Alternative culture: Anglican General Synod votes to reject report on same-sex marriage

Recently, the Church of England voted 100 to 93 to reject a report that would have allowed gay clergy to practise their sexual preferences (instead of remaining celibate) and allow the conduction of same-sex marriage.

Traditionalism or liberalism?
To the laymen, it may seem like a simple battle between the reactionaries who want to stick to traditional marriages and the radicals who want the church to be more accommodating to our homosexual friends.

However, to me, there is a greater battle than that. It is a battle of identity. Do we define ourselves by our sexuality or traditions, and reason our way from there? Or are we willing to identify ourselves as Christians and be willing to follow what Jesus said.

What did Jesus say about marriage?
“But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.' ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.’So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” 
-- Mark 10: 5-9

For out of the heart come evil thoughts—murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander.

-- Matthew 15: 19

Jesus not only affirms that marriage should be between male and female (Mark 10:5-9), he also spoke against sexual immorality in Matthew 15:19, which would have included homosexuality.

Let's be clear: Being homosexual does not send someone to hell, and being heterosexual does not send someone to heaven. We can only can be with God when we believe Jesus is Lord and has taken our sins away.

Conclusion
My stand on the matter is well-represented by Sam Allberry in the video below:

Theology 1.0: What is the Lewis trilemma?

The Lewis trilemma is the apologetic defence of the divinity of Jesus, popularised by CS Lewis (the writer of Chronicles of Narnia and the Screwtape Letters) in his 1952 book Mere Christianity. 

Based on Jesus's description of himself in the New Testament, Lewis argues the following:

1) Jesus is God
This is because this is who Jesus claims he is.

2) Jesus is evil
This is because he claims to be God and gathers followers .

OR

3) Jesus is mad.
This is because he was mistaken to be God.

What Lewis was criticising was the view that Jesus was a simple moral teacher. In his words,

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell.

What are the rebuttals?

Christian New Testament scholar, N.T. Wright (1999) felt that Lewis oversimplified how first century Jews might have understood Jesus's words. For instance in offering the forgiveness of sins, Jesus was telling the Jews that they did not need to pay for such a service at a temple, rather than showing he was God.

Christian philosopher William Lane Craig (1994) also points out that it is possible to be deluded and yet give great moral teaching. In other words, Lewis trilemma fails to take in other possibilities.

Conclusion

While the Lewis trilemma is not perfect, it is a great primer to kick off a discussion on why we see Jesus as more than a moral teacher.

References

Craig, W.L.C. (1994). Reasonable Faith

Wright, N.T. (1999). The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering who Jesus was and is.

Alternative Culture: Trump becomes the next president.

Map of the continental United States, from the board game Pandemic

In early November the unthinkable happened -- Donald Trump, a businessman with zero political experience was voted in to become the 45th president of the United States.

In this post, I want to get some theological reflections from this year's election. Before I get misunderstood, I am not a Trump supporter, nor am I a Clinton supporter. As an observer from Singapore, I would much rather see a Sanders VS Kasich election. If you are looking at a political analysis of a Trump presidency, go to another blog.

Theological observations
1) Liberal bias of the media

By watching the news alone, I would assumed that Clinton would win the election easily with 70% of the vote. After all, no major newspaper and news agencies openly endorsed Trump, especially with his seemingly divisive speeches. (Even Fox News, which traditionally supported the Republicans which Trump was representing, called the election result "unreal".)

However the media failed to reflect the reality on the ground. This should fuel our scepticism of the media's objectivity. This leads on to the next point.

2) The frustration of the masses

The key issues that were brought up were immigration, job security and trade. While there have been benefits of free trade agreements, the American masses do not feel those benefits. Trump may have been divisive in statements concerning political and social issues, but his economic promises were music to the ears of factory workers.

3) The importance of contingency plans

As Trump now begins to pull out of trade agreements and implement protectionist policies, my country of Singapore will feel the impact. We can ill-afford to be complacent and must adjust accordingly.

Conclusion
As Christians, we should be wary of what we read and what we hear. While we seek for news that that favour us, we should never be taken astray from the reality of the world and the truth of God's word.

And no matter what happens, God is in charge.

I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.

-- John 16:33

Video reference

Alternative Culture: Christianity in Asia exhibition at Asian Civilisation Museum

Japanese martyrs

Recently, I visited the Christianity in Asia exhibit at the Asian Civilisation Museum (in Singapore). My knowledge of Asian Christianity is limited: I do know of the Hudson Taylor's efforts in China and Francis Xavier's in Japan, but not too much beyond that.

