Toten, die in dem Herren sterben, von nun an" (Blessed are the dead, which die in the Lord, from henceforth) while the altos and basses in turn sing the challenging words of "Ja der Geist spricht" (Yea, says the Spirit).

The piece concludes in a final pianissimo with the hallowed words of "Selig"...thus ending with the very same words that the journey of Requiem starts with.

A truly moving work.

Brahms Requiem: A Subjective Interpretation (Sixth Movement)

2008-11-12T08:01:00.000-08:00

Words:

Denn wir haben hie keine bleibende Statt, sondern die zukünftige suchen wir. Siehe, ich sage euch Geheimnis: Wir werden nicht alle entschlafen, wir werden aber all verwandelt werden; und dasselbige plötzlich, in einem Augenblick, zu der Zeit der letzen Posaune.

Denn es wird die Posaune schallen, und die Toten werden auferstehen unverweslich, und wir werden verwandelt werden.

Dann wird erfüllet werden das Wort, das geschrieben steht: Der Tod ist verschlungen in den Sieg. Tod, wo ist dein Stachel? Hölle, wo ist dein Sieg?

Herr, du bist würdig, zu nehmen Preis und Ehre und Kraft, denn du hast alle Dingeerschaffen, und durch deinen Willen haben sie das Wesen und sind geschaffen.

Translation:

For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come. Behold, I show you a mystery: we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump:

For the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

Then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?

Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.

Movement Six is where the entire spirit of victory of Requiem is focused upon and contains some of the most explosive and energetic movements I have come across in Western music. The piece contains several climatic moments, each one mightier and more vigorous than the preceding one - before achieving their final culmination in a stunning 151-bar C major fugue (40 per cent of the piece) of glorious praise.

The piece though starts off in E flat major at a walking beat - similar to a deep breathe before a plunge - before taking on an aura of mystery with the words "Siehe, ich sage euch Geheimnis: Wir werden nicht alle entschlafen, wir werden aber all verwandelt werden" (Behold, I show you a mystery: we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed)

Upon the conclusion of these words (barely one-fifth into the piece), the true message of Movement Six takes shape with the Baritone solo sounding the words of 1 Cor 15:52 "und dasselbige plötzlich, in einem Augenblick, zu der Zeit der letzen Posaune" (in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump) subsequently echoed in a resounding manner by the choir, signalling a thunderous response from the orchestra.

The words "Denn es wird die Posaune schallen, und die Toten werden auferstehen unverweslich, und wir werden verwandelt werden" (For the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed) are taken upon strongly in a quick and lively (Vivace) tune. This is the first climatic moment of the piece - which is abruptly ended by a short Baritone solo - creating a runway in anticipation of the next climatic moment.

"Der Tod ist verschlungen in den Sieg. Tod, wo ist dein Stachel? Hölle, wo ist dein Sieg?" (Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?) is where the full force of the orchestra and the choir are being summoned to assail and to wage battle against death and the grave. Death is made a mockery of, the grave no longer wields its power on the human race as Brahms intends for us to know. The final shout of "Holle, wo ist dein Sieg" - a mighty 12-bar fortissimo segment - is where the power of the grave is finally stopped. This is where the work reaches its highest point with a fugue of majestic power and strength.

The fugue is divided into two interconnected portions juxtaposed distinctively against one another; one, "Herr, du bist würdig, zu nehmen Preis und Ehre und Kraft"(Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power) and two, "denn du hast alle Dingeerschaffen, und durch deinen Willen haben sie das Wesen und sind geschaffen" (for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created). In my opinion, the latter is a response to the former; the former - despite its mighty voice - achieves it completion and perfection only through the "still small voice" of the latter; the former sets up the stage, the latter sews in the details; the former defines the character of the piece , the latter locks home the message that is sent; the former is a glorious anthem of victory, the latter is a gliding expression of hope. The piece ends on a high - one that is sufficient to act as a fitting conclusion to any musical piece; but Brahms refuses to allow the music to end - to do so, would be akin to Tolkien concluding his masterpiece writing "Lord of the RIngs" at the moment where Frodo throws the ring into the cracks of Mount Doom.

One final chapter awaits. A chapter that seeks to weave up the details of this wonderful musical narrative.

Brahms Requiem: A Subjective Interpretation (Fifth Movement)

2008-11-10T06:56:00.000-08:00

Words:

Ihr habt nun Traurigkeit; aber ich will euch wieder sehen und euer Herz soll sich freuen, und eure Freude soll niemand von euch nehmen. Sehet mich an: Ich habe eine kleine Zeit Mühe und Arbeit gehabt und habe großen Trost funden. Ich will euch trösten, wie einen seine Mutter tröstet.

Translation:

And ye now therefore have sorrow: but I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you. Behold with your eyes, how that I have but little labour, and have gotten unto me much rest. As one whom his mother comforts, so will I comfort you.

Movement Five was composed by Brahms in memory of his mother and it is in this spirit of love in which movement five must be understood. Bounded between grief and joy, pain and comfort, the movement opens with a beautiful soprano solo - meditative and reflective - thus defining the character of the piece. The words "Ich will euch trösten, wie einen seine Mutter tröstet" are repeated by the choir throughout - essentially underlining the message of this piece "As one whom his mother comforts, so will I comfort you". Fused together with the voice of the soprano, it is supremely moving - a poignant reminder of Christ's comfort and love for his people (incidentally where the words are taken from - John 16:22). The piece ends on a pianissimo - in silent anticipation of the glorious Sixth Movement that follows it.

Brahms Requiem: A Subjective Interpretation (Fourth Movement)

2008-11-07T20:42:00.000-08:00

Words:

Wie lieblich sind deine Wohnungen, Herr Zebaoth! Meine Seele verlanget und sehnet sich nach den Vorhöfen des Herrn; mein Leib und Seele freuen sich in dem lebendigen Gott.
Wohl denen, die in deinem Hause wohnen, die loben dich immerdar.

Translation:

How lovely are thy tabernacles, O Lord of hosts! My soul longs, yea, even faints for the courts of the Lord: my heart and my flesh cries out for the living God. Blessed are they that dwell in thy house: they will always be praising thee.

Movement Four marks a transition from the melancholic gloom that characterized the previous two movements to a work that rings forth a message of hope, redemption and joy. Composed in entirely in E flat major, it is tranquil and contains some of the most expressive musical lines I have encountered. The use of Perfect 4ths and a Major 6th to express the words "Wie Lieblich" (How lovely) are, to me, sums up the beauty of this movement and the challenge to the musicians and singers to articulate the full expression of Brahms' intention.

A short fugue "die loben dich immerdar" (they will always be praising thee) is another key highlight of Movement Four as the various voices in turn resound the richness of the joy of praising God. The slight undulating terrain of quaver notes lends its voice in expressing both the delicateness and depth of the meaning of these words. The movement then returns to its original form - but not before climaxing in a final Wie Lieblich - marking the end a a truly magnificent transition.

Brahms Requiem: A Subjective Interpretation (Third Movement)

2008-11-06T07:59:00.000-08:00

Words:

Herr, lehre doch mich, daß ein Ende mit mir haben muß, und mein Leben ein Ziel hat, und ich davon muß. Siehe, meine Tage sind einer Handbreit vor dir, und mein Leben ist wie nichts vor dir.Ach, wie gar nichts sind alle Menschen, die doch so sicher leben. Sie gehen daher wie ein Schemen, und machen ihnen viel vergebliche Unruhe; sie sammeln, und wissen nicht wer es kriegen wird. Nun, Herr, wes soll ich mich trösten? Ich hoffe auf dich. Der Gerechten Seelen sind in Gottes Hand, und keine Qual rühret sie an.

Translation:

Lord, make me to know mine end, and the measure of my days, what it is: that I may know how frail I am. Behold, thou hast made my days as an handbreadth; and mine age is as nothing before thee. Surely every man walks in a vain show: surely they are disquieted in vain: he heaps up riches, and knows not who shall gather them. And now, Lord, what wait I for? My hope is in thee. The souls of the righteous are in the hand of God and there shall no torment touch them.

Taken from the Book of Psalms, the opening lines of the third movement are possibly the most moving in this entire work as the soloist - followed by the choir - rings out the lines of " Herr, lehre doch michdaß ein Ende mit mir haben muß, und mein Leben ein Ziel hat, und ich davon muß" (Lord, make me to know mine end, and the measure of my days, what it is: that I may know how frail I am) - articulating the human cry towards God and plea towards his Maker.

The first half of this piece - right up to the fugue - primarily involves the choir echoing the words of the baritone soloist regarding the frailty of our lives and the vanity of our finest endeavors. The mood of this movement is gloomy, paralleling the previous movement; but in this case, in a much more personal and emotional manner - where the message of temporal human existence is brought to an individual level - thus achieving a greater sense of resonance with us.

But like Movement Two, the final word does not belong to death.

After pondering the question "Nun, Herr, wes soll ich mich trösten?" (And now, Lord, what wait I for?), Brahms provides a reply in a most victorious form as the movement is transformed from a grey of gloom into an anthem of joy*. This is done through the use of a series of triplets that sound the message of hope before achieving their final culmination in a D major fugue as the choir in turn resound the words of "Der Gerechten Seelen sind in Gottes Hand, und keine Qual rühret sie an" (The souls of the righteous are in the hand of God and there shall no torment touch them). With a combination of both tonal and rhythmic complexity, Brahms superbly weaves a message of remarkable hope in God's providence and protection of the righteous. This finally reaches its majestic climax in an aria that shouts out the promise "keine Qual rühret sie an" (that no torment shall touch (the righteous).

*As scholars have pointed out, the first and last movement, second and sixth, third and fifth movements are juxtaposed against one another to demonstrate the overall unity and integrity contained within the message of this work. Its notable that both the third and sixth movements conclude with a fugue - suggesting that Movements One to Three and Movements Four to Six can be seen within a broader thematical framework of death and life, despair and hope respectively. As emphasized already, the final message of this work is about life winning out over death - as seen by the messages contained within both fugues.

Brahms Requiem: A Subjective Interpretation (Second Movement)

2008-10-28T05:45:00.000-07:00

Words:

Denn alles Fleisch es ist wie Gras und alle Herrlichkeit des Menschen wie des Grases Blumen. Das Gras ist verdorret und die Blume abgefallen. So seid nun geduldig, lieben Brüder, bis auf die Zukunft des Herrn. Siehe, ein Ackermann wartet auf die köstliche Frucht der Erde und ist geduldig darüber, bis er empfahe den Morgenregen und Abendregen. So seid nun geduldig.

Aber des Herrn Wort bleibet in Ewigkeit.
Die Erlöseten des Herrn werden wieder kommen und gen Zion kommen mit Jauchzen. Freude, ewige Freude wird über ihrem Haupte sein; Freude und Wonne werden sie ergreifen, und Schmerz und Seufzen wird weg müssen.

Translation:

For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower thereof falleth away. Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and has long patience for it, until he receive the morning and evening rain.

But the word of the Lord endureth for ever.
And the ransomed of the Lord shall return, and come to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads: they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away.

The second movement is the longest movement in this work - about 15 mins - and is divided into two segments, each with its own distinctive message, but taken together, constitutes a dynamic whole that fuses the message of hope, joy and gladness against a temporal existence and the human aspiration for true redemption.

This tempo of the second movement starts off where movement one ends - in a slow, marching rhythm of D flat major that acts as a precursor to the words that follow.

As the choir ushers its entrance with the soulful words "Denn alles Fleisch es ist wie Gras", the orchestra rings a tune that is dark and mournful - a sharp reminder to modern man regarding the frailty of life. This passage is performed twice, the second in a forte tone that acts as a double reminder of sorts concerning the meaning of the passage.

Weaved within these words are the beautiful and moving words of "So Zeid Nun Geduldig, lieben Brüder, bis auf die Zukunft des Herrn" (Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord) flowing out from an expressive E flat minor key. The introduction is the performed twice again, firstly in piano and subsequently in a mighty fortissimo with hammerstrokes (reminding me of Mahler's Sixth Symphony, movement one) that drives home the message of human finiteness.

But death and decay does not have the final say - at least not for Brahms.

What comes next is an explosion of hope as the combined choir bursts into a triumphant B flat major key with the words "Aber des Herrn Vort" (Albeit, the Lord's Word). The message of Isaiah 51:11 is then repeated - as Brahms demonstrates his innate refusal to allow death to have the final say. This is seen by the fleeting words of "Wird Weg" (Flee) as if Brahms intended sorrow and sighing (Schmerz, Seufzen) to disappear as soon as they appear. Instead, the tranquility and freedom of everlasting joy (Ewige Freude) is what sustains the second movement till its climatic conclusion - with a series of crescendos and dimuendoes - before it fades off, but with a message that will be forever remembered.

Brahms Requiem: A Subjective Interpretation (First Movement)

2008-10-18T02:25:00.000-07:00

Words: Selig sind, die da Leid tragen, denn sie sollen getrostet werden. Die mit Tranen saen, werden mit Freuden ernten. Sie gehen hin und weinen und tragen edlen Samen, und kommen mit Freuden und bringen ihre Garben.

Translation: Blessed are they that mourn; for they shall be comforted. They that sow in tears shall reap in joy. They that go forth and weep, bearing precious seed, shall doubtless come again with rejoicing, bringing their sheaves with them (Psalsm 84, 2f)

The first movement is sung in a fairly slow (Ziemlich langsam) and with expression (und mit Ausdruck) as Brahms intended it to be. After a short but soulful introduction, the choir makes its entrance with the words of "Selig sind" (Blesed are...) - in which the entire spirit of Requiem is built upon.

Composed beautifully in F major, the first movement starts with a tranquility that is both haunting and comforting. The use of short spurts of crescendos and dimuendoes accentuates the soul of the piece - as if Brahms was trying to articulate the paradox of "Blessedness'. How is one able to understand and appreciate the blessing of life when faced with the certainty of death. Such is the profound nature of our existence which Requiem attempts to explore. In my opinion, the slowness of this movement serves as a form or reflection, in which the audience is challenged to see themselves "under the audit of eternity" (to quote Kierkegaard) and to foreshadow the subsequent two movements which explore the frailty of mankind's existence.

Despite its melancholic sway, Brahms ensures that the piece is not reduced to all "doom and gloom". Once again, this is a foreshadow of the latter movements (especially the seventh movement) where the joy and hope of life is masterfully composed. Hence the transformation from "Die mit Tranen saen (They that sow in tears) to "werden mit Freuden ernten" (shall reap in joy). Its as if Brahms - despite the knowledge of death and the sadness the event brings about - recognizes a higher and richer existence that takes place within the realm of life, and thus his conclusion, with a series of triplets, which captures the vitality - no matter how faint - and certainty of the message that "life is better than death".

Brahms Requiem - Some thoughts

2008-10-07T04:15:00.000-07:00

I will be involved in the SSO-SSC upcoming performance of the German Requiem by Brahms in November. For those who are not familiar with this magisterial work by Brahms, Ein Deutsches Requiem is Johannes Brahms largest work and marked the entrance of the German composer into full maturity and international celebrity.

Over the past few months, I have had the marvellous privilege to partake in the practice of this piece, together with other singers from the Singapore Symphony Chorus, Hallelujah Oratorio Society and the Singapore Bible College Choir. All this meant extra choir sessions every Monday and Thursday (where necessary) under the watchful, yet enjoyable tutelage of the SSC's residential conductor Lim Yau .

I'll be posting a series of thoughts on this piece from today till our performance on Nov 13 as part of my reflection and preparation for the performance of this piece. As Beethoven once commented, "Music should strike fire from the heart of man, and bring tears from the eyes of woman"; this is particularly true of Requiem - the deeper one reflects on this work, the more profound - and moving - the work becomes.

I shall not elaborate too much on the historical context of this piece, most historical records suggest that Brahms wrote the Requiem following the death of his mother and the earlier the loss of his close friend, Robert Schumann. Despite the uncertainty over Brahms religious views, the material of the Requiem was taken from the Bible and seeks to explore the theme of life and death.

As such, much of what i am going to post over the next few weeks would be to explore Ein Deutsche Requiem within the context of the Christian faith and how this piece - despite the author's humanist leanings - remain a truly brilliant work, and a magnificent testimony to the Christian worldview and tradition.

Life updates

2008-10-07T03:56:00.000-07:00

I have been really busy the past few months. In addition to my full time work as a civil servant, I have also embarked on my part time Masters program at RSIS in International relations as well being involved in the organization of the 2008 Stephen Tong Gospel Rally in Singapore which was held in September. In addition, my choir commitments have also increased; I will be involved in two upcoming performances at the Esplanade on Nov 13 (Brahms Requiem) and Nov 30 (Hallelujah Oratorio Society Christmas concert). Last month month (Sep 18-21), i went to Jakarta to attend the official opening of the Katedral Mesias - a megachurch designed by Rev Dr Stephen Tong and the product of some 16 years of planning and building.

My Favourite Films

2008-08-09T00:12:00.000-07:00

I like watching films, but having said so, i am very selective of what i chose to watch. My trips to the cinema are generally infrequent, about once every few months; sometimes i just borrow DVDs to watch at home (about once or twice every month).

Listed below however are some of the films that i have had the privilege of watching, and having watched them, these films receive my highest accolades, from an aesthetic and dramatic point of view. The narratives contained in these films reverberate long after leaving the cinema and the speak to the recesses of the human heart (at least for me). In no particular chronological order, here it goes:

1. Lord of the Rings (the entire trilogy - extended versions): I listed this work as among one of the life-changing books, and the film - which kindled my love for the book - is no exception. In bringing Middle Earth to earth, Peter Jackson, and his entire LOTR team - have already etched their names in the folklore of cinematic excellence. The Return of the King - the crowning jewel of this exceptional trilogy - deserves every of the 11 Oscar awards, including Best Picture. Ten, twenty years down the road, LOTR will continue to be the ultimate testimony of fantasy film-making at its very best.

2. Schindler's List - Done in black and white, i did not know what to expect when i first watched this film - except that was perched in the top 10 of the IMDB and that it was being directed by Steven Spielberg. My first viewing throughly shocked me to the core - after witnessing the excruciating atrocities committed against the Jews during the Holocaust. Subsequent viewings later, I slowly grew to appreciate the deeper, more profound theme in this film, which is "Whoever saves one life, saves the world entire" - incidentally also the movie tagline. I can only imagine the moral perplexities Oskar Schindler had to go through and the price he had to pay for his dedication and conviction to his beliefs. This film was thoroughly moving and in it, one sees both the human potential for goodness and the capacity of extreme evil. What makes us so different? The movie does not give us the answers, but the question will echo in our hearts and minds long after the screen credits have rolled.

3. Shawshank Redemption - I read somewhere on the Internet where someone wrote that if one is feeling down and devoid of hope, watching the Shawshank Redemption is one antidote that brings hope to the human heart. I cannot agree more. The film - adapted from Stephen King's work - is breathtakingly inspiring and warms the heart to no end. For those who have not watched, I shall not give away the plot; but only to say that any movie-lover who has not watching Shawshank is just a classical-music lover who has not heard Beethoven's 9th Symphony. The dialogue in this film is top-rate, and both its leading actors, Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman give Oscar-worthy performances. No other tagline in film history rings truer than this: "Fear can hold you prisoner, hope can set you free".

4. The Matrix - Any film that can generate the amount of philosophizing and discussion is worthy of its salt, and the Matrix does not disappoint especially with a supremely original screenplay that propelled the Wachowski brothers into cinematic fame. I've watched this film more than five times, at least, and it still continues to provoke me to think. The special effects are, of course, first-class...go watch this film with the full audio accessories and you'll know what i mean.

5. The Dark Knight - Last i checked, Christopher Nolan's sequel to Batman Begins was at the top of the IMDB charts - and rightfully so, at least for now. While i suspect Heath Ledger's chilling performance as the Joker and his untimely real-life demise contributed much to the excitement and the accolades, it was the deeper exploration towards human identity and morality that makes this film my favourite film of 2008. I hope The Dark Knight will win Best Picture next year, not because of any sentimental feelings towards Ledger (again i would give Ledger a posthumous Best Actor award), but because in the production of Dark Knight, and its prequel, Batman Begins, Chris Nolan has demonstrated an insight into human nature that far surpasses many works of psychologists, moralists, politicians and religious leaders. The vacillating tension between good and evil, right and wrong is marvelously articulated through the dialogues among the protagonist in the film. The capacity to connect with the heart - and the deep seated notions of morality - sets Nolan as a first-class film maker and story-teller. Nolan knows what he is talking about and this film is testament to his wisdom.

Life Changing Books

2008-05-09T23:09:00.000-07:00

Good books are like gems; in this age of MTV, Reality show and English football, blessed is the man who makes time to read, to take time to reflect and to put to use the knowledge gleaned to life.

The following five (in no order of preference) are some works that have profoundly influenced my thinking:

1. Mere Christianity (CS Lewis) - THis book needs no introduction, and so does the author. I read this book in my secondary school days (and still do so now), and was astonished by the simple yet thought-provoking ideas put forth by Lewis in this work. This book is the best example of how as human beings, the questions we all ask, to some extent can be reduced to certain basic propositions. Issues such as the existence of God, problem of evil, morality are universal themes that concern us all.

2. How Should We Then Live (Francis Schaeffer) - Was introduced to Schaeffer's works during my university days, and it was his writings that influenced and shaped much of my thinking within the academia and beyond. In How Should We Then Live, Schaeffer provides a supreme, yet concise dissectation of Western though and the cultural forces that have shaped Western thought over the last twenty centuries! Reading this book, one does not feel like one is attending a purely academic lesson, Schaeffer does not merely write, he speaks, and the message spoken more than 30 years ago still continue to reverberate to this day.

3. Reason for Being (Jacques Ellul) - This work, by Ellul, was read last year during a very tough period of life and it throughly ministered to me. Unlike many Bible commentators, Ellul (who is more often known for his social critique on technique, see The Technological Society) writes plainly, honestly and deeply on the various themes contained in the book of Ecclesiastes, challenging me to see my life within the framework of eternity and the existential complexities it brings about. It was a book that moved me to tears.

4. Lord of the Rings (JRR Tolkien) - Like many, I only started reading this book after watching the film (Fellowship of the Ring). It took me exactly one month to finish this, and after reading the last page, it was difficult to put down the book. LOTR remains my favourite film till today. Themes of friendship, courage, honesty, loyalty, deceit, evil, goodness, love, honor etc...abound in this work. And to think that i only read this book at the age of 22!

5. Hebrews expository preaching series (Rev Dr Stephen TOng) - I was compelled to listen to Dr Tong's preaching series on Hebrews (more specifically, Heb 11) in order to teach my Sunday School class about six years ago. So i listened to Dr Tong's preaching on the Internet (was too poor then to buy his VCDs), and for almost a year, taught from what i learnt, I became a Sunday school teacher and student all at the same time. I listened, i read the mandarin transcription, took notes, and taught. It was my privilege and blessing to have gotten acquainted with Dr Tong and his preaching of the Word of God.

So there you have it, four books plus a series of sermons that have changed my life. Next up, when i've got the time, would be a post on "Life Changing Films"...that's going to be interesting:)

3:10 to Yuma

2008-03-19T20:13:00.000-07:00

Just watched this movie on a slow Thursday morning at home, and was profoundly impressed by this film.

The story tells of a small-time rancher (Dan Evans, played by CHristian Bale) who agrees to hold a captured outlaw (Ben Wade, Russell Crowe) who's awaiting a train to go to court in Yuma. DUring their journey, a battle of wills ensues as both men are confronted with the reality of their ideals and pushed to the logical conclusion of their own beliefs.

The plot - despite its apparent simplicity - is marvelously rich in character content and moral tensions, all backdropped within the larger picture of the meaning of justice, and the complexities that it entails.

The battle of wills between Evans and Wade is riveting (similar to that between Hannibal Lector and Clarice Starling in Silence of the Lambs), and forces us to wrestle with the living consequences of our ideas. Unlike Silence of the Lambs though, the characters in 3:10 are more nuanced and we are compelled to see them as they are - flawed, but with the capacity for goodness and truth; fallen, but not beyond redemption.

Some reviews on this film can be found here, here and here.

Update: Year of the Rat

2008-02-16T07:21:00.000-08:00

Busy these days, now serving 5 weeks of reservist training.

Will update once i find the time and mood to do so:)

Franky Plays Schaeffer Card, Again

2008-01-02T15:26:00.000-08:00

This is an excellent review by DOuglas Groothius on Frank's Schaeffer book Crazy for God.

http://www.pearceyreport.com/archives/2007/12/franky_plays_sc_1.php

New Year Eve from Jakarta

2007-12-30T23:22:00.000-08:00

My first ever real-time blogging, and this post comes straight from Jakarta where I am currently waiting at the airport for my 9pm flight (got about 7 hours to spare).

Am here to attend Dr Stephen Tong' 50th year of Christian ministry with a group of friends. I have been attending Dr Tong's evening services in Singapore for sometime now and he is one of several Christians whose words have impacted my life immensely.

The trip was short, a mere 2D1N, but marvellously meaningful, as I had the opportunity not only to visit Dr Tong's newly built church building (which is also a magnificent architectural structure) but also the man's own home, as he graciously invited us over to his place - despite being clearly exhausted following preaching sessions in the morning.

What truly inspired me was his sharing on his Christian ministry over the last 50 years of which moved me to tears on at least four occasions. The sacrifices he had to made(when he could not return for the birth of his elder daughter, Elizabeth), the numerous times he was out there without the company of his family, the challenges of serving in Indonesia, the faith to believe in God to provide financially...all these landmark experiences demonstrated his devotion to God's calling and when it means to a servant of GOd. Moments of loneliness, prayers filled with tears, times where his co-workers could not share in a common vision, all these and more were part of the cost of discipleship and the price to be paid.

As 2007 draws to close, the time to reflect upon my own life here alone in Jakarta (yup, the rest of the group took an earlier flight back) is something that I hope will prepare me in greater stead for the year ahead. Truly it has been a tumultous year, and I can only ask God for his forgiveness for the imperfections and sins committed. To be honest, sometimes, I do not know the plans God has for me and my humble prayer is that I will be able to walk in this path - in my work, christian ministry and other matters in my life.

Pro Rege, Soli Deo Gloria!

A bLessed Christmas

2007-12-24T18:14:00.000-08:00

To all visitors of my humble blog. May your coming year be filled with joy, peace and goodness.

Book Review: The Victory of Reason (How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism and Western Success)

2007-11-29T01:20:00.000-08:00

In this rather controversial work (depending which side of the fence you are on), Rodney Stark advances a long-overdue idea, that Christianity and its associated institutions are responsible for Western progress and breakthroughs over the past few centuries. The New York Times has a longer review on this book
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/30/books/30book.html

Describing theology consisting of "formal reasoning about God", Stark puts forth the proposition that only with an image of God that is "conscious, rational, supernatural being of unlimited power and scope who cares about humans and imposes moral codes and respoonsibilities upon them" can the concept of reason, and its subsequent possibility of progress, be attained. This major premise is being revisited throughout the book, although at times the less-historically-inclined reader may be overwhelmed by Stark's historical anecdotes to appreciate the wider relevance of the historical data.

One minor problem i had however, was with Stark's notion of God - which seems to be that of a Roman Catholic Prime Mover espoused by natural theology - as compared to the God of Christianity as revealed in Christ. In addition, Stark also does not take into sufficient account the role the Protestant Reformation played in the contribution to Western success - which is a pity - since much of Western thought (especially the use of reason) can be traced back to roots found within the Reformation movement. Its a point that we should not overly dwell or nitpick upon though, considering Stark's already immense historical contribution to Christianity, despite him not being a professed Christian. His concluding remarks (quoted from a Chinese scholar) to the book are worth noting:

"One of the things we were asked to look into was what accounted for the success, in fact, the pre-eminence of the West all over the world. We studied everything we could from the historical, political, economic and cultural perspective. At first, we thought it was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next we focused on your economic system. But in the past twenty years, we have realised that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity. That is why the West is so powerful. The Christian moral foundation of social and cultural life was what made possible the emergence of capitalism and then the successful transition to democratic politics. We don't have any doubts about this."

Neither do I.

Book Review: Reason for Being

2007-10-20T07:08:00.000-07:00

Was introduced to the title of this book earlier this year at a Christian conference where the conference speaker took us on a whirlwind study of Ecclesiastes...was only a matter of time before i too got my copy of this book, written by French sociologist and professor Jacques Ellul.

To say that Ellul's ideas were original (as usual) is to do the French sociologist and professor a great disservice. With the power of an imagination and polemical rhetoric that reads in contrast to the many bland academic reports, Ellul masterfully ploughs through the various themes of God, Wisdom, vanity interspersed throughout the profound work of Ecclesiastes, that stretches and challenges our understanding of Christianity to the very limits of human logic.

Ellul demonstrates and reveals to us the many paradoxes contained within this book- and provides a fresh understanding of themes closely related and common to all human existence. The numbing tension between hope and despair is put forth brilliantly in this book, as Ellul brutally dissects our vain hopes (of progress, anthropocentric self-autonomy) but at the same time, points the way to true healing and the experience of a meaningful life.

There are tons of stand-out quotes in this book; Joyce Hanks has done a truly first-rate job in articulating the profound nuances contained in this extraordinary work, of which the following two are particularly of significance - at least to me:

"In order to be prepared to hope in what does not deceive, we must first lose hope in everything that deceives"
(This is Qohelet's whole message)

"Everything begins with the fear of God. All the rest flows from it: vanity and fleeting pleasure, as well as the recognition of the God who gives and the discernment of foolish human behavior. God has led us by the hand to the last door, which is the first door to life"

Back from blogging hiatus

2007-10-20T07:01:00.001-07:00

Actually, its more of a case of being really tied up with work and other commitments in life...things are clearing up for me - at least where my tuition assignments are concerned, hope to explore other areas of interests in the upcoming months as well as in the following year...which hopefully includes a travel trip or two (and I'm not talking about going across the Causeway:)

Well, those who know me well, know what i've been through this year...then again, its been a year where many things in my life have taken a change (hopefully for the better). In anycase, these experiences have only served to strengthen my resolve and convictions on many issues close to my heart, may God grant me his wisdom, light and grace.

Amen.

China Roars, but at what cost

2007-08-25T23:22:00.000-07:00

Below is an excellent article by the New York Times on the problem of pollution in China.

As train of "progress" continues to chug on, one must ask the question "but at what price". Let's hope it is not at the expense of our future generations.

Perhaps the following quote superbly articulated by Tolkien, through the mouth of Gandalf can instruct us in the manner of living with regards to our environmental responsibility:

"It is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till. What weather they shall have is not ours to rule."

Book Stocktake

2007-08-24T09:06:00.000-07:00

Realized that my bookshelf is burdgeoning and the number of books that I've YET to read is ever-increasing. A quick stock-take of the books that I have NOT read or have only partially read are as follows:

NOT READ
- Complete Works of HR Rookmaaker (6 Volumes)
- Defense of the Faith (Cornelius Van Til)
- The One, The Three, The Many (Colin Gunton)
- The Idiot (Fyodor Dostoyevsky)
- Crimes and Punishment (Fyodor Dostoyevsky)
- From the Shadows (Robert Gates)
- To Change China (Jonathan Spence)
- Paradise Lost (John Milton)
- The Next Christendom (Philip Jenkins) - still in shrink-wrapped condition after three months!
- Conscientious Objections (Neil Postman)

Partially read
- God, Revelation and Authority (Carl FH Henry) - 6 volumes
- Christianity and Western Thought (Colin Brown) - 2 volumes
- The Victory of Reason (Rodney Stark)
- Purity of Heart is to Will One Thing (Soren Kierkegaard)
- The Technological Society, Propaganda, Reason for Being, The Humiliation of the Word, The Technological Bluff (all by Jacques Ellul)
- Art in Action (Nicholas Wolterstorff)
- The Lexus and the Olive Tree, The World is Flat (Thomas Friedman)
- Decline of the West (Oswald Spengler)
- The Story of Philosophy (Will Durant)
- Death of Death in the Death of Christ (John Owen)
- L'abri (Edith Schaeffer)
- Wild Swans (Jung Chan)

South Koreans hostage crisis (update)

2007-08-24T01:07:00.000-07:00

Brings tears to my eyes just hearing the news that one of the woman, Lee Jee-Young, gave up her opportunity to be freed so as to allow another woman to go. This is Christian self-sacrificial love at its best. May God move the hearts of their captors to see this.

Story of Francis and Edith Schaeffer

2007-08-16T08:43:00.000-07:00

A beautiful love story that chronicles some of the early lives of Francis and Edith Schaeffer... do check out Fran's first words to Edith when the couple first met at church group=)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7468763482658772507

Ingmar Bergman, dies at 89

2007-07-30T09:15:00.000-07:00

This was the man who brought themes like existentialism, nihilism into the theatres. Read the New York Times obituarial tribute for a introduction to Bergman, his beliefs and philosophy to life.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/movies/30cnd-bergman.html?hp

Korean hostages in Afghanistan

2007-07-22T08:52:00.000-07:00

Pls pray for the safety of the 23 South Korean hostages in Afghanistan and that God will open the eyes of their captors to see that that what is being perpetrated is something that goes against every grain of our shared existence and humanity - regardless of political and religious positions.

Full stories can be found on the urls below:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6910855.stm

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/07/22/afghan.hostages.reut/index.html

Complete Works of Hans Rookmaaker

2007-07-21T09:13:00.000-07:00

This wonderful set of books are next on my reading list. Hopefully, I'll be done by end of the year.

Book Review: Sex and the Supremacy of Christ

2007-07-20T08:10:00.000-07:00

I don't usually read many books regarding relationships, but recent experiences have compelled me to at least start thinking about the meaning and value of relational issues such as sex, marriage and its impact on us human beings all. John Piper needs no introduction, and so does the title of this book (which caught my eye sometime ago).

After reading through the book, i'll have to say that this book MUST be on the shelves of all Christians (and even non-CHristians) who yearn for a honest and delightful treatment on the sacred topic of human sexuality. The book provides refreshing insights into various difficult subjects, such as the value of sex, singlehood, homosexuality - and leaves the reader with a deeper and richer appreciation of these issues.

I shall not go into much detail about the various topics expounded upon (to all Christians who are in a relationship, this book is a must!) except to highlight some of the standout quotes in the book:

- Sex is good because the God who created sex is good. And God is glorified greatly when we receive his gift with thanksgiving and enjoy it the way he meant for it to be enjoyed (Ben Patterson)

- This is what sex is finally all about: one man and one woman to the end, loving and caring for each other's bodies with their bodies.

- Outside of marriage, sex is like candy. It may 'taste' good, but it does not last, and a steady diet of it will make you sick - sick in your soul and sick in your relationships with women.

...and my takeaway lesson from the book

"In order for romance to deepen, you must touch the heart and mind of your wife before you touch her body"

Blog Update and change of direction

2007-07-19T08:26:00.000-07:00

As my previous posts suggest, i'll probably blog much more on book reviews in the future and will cut down significantly on commenting on political issues. I haven't lost interest in politics - in fact, it continues to remain one of my chief interests - except that most political trends are often a result of a larger, wider cultural and social landscape. This is where good books come in handy in articulating some of these ideas - which is where I hope this blog will provide some insights into my literature influences.

Of course, if there's an issue that i have sufficient material and originality to say something about, i'll do so... if not, I think the blogosphere is well-endowed with interesting folks to give us food for thought - as far as local politics is concerned.

Book Review: Capitalism and Progress

2007-07-11T07:32:00.000-07:00

Authored by Professor of Economic Theory at the Free University of Amsterdam Bob Goudzwaard, Capitalism and Progress provides a penetrating analysis into one of the foremost economic systems of the Western world. Goudzwaard's basic premise, which is the West's faith in progress - thus blinding its civilization to more fundamental human limitations - is both a reminder and rebuke to our modern, technocratic society which attempts to master nature, but in the process of doing so, have led to a razing of values, norms and institutions that provide its existence with meaning.

I bought this book about three weeks ago - half-expecting myself not to finish the book (as with the case with many other books), but the breadth, complexity and his ability to weave multiple threads together into a poignant argument, was simply compelling. More helpfully, Goudzwaard writes simply and honestly thus ensuring the book reads, not like a piece of academic work, but with the heart of a writer whose thoughts form the bedrock of his words.

I would recommend this book to all - regardless of their faiths - who are becoming increasingly disillusioned with the economic patterns of modern society, and are in the search for answers, and "substantial healing" in economic life.

Neil Postman on CyberSpace

2007-07-06T20:55:00.000-07:00

Media theorist and cultural critique Neil Postman (1931-2003) comments made in 1995 on cyberspace - even before the popular use of the Internet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49rcVQ1vFAY&NR=1

I've read most of Postman's books during my four-year mass communications degree course, and he does an excellent job in pointing out many of the flawed assumptions that govern our understanding of the media. His books, especially Amusing Ourselves to Death and Technopoly are a must read for all folks who hope to think and reflect critically on the media.

Book Review: The Language of God

2007-06-25T07:13:00.000-07:00

Francis Collins - head of the Human Genome Project - is among the world's most respected scientists, and does a remarkably honest job in expressing some of the central tenets of his Christian faith within a sphere that is somewhat ambivalent towards theistic belief. Collins basic premise: that "truth cannot disprove truth", or to use another term, "Total Truth" means that ultimately all truths point to God. In fact I would go on to add that the Truth is "All things being True at the same time" - or what I would term as the "eternally existential" truth.

Collins - like many Christians out there - is greatly influenced by the ideas and works of CS Lewis, which can be seen his opening chapter in which he briefly sketches his journey of faith to Christ. Nevertheless, the use of the moral argument for the existence of God - in my opinion - is somewhat difficult to substantiate, at least on an evidential plane, and while it is useful tool in expressing the "reasonableness of our faith", a presuppositional approach is necessary - if we are going to challenge today (post)modern culture.

Personally I do have several reservations on accepting the theistic evolution beliefs that Collins espouses; nevertheless, it is an area that I am not overly worried or dogmatic about - and perhaps time will change my beliefs or strengthen my existing ones. In any case, The Language of God is a book that I would highly recommend to folks whose faith is somewhat challenged by "science". As Collins sums it, "Science is not threatened by God; it is enhanced, God is most certainly not threatened by science; He made it all possible".

Book Review: The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind

2007-06-24T09:12:00.000-07:00

Written by an author who describes the work as "an epistle from a wounded lover", the Scandal of the Evangelical Mind is a must read for all Christians who yearn to understand the backdrop of the cultural crisis directed at the heart of the Church. In the book, Mark A. Noll provides an extended and thoughtful critic of the modern day church, and how the church has abdicated its role as an institution in articulating God's revealed truth - in its totality and authenticity - to a world desperate for answers.

As Noll puts it:

"The much more important matter is what it means to think like a Christian about the nature and workings of the physical world, he character of human social structures like governemtn and the economy, the meaning of the past, the nature of artistic creation, and the circumstances attending our perception of the world outsde ourselves. Failure to exercise the mind for Christ in these areas has become acute in the 20th century. That failure is the scandal of the evangelical mind"

The book is by no means the easiest of reads, and one has to have a basic level of understanding contemporary and modern society to see the trajectory of the arguments put forth in this work. However, as Os Guinness puts it in his review, "Noll's cri de coeur is powerful and superb. Those of us who are evangelicals should finish it on our knees. The character of evangelicalism is at stake in our response".

Douglas Groothius Blog

2007-06-16T03:09:00.000-07:00

Came across Douglas Groothuis's - author of the book Truth Decay- profile on Amazon and he does an excellent job in his book reviews.

That's all for now... still trying to get my Macbook all set up and going... this will be my last post on the ancient Acer laptop.

Adieu

Some updates

2007-05-15T09:22:00.000-07:00

Mentioned that I'll be posting more often, clearly that isn't the case - and is unlikely to be - at least not in the near future. Work and other commitments have really packed my schedule, so I guess this blog will have to take a hit, for the time being.

Was away in HK for a week late last month (Apr 28- May 5) with some Campus Crusade friends. Overall, it was a good trip - though shopping did not excite me too much - not when you are trying to survive on a limited budget. Also there were people all around, all the time, around the place where we stayed. Seems that the HKers are even more avid shoppers than us. Makes navigating Orchard Road a breeze, once you've mastered the art of traffic dodging along Tung Choi Street. Did quite a bit of travelling alone as well - its actually quite good, as you don't have to report to people, and also met up with a church couple whom I've known for many years, but never had the chance to speak with them in any depth. They're really great folks!

Have been also catching up on my reading these few weeks. I have completed Francis Collins Language of God and am currently working on Mark A Noll's classic The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind. ALso need to start studying for my end of year Chinese A levels examinations...so that's quite big commitment. That's all for now.

RZIM Reasonable Faith 2007

2007-04-16T08:07:00.000-07:00

Spent the weekend (Apr 13 -15) over at Melaka attending the Ravi Zacharias International Ministry's Reasonable Faith conference together with the Agora SG gang - Joshua, Darren, Mejlina, Zhenhao and two other friends - Joanne and Serene (who incidentally was my uni coursemate)...oh, and not to forget, Dave Chong - the Morpheous behind the Agora matrix.

In any case, the conference was a mentally sapping, but spiritually extremely rewarding. The daily meditations on the book on Ecclesiastes by Stuart McAllister were supremely insightful and brilliantly articulated (ok, I'm getting a bit ahead on my praise...but the three sessions on this profound book were truly well worth the cost of the seminar).

In addition, the Australian historian John Dickson - and his series of messages on Christ's historicity, divinity and the Christian faith provided much food for thought - especially within a pluralistic social context where the uniqueness of the Christian religion is often called into question.

And not to forget folks like I-Ching, Brian Thomas and LT of the RZIM team, all whose words, actions and wisdom I have come to appreciate and learn from.

A weekend well-spent.

MM Lee has spoken

2007-04-06T10:06:00.002-07:00

Which means that it is probably going to be the end of this ministerial pay hike debate. Some quick thoughts about this:

MM has always been a pragmatist which in short basically means, "what works is right" - and this has been proven more often than not over the last 40 years or so. The fact of the matter is, he gets more stuff right than wrong - and this earns him the moral authority to speak. Think about it, if a scholar-just-turned-MP would to utter words like:

"The cure for all this talk is really a good dose of incompetent government... your asset values will disappear, your apartments will be worth a fraction of what it is, your jobs will be in peril, your security will be at risk and our women will become maids in other persons' countries - foreign workers." http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/268475/1/.html

... you can be sure he'll be heavily censored (think: Wee Shu Min episode).

In other words, who says what may be more important than what is being said. MM Lee gets away with some tough statements simply because he is MM - whether one likes it or not.

Having said so, I think the government is going down a very slippery slope with its emphasis on economics. A friend of mine, who is a PSC local scholar - is now actively trying to find ways to leave the civil service - simply because the pay does not match up to what he could earn if he had work in the financial sector (he's a pretty brilliant guy, for that matter).

This means that values like "duty, honour, country" - values which ultimately safeguard the future of Singapore - can go down the drain. After all, such ideals cannot be quantified - and remain intangible - as far as our materialistic system goes.