I was quite pleasantly surprised by the evidence Chinese Christians in 800 AD, as shown by the tavlet below. The museum also displayed the sword hilts of the Christian samurai.

Tablet of Nestorian Christians in China dated around 800 AD

Displays of Christ and angels from India to Southeast Asia were always shown. All in all, it was a good attempt by the museum to show that Christians were not newcomers to Asia.

Ivory ornaments from India

With due respect: Nabeel Qureshi is not a good example of a convert

Recently, the Christian blog Pulpit and Pen criticised Christian convert Nabeel Qureshi, joining the chorus of several religious commenters. Their issues concerned the legitimacy of his conversion and whether he was truly Muslim in the first place.

While I do not know Nabeel personally, I have followed the news of his ministry from 2008. I feel compelled to write something in his defence before others continue to slander him. So let me deal with the unfair criticism.

1) Nabeel's contradictions in his conversion story

In Nabeel's conversion story, he had dreamt of a banquet hosted by Jesus that he was not allowed enter. This was one of his more potent dreams as his friend David stopped him from entering the banquet.

What was this major contradiction? In some of the stories, David was standing while in others, David was sitting.

Firstly, the whole point of the story was that Nabeel was disallowed from entering the banquet, rather than David's stance.

Secondly, a simple check of Nabeel's stories reveals that in most versions of the story, David was sitting. Nabeel's simple slip should not make us judge his character.

2) Nabeel was never really a Muslim

Nabeel never hid the fact that he was an Ahmadi Muslim. While Ahmadis are regarded as heretics by orthodox Muslims and are persecuted in some countries, Ahmadis do see themselves as Muslims. So naturally, Nabeel would introduce himself as an ex-Muslim, rather than an ex-Ahmadi as the differences would be too pedantic for most listeners.


So Nabeel was not being deceptive as introduce himself as an ex-Muslim, even if one feels that Ahmadis are not Muslims.

3) Nabeel should not participate at a conference (Together 2016)where "enemies of the cross" are also speaking

Well, I would also jump at a chance to preach the gospel even if someone invited me to speak at an atheist conference. At Together 2016, there were famous Christians like Francis Chan, Ravi Zacharias and Louie Giglio. They are hardly the sort one would call heretic Christians.

That said, we cannot expect everyone at a conference to agree with everything we are saying.


Conclusion
Pulpit and pen's editor Seth Dunn was being unfair in his judgement of Nabeel. He did apologise somewhat, but stuck to his general opinions.


For further references

Alternative culture: How theology infuenced ISIS

Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant
The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIS, is a terrorist organisation which currently controls some Iraqi, Lebanese and Syrian territories. Claiming to be a Caliphate (a successor kingdom to the one Prophet Muhammad established), ISIS urges all Sunni Muslims to fight the decadent West and recognise its statehood.

ISIS has also claimed responsiblity for the 2015 Paris attacks and 2016 Brussels bombings.

In this post I will be exploring why the theology of ISIS is so attractive to potential recruits.

Why they are convincing
The temptation is to brush off the members of ISIS as gullible fools who were mislead into following a misguided form of a religion. Yet we have educated professionals signing up to ISIS to serve as doctors, military strategists and computer engineers. Why?

To a secular audience it may sound weird, but true religion is not just hobby people share with friends. To a true religious person, God is the most important thing in their lives. ISIS uses this fact well in its recruitment.

If all that is needed to be justified before God and enter paradise is to die for him, then ISIS is the most logical and safest bet for eternity. In the course of life, it is inevitable that one feels guilt on all the mistakes one has done in his or her life. Yet in final judgement, if God brings up one's sins, one could tell God that "I died for you", and therefore is worthy of paradise.

In the light of Christianity
However in Christianity, one could not use that reasoning. Even if we were to give our lives in following God, we do not change the fact that God (in the manhood of Jesus) had died for us. Our only hope is that God would reveal Himself to us in such a way that He chose us.

Conclusion
Any level-headed analysis of any movement must take into the account its theology.

For more information
ISIS

Theology 1.0: What is the earliest Christian creed?

St. John Cathedral, Hong Kong in 2016

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
-- 1 Corinthians 15: 3 - 8

A creed is a statement of belief. The first Christian creed is found in 1 Corinthians 15: 3-8, stating that Jesus died and rose again. Paul is estimated to have written this creed 2 - 24 years after the crucifixion of Jesus.

The significance of this creed was that it was written so close to the actual events of Jesus's life that it would have been easy for the early Christians to correct Paul had he been inaccurate.

This creed lends credibility to the historical reliability to the New Testament.

For further details
Article from CARM

Article from Wikipedia