As such, let's not be overly surprised why so many of our brightest folks leave the country. The brutal fact is: they are simply paid better. And we have been taught (or at least, brought up to believe) that money is what that ultimately matters.

"We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and then bid the geldings to be fruitful" (CS Lewis, The Abolition of Man)

An Update

2007-04-02T07:32:00.000-07:00

Its been a really long time since I posted anything substantial - well, as i mentioned earlier, the last few months have been a really difficult time for me...after separating from my girlfriend of seven years. In any case, life goes on, and hopefully the passage of time will heal some of the emotional scars...

Tthere are many things that I hope to do in the upcoming present - partly to keep busy and occupied, but more importantly, to do the things that I've always wanted to do, but somehow for various reasons, did not. This will include volunteer work at a children's home, learning how to sing (sacred music) and to travel. WIll update my activity schedule accordingly.

As for this blog, there are some areas of change that I plan to introduce. For starters, my posts are going to be much shorter (unless its an issue that I've got lots to say - and if that's the case, it won't be on this blog).

Secondly, i'll probably comment a lot lesser on Christianity and a bit more on political issues. In return, i'll be posting book reviews of Christian literature that i've read - so that folks can get a sense of my theological, academic and cultural inclinations. Again, I really don't plan to write a lot - probably a para or two, at most.

Last but not least, I do hope to make this blog a little more personal - without being over-bearing - its probably easier to update my blog this way.

Ok, this post is getting way too long... stay tuned.

CNY Wishes

2007-02-19T07:02:00.000-08:00

Would like to wish all my readers a blessed Lunar Chinese New Year.

True to the spirit of CNY, here's an interesting article by The Economist on the relevance of religion in China. Adieu Marx -

Thanks to Dr Randy Kluver for pointing this out.

Will return to blogging proper sometime in March (maybe after my birthday =)

This blog is still alive

2007-01-31T08:43:00.000-08:00

Its been a trying period for me... I will return to post sometime in February.

The Nature of Credit and the Nature of Man

2006-12-22T06:36:00.000-08:00

Since i began work about half a year ago, the nature of credit (cards) and the possible financial perils that accompany owning a card/cards is something that I have been thinking about. Now lest anyone thinks that I am about to go on a tirade against credit cards, let me just make clear that I am not. As the extremely astute and articulate Mr Wang has pointed out (come on ST, don't disappoint me) here , here and here , there are ways to "beat" the system and come up on tops (or at least, not fall into the credit leach that credit card companies are capable of turning into).

A more subtle danger of using credit cards though, is the possibility of interest-free installments. Now I am not a financial guru (I'm sure our well-acclaimed financial journalists can provide some valuable insight - in fact they do, sometimes - though rarely), so my subsequent arguments will essentially take a common-sensical/logical approach rather than an empirical, show-me-the-proof train-of-thought.

Now, as the term suggests, "interest-free installments" basically means you repay what you owe without paying additional charges on interest (assuming you pay your bills punctually). Perfectly ok, one may think - but herein lies the twist, and danger. And it has nothing to do with financial models or statistics, but the nature and psychology of human beings.

Why do I say so?

Firstly, the nature of man (this is not a sexist language) is such that we are generally folks who do not like to take on - or at least minimize - the responsibility for our actions. Before you go "huh", let me explain further.

This tendency and desire to "pay less" is a natural one - and one that credit card companies exploit to their maximum advantage. Say if Mr Tan decides to purchase a lap top that costs $1,500; in addition, he wants to buy a $3,000 sofa set as well as a 42-inch LCD TV that costs about $3,500...if full payment is being made upfront, he would immediately be $8,000 poorer, and assuming he's a salaried employer (earning about $3,000 a month), most likely he would think twice before forking out for all three items.

But with interest free payments, he is able to spread out the cost over, say, 24 months. Each month, all he has to do is to repay about $333 in installments. The cost (or responsibility) of paying for what one owns is diminished temporarily (at least at the moment of purchase); this creates a false sense of reduced liability. To state in simpler terms: If one does not feel the pinch (and pain), one does not know that he is in trouble. By spreading out the "pain" over 24 - or 48 months - it makes the consumer think that he can get away with what he wants at a lowered cost. In fact, what it only does, is to tempt the consumer to purchase more (than what he originally needs, or is able to afford) without considering the costs - and common sense - of doing so.

Secondly, human nature is such that the utility obtained from material consumptions are only temporal ones. So if today, Mr Ali commits $3,000 to a brand new state-of-the-art home theatre system and decides to pay by installments (because he earns only $1,000 a month and is unable to afford the product directly); most likely, 6 months down the road, his interest in his theatre system will wane (according to the Law of Diminishing Marginal Returns), unfortunately, his commitment to a 24-month repayment scheme does not. So the amount of utility he obtains from having the theatre system go into the negative - in short, the burden of owning a set exceeds the utility he gains from the set. Now, you know why SIngaporean car owners change a set of wheels once every five years...

These two reasons are why the concept of interest-free payments - while increasingly popular - are starting to become baits to financial destruction. To be honest, I absolutely dislike living on credit (because it is an indirect form of covetness), although sometimes this is impossible to avoid. In fact, I am living on credit now (due to my wedding preparations), the difference being - I am willing to pay for what I think is valuable (my relationship with my wife-to-be), and this value exceeds that of what money can quantify.

Some pointers to consider:

1. Remember - there is no such thing in this world as a free lunch. Whatever you owe, you'll have to pay back (if not now, then later).

2. The bank always wins.

3. If you are feeling impulsive about buying something, it is a sure sign that you probably don't need that thing. Unless its value can be qualified in other non-quantifiable ways (i.e. a professional photographer paying 10 grand for a camera knows what he is getting out of the camera), don't be stupid and jump into the bandwagon as well. A confession: One of the worst purchases I have ever made was paying $450 for a Palmtop (few years back) for appointment-jotting. Afterawhile, I decided that remembering my appointments in my head was far by the easier thing to do. Now the palmtop is an expensive paperweight.

In all fairness, using credit cards and interest-free payments are perfectly ok. The only issue is that most folks do not seem to understand the psychological logic of how these mechanisms work. So the next time you are tempted to plonk down $5,000 for a product (esp with a beaming salesgirl saying "oh, its interest-free", better think twice before doing so.

Individuality in Modern Culture: The Loss of the Self in Romanticism

2006-12-12T06:56:00.000-08:00

A superb summary by Reinhold Niebuhr on the tension between romanticism and idealism - the reason I am putting this down on the blog is because the book (The Nature and Destiny of Man) is almost impossible to obtain (unless one is willing to buy through Amazon) - mine is a borrowed copy from NTU library - and his words are well worth retaining:-

Romanticism is, in short nearer to the Christian faith and a more perverse corruption of it than idealistic philosophies. It understands, with Christianity, the unique and arbitrary character of historical existence and knows that the rational universalities of philosophical systems can neither fully contain nor comprehend the unique quality of the givenness of things nor yet themselves fully transcend the contingency and irrationality of existence. With Christianity, it consequently discovers the subtle self-deception and hypocricy of rationalistic cultures, which manage to insinuate their own particular values into the supposed impartial and objective universall values of their philosophy. (The relation of democracy to bourgeois culture for instance.) It is this penetration into the dishonesty of rational idealists which establishes affinities between Nietzsche and classical Christianity, despite his strictures against the "bad conscience" which Christianity prompts. On the other hand romanticism, at least in its fully developed Nietschean form, substitutes brutality for hypocrisy and asserts the particular and unique, whether individual or collective, in nihilistic disregard of any general system of value.

The simple fact is that both the obviously partial and unique and the supposedly universal values of history can be both appreciated and judged only in terms of a religious faith which has discovered the centre and source of life to be beyond and yet within historical existence. This is the God whi is both Creator and Judge revealed in Biblical faith. Romanticism understands the fact of the goodness of creation in all of its particularity and individuality; but it has no perspective beyond creation. Idealism seeks a rational point of vantage beyond the created forms and thus has an inchoate conception of God as judge. But the judge turns out to be man's own reason. The individuality of man is tenable only in a dimension of reality in which the highest achievements of his self-knowledge and self-consciousness are both known and judged from a source of life and truth beyond him.

The idea of individuality which is the most unique emphasis of modern culture, is thus a tragically abortive concept, which cannot be maintained as either fact or as idea within the limits of the cultural presuppositions of modernity. The social history of modern life moves from the individualism of the early commercial period to the collectivism of industrialism. The individual who emancipates himself from the social solidarities of agrarian feudalism and the religious authoritarianism of medievalism is, within a brief span of history, subjected to the mechanical solidarities of industrial collectivism. His revolt against this collectivism betrays him into the even more grievous tyranny of primitive racialism and imperial nationalism.

The cultural history of modern man gives him no resource to modify or to defy this tendency. In idealism the individual is able to transcend the tyrannical necessities of nature only to be absorbed in the universalities of impersonal mind. In the older naturalism, the individual is for a moment to apprecoate that aspect of individuality which the variety of natural circumstances creates; but true individuality is quickly lost because nature knows nothing of the self-transcendence, self-identity and freedom which are the real marks of individuality. In romantic naturalism the individuality of the person is quickly subordinated to the unique and self-justifying individuality of the social collective. Only in Nietzschean romanticism is the individual preserved; but there he becomes the vehicle of daemonic religion because he knows no law but his own will-to-power and has no God but his own unlimited ambition.

Without the presuppositions of the Christian faith the individual is either nothing or becomes everything. In ths Christian faith man's insignificance as a creature, involved in the process of nature and time, is lifted into significance by the mercy and power of God in which his life is sustained. But his significance as a free spirit is understood as subordinate to the freedom of God. His inclination to abuse his freedom, to overestimate his power and significance and to become everything is understood as the primal sin. It is because man is inevitably involved in this primar sin that he is bound to meet God first of all as a judge, who humbles his pride and brings his vain imagination to naught.

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

Postmodernism: What the Govt does not understand and what we wished they would

2006-11-24T03:58:00.000-08:00

Its been a long time since I last posted on a political topic. Nope, I haven't lost my interest in politics (domestic or otherwise), but simply because there were other matters on my mind that I felt were more important than GST Hikes, Shin Corp and Elderly care. This is not to say that these matters are secondary (it involves us all, so how can that be?), but then again, with folks like Mr Wang (whom I have met personally and interviewed for a school project), Gayle Goh (oops, she's on blogging hiatus), Loy Huichieh, Xenoboy and the grandaddy of all bloggers, Mr Brown - the blogosphere is well represented, and I do not have anything else significant to add.

But having said so, its time to crack open the egg on an area that is probably the biggest reason why the Govt is having such a hard time convincing the young that its policies are fine and dandy (well clearly, they are not - at least not all - especially the HDB-Vote-for-me-or-else-no-upgrade policy). The bigger problem - in my opinion - is that of our social culture, and that which is best described as a rupture between those who subscribe to a worldview of modernity vs. those who are influenced by the postmodern spirit. Now I have blogged about this with regards to my Christian faith - which incidentally has parallels with what we are seeing in the social and political arena.

Incidentally about a year and a half ago, I was invited to tea together with several other folks at the MAS with Dr Vivian Balakrishnan (whom btw, I do think quite highly of). Among the first questions he asked us (after exchanging pleasantries) was: What do you think is the biggest challenge the Govt has in reaching out to the young (or something to that effect?)... while the rest of the folks gave answers like "oh, they are apathetic" to "they want more freedom" etc...you get the drift... my answer was "the challenge of postmodernism". Upon my reply, I could see half the table going "huh?" (though to Dr Vivian's credit, he wasn't among the blank-faced). So I went on about how in our current society, authority is no longer taken as an absolute etc...and howthe govt is going to have a tough time convincing the young of its plans and policies.

So what are some of the basic assumptions of postmodernity? Without going to much into the philosophical and historical context, let me just point out several key characteristics:

1. A distrust of metanarratives (Jean-Francois Lyotard's famous dictum "an incredulity towards metanarratives")
2. Deconstruction. This basically means to undermine the frame of reference and assumptions that underpin the text or the artifact. Jacques Derrida would be one name that academics would be instantly familiar with.
3. Disillusionment with the notion of scientific - and social - progress. AFter two world wars and thousands of localized conflicts, terms like progress and peace are increasingly discarded.
4. Epistemological relativity. Or more crudely put "What is true for you may not be true for me, so f*** off" and stop telling me what is right - or wrong. Moral relativism is a clear example of this paradigm shift.
5. Discursive Power. (i.e. language is oppression. According to Michel Foucault , language was developed to allow only those who spoke the language not to be oppressed. All other people that don't speak the language would then be oppressed).... the list of characteristics go on...

Some of the names (which almost every self-respectable liberal arts course teaches - including NTU and NUS) often associated with this postmodern spirit include: Nietzsche, Heidegger, Wittgenstein, Richard Rorty, Jean Baudrillard, Thomas Kuhn, Soren Kierkegaard, Fredric Jameson, David Harvey, Roland Barthes and so on... - all giants of 20th century intellectual thought.

Now if our Govt leaders understand a fraction of postmodern thought, then it is not surprising why the young (esp those better-educated) are not sharing in their vision. If we just take the above postmodern characteristics as an example and apply it to what we see ard us:

1. Distrust of metanarratives - Nowhere is this made clearer than in the blogosphere almost total rejection of the Govt's perceived mode of propaganda, The Straits Times. It is no wonder why the flavour of the blogosphere is strikingly different from ST. Why should we believe what the newspaper says?

2. Deconstruction. Folks like Xenoboy, Mr Wang and Lucky Tan are experts on this field - albeit in their own different ways. What these guys are saying, or asking - in a nutshell - is basically: There's more than meets the eye. Don't fool me with your PR statements.

3. Social disillusionment - esp with notions of progress. Life is getting better, more optimistic, nah. Peace and prosperity? You must be kidding. Just listen to Mr Brown's podcasts to get a feel of this mood (that is parodied).

4. Epistemological relativity. Yawning bread's critic of the Singapore's social and political conservatism is a case in point. Why should we believe what you say? To everyman his own version of truth. To quote Gorgias, "Nothing exists. If anything exists we would be unable to know it. If it did exist and you could know it you would be unable to communicate anything about it".

5. Discursive power - the universal blogsophere criticism of the Government. It all boils down to this: To maintain the PAP hegemony of power. Everything can be reduced to this singularity. No wonder conspiracy theories abound. The mass media is just one big power play by those in power to retain that power.

Now I am sure that the Government knows of these social phenomenon and are actively trying to engage the younger, more net-savvy but less-trusting generation. The only problem is: It is barking up the wrong tree and engaging the young in the wrong battlefields. its not about having our ministers going about hip-hopping (for its image sake, I really do hope our leaders dump this outrageously horrifying idea), nor is it about blogging or even organizing more dialogue sessions. All these ideas are not wrong or bad in themselves, it is just that we are seeing things from different paradigms. I would even go to the extent to say that "even if the government has truly sincere intentions, these intentions - and their subsequent actions - will be perceived as just a grand show to rake in more money from its citizens" Essentially this is a no-win-situation for the Govt. In order then, to engage a new generation of citizens, fresh perspectives need to be adopted.

For instance,

1. Accept that you are fallible and capable of erring. Few governments and leaders would do this, but those which have done so (i.e. Germany after WWII, Pope Benedict) have often gained favour with the rest of the community. Accept that you do not have all the answers to all the problems.

2. Do not be so eager to retain power. AS Thomas Jefferson puts it, "That government which governs best, governs least". I am not saying that society should be run in a political free-for-all, but clearly, the perception on the ground is that the ruling party is simply trying to hard to hold on to power that is resorts to means that are perceived as less-than-ethical. Mah's theory of the Law of Estate Upgrading is a case in point.

3. Accept that not all social matters can be reduced to a black-white monochrome scale. There are shades of grey and other colours all around. Be willing to engage in honest discussion and be ready to take on criticism (without resorting to defamation lawsuits). Do not be too quick to judge, even the wisest cannot see all ends.

4. lead by example and demonstrate genuine understanding to the needs of the needy. The bureaucratic aura is a stiffling one. The lack of communicative authenticity sticks out like a sore thumb.

5. Do not just think about economic efficiency. Not all things can be measured by economic indicators. Yes, Maslow hierarchy of needs states that we need to fill our stomachs before we can even proceed to talk about other more abstract things; but no, man does not live on bread alone, there are many other noble and good things in life that man lives on. The spirit of capitalism must be tempered with the heart of compassion - or else we're no different from the Soviet labour camps - albeit an air-conditioned nation.

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

Ok, I have written much and much of this is from the heart - and a heavy one at that. I am in no illusions as to whether these things will and can take place. Social life is often too complex for us to carve out cartesian-like parameters in which to analyze and resolve with. Nevertheless, there is always a time and place for the first steps. As the famous Chinese poet Wen Tian Xiang once wrote, "人生今古谁无死, 留取丹心照汗青" (What man is ever immune from death? Leave me with a loyal heart shining in the pages of history). These are words, I hope our leaders can take to heart, and perhaps - in their own small way - make a significant difference of good in this country.

Spiritual musings: Moral man and immoral society

2006-11-21T07:15:00.000-08:00

Have been spending the past couple of weeks reading Reinhold Niebuhr's Moral Man and Immoral Society - a book that is ranked among the top ten religious books of the 20th century. It's a dense - but highly rewarding - read (in fact, at the time of writing I have not yet finished the book) and one has to be familiar with various political theories (from Marxist to Stalinist to Capitalism) to understand and appreciate the dialectical tension that underline Niebuhr's arguments. His basic premise: that individuals have a moral code which makes the actions of collective man an outrage to their conscience. In other words, Niebuhr argues that man is morally capable of goodness when left to himself, but in a technological civilization, he is forced - or at least, compelled - to obey the logic of a system that dehumanizes/destroys the very moral fabric of which he is endowed with.

It is very difficult to argue against Niebuhr's central thesis - parts of which resonate with Jacques Ellul's Meaning of the City . Unless one is a techno-optimist (which I am not), one will see the reality of Niebuhr's arguments in daily life. Nevertheless, i would caution against going down the Orwellian/Huxleyan route upon which a dystopic society must be the only necessary outcome. Why do I say so?

It is my belief that the kingdom of God will prevail, not in the militaristic, political or economic sense, but in a spiritual one. The victory of CHrist on the Cross of Calvary means that the final destination of the Christian is one of hope, not of despair. The re-creation of the fallen world upon Christ's second coming will not take place under the backdrop of an Armageddon war, but one that retains a spiritual continuity with the present. WIthout going into eschatological details, I would like to simply say that "the gates of hell shall not prevail against the church".

However the church will only be able to stand her ground if and only if she remains faithful to her calling as the Bride of Christ. Orthodoxy, unless backed by a true spirituality can only lead us into traditionalism - upon which the church will capitulate under the weight of the postmodern attack. On the other hand, a church without the belt of truth upon which it can gird herself with, will also crumble like a house built on sand - once the social conditions upon which it has aligned itself with become passe.

The true church of Christ then is one that bears witness to the reality of a Christian faith that is robust, realistic, authentic and ultimately, true. The demonstration of Christian love in a society that is increasingly searching for meaning, the willingness to sacrifice oneself in order to redeem others (as opposed to destroying others) and the testimony of a life well-lived - all these continue to remain hallmarks of true spirituality upon which we can live as shining stars - blameless and faultless - in a fallen world.

A confessing Christian

2006-11-03T08:34:00.000-08:00

Attended a Reformation Day Conference at First Evangelical Reformed Church at the invitation of a friend. This year's conference day title is "The Biblical Basis and Historical Rationale for Confessions". The speaker, Chris Coleborn - rightly pointed out several important principles that a confessing Christian should be aware of; these include: the recognition of our spiritual inheritance, instructing the church (particularly our young) in confessional creeds and being witnesses to the world through proclaimation of propositional truth.

I do, however, have something more - and maybe, different - to add.

Firstly, what does it mean to confess Christ?

The Protestant Reformer Martin Luther brilliantly puts it: "If I profess with the loudest voice and clearest exposition every portion of the truth of God except precisely that little point whichthe world and the devil are at that moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be professing him. Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the soldier is proved, and to be steady on all the battlefield besides is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point".

In a nutshell, confessing Christ means articulating the Christian faith within a socio-political-cultural context. By this I mean that as Christians, we need to be mindful of where we are placed in and the battlefields of our times. Francis Schaeffer rightly noted that part of the reason the church was unable to convey its message to its subsequent generations (during the 60s) was that because the church was simply living on a memory of a Christian past that was ebbing away. As a result, many orthodox churches found that they could not connect with their young; the remaining option then - instead of reforming - was to embark on the megachurch church movement path, a path that Os Guinness compares to "Dining with the Devil" (I will critique this movement in a later post).

In my opinion then, creeds - if merely treated as propositional assertions - are likely to do more harm than good, especially if they are unable to provide subjective evidence of Christian truth. This is where I do think the postmodern movement has a valid point to make, in that our understanding of truth is always relative to the subject involved. The words "I believe" that we often recite in our creeds are perfect examples of the subjective nature of our faith (that is not to say that objective truth does not exist).

Truth then, is both propositional and personal. The over-emphasis of one over the other is fallacious and will only result in disastrous consequeces. Furthermore, unless some form of qualitative distinction can be made and demonstrated by self-professing Christians, then our confession of faith (no matter how elaborate) would only mean that our words ring as hollow and carry no resonance beyond the four walls of our church.

So what can be done then? This will be the subject of my next post. By the way, I do think FERC is doing an admirable job in training its young (I was told that the kids learn the Heidelberg Catechism during Sunday School class). This is something worth emulating.

Gay Rights: A Christian Response

2006-10-26T06:39:00.000-07:00

The issue of homosexuality has been one of the thorny issues that the Christian church has to contend with these days. Sadly for the church, we have articulated our opinions in flimsy tones - that only reveal our inability to comprehend the complexity of the argument.

Below is a response from a fellow Christian blogger who is part of the e-community that I am in. While one may not agree with everything he says, at least it represents a honest answer from a Christian that knows the nature of the topic that is talked about.

For publishing purposes, I have made some changes to the names of certain groups, nationalities mentioned in the original letter (changes made are in bold).

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

First, let me say that I hold no grudges against homosexuals. Not only that, I fully support your timely call to treat our fellow friends who are homosexuals with respect, understanding and compassion.

The authorities must be vigilant to bring swift justice upon those immoral individuals who verbally or physically abused them.

Now, I accept my homosexual friends as dignified human beings. And they understand that I do so without condoning their behavior. In my humble opinion, homosexuality is immoral just as heterosexual adultery is immoral.

However, if you say that in a public forum nowadays, you are immediately called derogatory names like “homophobic”, “heterosexist”, intolerant or hate-monger.

I don’t use bad labels to publicly stigmatize people who I disagree with. But name-calling is often used to condemn people who disagree with the 'morality' of homosexual behaviour.

This is a convenient but unhelpful way of muddying the waters. Now I may be wrong but at least my views are based on principles, not prejudice or prudery.

So what’s the big deal about homosexual behavior?

You seem to argue that homosexuality is ‘normal’ or morally benign because “being gay is their choice, they have the right to choose their preferences”. That’s the “freedom of choice” argument.

But let’s think about this: Can people choose whatever sexual preferences they fancy?

Apparently not. We are not morally entitled to choose preferences like pedophilia, necrophilia or extramarital affairs, for that matter.

Why not? Because it’s wrong, even if it’s done in private.

Now, it may be objected that we are comparing apples and oranges. Unlike pedophilia, homosexual behavior may be consensual.

What’s wrong with gay lifestyle as long as “the couple truly love and accept each other”?

But again, the argument does not hold water after a moment’s reflection.

Are people allowed to commit adultery or incest “as long as they love and accept each other”?

Even a heterosexual man who falls in love with his own sister or daughter (yucks!) can’t simply marry anyone he wants. So mutual consent simply does not justify immoral behaviours.

Now, I do agree with your description of homosexual practice becoming more “normal” or publicly visible as seen in instances of gay clerics, Ang Lee movies and celebrity tabloids.

But we should not conclude that therefore homosexuality ought to be considered “normative”.

Simply put, what is “normal” (as-is) may not be “normative” (ought-to-be).
Heavy drinkers often get liver cancer (what is). Does that mean everyone ought to get drunk?

Yes, homosexuals are among us. But it doesn't follow that their behavior is a moral norm just as having Mat Rempits (illegal motorcycle racers) around us does not mean that we ought to encourage illegal races.

There is also another sense of the word “normal”, meaning “things are functioning in the way it was meant to be”. When things work “normally”, they are fulfilling what they are designed to do.

In this sense, homosexual practice is “abnormal”.Sexual organs were obviously not meant to fit in bodies the way homosexuals use them.

So we should not confuse the call to accept the reality of homosexuals among us in a spirit of tolerance with advocacy of homosexual behavior as morally acceptable.

We are quite willing to tolerate homosexuality, for the simple fact that tolerance is reserved for behavior one thinks is inappropriate or immoral.

Now don’t get me wrong. There is a lot of confusion when it comes to making such distinctions.

I am not asking people to be bigoted gay-bashers, spread hate or boycott Elton John’s music just because there are moral objections against their lifestyles. This kind of thinking would blame PEMADAM everytime a drug addict gets beat up behind a Chow Kit Road alley.

Whether Michael Jackson molested kids or not is irrelevant to the oustanding quality of his songs and dance moves, right? So what?

And whether he did it or not does not make pedophilia morally ‘acceptable’ too, does it?

Lastly, I share your hope for a period of social reform in our nation that makes for a more equitable, just and caring society for all citizens regardless of creed, skin color or economic status.

Ethnicity has nothing to do with morality. With homosexuality we're talking about something different – a particular behavior that most people find odd, unnatural and deeply immoral.

As yet, there is no confirmed biological cause for homosexuality. Even if a biological factor may contribute to a homosexual tendency, it does not determine our choices. Human beings are not programmed robots whose destiny is determined by nature.

Some heterosexuals may ‘naturally’ feel a biological urge to grope female pedestrians because they are ‘born that way”. But they are not entitled with ‘equal rights’ to follow those hormone-induced inclinations.

Why not? Not because of blind prejudice, prudery or lack of understanding.
Simply because it’s unethical.

They should still have the freedom to vote, find security and equal employment opportunity as any other citizen in our country. But no one – heterosexual or homosexual – has the right to unethical behavior.

Chang Wei Hao, a heterosexual sinner being rescued by Grace, is also an avid blogger at The Agora.

----------

Used with permission.

Right Wing Morality and the Christian Mind

2006-10-14T04:40:00.000-07:00

Another issue I have been thinking for a while - something that we have all took for granted most of the time - is the issue of Christian morality.

The problem of morality is something that involves us all, yet it remains one of the least understood (much less articulated) areas in contemporary Christianity. What do I mean?

Firstly, churches have largely forgotten what it means to be a church - that is, a community of God's people set apart in this world and called to be holy and blameless. Of course, the history of the Christian church is a tainted one (sometimes by the shedding of innocent blood), but then again, Christians (including myself) have always been less than saintly on this side of heaven (this is no excuse though for the need for repentance).

Now, what erks me is not so much that we have been less-than-perfect (sometimes even wilfully), but that the church - under the throes of modernity - have capitulated without even knowing so. In the process, we have exchanged the essence of true Christian morality for a counterfeit version, one that is shallow at best and hypocritically despicable at worst. This I will term as the Right-wing morality.

For instance, someone who does not drink, dance or smoke and attends church regularly is generally seen as a model Christian of sorts. On the other hand, a tattoo-toting, cigarette-wielding alcoholic is almost immediately discriminated against - sometimes even without knowing his name. Lest anyone thinks I am a sword-flashing angry young man of the hippie generation, let me assure you I am not. In addition, I am not against folks who do not drink, dance or smoke (and certainly not against regular church-worship) nor for those who dress and act simply because of some latest fashion fad.

However, the error of the church lies in her tendency to polarize according to cultural, socio-political trends and agendas rather than in faithful obedience to the Word of God. So instead of standing up for holiness, righteousness and truth - as opposed to profanity, falsehood and sin - we drum up categories like Conservative vs. Liberals, Communists vs. Capitalists, Right vs. left, Science vs. religion, the list goes on...

Now, I am not advocating that we cannot have categories with which to think and articulate our ideas within - except that these categories cannot sufficiently take into account the totality and reality of the Christian faith. Unfortunately, many Christians fall into the trap of aligning themselves with the dominant ideology of their times without realising that such ideologies - while containing valid moral aphorisms - actually do more harm than good as they create a false sense of self-righteousness. No wonder then, the harshest words of Christ and John the Baptist were not directed at the tax-collectors nor prostitutes, but against the Pharisees and the Sadducees.

Unless the Church of God can recover its true missiology, we'll be forever conducting our operations in the wrong battlefields...leaving the real work undone.

Spiritual Musings: Reforming a perishing church

2006-10-02T08:25:00.000-07:00

Haven't been blogging for awhile, reason being I simply just can't find the time to do so. But this is one post I must get off my chest - it is something that has bothered me for sometime this year (and perhaps the past few years).

Now those who know me will know that I come from a traditional evangelical church and that I currently serve as a Sunday school teacher in the Chinese ministry. I have been attending the Mandarin congregation since young and have found good friends in the course of the years (interestingly though, most of my best pals have left church, for various reasons I will not elaborate).

I have been teaching Sunday school in church for about four years (and in the process challenged myself to improve my Mandarin). During those years, it has become increasingly evident that the Sunday school education ministry has to reform herself or die a natural (or rather, unnatural) death. The reason being that we are unable to penetrate the hearts and minds of our Christian children, thus leaving them virtually a non-existent foundation of Christian truths upon which they are able to stand upon.

During these years, it has been my great privilege and blessing to have encountered many good Christian brothers and sisters outside of the four walls of my church - many of whom have shared similar sentiments and the burden of preaching and living out the Christian faith in a hostile world.

Nevertheless, the challenges of trying to enact changes within the Sunday school ministry go on. Over the years, I have attempted to stretch the contents of the current curricular, in the belief and conviction that my students are intelligent and are capable of comprehending deep and profound truths. Sometimes, it is agonizing to see well-meant folks speaking to these youths (some of them straight As students) in a manner that make a mockery of their abilities. Somehow, I cannot imagine the early church fathers - from Paul to Augustine - to folks like Luther, Calvin, Spurgeon, Whitfield, Jon Edwards, Kuyyper, Schaeffer etc... ever doing this. Whatever happened to evangelical theology???

Right now, our congregation is going through a difficult period due to tensions with the English-speaking congregation (for reasons I will not go into). All I can and will say is that these reasons - valid or otherwise - say more about the attitudes of the people in church towards their faith than the rightness or wrongness of the explanations themselves.

Whatever the outcome may be (of which I am probably in no position to decide on), I will continue to strive for the excellence of the Sunday school system. Already the Word of God is bearing fruit - slowly but surely. Next year, I intend to embark on a year-long (if not longer) course with some of the university folks in church where I hope to explore with them the Word of God - and its relevancy upon the world we live in. There are tough - but exciting - times ahead... there is much that is yet to be done.

The IMF Descends: A Crystal Ball gazing...

2006-09-13T03:55:00.000-07:00

By now, the story of how our local authorities here has handled public protests/demonstrations is well-known - both locally and internationally. In my opinion, getting the World Bank/IMF folks to town is a bad mistake - not so much for its security implications - but for the Singapore Brand Name (assuming we even have one).

Let's take a look at how this entire IMF/World Bank circus is generating a load of unnecessary - and unwanted- poor press from folks all around...

The Man on the Street

Let's be honest and admit that most Singaporeans do not actually care about what goes on inside those meeting halls. Transport fare hikes, English Premiership results and how-much-money-I-made-last-month are more likely to resonate with local folks rather than whether the third-world debt is reduced or not. With the IMF folks descending to town, most of us - directly or indirectly - are caught up in this. From incurring extra ERP charges to four million smiles, these 10 days have never been more exciting...

The Journalist

Coming from a journalistic background, its obvious what the news of the day is for foreign correspondents. Assuming that the IMF-World Bank meeting don't turn up any breaking news (such as erasing all the debts of the third-world countries), the general take-home news is likely to be more of the same. This is where - in my opinion - allowing protests would be useful. By allowing outdoor protests, it diverts attention from more critical issues at hand, and after all, protestors do regurtitate the same old arguments after a while. However, by prohibiting outdoor protests, the Government has only ironically opened a pandora can of worms for foreign journalists (who are not paid by SPH or MC) to have a field day with.

The Rest of the World

Now I don't have to remind you that the rest of the world does not read our beloved Straits Times nor do they tune in faithfully to Channelnews Asia. Chances are, they are likely to read The Guardian, The New York Times and Washington Post...so unless Temasek has some MOU with them, it is unlikely that their stories will sound like our local press... after all, as Journalism 101 teaches, bad news is always good news.

Next, let's take a look at what could possibly happen regarding this entire issue of outdoor protests. Below are four possible scenarios (not exhaustive):

1. The authorities do a last minute u-turn and allow outdoor protests to go on. This is what I hope will happen - for the good of our international image (as earlier mentioned). Knowing our Government, this is very unlikely to happen, because in order to do so, we'll have to first admit that we made a mistake - and we all know how our MIW don't like to do so.

2. Retaining the status quo. This means that protests will go on - indoors - under the comfort of air-condition and Starbucks (when the protestors get thirsty). Everything goes on as planned, and Singapore gets a lousy reputation, once the pen of the journalist gets itchy. Those who are not allowed to come in will go to Batam to carry out their protests.

3. Indoor protests spill outdoors. This may very well happen if 500 CSOs all turn up at the same time in their designated location. As most of these guys are not schooled in the Singapore doctrine of law and order, things may really get out of hand...

4. Boycott of meetings by CSO. This will have disastrous consequences for the organisers... as it renders the entire function of such a meeting irrelevant. What we don't need is to make news for the wrong reasons (imagine the NYT Headline: Civil Societies Boycott Singapore Meetings). Our reputation of being an inclusive society and a intellectual hub will be wrecked beyond recognition.

There's a fifth, actually, and it goes by the name of Chee Soon Juan. Now the police would probably have no problems containing him and his teammates should they embark on their protest march...but if foreign CSOs start thinking creatively, things may really get interesting...imagine a Singaporean opposition leader (CSJ no less) rallying a troop of 200 ang-mohs... that would really be a sight. Will our law enforcement officers open fire... would a second Tiananmen take place?

By the way, I do not think that the terrorism factor is a terribly convincing reason for banning outdoor protests. As Gayle Goh astutely points out, "terrorist attacks... do not occur at maximum-security occasions. They do not occur at WTO rounds, APEC summits, or ASEAN meetings. They occur on buses in London. They occur on an average workday, 9/11, in New York City. They occur on trains in Madrid. They occur when tourists least expect it in Bali." I would also like to add that should someone somehow manage to smuggle a bomb in, it doesn't matter where the explosives are detonated - Orchard Road or Suntec City - the consequences will be equally disastrous.

The more understandable reason would be the fear that riots would take place (like in the past). To that, I would say, that riots can take place in doors as well - ever heard of a stampede - and things may get even worse. Unless one considers a little pushing and shoving as a riot - which in this case, Zoukout and your average campus orientation camps are full of...

In addition, the reason cited by the authorities of the significance of such an event (in being able to generate more tourism and investment dollars) is a really bad one. Come on, if the IMF/World bank folks need duck tours like these to let them know how good we are, then our STB is doing a lousy job. If we are good enough (which I think we are), then we are good enough. An extra flower pot on the ECP isn't go to change public and international opinion; if we have too much reserves to burn, then I suggest that our authorities go upgrade the lifts at Potong Pasir and Hougang (note: I have nothing against planting flowers and trees, in fact, I think we should plant more greenery instead of mining our land to build shopping complexes...but that's for another post).

P.S. In case anyone thinks that I am against the IMF/World Bank folks coming to town, let me flatly say that I am not. Chances are, if I see Paul Wolfowitz or Gordon Brown in the Suntec City toilet, I'll smile at them and say "welcome to Singapore". Its just the way our authorities have handled the entire situation that really leaves a sour taste in the mouth.

On Exploring the Origins of Man and logical loopholes

2006-09-01T18:23:00.000-07:00

Came across an article exploring the origins of man. According to a Georgian palaeontologist, David Lordkipanidze, an early toothless human skull (supposedly 1.75 million years ago) indicated an early example of human compassion.

To quote Dr Lordkipanidze (Dr LK):

"The skull shows that an individual survived for a long time without consuming
solid foold that required heavy chewing...It is clear that he or she may not
have been able to do so without help from other individuals. It is conceivable
that we have recorded one of the earliest traces of compassion in human history"

Statements like the above ones are the reason why the naturalistic-Darwinian evolution concept continue to gain popular mileage among the masses - even though it has been philosophically and academically attacked.

To be fair to Dr LK, no where in the article does Dr LK claims that his explanation is the truth. In fact, the palaeontologist only "thinks" his explanation is plausible. Furthermore, it is possible that the report omits the necessary context upon which Dr LK statements could be construed as overly simplified. Nevertheless, I shall make do with what I know.

Now I have my doubts regarding the authenticity of such a finding and whether any meaningful inspection can be done on a skull that supposedly exist 1.75 million years ago. But even if we give Dr LK the benefit of the doubt, such an explanation nevertheless defies common sense and human logic.

Firstly, there is absolutely no way one can make the conclusion that humans are compassionate from the data of a toothless skull. Dr LK makes a logical fallacy in three aspects;

1. Equating a finding of a toothless skull with the conclusion that the skull never had teeth

2. That the diet of the individual then consists of meat-tearing activities like we do

3. That help from other individuals is an indication of compassion.

Now I have to say I don't have any problems agreeing that human beings (or individuals, as Dr LK wants to call it) have the ability to be compassionate. The fact that we are created in the image and likeness of God means that we are called to be compassionate, which etymologically speaking, is "to suffer with".

"Finally, [be ye] all of one mind, having compassion one of another, love as brethren, [be] pitiful, [be] courteous" (1 Peter 3:8, KJV)

What I do have a problem with (in addition to the fact that naturalists would use his arguments as a defensive shield, without actually taking into account that values like compassion are in fact, contradictory with the basic principle of survival of the fittest) is that the above statement by Dr LK simply smacks of poor scholarship.

Point one is obvious. Haven't heard of old age or a saccharine-filled diet before? Just because a skull is found without teeth does not mean it never had teeth. It could also mean that the person had lost their teeth.

But maybe I am wrong somewhere and this individual had no teeth to start of with - which is what I think Dr LK is trying to assert (at least implicitly) in order to back his claims.

Which brings me to point two. A major problem in the field of such studies is that researchers often extrapolate their cultural worldview backwards while in the course of their work. As such, the assumption that the skull could not eat because it had no teeth is clearly false. Furthermore, the assumption that the individual was living on a chew-heavy diet is without any proper basis (or at least it was not reported). I am sure we all have relatives (because of old age) who could swallow food. While I am no dentist, I also do think that it is possible to "chew" food with the inner muscles of the mouth.

Last but not least is Dr LK's third point, that help from other individuals is a sign of compassion. This depends on how one defines the meaning of the word help. Here is why semantic confusion reigns; and linguistic ambiguity is often covered through the popular use of word. It is probably Dr LK's intention to use to word "help" in the way it is often understood and socially perceived. Interestingly Webster's Online Dictionary, in its helpful definition on "help", does not mention anything about compassion at all...as such, simply offering assistance in a mechanical, instinctive sense (i.e. ants helping fellow ants to carry food) cannot be equated to the presence of compassion, which goes further than just offering physical assistance. You don't call someone who helps the teacher to carry books a compassionate person...

Mainstream media under siege...not unless

2006-09-01T16:37:00.000-07:00

Its been more than a year since the Acid Flask days... and folks in Singapore - from food-lovers to top-level politicians - no less our PM - are starting to take note. Blogging - the phenomena that just won't go away (at least for now) - as Hugh hewitt argues, is the next big information revolution that will change the world - in a manner no less catalysmic than the Gutenberg revolution some five hundred years ago.

Yeah, maybe Hewitt's exaggerating (after all that's how authors sell books)... but is there some truth in his words? It is my opinion that for digital media to challenge or even replace mainstream media, the following scenarios (in paralleling the present with the past) must first be seen:

1. The Presence of a Meta-Authority.

Throughout the Middle-ages, the Church (Roman Catholic) was the final governing authority. Even the coronation of a king had to be done in the presence of the Pope - who was seen as the Vicar of Christ on earth. The sanctions of the church were final- to the extent that excommunication from the church meant the straight road to hell.

In extrapolating this example to SG society, the Government plays the role of the PAPacy (no pun intended), its Bhavani commandments are etched in gold. The media cringes at the thought of being struck by (divine) lightning... as folks like Catherine Lim, Mr Brown and even Cherian George can testify to.

2. The Monopoly over Truth

Truth was what the Pope, or his representatives claimed. The papacy was infallible, its pronouncements were the propositions of absolute truth.

Similarly, the PAPacy in SG, to quote a certain senior member, "is incorruptible". Its verdict and decisions often stood as final truth.

3. The Ability to Censure

The Church had the power, or so they claimed, to excommunicate a member for various reasons. A person who was excommunicated by the church means that he was going to hell. Needless to say, thousands trembled...

The version of censorial mechanisms in SIngapore can take place in two forms: the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act and the Bhavani Commandments.

4. The Indulgence in Excesses

To make matters worse, the Roman Catholic Church (note: this does not mean all RCC churches then were equally guilty) started to indulge themselves in excesses and added extra-Biblical prescriptions to their dogma. For instance, the collection of indulgences for the construction of churches, the using of Church sacraments as a foundation of grace etc...

The NKF scandal brought to light the possibility of deeds done in the dark and the possibility of "legalized corruption" (as some critics put it). While most members of the ruling party remain generally innocent of misdeed; knowing human nature, it is not entirely impossible...

5. The Pain of the People

As the power of the Church grew, its enforcement powers grew too - to the extent that the common folk placed under the anvil of punishment, for fear of transgression. Human freedom was only allowed - as far as it did not contradict the rules of the papacy.

In Singapore, the Weberian iron-cage continues to grow; economic progress comes at a price...

6. The Character of Revolution

Finally in 1517, a certain individual - Martin Luther - nailed his 95 theses to the gate of Wittenberg Church, thus beginning the Reformation that would change church history.

The presence of such an individual as yet to emerge. From JBJ to Tang LH to CSJ, their actions have been limited.

Which brings me back to my original point:

Any media student should be able to tell you that paper was actually discovered long before

Gutenberg (by the Chinese, no less), however what catalyzed the revolution were cultural factors, not technological ones.

The birth of the Renaissance was followed by the challenge to the authority of the Church (Roman Catholic) which resulted in the common folk wanting to read for themselves the Word of God (and not blindly follow church dogma).

It is my opinion that in SIngapore, points one to three are largely fulfilled. Mainstream media - if it continues to align itself with the pro-Government stance - would find itself increasingly being isolated and Stomped out of relevancy once the dynamics of power changes

Book Review: The Betrayal of the West

2006-09-01T16:26:00.000-07:00

Just finished reading The Betrayal of the West by Jacques Ellul. Below is a book review I posted on Amazon (after discovering that no one had done so before).

Its almost 30 years since Ellul wrote Betrayal of the West, nevertheless some of his words remain prophetic - chiling to the core. Ellul's thesis is clear: The West and its ideals have been betrayed - ironically by the West itself. The price the West has to pay for progress is the betrayal of the values that brought the West progress.

Ellul writes at his passionate best in this book, as one senses his conviction and pain in articulating the decline of Western civilization. The book is essentially divided into three main categories.

In Chapter 1, Ellul starts of by articulating the various reasons the West has had a bad name over the past 200 years (slavery, colonialism etc...). Unlike postmoderns however, Ellul does not buy into the argument upon which many anti-Western advocates take, simply because those who oppose the West - rightly - are only able to do so because of the freedom that the West has originially conferred upon them.

2. In Chapter 2, Ellul enters into a magnificent discourse on the relevancy of the Left, and takes the argument into a never-seen before level with his stunning discussion of why those who are truly betrayed are those who have no means of articulating their sufferings. Terming them as the "truly poor", this group of people include the Tibetans, the Kurds and the Harki tribe in North Africa.

3. Finally Ellul concludes his treatise with his analysis of how the West has been betrayed. This takes place at three levels (and as usual, stamped with the mark of Ellul's originality): i) The Betrayal of Reason of History: The Utopist, the Geometer and the Technician, ii) The Betrayal of the Individual: The Executioner and iii) The Betrayal of Love and Freedom: The Grand Inquisitor...

In Ellul's words:

"Our speed is constantly increasing, and it does not matter whither we are
going. We are caught up in the madness and hybris of the dance of death: the
important thing is the dance, the saturnalia, the bacchanalia, the
lupercalia. We are no longer worried about what will emerge from it or
about the void to which it points...there is no goal, nothing transcendent, no
value to light the way; the movement is enough"

"Fragmentary theater and deciphered Moliere, poetry without words and music
that is sheer noise, destructured language, Lacan, Derrida, and all their
second-rate imitators who think that absolute incomprehensibility offers a way
out, when in fact we have shut the door on all possibilities and hopes, and have
sunk into a resignation that knows no future"

And my personal fav, which sort of sums up the tension of his arguments:

"The West has always claimed to be on the side of David against Goliath, and
it continues to make this claim. The difficulty is that the West is now a
Goliath, one of the might of the earth, yet it cannot but still judge itself
according to its old values"

The book is no longer in print (unless you are willing to part with good money to get it ordered). I obtained my copy from NUS library. However, a pdf version is available here. Theology Today has also reviewed this book.

The Myth of Political Apathy

2006-08-25T07:14:00.000-07:00

It is the widespread belief and saying that youths in Singapore are politically apathetic. Think of the multiple surveys conducted (whether by our MSM or otherwise) indicating that young people in SIngapore can't tell between their Education Minister from their Defence Minister (not to mention not knowing the names of their MPs). Anecdotal evidence - from our political leaders - have also suggested that the young is a problematic demographic. From sexual bravadoes to Internet rebels to political radicals, these are some of the labels pinned upon the P75 or P80 generation.

So what is the problem?

Essentially we can reduce the political rhetoric that has spilled out over the past few years to several key elements:

1. Lack of identification with Singapore's history and past (think of all those letters published in the press about how it was necessary for the younger generation to remember the achievements of our forefathers like Dr Wee Kim Wee, Rajaratnam etc...)...not to forget the bloody riots of the Communist days.

2. Deviant behavior that defines the present... yup, we are the problematic lot (see para1). Other socially undesirable acts also include: teacher-bullying, handphone thefts and blogging...=)

3. Unwillingness to root oneself to the country's future...you've got bond-breakers, Kangaroo-land-immigrants and ordinary Singaporeans who just decide to go AWOL - with the occasional congratulatory NDP message through interviews with the newspaper.

In a nutshell: The past, present and future of Singapore are under siege from the young. A person who forgets his past loses his identity; a person who loses his future loses his hope; a man who loses his present loses his value.

Taken together, these three problems constitute the reason for the Govt's general poor impression of the youths as rebellious, roguish and perhaps - even rude. (of course, this does not mean that ALL youths are like that). Add in the fact that youths do not know who their MPs are (it takes two hands to clap though...), and you've got the point: that youths are politically - and socially - apathetic, not to mention, unknowledgable, shallow and only know how to SMS (again, I have to stress that there may be many out there who are knowledgable, articulate and can SMS... folks like Gayle Goh can put many a seasoned journalist to shame with their knowledge of political happenings)

Now any problem demands a solution (at least that's the Govt point), and if youths are politically apathetic and could not care less about the country, then surely such a problem would require drastic measures, or something to that effect.

Now the Govt's ready-made solution is education, education and more education. Their tools: textbooks, TV (esp. news) and the Straits Times.

But what if the problem isn't with us (the youths?) What if the problem is with the definition of politics - and what it means to be politically engaged or disengaged?

What do I mean?

While some folks may argue that "everything is political" (from baby-making to bak chor mee), others chose to narrowcast the definition of politics - preferring to locate it within the strata of party politics etc...

Our Govt unfortunately, has elected to take part of both arguments - through the politicising of seemingly trivial social affairs (think Mr Brown podcast) while putting across the mentality that party affairs are also political spaces (think of the recent Potong Pasir walkway saga...) . Imagine Condolezza Rice telling off a municipal governor over such matters.

The micro-managing then, of macro social issues coupled with the political macro-lization of micro issues lies at the heart of many of our current social problems.

Take another example, the current dearth of babies. The "stop at two" policy introduced in the eighties was clearly a mistake as the consequences that resulted from the slew of measures taken to restrict population growth have now returned to haunt our current generation. As Mr Wang astutely points out, generally, human beings do not breed for the sake of sustaining the economy. In other words, please do not poke your nose into areas where you are not needed.

On the other hand, not knowing one's MP name does not necessarily mean that youths are politically apathetic. There are thousands of reasons why youths do not know their MPs (the most obvious one being the MP's never around). Please do not extrapolate micro-phenomenon into macro-problems. There are other problems - like the shortage of taxis - that need more urgent looking into.

Perhaps then, despite our seemingly indifference, youths do have a stake in the country (think of the thousands who recited the national pledge during WP's Serangoon rally). Its just that we don't like what we are currently seeing.

The (In)utility of Statistical Analysis: Why Statistics Don't Matter

2006-08-18T18:46:00.000-07:00

"There are three types of lies - lies, damn lies and statistics"...

The above statement is not new, it has been repeated time after time in various places and occasions; most folks would have heard of it, and those who don't are likely to agree that the statement is generally valid...

Unfortunately, few of us are willing to bite the bullet - and question these statistics - particularly politicians and journalists.

To politicians (of which I will return to later), the reason is obvious: Statistics can be manipulated and massaged to fit any form of political agenda.

To journalists, the reason is less-obvious, but no less appealing: Statistics can be used as headline news fodder to awe the average man into a conclusion that does not take into account the complexities of social phenomenon.

Now you may ask - isn't the duty of a newspaper to seek and inform the masses of the latest happenings? Why is there a need to go into detailed analysis...even so, there are experts interviewed who have given their take on the problem(s)...what else is there to know?

Which brings me to my next point: That journalists themselves do not actually realize that there is more than meets the eye - which is why statistics are used: Numerical precision replaces logic and a sense of critical observation.

Let's take a look at a case study:

In the May general elections, the PAP was voted back into power with a 66.6% total vote...according to PM Lee Hsien Loong, the percentage figure suggested "a strong mandate" (but of course, what else do you expect him to say, a weak mandate?)

The explanation by PAP folks was simple: By comparing these percentage with those in other developed countries, 66.6% is a strong vote. After all, if George Bush polled only slightly over 50%, that makes our mandate pretty good.

Whoa...hold on. Percentage-wise, it is definitely superior to the Bush's administration, but I don't remember our PM ever debating opposition leaders like CSJ, LTK or even CST on prime time national TV. In addition, I don't remember our local media critiquing our incumbent politicians with regards to social policies etc... come to think of it, I don't remember Bush ever calling Kerry "a liar" ... in fact, they shook hands after each televised debate, didn't they?

My point is then, if you want to make statistical comparisons, then you jolly well ensure that the variables are similar. As any good science student would tell you, in any experiment, one has to keep all conditions - except the tested property - unchanged. Otherwise, no meaningful conclusion can be made.

Secondly, and this is perhaps the more important point, that statistics (by themselves) cannot possibly allow us to come to any conclusion about the strength of public support. The reason is simple: There is a qualitative difference between quality and quantity.

As such, percentages and statistical reports are highly deceiving and do not take into account the complexity of human personality and complexities behind his choice. As such, whether the ruling party gets 66% or 46% does not prove whether it is doing a "good" job or not (and we should not delude ourselves to think that these figures do actually indicate anything). What these figures show, is simply, who the electorate casts his/her vote for.Period. Any attempt to extrapolate the vote into a qualitative measurement of political ability is simply shrouded in too much ambiguity.

To put it in layman terms, having 66.6% does not mean that the electorate necessarily agree that the PAP is doing a better job. If that's the case, than the 99.9% that Saddam Hussein received during the Iraqi elections would mean an amazing mandate... Whether a government does well or not is not measured by the level of support, but by other indicators.

So does that mean we should discard all forms of statistical reports? Of course not.

What it means is that as readers, we had better start to think the next time we are presented with a bunch of statistics (on whether Singaporeans are eating healthier or whether the job market is doing better). In any case, we should not swallow these figures whole sale, what is unsaid sometimes speaks louder than what is said.

On Interpreting Scripture

2006-08-10T07:05:00.000-07:00

The interpretation of Scripture is fundamental to our Christian faith. The rallying cry of the Reformation was Sola Scriptura, among others. Several hundred years later, under the influence of the postmodern, poststructuralist movement upon which human language is argued to be contingent upon the social-cultural factors of its current epoch, how then can the Christian meaningfully interpret the Bible - a book that was written several thousands of years ago.
Below is a long, but excellent reply from a friend - who is about to embark on a degree course in law. Emphasis mine.
----------------
Used with permission.

All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto
all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed,
for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture
or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the
ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of
them. - Westminster Confession of Faith, I:VII

Your question deals with the topic of what is traditionally termed "the perspicuity of Scripture", which deals with the clarity of the Scriptures. It is an interesting question to ask, after all, if even the most capable exegetes need commentaries, numerous greek/hebrew texts, and the other literature of the time in order to interpret particular portions of Scripture, what makes the layman capable of doing the job on his own? Furthermore, if even exegetes can make mistakes (and they have), how can the layman even suppose himself to embark on the job of figuring out what the Scriptures say? Analytic philosophers make it a full time job to interpret what their own peers are saying, and they exist in a similar time period! How much more the difficulties
of us people who try to read a text that was written 2000 and more years ago, in a socio-political-rhetorical context that is so vastly different from ours? Taking a good illustration, Alisdair MacIntyre, in "Whose Justice? Which Rationality?" makes an excellent case on your side by referring to translations of the Homeric plays that miss the point altogether, and often create a worldview that is off from that that is Homer's worldview, by no fault of the translator, but our socio-political-rhetorical context that causes us to interpret it in a manner different from that of Homer's worldview. Indeed, it seems that the only way we can plumb the depths of any writing whatsoever (and especially literary ones), is to first read the available resources that will first unravel the linguistic context of the time.

Looking at it, it may just seem as if this whole doctrine of the Priesthood of Believers in regards to the interpretation of Scripture is just a liberal notion of placing autonomy in the individual, instead of subjecting the individual to the relevant authority, as it is more rational to do.

I am sympathetic with your laments, especially in light of all the weird interpretations that people sometimes give of individual texts in the name of 'exegesis', which, upon closer examination, really turns out to be eisegesis. People who do not know their own worldview often uncritically apply it to their reading of Scripture, distorting its meaning many a time. Perhaps the most obvious example of this is how some people turn to the Scriptures and ask "how does it speak to me?", and, in the process, ignore the context of the text completely. All this done with the sanction of this hallowed doctrine of the reformation.

While I sympathize which much of your feelings, I will beg to differ because a proper understanding of the doctrine and the role of tradition defeat it. At the same time, I will also seek to establish a position that will attempt to meet our concerns for accurate exegesis with the role of the layman in interpretation, and necessary practical steps. I will then end by talking about why the doctrine of the Perspicuity of Scripture is one that we must continue to guard.

Some prolegomenal thoughts:The doctrine of the Priesthood of Believers with regards to believers reading the Scriptures for themselves is deeply linked with the doctrine of sola scriptura. This is because the belief that believers should interpret the sciptures for themselves is rooted in the belief that the only ultimate authority that should bind the Christian, is the Scriptures, and therefore, his own personal conviction of what the Scriptures say is what is the most important. It follows then that if he does not accept the ultimate authority of any but the Scriptures, he may (but not necessarily) start with the premises that external material is only secondary to the primary text of the Scriptures.

On Tradition

We will progress from here by considering that a doctrine of sola scriptura does not cause the believer to read the scripture in a vacuumes manner, and to make a case that the doctrine of sola scriptura encompasses with it the role of tradition, and the regula Fidei, so that it is possible to assert that the believer may hold to a doctrine of sola scriptura, but still be bound by tradition, so that we may assert that the exercise of the Perspicuity of Scripture does not open a pandora's box of arbitrary interpretations. The doctrine of sola scriptura affirms that the ultimate authority for faith and practice is to be vested in the Scriptures alone. This assertion, however, does not preclude the use of materials in a secondary manner in order to gain understanding of what the Scriptures mean to say. That defeats the notion that the Priesthood of Believers and sola scriptura conceptually serve to encourage the growth of arbitrary interpretations apart from the tradition of the Church, and with it, the resources that have been written by theologians and exegetes across time. Contrary to that, the Reformers have always likewise affirmed the importance of the regula fidei, and Keith Mathison builds a strong case for this in "The Shape of Sola Scriptura". I quote a summary portion:

"In fact, the position the magisterial Reformers maintained was essentially that
which was held in the early Church and throughout most of the medieval
Church - that Scripture was the sole source of revelation; that it was
the final authoritative norm of doctrine and practice; and that it was
to be interpreted according to the regula fidei." (p 85)

In sum, the issue that the Priesthood of Believers and sola scriptura confront is that of authority, and not interpretation. For the latter, the tradition of the Church has always been asserted to be a guide. So does this mean, that in fact, the tradition is the authoritative source, and not Scripture? Certainly not! Luther's own life experience exemplifies how the dual propositions of the Scripture's ultimate authority, and tradition's interpretative authority, may be harmonized, and how the latter would not defeat the proposition of the former. While constantly remaining a child of the Roman Catholic Church (he always meant to reform the Church, not break from it), he constantly quoted the Church Fathers in order to draw the Roman Catholic Church back to its roots. He argued that it was the Church that had strayed from the regula fidei, and that it needed to get back in line. At the same time, it is this same reformer that asserted at the Diet of Worms that his soul was bound only to the Word of God. Calvin too, was extremely well versed with the works of the Patriarchs. The reader will be directed to Alister McGrath's Reformation Thought: An Introduction for a deeper study.

Scripture and tradition are not opposed to one another, but the latter guides the former.

It may be responded, that the ordinary Christian does not possess such a tradition by him, as he does not refer to the large treasure troves of literature that have already been established. That they do not have the books and material, I may grant, but it does not follow that the reader of the Scriptures do not have the tradition of the church for lack of the books. As the Word is preached from the pulpit by competent ministers of the Word (we assume competence from ministers in general), the tradition of the Church is thereby taught to the Christian in the pews. The worldview of the Scriptures is thus expounded to them, and that serves as the regula fidei even as the Christian does his daily devotionals. It is not reasonable to demand a complete passing down of the tradition since I doubt any theologian or exegete will lay claim to having an exhaustive mastery of their own tradition. The question then, is the degree to which this tradition has been passed on. This point is recognized even by the laymen in the pews. We have labels for young Christians who are not familiar with the precepts of the faith, and 'old birds' who have been around for ages. Some of these are elders who have been in the nurture of the Church all their lives, and can boast of having been molded by countless sermons, and a lifetime of reflection. Even by the laymen, it is accepted that the exegesis of the young Christian will not be as profound or insightful as that of the 'old bird'. To make it more relevant to the issue at hand, we accept that the young Christians will make error in interpretation of the Scriptures, but have less patience if an elder makes a similar mistake, We expect that the elder would be well-versed in the Scriptures and the tradition! It is not true to assert that the only meaningful (not in an experiential sense, but in a sense of ability to gain truth) transmission of knowledge of the Scriptures is through personal reference materials.A Proper Model?What the proper position is, I will assert, is a return to the historical doctrines of the Priesthood of Believers (in the sense you mean it), and the affirmation of the doctrines of the Perspicuity of Scripture and sola scriptura.

As Keith Mathieson masterfully argues in "The Shape of Sola Scriptura", the proper doctrine of sola scriptura is one that pays careful attention to tradition, and does not operate apart from it. The Christian should always do his exegesis in light of tradition. This will manifest itself in several ways. In particular, we may mention: the referral to early creeds, the attention to exegesis done of texts throughout the passage of time, as well as referral to more mature Christians who are familiar with the orthodox tradition. Being in sync with tradition is an important factor that will ensure that one's reading of the Scriptures are not arbitrary.

Such endeavours at exegesis will only be meaningful though if there was a similar affirmation of the perspicuity of Scripture. As such, It is necessary to assert that the Scriptures can be communicated meaningfully.

On Clarity

The Westminster Confession sets forth the doctrine of clarity rather carefully, and it is my opinion that its carefulness serves us well in what we need to affirm and what we are not affirming in that doctrine. Firstly, we need to be realistic and affirm that "all things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all". We have to recognize there are difficult passages, such as those that talk about baptism for the dead, Christ's preaching in hell etc etc. Apart from that, there are less difficult passages that are still difficult, in that Christians throughout the ages have differed on their interpretation. We need only to think about the numerous denominations and beliefs there are in the Church to gain a sense of what these are. However, our doctrine affirms most emphatically that "yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed, for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them". It is the things of importance of which clarity is asserted. Of which we may mention the doctrines of Christ, the doctrines of God, etc etc.

Our doctrine affirms that the things of importance are clearly shown in Scripture, so that even the unlearned may know them.

However, the affirmation of our doctrine that there are difficulties in the Scripture also compel us to refer to the great wisdom of tradition that we have inherited, and to learn from the Scriptures with the aid of the diligent use of the grammatio-historical method, other commentaries, etc.

Why is it important for one to affirm an optimistic view of our ability to understand the Scriptures? This is not an exhaustive approach, but here are some thoughts:

1) If we could not understand the Scriptures, the purpose for which it was given would be thwarted.

One of the important affirmations of the Reformed faith is that God's will is always done. A pessimistic view of interpretation would have problems with this, because it seems that while God has given His Word to man, man cannot understand it. Unless one takes an esoteric view of the manner in which one receives affirmation from the Scriptures (and I doubt this is what you are affirming), man's inability to understand revelation thwarts the purpose of God to give His Word to man. I can imagine you laying a caveat by saying that you are not adopting a pessimistic view of interpretation, but only affirming it insofar as unlearned men are reading it. But how about regions in which there are no competent teachers of the Word? Are they unable to gain knowledge unto salvation for this lack? Indeed, the testimony of the Church is that the truth of the Scriptures unto salvation may be gained even by men who do not have the resources we do. One only need to think of missionaries to difficult regions such as Southeast Asia and Africa.

2) If we could not understand the Scriptures, the laymen would be dissuaded from seeking to understand its content and apply it.

I believe that one of the important things the Church needs in order to fulfill her cultural mandate, is first to understand her own culture before seeking out to inculcate the values of Christ in the marketplace. With such a pessimistic view of interpretation, the laymen would be deterred from attempting to understand the Scriptures and to understand her truth, let alone to seek to establish these values elsewhere. An optimistic view of interpretation (properly set out as attempted above) is vital to encouraging people to read the Scriptures and to apply it in their daily lives. Worse, a pessimistic view might leave an illusion that the Scriptures are too 'cheem', and even when it is preached and explained, people will have an automatic mental barrier, such as occurs when people talk about philosophy to laymen.Some final thoughtsActually, I really empathize with your concern for proper interpretation. I want to affirm that I believe that the teaching ministry of the Church is of great importance, and we should give this ministry its due importance instead of allowing an individualistic idea to creep in that denies the importance of the teaching ministry. But I also want to affirm that the reason why I hold this, is because teachers of the faith are expected to dig into the Scriptures with greater effort, and to convey its meaning in greater depth. We may not expect the same standard from laymen. It is the teachers that are expected to convey the tradition of the church, with the sanction of the church. This tradition that is passed on becomes the regula fidei which governs the interpretations of laymen.

Copyrights.

New Standards for Buses

2006-07-28T23:44:00.000-07:00

Haven't been posting much social commentary lately. But this is my response to a post at Mollymeek regarding the proposed new standards for buses. By the way, I've just discovered how to hyperlink my texts to the URLs...(so much for my Communications Degree)
--------------
The problem here isn't the proposed changes, but rather, the use of statistics to provide a ambiguous facade of imagined change. More interestingly, I would like to know the base rate of these statistics before the new amendments were proposed. This will give commuters a more meaningful basis for comparison (at least quantitatively).

Let's take a couple of examples:

1. "Bus service reliability - for example, at least 85 percent of bus services should not deviate more than 5 minutes from the scheduled frequency".

The above statement says nothing at all. While Molly has rightly pointed out the "problem of the other 15 per cent", I would extend the argument further to question "so what 85 per cent of bus services do not exceed more than 5 minutes from the scheduled time"...

The simple answer (which most folks would be satisfied with) would be "higher frequency means less over-crowding" or something like that...What this statement fails to provide is the current base rate of percentage of buses leaving xx minutes from the scheduled time. So unless we know, for instance, that currently only 70 per cent of buses leave the interchange punctually, therefore causing the human traffic jam, the above statement is pretty useless.

2. Loading - for example, weekday peak period bus loading shouldn't exceed 95 percent.

Again, the above statement is a devilishly deceptive one because the problem here isn't the bus load (let's assume that safety requirements are met), but the bus routes that are the bane of many commuters.

Granted that it is impossible to please all commuters all of the time, but what I would like see SBS do is to reduce the number of intermediate stops for lengthy bus trips.

Take for instance, if I would to travel from Tampines to Clementi (Bus Service No. 10), the trip would take me almost two hours (during peak hours) because the bus travels through Bedok, Siglap, Mountbatten, Shenton Way, Pasir Panjang then Clementi...maximising profits for themselves and maximising stress for the commuter (who lives, say somewhere in the suburbs of Siglap and is caught between taking the train - which he has to take 20 minutes to reach - and the bus, which does not move).

In short, I think most people would not mind standing in a slightly over-crowded bus that cuts short travel time then sitting in a stationary bus (watching 20 repeats of TV Mobile advertisements)...

Sport and Technology

2006-07-10T03:51:00.000-07:00

The recently concluded FIFA World Cup will be remembered by many where decisions made by referees were increasingly scrutinized - by billions around the world - through the use of technology.

Now most people tend to think that technology is "neutral" (it all depends on how one uses it). Nothing can be further from the truth - if the game of football is any indication. Technology in fact, shapes the structure of human society and its accompanying discourse. Let's examine why:

To take football as an example,

Before television became a universal medium, football games were generally localized. Earlier editions of the World Cup (before the television revolution) were not usually met with the amount of pomp and fanfare of recent ones. Sure, the sport was popular, but the stakes (culturally or economically) weren't high. To take an example, England (whose history of football stretches over a century), decided to opt out of the first three editions of the tournament (1930, 1934 and 1938); football a matter of life and death, nah...

Fast forward to June 2006. The acknowledgment of football being a global game was, in large part, due to the use of satellite television to broadcast football matches all over the world. With the added use of video technology, the entire dynamics (not the rules) of the game have changed.

Previously, a referee makes a mistake (for instance: awarding a penalty kick incorrectly, failing to spot a offside player), such errors were generally confined to limited spheres of discussion; after all, to err is human, as the saying goes...

Today, its a whole new ball game. Expert power no longer lies with the people on the field, but those off it (fans, football pundits, tuxedo-suit officials). Actions made on the field are now open to examination (to the nth degree) off-field. Players and referees are held accountable - blamed or praised - by the verdict of the masses, whose opinions now constitute as "truth". Split-second decisions made in the heat of the moment reverberate in electronic archives long after the game is over.

So what does all these mean? Is the game better off or worse off? I think the answer is probably a mixture of both. The fact of the matter is, as Ellul noted, technique (or technology) is ambivalent and that no matter how it is used, it has of itself a number of positive and negative consequences.

I am sure folks like Wayne Rooney and Zinedine Zidane would agree with me.

Human - All too Human

2006-07-10T03:41:00.000-07:00

An interesting letter to the Straits Times forum which goes into a discussion of what it means to be human and whether human nature is extrinsic or intrinsic.

---------------
I refer to the letter, 'Stop cruelty to animals, stop the apathy as well' (ST, July 3) from Ms Chin Chiu Ngo.

Ms Chin goes on the assumption that to be human is to be kind and from this, two fundamental values come to mind, where the words humane and humanity are derived from the word human.

The point she makes is that humane and humanity in zeitgeist terms became antithetic to what they originally meant because of our behaviour.

It is an error to believe the trait humane is characteristic of being human. It may originate from the word human but here the similarity ends and remains only an idiosyncrasy.

The early English political philosopher, Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), made a trenchant statement that men (humans) needed a leviathan to curb the savage instincts inherent in them. Every man, he said, by nature, is enemy to every man, where force and fraud are the two cardinal virtues.

The life of man, he added, follows the pattern of attack for personal gain; a war where notions of right and wrong, justice and injustice, have no place. A leviathan in the form of the state was necessary to check these natural instincts, if there was to be any true freedom in society at all.

The pages of human history are soaked in the blood of battlefield carnage. The rhetoric is dichotomous and speaks of war as abhorrent while the human species per se marches inexorably toward its own funeral.

It was estimated that in the last 5,000 years, only 292 were without war. There were almost 15,000 wars resulting in the deaths of 3.6 billion human beings (Bobrakov, 1973). If we add in the extension time to 2006, the wars and carnage increase dramatically, in this relatively short space.

There was mention, by Ms Chin, of killing animals for food, which was deemed acceptable. This may be so because in nature one animal must die so that another can live.

It is the law of survival - a natural process between predator and prey. It is interesting to note that man is the only animal which kills not only for food but for sport.

The fisherman who goes sport fishing is not hungry or starving. He seeks the prey and kills for the pleasure the death of another species (he considers inferior) brings. It is the same with deer or wild boar hunting. It is the same in fox hunting which has become a traditional event in England. It is the same in grouse or pheasant shooting.

This is the instinct to kill which Hobbes spoke off and which peregrinated logically to the killing of man as well, on the pretext of protecting some ideology or to gain access to some gain.
The 'duty' of animals to feed us has led to a 'duty' of animals, in various forms, to die to entertain us. Many bloody animal sports bear testimony to this. Millions die every day to please our palates which we justify as food.

How do we justify the millions which die horribly in suffering in the attempt to find a cure for human diseases?

How do we justify others which die in excruciating pain as 'guinea pigs' for beauty products, for the vanity of human beings?

It has been said, and truthfully, that on this planet man (humans) is the ultimate predator who has brought many animals to extinction and many others to the threshold of extinction, by destruction of the ecosystem and the addiction to kill, not for food, but for sport and for gain.

Gain is a strong motivating factor and the slogan for animal welfare makes this clear in: When the buying stops so can the killing.

In the beauty or cosmetic field, the vast majority of products entering the market are new formulations or duplications of existing drugs. The crux lies in commercial return rather than therapeutic consideration. The point is knowledge gained, from studies on animals, is often misleading owing to differences in the responses to drugs by animals and man.

The LD50 test, for example, represents the lethal dose necessary to kill 50 per cent of the animals tested. It is an acute toxicity test of which 484,849 were carried out in England during 1980. It is used in cosmetics, pesticides, food additives and household products.
The LD50 does not give direct indication of the short term toxicity of a compound but only of its lethal potential. For the recognition of the symptomatology of the acute poisoning in man and for the determination of the human lethal dose, the LD50 in animals is of very little value (Zbinden and Flury-Roversi).

While there seems to be little scientific justification for the test, it was acknowledged that the LD50 caused appreciable pain to a proportion of the animals subjected to it.

The Draize ocular- and skin-irritation tests consist of introducing a fixed dose of a chemical (0.1 millilitre of a liquid or 0.1 gram of a solid) in one of the rabbit's eyes. The other eye serves as a control. The pain, if the chemical is toxic, is excruciating and the rabbit often goes blind.

The skin test is made with a shaved area of the rabbit's hide. The irritation and inflammation are recorded. It goes without saying that the intentionally induced irritation and inflammation are anything but pleasurable and cannot by any stretch of imagination be called humane.

While Ms Chin's call for a stop to cruelty to animals is commendable, her perceptual set of humaneness, as a trait belonging to humans is misleading.

By and large, nothing can be further from the truth if we are to believe recorded history, and the cruelty perpetrated by man against man, and a fortiori, against species considered inferior to man.

Nicholas Copernicus knew of this cruelty inherent in his fellow men, which kept him, for a time, from speaking the truth about his observations of the behaviour of the planets, until Galileo's concurrence - discretion being the better part of valour.

Dudley Au

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

The main gist of the article - if I understand correctly - can be summarized in the following words, "Human nature is by nature violent and unkind and therefore we should not delude ourselves into thinking otherwise".

In order to understand the central idea of the author's claims, a short introduction to the thoughts and ideas of Thomas Hobbes (which the author attributes his central premise to) is necessary.

Most folks today - including this author - would remember Hobbes for his comments on human nature, upon which he depicts the human life in its natural state as "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" (Leviathan). His pessimistic view of human nature can be, in part, be traced to his materialist view of human nature, in contrast to the older prescriptive view of moral law (i.e. what ought to be done should be done because there was some intrinsic ethical obligation).

Essentially, Hobbes argument was that it made no sense to talk about the soul as some kind of separate entity. What this meant was that human being were just living bodies, and death was simply the cessation of bodily functions. It was no surprise then, that Hobbes rejected the idea of the divine right of kings to rule (after all, what is a divine right?)

Now, it is interesting to see how the author brings in the fact that man kills, not just for food, but for sport. Such an argument - correct me if I am wrong - does not fit in squarely with the assumptions of the Hobbesian view of human nature. Sure, man is cruel, but his cruelity stems from his propensity for self-preservation. Now unless one can make the argument that tigers are a threat to humanity, or that hunting deer somehow prolongs one's lifespan, it is fallacious to think that game hunting is a proof of man's self-preservatory nature.

Back to the author's main point as to whether there is such thing as a "humaneness that characterizes human nature".

Well, my personal take is that the term humaneness is a term loaded with pictures and scenes of human kindness, personal altruism and agape love, which - as the author rightly points out - seem to contradict human experience and practice.

Furthermore, the claims made by animal rights advocates - a group that the author is arguing his case against - are not terribly impressive; in fact, some even smack of pure hypocrisy - kicking a dog is wrong, but abortion of a foetus is permissive? Come on...

To use a Schaefferian term then, I would argue for the "mannishness of man" - that man is created in the image and likeness of God and therefore he is man - dignified but fallen; noble, yet shamed; equally capable of performing great works or committing heinous crimes.

Last but not least, if we agree with this author's view of human nature, then nothing - and I reiterate again - nothing can stop us from condemning 20th century tyrants like Hitler and Stalin. After all, as the Fuhrer once said, "I cannot see why man should not be just as cruel as nature".

Paradigm Shifts and Political Revolutions

2006-07-07T08:42:00.000-07:00

I have been reading this fascinating book by Thomas Kuhn The Structure of Scientific Revolutions - considered one of the 100 most influential books since the second world war.

Kuhn's basic premise is to sketch a theory upon which revolutions (in this case, scientific) take place and how the paradigm otherwise known as normal science can be altered under certain circumstances giving way to a new paradigm (or a change in worldview).

Now most of Kuhn's examples are predominantly scientific; his ideas however, echo far and wide into other spheres of social activity.

In Singapore, recent cases of bloggers getting into trouble with the Government are indicative of certain tensions at work. While I wouldn't jump the gun by overplaying the significance and relevance of bloggers (however much I would like to), clearly the blogosphere (particularly political bloggers) are an anomaly of sorts - as far as the challenge to normal science (otherwise known as the political status quo) is concerned.

Why is this so?

Several reasons:-

1. Ease of setting up blogs (now anyone with Internet access can set up a blog within 10 minutes). As such, the potential for civic and political participation is increased - at least quantitatively.

2. Network phenomena of blogs. Bloggers with common interest can bunch together and form e-communities. Among some of the renowned ones in Singapore include www.singabloodypore.blogspot.com and www.singaporeangle.com.

3. Ability of bloggers to identify and frame breaking news. Now this may not be so common in SIngapore, as the size and scope of local news renders the blogosphere little comparative advantages. Nevertheless, recent examples have indicated that bloggers here may not be that impotent (think: Yawning Bread's GE2006 Workers' Party rally pics)

4. Communication of personality. Well, this is something I would really hope our political leaders (read: PAP folks) can start tapping upon. So far, the men-in-white have seemed to adopt a rather adverse reponse towards new media, preferring to rely on traditional print and broadcast media to communicate their personalities (and that, only in rare instances) thus creating an impression of bureaucratic aloofness.

5. Ability of blogs to foster a community of writers. Unlike newspaper pieces (where the journalist is perceived to be writing for an organization), the primary relationship [in blogs] is always with respect to the writer. No surprise then that the recent suspension of Mr Brown was met with much criticism from hundreds (and possibly thousands) of bloggers.

Which brings me back to my original point.

As Kuhn argues, "the sense of malfunction that can lead to crisis is prerequsite to revolution". Now, a term like revolution is extremely loaded (if one uses the history of the 20th century as a basis for comparison); however, what Kuhn suggests isn't of the guns and gut spilling sort.

Instead, he argues that when such revolutions (or paradigm shifts) take place, a shift in worldview happens. In his words, "What were ducks in the scientist's world before the revolution are rabbits afterwards".

Now, within the blogosphere, this seems to be happening (or maybe it's just a figment of my imagination). Nevertheless, if my hunch is correct, then how the authorities here deal with bloggers (and their propagated ideas) will be an indication of how Singapore is perceived within the greater international community. Ducks and rabbits may be trivial stuff to begin with, but insisting that rabbits are ducks when the rest of the world thinks otherwise may be a triviality carried too far - especially if the joke's on us.

The Dissatisfaction of Francis A. Schaeffer

2006-07-04T18:56:00.000-07:00

To folks who know me, this man, Francis A. Schaeffer - one of the greatest Christian intellectuals of the 20th century - his thoughts and his works have greatly shaped the foundations of my Christian faith.

A good friend of mine introduced his works to me several years ago. Back then, I was familiar with the Reformed faith and its central tenets, but articulating a worldview (weltenschaung) of what it means to be a Christian, ah, that was a different matter... Politics, economics, social theories, philosophy, anthropology (all these subjects were foreign stuff to me). Worse, it didn't occur to me that such diverse subject matters were of any particular relevance to the Christian faith. Only salvation mattered.

But bit by bit - partly due to my dissatisfaction with the quality of my faith as well as the intellectual challenges that were arising from my university program - I knew that I had to dig deeper into the essence of my faith, in order to really know what I believed.

Schaeffer's works were a watershed. I bought his Complete Works and started reading them. After completing The God who is there and Escape from Reason, I was awestruck with the magnitude of this man's thinking and his ability to integrate diverse spheres of knowledge into a coherent Christian worldview. More importantly, his writings were not simply academic dissertations - detached and aloof from the pangs of a broken world, but works upon which you could sense his compassion for humanity, demonstrated through his outreach to people from all walks of life. His starting point was that, all men - whether saved or unsaved - are created in the image and likeness of God and possess intrinsic value to life.

The following links will provide a deeper insight into the man, his ideas and his life:

http://www.markheard.net/heardtribute/archive/schaeffer1_c_today1997.html http://www.markheard.net/heardtribute/archive/schaeffer2_c_today1997.html

Christianity and Literature

2006-06-23T05:06:00.000-07:00

Haven't been blogging for awhile, reason being - I have been spending quite a bit of time catching up on my reading. Books on my reading lists include: Solzhenitsyn's Cancer Ward, Daniel Bell's Coming of Post-industrial Society and Edgar Snow's Red Star over China (Mandarin Translation - that explains the snail-paced rate).

In the process of managing my email box, happened to come across an email sent by an old friend regarding the Harry Potter series (yes I know now's Da Vinci season); nevertheless, thought i'll rehash my reply to her down here. Just so in order to articulate my stand on the role and significance of Christianity in the realm of literature.

Here's it:

Her email:

BEn, are u in favour of Harry Potter?

This article sent shudders down my spine..... have a read, the link is there.

http://www.bibleplus.org/Potter.htm

and my reply:

I haven't read any - and I don't intend to - of the Harry Potter books yet, so I wouldn't be able to comment on the validity of these observations. Its not surprising however, given the nature of the contents (and the popularity of the books) to find evangelical Christians up in arms against the book... in fact, you'll be surprise to find many mainstream Christians arguing against mythological beasts (like those from LOTR and Chronicles of Narnia... although the fact that both Tolkien and CS Lewis are well-documented Christians mitigates the criticisms).

Furthermore, many of us Christians seem to forget that the gift of creativity and imagination is something that God has given to us - and if put to good use (Bunyan, TS Eliot) provides an excellent tool in which to communicate the gospel truth - in ways that are both meaningful and inspirational.

based on my random observations, I think the Harry Potter series are probably entertaining enough - at least for the casual and less-discerning reader. What it lacks however, is the transcendental mythology that is of the stuff of LOTR and Narnia... time will tell whether it stays on the best-seller lists (the same can be said for Da Vinci Code actually).

Last but not least, as Christians, we need to avoid the 'devil behind every bush and angel behind every empty parking lot' syndrome - which is what many charismatic churches tend to do

Gayle Goh's Blog

2006-06-09T18:11:00.000-07:00

Few things impress me more than ideas well-thought of and articulated. Recently I have been following this blog by a 17-year-old student here, and I have to say that she has got a really good blog, not to mention, a generally solid understanding of the social-political process in Singapore.

Of course, she is now no stranger to publicity, after being featured in the Straits Times.

http://i-speak.blogdrive.com/

Moral Courage and the Christian Heritage

2006-05-24T06:58:00.000-07:00

Just completed reading the novel, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, one of the 20th century giants of the Christian faith. Happened to come across this speech he made 28 years ago at Harvard, below is an excerpt:

A Decline in Courage [. . .]

may be the most striking feature which an outside observer notices in the West in our days. The Western world has lost its civil courage, both as a whole and separately, in each country, each government, each political party and of course in the United Nations.

Such a decline in courage is particularly noticeable among the ruling groups and the intellectual elite, causing an impression of loss of courage by the entire society. Of course there are many courageous individuals but they have no determining influence on public life.

Political and intellectual bureaucrats show depression, passivity and perplexity in their actions and in their statements and even more so in theoretical reflections to explain how realistic, reasonable as well as intellectually and even morally warranted it is to base state policies on weakness and cowardice.

And decline in courage is ironically emphasized by occasional explosions of anger and inflexibility on the part of the same bureaucrats when dealing with weak governments and weak countries, not supported by anyone, or with currents which cannot offer any resistance.

But they get tongue-tied and paralyzed when they deal with powerful governments and threatening forces, with aggressors and international terrorists.

Should one point out that from ancient times decline in courage has been considered the beginning of the end?

The full text can be found at http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/solzhenitsyn/harvard1978.html

------------
Reflecting upon these words serve as a poignant reminder of the challenges the Christian has to live up to in order to testify to the reality of our faith. So often, our Christ-likeness is only exhibited within the four walls of the church, and we fail to demonstrate the power of our faith within contemporary modern society. Where are the Christians in high places, those whose voices can inspire and transform? Have Christians abdicated their duties in putting Christ in sovereign above all earthly powers? Where is the voice of the Christian - to stand up against unrighteousnes, injustice and evil? What is the duty of the disciple of Christ? Who is my brother? And how should I then live?

As we live among such postmodern times - when the distinction between truth and falsity is often blurred or seemingly non-existent - let us remember those who have sojourned together with us in this pilgrimage as we seek to be the beacon of light that shineth forth in this world of darkness.

Interview with Mr Ngiam Tong Dow

2006-05-16T02:34:00.000-07:00

Happened to come across this interview... what a wonderful breathe of fresh air...honest words from a civil servant. If I am not mistaken, Mr Ngiam is a Christian...and if this interview is anything to go by - an excellent Christian is he.

---------------
Subject: Singapore 'bigger than PAP'By Susan Long.

Time to get off the autopilot, says a former civil servant.

SINCE Mr Ngiam Tong Dow retired from the civil service in 1999, affairs of state have weighed heavily on his mind. The highly respected former Permanent Secretary worries about Singapore's long-term survival and the kind of society the next generation will inherit. At 66, the HDB Corp chairman insists he is 'no radical', just a concerned Singaporean with three grandchildren, who wonders 'whether there will be a Singapore for them in 50 years' time'. In Tea with Think, a weekly interview series, he gives a candid appraisal of the civil service, and his prognosis of what the lack of an alternative political leadership means for Singapore. The interview will be continued next week.

Q. With all this pessimism surrounding Singapore's prospects today, what's your personal prognosis? Will Singapore survive Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew?

A. Unequivocally yes, Singapore will survive SM Lee but provided he leaves the right legacy. What sort of legacy he wants to leave is for him to say, but I, a blooming upstart, dare to suggest to him that we should open up politically and allow talent to be spread throughout our society so that an alternative leadership can emerge.So far, the People's Action Party's tactic is to put all the scholars into the civil service because it believes the way to retain political power forever is to have a monopoly on talent. But in my view, that's a very short term view. It is the law of nature that all things must atrophy. Unless SM allows serious political challenges to emerge from the alternative elite out there, the incumbent elite will just coast along. At the first sign of a grassroots revolt, they will probably collapse just like the incumbent Progressive Party to the left-wing PAP onslaught in the late 1950s. I think our leaders have to accept that Singapore is larger than the PAP.

Q. What would be a useful first step in opening up?

A. For Singapore to survive, we should release half our talent - our President and Overseas Merit scholars - to the private sector. When ten scholars come home, five should turn to the right and join the public sector or the civil service; the other five should turn to the left and join the private sector. These scholars should serve their bond to Singapore - not to the Government - by working in or for Singapore overseas. As matters stand, those who wish to strike out have to break their bonds, pay a financial penalty and worse, be condemned as quitters. But it takes a certain temperament and mindset to be a civil servant. The former head of the civil service,Sim Kee Boon, once said that joining the administrative service is like entering a royal priesthood. Not all of us have the temperament to be priests. However upright a person is, the mandarin will in time begin to live a gilded life in a gilded cage. As a Permanent Secretary, I never had to worry whether I could pay my staff their wages. It was all provided for in the Budget. As chairman of DBS Bank, I worried about wages only 20 per cent of the time. I now face my greatest business challenge as chairman of HDB Corp, a new start-up spun off from HDB. I spend 90 per cent of my time worrying whether I have enough to pay my staff at the end of the month. It's a mental switch.

Q. What is your biggest worry about the civil service?

A. The greatest danger is we are flying on auto-pilot. What was once a great policy, we just carry on with more of the same, until reality intervenes. Take our industrial policy. At the beginning, it was the right thing for us to attract multinationals to Singapore. For some years now, I've been trying to tell everybody: 'Look, for God's sake, grow our own timber.' If we really want knowledge to be rooted in Singaporeans and based in Singapore, we have to support our SMEs. I'm not a supporter of SMEs just for the sake of more SMEs, but we must grow our own roots. Creative Technology's Sim Wong Hoo is one and Hyflux's Olivia Lum is another but that's too few. We have been flying on auto-pilot for too long. The MNCs have contributed a lot to Singapore but they are totally unsentimental people. The moment you're uncompetitive, they just relocate.

Q. Why has this come about?

A. I suspect we have started to believe our own propaganda. There is also a particular brand of Singapore elite arrogance creeping in. Some civil servants behave like they have a mandate from the emperor. We think we are little Lee Kuan Yews. SM Lee has earned his spurs, with his fine intellect and international standing. But even Lee Kuan Yew sometimes doesn't behave like Lee Kuan Yew. There is also a trend of intellectualisation for its own sake, which loses a sense of the pragmatic concerns of the larger world. The Chinese, for example, keep good archives of the Imperial examinations which used to be held at the Temple of Heaven. At the beginning, the scholars were tested on very practical subjects, such as how to control floods in their province. But over time, they were examined on the Confucian Analects and Chinese poetry composition. Hence, they became emasculated by the system, a worrying fate which could befall Singapore.

Q. But aren't you an exception to the norm of the gilded mandarin with zero bottomline consciousness?

A. That's because I started out with Economic Development Board in the 1959. Investment promotion then was all about hard foot slogging and personal persuasion, which teaches you to be very humble and patient. I learnt to be a supplicant and a professional beggar, instead of a dispenser of favours. These days, most civil servants start out administering the law. If I had my way, every administrative officer would start his or her career in the EDB. Hard foot slogging.

Q. YOUR idea of creating an alternate elite is not new. What do you think of the oft-mooted suggestion of achieving that splitting ranks within the People's Action Party?

A. Quite honestly, if you ask me, Team A-and-Team B is a synthetic and infantile idea. If you want to challenge the Government, it must be spontaneous. You have to allow some of your best and brightest to remain outside your reach and let them grow spontaneously. How do you know their leadership will not be as good as yours? But if you monopolise all the talent, there will never be an alternative leadership. And alternatives are good for Singapore.

Q. In your calculation, what are the odds of this alternative replacing the incumbent?

A. Of course there's a political risk. Some of these chaps may turn out to be your real opposition, but that is the risk the PAP has to take if it really wants Singapore to endure. A model we should work towards is the French model of the elite administration. The very brightest of France all go to university or college. Some emerge Socialists, others Conservative, some work in industries, some work in government. Yet, at the end of the day, when the chips are down, they are all Frenchmen. No member of the French elite will ever think of betraying his country, never. That is the sort of Singapore elite we want. It doesn't mean that all of us must belong to the PAP. That is very important.

Q. What do bad times mean for the PAP, which has based its legitimacy on providing the economic goods and asset enhancement? Is its social compact with the people in need of an update?A

Oh yes. And my advice is: Go back to Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew's old credo, where nobody owes us a living. After I had just taken over as the Housing Board's chairman in 2000, an astute academic asked me: 'Tong Dow, what's your greatest problem at HDB?' Then he diagnosed it himself: 'Initially, you gave peanuts to monkeys so they would dance to your tune. Now you've given them so much by way of peanuts that the monkey has become a gorilla and you have to dance to its tune. That's your greatest problem.' Our people have become over-fed and today's economic realities mean we have to put them on a crash diet. We cannot starve them because there will be a political explosion. So the art of government today is to wean everyone off the dispensable items. We should just concentrate on helping the poorest 5 to 10 per cent of the population, instead of handing out a general largesse. Forget about asset enhancement, Singapore shares and utility rebates. You're dancing to the tune of the gorilla. I don't understand the urgency of raising the Goods and Services Tax. Why tax the lower-income, then return it to them in an aid package? It demeans human dignity and creates a growing supplicant class who habitually hold out their palms. Despite the fact that we say we are not a welfare state, we act like one of the most 'welfarish' states in the world. We should appeal instead to people's sense of pride and self-reliance. I think political courage is needed here. And my instinct is that the Singaporean will respect you for that.

Q. So what should this new compact consist of?

A. It should go back to what was originally promised: 'That you shall be given the best education, whether it be academic or vocational, according to your maximum potential.' And there will be no judgment whether an engineer is better than a doctor or a chef. My late mother was a great woman. Although illiterate, she single-handedly brought up four boys and a girl. She used to say in Hainanese: 'If you have one talent which you excel in, you will never starve.' I think the best legacy to leave is education and equal opportunity for all. When the Hainanese community came to Singapore, they were the latest arrivals and the smallest in number. So they had no choice but to become humble houseboys, waiters and cooks. But they always wanted their sons to have a better life than themselves. The great thing about Singapore was that we could get an education, which gave us mobility, despite coming from the poorest families. Today, the Hainanese, as a dialect group, form proportionately the highest number of professionals in Singapore.

Q. You say focus on education. What is top of your wishlist for re-making Singapore's education system?

A. Each year, the PSLE creams off all the top boys and girls and dispatches them to only two schools, Raffles Institution and Raffles Girls' School. However good these schools are, the problem is you are educating your elite in only two institutions, with only two sets of mentors, and casting them in more or less the same mould. It worries me that Singapore is only about 'one brand' because you never know what challenges lie ahead and where they will come from. I think we should spread out our best and brightest to at least a dozen schools.

Q. You advocate a more inclusive mindset all around?

A. Yes, intellectually, everyone has to accept that the country of Singapore is larger than the PAP. But even larger than the country of Singapore, which is limited by size and population, is the nation of Singapore, which includes a diaspora. My view is that we should have a more inclusive approach to nation-building. We have started the Majulah Connection, an international network where every Singaporean - whether he is a citizen or not, so long as he feels for Singapore - is included as part of our diaspora. Similarly, we should include foreigners who have worked and thrived here as friends of Singapore. That's the only way to survive. Otherwise, its just four million people on a little red dot of 600 sq km. If you exclude people, you become smaller and smaller, and in the end, you'll disappear.

Q. What is the kind of Singapore you hope your grandchildren will inherit?

A. Let's look at Sparta and Athens, two city states in Greek history. Singapore is like Sparta, where the top students are taken away from their parents as children and educated. Cohort by cohort, they each select their own leadership, ultimately electing their own Philosopher King. When I first read Plato's Republic, I was totally dazzled by the great logic of this organisational model where the best selects the best. But when I reached the end of the book, it dawned on me that though the starting point was meritocracy, the end result was dictatorship and elitism. In the end, that was how Sparta crumbled. Yet, Athens, a city of philosophers known for its different schools of thought, survived. What does this tell us about out-of-bounds markers? So SM Lee has to think very hard what legacy he wants to leave for Singapore and the type of society he wants to leave behind. Is it to be a Sparta, a well-organised martial society, but in the end, very brittle; or an untidy Athens which survived because of its diversity of thinking? Personally, I believe that Singaporeans are not so kuai (Hokkien for obedient) as to become a Sparta. This is our saving grace. As a young senior citizen, I very much hope that Singapore will survive for a long time, but as an Athens. It is more interesting and worth living and dying for.

Courts in Singapore come under scrutiny

2006-05-12T08:16:00.000-07:00

An article from the International Herald Tribune putting the jurisdictory system here into question:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/05/09/business/courts.php

And a couple of good analytical pieces by fellow bloggers here:

http://commentarysingapore.blogspot.com/
http://www.yawningbread.org/

------------
Now I'm generally not too keen in speculating on who or what is right in this legal wrangle; clearly, the dispute is a matter that probably involves multiple interpretations of the incidents and the final outcome will be a decision that will have far-reaching consequences within the sphere of international law (especially in the way our laws are perceived).

Now the relation between Christianity and Civil Law is an issue that many people (particularly within a secularist worldview) have attempted to discard or at least force into a peripheral existence. But if that is indeed the case, then it is useless to speak of morality or make claims to the exercise of justice (for the questions - whose justice, and according to what standards - cannot be answered).

In this case then, Singapore and her laws - despite having originated from a British system (which can be traced to her Christian origins) - is clearly premised on an ethos of a pragmatic worldview (i.e. what works, is right). Furthermore, the close conflation between the various branches of the executive, legislative and judicial system is a link that is not officially admitted, but one that is often cited by critics in their criticism of our legal system.

As I have suggested before, the only golden egg our country has on our side is our financial strength (due to the uncanny abilities of our leaders to forge, at the very minimal - paper ties - with other countries). But we are treading on very uneasy ground here, for such alliances can easily collapse into oblivion anytime, nulifying whatever treaties that have been signed.

Furthermore, the huge monopoly of power invested within the current ruling party is something that can be troubling, if one considers the understanding of human nature. As Samuel Rutherford concludes in Lex Rex, "but, if we consult with nature, many judges and governors, to fallen nature, seem nearer of blood to nature than one only; for two, because of man's weakness, are better than one".

I am not so sure what all these means, but it is evident that the upcoming four to five years (at least till the next parliamentary elections') will be an indication of how the secularist worldview plays out within the various realms of politics and law here in Singapore.

General Elections 06

2006-04-27T01:17:00.001-07:00

Its election time in Singapore...and the local media here seem to be stoking the flames of election fever through their widespread - and some would argue, biased - coverage.

Some random observations:

1. As seen from CNA's coverage during Nomination Day, predictability is the name of the game. No surprises to see wide-eyed journalists rushing to obtain sound-bytes from only-all-too-obliging PAP members. That's TV news for you - spot on, Neil Postman. One of the worst questions ever-posed to the PM: "Do you feel confident about the PAP's chances?"

2. Interesting to note that almost none of the opposition members were asked about their plans...

Now for more serious food for thought:

It's going to be good to see how the battle lines are shaping out to be like. Clearly, the Workers' Party (despite what the 3Ms have said) are looking like a whole lot more prepared and serious in its work. For its sake though, I do hope that it does not try and engage the PAP's on its strengths (i.e. its ability to mobilize resources to meet material needs), but rather to engage the men-in-white at a different level (questioning the materialistic rhetoric, for instance).

In my opinion, the move to field 5 young candidates at AMK GRC is a masterstroke (they're unlikely to beat the PAP machinery helmed by PM Lee) as it will be an indicator of how the younger folks think and vote. I would venture to suggest in fact, that, the WP's candidates are more likely to be favored among the young (esp. those who are skeptical of the promises of progress and disillusioned with the general state of political affairs). The question though: can the opposition provide a realistic alternative - is something that remains to be seen.

All said, I think GE06 is very much shaping to be a pivotal moment in domestic politics. More than just a clash of political parties, it is - in fact - an indicator of how the future of Singapore as a nation-state would develop and how ideas - propagated and circulated throughout the years - do have consequences.

Straw poll of young voters in a rainstorm

2006-04-16T18:24:00.002-07:00

A letter written to The Straits Times by a member of a public, essentially saying that 4 out of 6 people in a straw poll would vote the PAP due to its ability to deliver the material needs to Singaporeans.
http://www.asiaone.com/st/st_20060417_385874.html

Couple of thoughts:

Firstly, this must be the worst straw poll/interview ever conducted that is newsworthy. According to the writer, a group of senior citizens, stuck in a rainstorm at P. Ubin proceeded to ask 6 young people who would they vote and why. While I shall not doubt the authenticity of the event, any thinking person would tell you that interviewing 6 people on their take on political issues - and esp. on who will they vote - is akin to almost saying nothing. Interesting why ST even chosed to carry the report...

More interestingly is the statement, "But for the time being, as far as the young are concerned, life is all about making a living and achieving the five Cs, and not about freedom, democracy or the need for an opposition". I'm not sure how many people would agree with that (to me, it says more about the author than the youngsters he spoke to), but if that is indeed the case - then our situation is indeed quite deplorable.

I would agree with MM Lee's take on the relevance of politics on bread-and-butter issues. Politics certainly includes these issues, but our elder statesperson is wrong to say that is all there is. When is life ever all about "men living on bread alone"?

Unfortunately, the opposition parties here - by their rhetoric - are simply playing into the same ball-game without actually challenging the assumptions that govern the PAP's rule. As Ellul pointed out (albeit in a slightly different context), both Communists and Liberals are actually arguing on the same side of the fence (in their advocacy of progress). My question: Based on whose standards?

As far as I see it, the modernist progress view that the older generation of Singaporeans are well-versed in is due for a shockwave. As the cost of sustaining material success becomes increasingly more difficult to pay ane people become more difficult to please, one's allegiance (to a political system) will be called into question.
This is not to say that the young will necessarily revolt against the system, but rather, social trends will increasingly affirm that the comfortable-life does not equate with the good-life. The "disenchantment with modernity" is likely to go on...

The 60s Counter Culture Movement and the 21st Century Church

2006-04-11T18:15:00.000-07:00

Am embarking on a 10-week course (Apr 9 - June 25) in my home church where I will be exploring the 60s countercultural movement and its impact on Western culture and its impact on Christianity.

Much of the material will come from Os Guinness's classic The Dust of Death - and I am still in the process of reading as much as possible to glean further knowledge.

Part of the reason I proposed the course was to try and get Christians to understand the current cultural and social context in which the church is placed within. This, as I explained, was due to a growing disenchantment with modernity especially in its false myths of science, human reason and progress (within a secularized framework). In art, the depiction of a fragmented and despairing human was portrayed superbly in the works of artists like Edvard Munch and Francis Bacon (the 20th century English painter).

Later works of art, for instance, Jackson Pollock's Convergence (just one of many of his random-splashes), Andy Warhol Campbell's Soup cans and even Samuel Beckett's Breathe all highlighted the existential anguish and meaninglessness that the post-modernity movement have come to associate themselves with.

The 60s countercultural movement then, was an attempt to breakfree from the naive optimism upon which Western culture (with its Darwinism beliefs) was built upon. This revolt was not unexpected, however, the solutions that were proposed (Eastern mysticism, psychedelics and violence) were not any better. For the Christian church, the question would be: what then are our alternatives? How then should the Gospel of Jesus Christ be positioned (I am not arguing for a social gospel) in order to challenge and transform a broken humanity? Do we see the mighty power of our God and the thundering truth of the revealed Logos? Only when we do so are we then worthy of our Christian calling.

Political Ideals at Stake

2006-03-28T16:51:00.000-08:00

An excellent news analysis made by a Straits Times journalist on the nature of politics in SIngapore.
http://www.asiaone.com/st/st_20060329_381298.html

The author has rightly pointed out that the political game - if conducted merely on the premises on material needs - will have disastrous consequences. If ideals like "love" and "justice" are merely rhetoric weapons of the powerful and play no part whatsoever in social life, then we are treading on a slippery path to big-time problems.

In my opinion, the current battlelines drawn between the ruling party and the opposition party is one that is clearly based on a materialist (or epicurean) worldview. This is probably inevitable, considering the amount of secular success that Singapore has achieved over the past 40 years.

To position the arguments within a different context, the church is playing the same game too (albeit sugarcoating it in spiritual mumbo-jumbo)... in her attempt to stay "relevant" within contemporary society. My question is: When is the church ever commanded to stay relevant? Isn't the duty of the Christian church to challenge the principalities of this world (not simply to convert them to become Christians), but rather to fulfill its mission to be the salt and light of this fallen world.

Sadly, we have been so used to the materialist rhetoric that it seems churches who do not abide by these rules are being labelled as being "un-loving". But as David F Wells rightly argues, "if the [church] cannot clarify for themselves who is sovereigh - God or the religious consumer? - what is authoritative in practice - Scripture or culture? - and what is important - faithfulness or success? - they will find themselves walking the same fate as the churches that failed before because whatever seriousness now remains will dissolve into triviality" (Above all Earthly Powers: Christ in a Postmodern world).

In other words, once the capitalist-consumerist-materialist system that our modern society is based upon starts to wither, it will take down all elements that have aligned themselves with her. If the defining characteristic of the church is merely a built upon such foundations, then it too, will capitulate along with everything else it stands for.

Eerdmans Interview with David F Wells

2006-03-21T09:23:00.000-08:00

Check out Eerdmans interview with David F Wells, one of the foremost Christian writers and intellectuals of our time:
http://www.eerdmans.com/wellsinterview.htm

A short excerpt:

3. What do you see as the difference between popular postmodernism and academic or intellectual postmodernism?

David Wells: The difference is less in the ideas than in the degree of self-consciousness, and often the clarity, with which they are expressed.

However, there is a myth which needs to be laid to rest here. Intellectuals like to think that they are society's trend-setters, that what they are thinking is where reality is cresting. The result is that when intellectuals write about culture (and who else does?) they are inclined to see their ideas and their own culture as being in a cause-and-effect relation. They are the cause of which it is the effect.

In the modern period, however, this has rarely ever been the case. It is the culture, far more commonly, which gives the ideas their plausibility and which makes them seem inevitable. It is from the culture that ideas gain their traction and it is often because of the culture, when it changes, that they lose their traction. That is why, I believe, the Enlightenment ideology has lasted so long in the West and has become so deeply ensconced in our cultural elites, the gatekeepers, in academia, Hollywood, and many of our newspapers. The modernization of our society made Enlightenment ideas (like secular-humanism) seem inevitable, true, and incontrovertible. When this kind of public, cultural scaffolding began to shake in the 1960s, the ideas came tumbling down, leaving us with a void that the Enlightenment beliefs had once filled in our thinking. So we have come to be postmodern. For some, on one end of the intellectual scale, this is so in very cogent ways and for others, on the other end, it is so in ways that are more unthinking but nevertheless not any less real.

Reformed Evangelical Movement Seminar

2006-03-01T19:46:00.000-08:00

Below is the link to the transcripts of the recent Reformed Evangelical Movement Seminar held in Singapore from Feb 23-26.

http://www.stephentongsermons.blogspot.com/

A couple of take-home points: Clearly the church in Singapore has much reforming to be done. Perhaps years of prosperity and personal affluence has left us with an extremely soft under-belly upon which the courageous Reformation spirit has been all but extinguished.

Speaking with Elder Yong after the seminar, he commented that many Singapore Christians are un-intellectual... prefering instead to dwell within the comfort zone of their own local church.

Another worrisome sign - in my observation - is the increasing compartmentalization of faith into the private sphere and there alone. The separation of church and state powers - which resulted as a recognition of the God-given rights of civil governance - is now brought to a situation (at least in the Western world) where the public confession of one's faith is generally looked down upon.

As David F Wells puts it: [Such faith/spirituality], with its individualism, its wholly privatized understanding, its therapeutic interest, its mystical bent, its experimental habits, its opposition to truth as something which mediates the nature of an unchanging spiritual realm, its anti-institutional bias, its tilt toward the East, its construction of reality, and its can-do spirit...is something which is emerging from the very heart of the postmodern world (Above All Earthly Pow'rs)

What then next?

Cartoons of Mohammad

2006-02-05T06:47:00.000-08:00

A headline on the front pages of a local paper caught my eye: Again, Eurpoe is demonising a minority... now, I do not need to rehash the points of the debate (issues on free speech, religious extremism etc...)

Couple of other thoughts:

Firstly, such caricatures are not new in the Western media... political figures, religious sects have all been satired before... by the way, i do not think the Danish PM's remarks about free speech is overly convincing. As I have pointed out before, notions of free speech is often thought of having the freedom to say and write whatever you want (which is a silly concept)... because being "totally free" means that language and syntax rules should not apply. Obviously, the simplistic Hobbesian conception of freedom of action as the untramelled pursuit of desire still holds. Immanuel Kant would have made a better argument against such lousy notions of "freedom" that the Western world are still raising their voices about.

The practice of such satirical cartoons highlights a much bigger problem that is plaguing Western liberal democracies - in which the important matters are increasingly trivialized - we see these in political spectacles and on TV everyday.

Having said so, examples like these only go to show that God has given men much more freedom than fellow men give one another - which is the freedom to object, oppose or even "blasphemize" against Him... which is where the Islamic faith fails to recongnize - or should I say - isn't present within Islam.

The notion of redemption and forgiveness is something that only the Christian faith can truly witness to. Without a Incarnate Savior - who truly forgives those who sin against him - as human beings, we are left in a world that is devoid of any foundation or hope of reconciliation.

Hiring of the elderly to work

2006-01-27T03:59:00.000-08:00

A recent law proposed in Singapore could see people work beyond the age of 62.
http://www.asiaone.com/st/st_20060127_367455.html
While there isn't any biblical support as to how old a person should work until, part of the Christian worldview is to recognize human beings as dignified - being created in the image and likeness of God.
In Singapore, where we are experiencing an ageing population, it is inevitable that more and more people may have to work till an older age in order to sustain the economy. While I do not have any problem with work (instead of amusing ourselves to death watching TV), it is troubling to see some elderly folk toiling under the sun or scrubbing an entire row of toilet floors simply because they are forced by circumstances to do so.
A mark of a gracious society is to see how the elderly are being treated - and on such accounts, I suspect that the consumerist culture of Singapore may be sorely lacking in such social graces. Unless we start to re-examine our sense of moral virtues, I fear that the next generation of Singaporean parents (that includes myself) may lose our moral authority and credibility to educate our young.

A Beginner's Christian Bookshelf

2006-01-01T07:02:00.000-08:00

Happened to stumble across this list of good books that every well-informed Christian should attempt to read.

http://www.yale.edu/ygcf/various/bookshlf.html

One reason why the church is struggling to make any sort of intellectual and cultural impact in society (beyond simply duplicating existing trends) is because we are very impoverished when it comes to loving God with our minds.

As Bertrand Russell once quipped, "Most Christians would rather die than think—in fact they do". In my opinion, he was spot on. Living in the 21st century, we seemed to have forgotten that the history and heritage of Christianity is one that has constantly challenged cultural assumptions, demolished ideological strongholds and transformed societies. Instead, we are now caught up with all sorts of fads and fairy tales, taught to us by less-than-credible writers. I visited a booksale recently and gosh, you wouldn't believe how rotten thousands of books out there in the market are.

Sigh...

Children's Camp - reflections

2005-12-02T02:26:00.000-08:00

Just finished attending a three-day children's church camp in which I was the camp commandant. To say the least, it was an extremely fruitful time in which I somehow felt at least several years younger. That aside, how the church responds to children is indicative of her ability to challenge and transform the world she is in.
Why do I say so?
Firstly, it is in childhood that the foundational things of one's life (belief in God, value of human life) are shaped and moulded. If the church is unable to fulfill her teaching ministry - and by that I do not mean simply teaching biblical narratives - but rather, to inculcate a Christian worldview among the young, then it is of little surprise that it the church remains impoverished when confronting the bigger ideas of our times.
Secondly - and in the words of a certain MJ - "children connect us to the deeper wisdom of life which is everpresent, and only asked to be lived" (not sure whether its a form of idealized childhood, but what rings true about it is that the 'relative innocence' of a child symbolizes the type of child-like faith that is partaking of the Kingdom of God).
Thirdly, the zest of life resonates most clearly among children and that one would have to be a cynic or nihilist not to see that (though unfortunately, as Neil Postman has pointed out, the pop culture of our times have steadily eradicated the value of childhood).
As a result, it is my belief that any revival in the church can only take place (as a general principle) when a church's sunday school ministry is being reformed. Sadly, most youth ministries merely duplicate activities from CCA groups, rewording them in some Christian-sounding terms that ultimately ring hollow.

Treatment of maids in Singapore

2005-11-10T15:58:00.000-08:00

A rare gem of an article written by a Straits Times journalist on the recent changes to give a day off for maids here.
--------------
As the writer puts it, "So why are maids treated differently? And how did we as a society come to accept such inequality as a matter of course? I would argue that a big factor is how we tend to view people in a utilitarian way. By that, I mean this society tends to judge a person by his economic usefulness and, more often than not, measures this in terms of the salary he draws. On this scale, maids - unsurprisingly- are at the bottom of the heap".

"This is not unique to Singapore, of course. Many other countries also judge a person by his earning power. The difference is that in developed countries in the West (not sure how accurate this statement is, but there is some element of truth in it), there is an opposite point of view to act as a counterweight (oh, by the way, such opposite POVs do not evolve from some Hegelian dialetic, but from a Christian consensus on the value of human lives)..."

And check out this statement: "This is based on the belief that every person deserves to be treated as a human being, regardless of external trappings such as welath and status. Each person has intrinsic worth simply because he is human" (well said). "
:
"And this is the source of the problem. Because the more a person is measured by his economic utility, the more he will be seen as a tool, a machine, a factor of production - in other words, a means to a measurable monetary end" (I fully agree)
-------------

The essence of it then is that every society must be judged by how it treats its fellow citizens. Slavery was abolished in the West because of a Christian conviction that man is made in the image and likeness of God and should be treated with dignity and respect. In a capitalist society that is Singapore, it should be remembered that the maids we employ are first and foremost, humans (just like us) and not our "paid slaves"... and should we ever forget that (and begin to judge a person by his utilitarian worth), then may God pity our country.

Evolutionary Theory vs. intelligent design

2005-10-20T05:27:00.000-07:00

For once, this topic was brought to class in which a bunch of undergraduates (including myself) were tasked to discuss what we would do if we had to deal with the subject in the mainstream media. What surprised me (or maybe it shouldn't) was the level of belief that evolutionary theory was scientific and that it was PROVEN to be true while ID remains the subject of superstition (among some of the future media practitioners in Singapore). Oh and by the way, I think the media should not handle an issue like this (not if they want the simplest explanation - that aims to cover both sides of the debate - within 400 words).

Interestingly though, one schoolmate (whom I suspect is pomo) commented that evolutionary theory is "rational" and "fits with the scientific system"- did I hear correctly?

Another thing: It seems that even academics do not see the sociological consequences of evolutionary theory (read: Hitler and the Third Reich) but are mostly contented to accept what other evolutionary proponents say.

And check out this quote: "Journalists reporting the evolutionary theorists perspective can conveniently rely on the fact that many sources who are "authoritative" by traditional standards - biologists of all kinds, with the credentials traditionally recognized in their professions - will happily state for the record that evolutionary theory is the theoretical foundation of moderm biological science...moreover the evidence they present is traditionally recognized as credible - it is gathered using the scientific method"

This common consensus - that evolution is science - has permeated so much of society that it seems to be the most "rational" explanation. To make things even more challenging, those who hold to a creationist (or intelligent design view) often use "religion" as a reason to support their belief.

So for once, let me play the postmodern skeptic and say "how do you know whether evolution or creation (ID) is true?" The fact is: many who claim to be evolutionarists or creationists simply do not know why they believe what they believe. Most of the time, we don't bother to find out and simply hold on to an opinion because its the most convenient thing to do.

You know what? I think we should take the science (the form of science that accepts wholeheartedly what some scientists say) out of evolution and the religion (by this I mean the institutionalized form that erked Kierkegaard so much) out of creation. As what the prophet Elijah might have said: "How long will you waver between two opinions? If evolution is the truth, follow it; but if creation is the truth, follow it" - but of course, the postmodernists will reject any notions of truth (and still they claim that evolutionary theory is the correct one)... biased indeed...

Natural disasters - reflections

2005-10-11T19:09:00.000-07:00

Yet another natural disaster to strike our fragile world, leaving in its trail a body count of over 35,000 people... sometimes numbers like that do not mean anything to people like us living in "safe" Singapore (we seem to take personal peace and affluence for a given grant these days).

Well, first and foremost, a proper Christian view of these disasters would be that - these disasters are "not natural". Romans 8:20 -21 puts it: "For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God". The Fall of Man has its implications, not just for ourselves, but for the entire created world.

So where is God in the midst of these all? My answer (to borrow a phrase from Francis Schaeffer): He is There and He is Not Silent. Often, our eyes are so blinded by the phenomenon of suffering and pain that we fail to recognize the essence - and perhaps, the nobility - of human nature that such devastation produce. Yes, more than 3,000 people died on September 11 - but you know what, the firefighters who put their lives on the line to rescue several hundreds - or thousands more - you don't see such actions on Wall Street everyday. Yes, 200,000 people had their lives wiped out in an instant when the tsunami struck, but for once, I see hostile guerilla fighters putting down their guns and picking up their stretchers to tend to many thousands more... the reasons go on...

yes, we have reason to believe that "there is some good in this world, and that it is worth fighting for" (Sam, Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers) - we may not understand the fury of nature nor comprehend the extent of human sorrow, but yet, these events do have their significance and the value in our broken world... at the very least, they remind us of our humaneness and our duties to fellow human beings...

Blogging in Singapore - Part II

2005-10-10T05:14:00.000-07:00

The recent jail sentences of the two bloggers in Singapore got me thinking again - with regards to issues of freedom of expression... Most of all probably would argue for a liberterian form of freedom where the right to express whatever I want to express should be allowed...to me. that notion of freedom is simply nonsensical and perhaps childish... instead the freedom NOT TO DO the things that YOU DO NOT WANT TO would be closer to the definition of what freedom is - for self-control is one of the most important attributes any human being should have.

With regards to whether the sentences passed were too harsh, my answer would be: I suspect it is probably arbitrary - since there is no global precedence yet. But its funny though how the government here chooses to go alone when it comes to enforcing the law but decide to follow the global crowd when it comes to other social issues (i.e. building a casino, bar-top dancing etc...) I reckon that we won't be seeing the end of matters like these...

Blogging and Freedom of Speech

2005-09-20T18:22:00.000-07:00

The recent charges by the authorities on several bloggers here, to say the least, has been of concern - especially to the blogosphere and issues on freedom of speech. But let me just offer some words against those who rant and rave online - without any substance to guide their discourse.

jksadhfjhdlfash - now this is freedom of expression for you. If you are scratching your head, then you obviously aren't as consistent as you think you are. Why do i say so? Simple - if you really believe in a laissez-faire form of freedom, then that very nature of freedom has to presume that even linguistic restrictions do not apply online. In other words, you do not live by any rules - absurdity is the name of the game, my friend. Why bother to be coherent in the first place?

But if you agree with me that the rules of language in itself - presupposes that some form of regulation is in place - then what you are saying is that there is no such thing as "absolute freedom of expression" - and that all you are saying is that you disagree with whatever you are disagreeing with (at least that's intellectually more honest).

The next time I see or hear someone advocating freedom of expression without much consideration as to what this term means, I'm gonna get really angry...

Hurricane Katrina - reflections

2005-09-05T08:16:00.000-07:00

The recent fury of Hurricane Katrina is a poignant and timely reminder on how vulnerable our human race is - and how lethal nature can be.

But even more sadly, the disaster highlighted the degenerative aspect of human nature - in the absence of the law enforcers.

The noble ideals of freedom - upon which America was founded upon - are being increasingly trampled on, ironically - in the name of freedom, resulting in a mob democracy... in other words, anarchy.

As David Brooks of the New York Times puts it, "It is beginning to feel a bit like the 1970's, another decade in which people lost faith in their institutions and lost a sense of confidence about the future."

"Katrina means that the political culture, already sour and bloody-minded in many quarters, will shift. There will be a reaction. There will be more impatience for something new. There is going to be some sort of big bang as people respond to the cumulative blows of bad events and try to fundamentally change the way things are."

The growing disenchantment with modernity has given rise to a new epoch known as postmodernism. Pomo however, if taken to radical extremes - and without any moral foundations - is a sure way of committing sociological and cultural suicide.

After postmodernism, what next? Dr Tong suggested... barbarism - and he may not be far from the truth.

Lest we forget, the destruction of Rome was not simply a result of the invading barbarians, but rather a moral implosion from within the Roman society.

Perhaps we are closer to realising Oswald Spengler's "Decline of the West" prophecy than ever before.
May God help us.

The Evolution Debate

2005-08-29T18:39:00.000-07:00

Check out these series of evolution vs. intelligent design debate on The New York Times.* http://www.nytimes.com/pages/science/sciencespecial2/index.html.

If such a flurry of arguments are anything to go by, it suggests that the effects of Darwinism - despite its philosophical and social fallacies - continue to have a wide reach and influence among the scientific world... which is ironical - since the belief in it requires even more faith than believing in creation - now you call that science???

Part of the problem - I reckon - is the system of natural theology (proposed by Aquinas) that is at fault here... which sadly many Christians (within evangelical circles) continue to be trapped in.

By trying to "prove" the existence of God within a rationalistic framework, it makes the mistaken assumption that the existence of God can be "proved" - without the necessity for revealed theology.

I am not proposing an existential "leap of faith" here - but rather, for Christians to remember that by trying to prove the existence of an "unmoved mover" or a "unchanged changer" - simply so that the complexities and intricacies of the created world can be explained - is at best a form of Christian deism - that does away with a personal God.

*Thanks to Postmodern Areopagus(http://postmodernareopagus.blogspot.com/) whose blog directed me to the NYT stories.

Haze and the environment

2005-08-13T07:15:00.000-07:00

The recent haze that has swept across KL and Indonesia is a serious reminder of our environmental duties that is often swept under the carpet under the name of economic progress and urbanisation.

To make things worse, the church has often been slow to preach the importance of environmental ethics... (i'm not sure why)... maybe we just take the world we live in for granted - forgetting that one of our duties on earth is the redemtion of a fallen world.

As one member of M'sia's Democratic Action Party said, "We are breathing in poison every day. Things have never been this bad."

But year after year, the same thing happens over and over again... one only wonder when we'll ever learn our lesson...

Presidential Elections in Singapore

2005-08-13T06:59:00.000-07:00

Yet another uncontested election in Singapore. Opposition critics will say that this is yet another sign of the incumbent electorate manipulating the system to ensure that the status quo is maintained. While this may be a possibility, a more interesting debate would be to examine the nature of politics in Singapore and the reason why capable people seem to be shying from participating - at the highest level.

My own guess would be that there is simply too much to lose trying to go up against a government-backed candiate and thus decide not to. However such a situation is worrying - if this mindset persists on in the next generation.

Competency and character are two important hallmarks of any capable leader... unfortunately the very nature of politics these days is sometimes a public relations exercise more than any other (read: US elections). As such, phenomenon is often mistaken for essence, container mistaken for content and form takes precedence over substance.

I personally do not foresee a optimistic future ahead.

Some post-NKF saga thoughts.

2005-08-01T09:34:00.000-07:00

a short reflection of the recent NKF saga that rocked the front pages of the local papers...
----------------

IT is no exaggeration to say that the recent National Kidney Foundation (NKF) saga has greatly tarnished the image of many charitable organizations here.

But it has also brought to light one fundamental flaw that plagues much of our modern society.

That good ends can sufficiently justify bad means.

What do I mean?

Living in a country that is generally governed on capitalistic principles – of which the measurement of success is often that of achieving the bottom-line – it is easy to justify our actions by citing the goals that have been attained.

As such, surely the thousands who have benefited from NKF’s health programmes can justify the questionable means that have been employed.

As what its former CEO T.T. Durai may have argued: For what can be more noble – and important – than saving a human life?

Such an argument can be highly persuasive – given the nature of the work – but in my opinion, is highly erroneous.

This is because its core value - that of pragmatism, or utilitarianism – is ultimately one without any sensible appeal to morality.

In other words – as what Mr Calvin Choo Kahwei wrote - everything is OK as long as you can raise or make more money, or do not get caught. (“Were not questionable means employed”; ST, July 20)

Today, I sense a similar – and even hypocritical – situation at work here.

In the quest for material success, many individuals chose to ignore their moral compass and instead adopt a “survival of the fittest” work ethos, without any concern for what is right – or wrong.

And yet, many of these individuals – when their pockets are hurt – ironically condemn the NKF’s actions, without realizing that these actions were only the logical conclusion of the pervasive forces of pragmatism that is at work here.

In this instance, the NKF has been made a public scapegoat – and rightfully so. But I fear that unless we start to examine our ethical responsibilities, we will be in peril of going down the slippery slope without even knowing so.

I am not saying that we should discard rational principles and targets in exchange for altruistic sentimentalism, but rather, to advocate the fact that our good deeds must be backed by a clean conscience.

Only then, will charity be true charity. Let’s hope we have learnt our lesson well.

NKF Controversy

2005-07-14T02:01:00.000-07:00

Guess enough has been said about the misappropriateness of funds in the local media... one thing that strikes me however is the fact that many people continue to believe that "the ends justfifies the means" and yet continue to slam Mr Durai for doing so. In other words, what NKF is saying is that "since we helped raised lots of money and we are saving lives", therefore, we have achieved the bottomline, and therefore the rest is secondary. In fact, seems that a certain Mrs Goh also endorses that view.

The point that I want to make here is that "the ends DO NOT justify the means"...and that applies to our faith as well, especially in a postmodern age when the church preaches "relevancy" and "trying to reach out to as many people as possible".

Just because our anthropocentric methods of evangelism garner results (and thus leading more people to Christ) does not mean that we are on the right track to revival.

Even though God may use those who "preach Christ out of selfish ambitions... (or out of) false motives" to expand his Kingdom, it does not excuse us from our responsibilities.

Let us hope the Church will be enlightened on this point - sooner than later.

Amusing ourselves to death

2005-06-13T07:35:00.000-07:00

This is an article I wrote for The Straits Times- wasn't sent to print due to space constraints..
-----------------------------

""The worst loneliness is not to be comfortable with yourself,'' wrote 19thcentury novelistMark Twain.

I suspect many of our young … and old … are feeling that way.

Despite the industrial, scientific and technological benefits ofmodernity, we are not necessarily happier.

In fact,we are becoming a lot lonelier without even realising it.

The multi-tasking abilities of today's young are but a projection oftheir fear of being bored … or lonely.

I am not saying that one should shy away from modern life, like thepeople in the movie, The Village. To do so would be unrealistic, but I do hope we will not make the mistake of equatingquantity with quality, form with substance.

For instance, our notions of friendship are often reduced to thenumber of contacts we have on MSN, how often we getinvited to parties and how much time we spend chatting or gaming online …where more means good, and less means bad.

As a result, we fool ourselves into thinking that being in a crowdmeans having company, without realising that thefaces we see may just be a gallery of cold and impersonal pictures.

We immerse ourselves in a ""peek-a-boo'' world of entertainment andmake-believe, not knowing that the louder welaugh, the deeper we dig ourselves into a rabbit-hole of despair.

Rathan than confronting our problems, we choose to hide behind the incessant drone of activity, in the hope that the noise would drown out the deafening silence of our loneliness.

Rather than using our loneliness ""to spur ourselves into findingsomething to live for, great enough to die for'' …as the late UN secretary-general Dag Hammarskjold once said … we are content to run around in circles, in our pursuit ofgolden eggs and red herrings.

And rather than trying to find the meaning of life, we go on amusingourselves … to death.

Education won't solve social woes

2005-05-30T05:16:00.000-07:00

SOMEONE once asked Confucius how he would deal with the problem ofoverpopulation, and the answer was ""educatethem''. That was 2,500 years ago. But some things haven't changed with time. ""Education'' is often mooted as the way to solve social ills … fromovereating to gambling to sexual addiction. Its basic assumption … the more you are told what is right, the lesslikely you will do what is wrong … is naivelyoptimistic. Fifty years ago, a university graduate was almost unheard of. A childwho started school at age seven would be out ofit by 12. That was all the education many of our founding fathers had, buttheir lack of formal education was no stumblingblock to their achievements. As the late Dr Wee Kim Wee, who did not complete his formal education,said: ""My university was the university oflife.'' Confucius advocated the development of a person's character, inaddition to academic training. However, thatdefinition of education is often narrowed to mean only that which is taughtin schools. Today, most children receive at least 12 to 16 years of formaleducation, but that hasn't solved many of their woes. The fact is, more formal education simply does not equate to beingbetter educated and having a better character. How effective education is has to be seen in the context of a risingindividualism among the young. We come from the I-Me-My generation that is used to instantgratification. Hence, the claim … ""I know what's best foryou'' … made by traditional figures of authority like parents, teachers andeven the government is no longer taken at facevalue but questioned. A modern teenager's beliefs are rooted in ""what works for me'' … nomore benchmarking my behaviour against what youthink I ought to do, but I make decisions based on what I think I like(subs: pls italicise) to do. As such, science textbooks and abstinence organisations - for all theyare worth - are destined to remain sciencetextbooks and abstinence organisations. Why? Many of the prescriptive measures dished out to youths merely assertthe ""what'' and ""how to'', and seldom delveinto ""why'' something is right or wrong. People say that being promiscuous is wrong. My retort is: Why is itwrong? Is it because promiscuity will lead to thespread of infectious diseases that affect society? But if I use a condom, I can help prevent the transmission of HIV/Aids.Does that make permissive behaviour right? If our notions of right and wrong are reduced to a matter of ""whatworks must be right'', then I fear we are slippinginto a dangerous moral relativism. And if that happens, education … which is supposed to teach one torecognise right from wrong … will be madeincreasingly irrelevant. And being promiscuous is right … if not for you … at least it is forme.

Construction safety in Singapore

2005-05-17T06:30:00.000-07:00

With the recent published findings of what went wrong with the Nicoll Highway accident, it is interesting to note the current problems plaguing much of the construction industry.
As a managing director of a reputable scaffolding company here once told me, "while it is good and nice to talk about safety measures, the reality is that time pressures, coupled with financial restrictions do make nearly impossible to abide by every rule in the book" - perhaps it will be good for some of our Ministry of Manpower officials and the various construction-related organisations here to drop by work sites for a look (and i am not talking about planned public relations visits).

But the more critical issue that I am trying to make on this point is that safety is not just about straffing a harness on a worker nor just simply having more checks - safety is linked to how an employee views his worker - that his life is not just about dollars and cents, but linked to the infinite worth that he is being created also in the image of God.

After all, if this foundational presupposition that man is made in the image of God is discarded, then one can always argue that losing one worker (and perhaps compensating his family with say, 50,000) is worth the risk if the project can be completed in a shorter time (especially if the company is able to save costs). Better still, if the death of a worker is not reported, then there isnt even any public relations concerns to worry about -

The same MD told me once when he was working together with his workers on site doing some high-risk work when his site foreman urged him to come down from his position saying that "you are the boss's son, you cannot be doing such things"...

The reply: "These men are also the sons of other parents, are you telling me their lives are worth less?"

Passing of Pres Wee

2005-05-07T07:28:00.000-07:00

Nothing much else to say - except that he is well respected by many in Singapore. I guess what we can all learn would be a sense of humility and being down-to-earth, something that many in power may find difficulty in doing. As Dr Wee said, "My university is society" - I absolutely agree - if only those in university would understand the simple yet profound message of this statement.
It seems that the more developed the education system here becomes, the longer a person studies in school - and yet end up not very much better than our forefathers - an irony.