Second Thoughts About Canonical Pseudepigraphy

In his Dictionary of Later New Testament and Its Developments article on pseudepigraphy (which means “false superscription”), James Dunn discussed the problem of New Testament writings that explicitly claim to have been written by a certain person but were believed by many modern scholars to have been written by someone else.

Unlike anonymous New Testament writings such as the book of Hebrews, the issue of false attribution in pseudepigraphal writings raised questions about their integrity and acceptability in the canon. For example, we read of Serapion (second century A.D.) who rejected the Gospel of Peter as “the writings that falsely bear their names [Peter and the other apostles] . . . knowing that such were not handed down to us” (Eusebius Hist. Eccl. 6.12.3).

Dunn described the nature of the moral and theological problem in this way, “It is this judgment of falseness, of an intent to deceive and mislead, particularly by passing off as apostolic what should not be so regarded, that makes the issue of pseudepigraphy in the NT so sensitive.” On the other hand, Dunn recognized the significant consensus of NT scholarship that maintains the pseudepigraphic character of NT writings such as Ephesians, the Pastoral epistles and 2 Peter. How then should we reconcile this apparent contradiction?

Download the rest of the article review below:
Review the Pseudepigraphy Article

Arts and the Church

The Agora recently threw a discussion of the relationship between Arts and the Church - an uncomfortable one at best. The relationship, I mean, not the discussion.

There is a joke amongst musicians in the Christian Contemporary Music world: just how many JPM's (Jesus's Per Minute) does a song's lyric need before a Christian radio station will agree to play it on the air? The joke points not so subtly to a long-standing complaint from Christians involved in the arts, who often feel that local churches demand that 'Christian' art carry obvious evangelical overtones.

Of course, there are complaints that go the other way as well: many in the church fear that the inclusion of contemporary works of art, drama, music, etc. into corporate worship is a form of compromise with the world.

Both complaints have merit. And both complaints are based upon misunderstandings: often churches do not understand either the power or the limitations of art, and so church leaders can sometimes make demands of artists that end up destroying the art; often artists do not understand the nature of the Gospel itself, and so sometimes in their efforts to help Christians engage with culture they can end up compromising the church - and vice versa: often churches to not understand the nature of the Gospel, while artists can underestimate the power and limitations of art. Throw all that into the rojak, and what the Church often gets is sub-standard art preaching a sub-standard gospel. Which comes first, bad art or bad gospel? Sometimes it is hard to tell.

C.S. Lewis was a champion of the idea that there are Stories ('Myths') that transcend storytelling itself. From his perspective as a professor of medieval literature, even a very good poet or writer cannot elevate a two-dimensional story, or a collection of facts; by contrast, a fully realized, 'mythical' story can be told un-poetically or even in synopsis form, and will still seize the heart of the listener. From Lewis' perspective, the Gospel story is the greatest and most complete of all stories, of which other myths only partake in bits and pieces. Once the Church distills the great Story down to a collection of propositional - or pietistic - 'truths' (which may or may not bear any resemblance to reality), it is very difficult for even a very good Christian artist to resurrect the underlying story. But if the Church continues to tell the Gospel story, the propositional truths will remain evident, will become even more so! - and the hearts of those who listen will be captured by the beauty of Christ.

So what we find is a truly symbiotic relationship. Artists - Christians with a gift for storytelling - need the Church to preach the real Story to them, the Story which will elevate their art beyond the merely beautiful, or prophetic, through the mythical to the sublime. And the Church needs Christian artists to imagine and reimagine the great Story for each context and time, so as to elevate truth and theology beyond mere sermonizing to an art form that actually preaches 'the Gospel, in season and out of season' to everyone who will hear.

Forgotten Treasures: God’s Prophets of the Old Testament

By Rabbi Anthony Loke

There is a group of people mainly found in the Old Testament (OT) who might be considered strange or eccentric today. They have been called diverse names such as prophet, seer, visionary, man of God, and man of the Spirit. Whatever the designation, one thing stands out clearly: they were unique. They often stood out in the crowd like sore thumbs, distinct in the way they dressed (hairy mantle, e.g. Zechariah 13:4), what they ate (wild honey and locusts, e.g. 2 Kings 1:8) or what they did (walking barefoot and naked, e.g. Isaiah 20:2).

These prophets came from all walks of life – from priest (Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi) to herdsman and sycamore tree dresser (Amos), to royalty (Isaiah) – but the personal backgrounds of the majority were unknown. Sometimes even their patrimony was not preserved and their lineage left unspecified. The OT is not concerned with their biographical details. It clearly had little or no interest in the kinds of questions modern readers would ask. The prophets are remembered not because they lived interesting lives but because of their message. Their lasting legacy was the words they left behind. These linger long after the prophets disappeared from the scene. Who can forget some of their more memorable sayings?

‘But let justice roll down like waters,
and righteousness like an everflowing stream.’ (Amos 5:24)
‘He has showed you, O man, what is good;
and what does the Lord require of you
but to do justice and to love kindness,
and to walk humbly with your God?’ (Micah 5:24)

When prophets spoke, even kings stopped to listen (e.g. David in 2 Samuel 12:13). Confrontation with them often proved futile (e.g. the story of Elijah and King Ahaziah in 2 Kings 1:9-17). They were often treated as enemies of the state and the originators of trouble (e.g. Elijah was called the “troubler of Israel” in 1 Kings 18:17). Yet, people frequently sought them for advice about venturing to war (e.g. Micaiah ben Imlah in 1 Kings 22) or to look for lost donkeys (e.g. Samuel the seer in 1 Samuel 9:6) or to seek help when all seemed lost (e.g. Elisha in 2 Kings 4).

Not only did they preach with power and conviction, some of them even dramatised their messages. Ezekiel immediately comes to mind. For Ezekiel, his life and personality became part and parcel of his message. One day, he was found lying on one side. After 390 days, he proceeded to turn over to lie on the other side for another 40 days (Ezekiel 4:4, 6). Another time, he cut his hair and beard and divided the hair into three portions; one portion he burnt, the second he chopped up with his sword, and the third he scattered into the air. Then he took some and sewed them inside the hem of his garment (Ezekiel 5:1-4). One night, with his belongings bundled up, he made a hole in the wall, and proceeded to crawl through it, leaving his flabbergasted neighbours to wonder about his sanity, if they had not already doubted it before (Ezekiel 12:1-7).

Read on for the full article at Kairos latest issue The Church's Forgotten Treasures.

Malaysia Bible Seminary Courses 2008

S2-08 Modules - Upload a doc

Read this doc on Scribd: S2-08 Modules

The Bible is Like...

“Going to the cinema to watch movies is sinful,” declared Disciple Ah Kow. “No, it’s not,” countered Disciple Ah Lek who loves to watch movies, “It’s educational.” Both disciples were washing toilets in the Sow-lin Monastery. The monastery has this policy that its disciples should share in the maintenance of the premises. The policy was instituted for building character in its disciples. The monastery also saves by not employing more janitorial staff.

“Watching movies corrupts the soul,” Ah Kow continued, “Did not the Apostle Peter said, ‘Do not love the world or anything in the world.[1]’” “But the Apostle Paul said, ‘be transformed by the renewing of your mind.[2]’ Going to movies will renew our minds.” responded Ah Lek. “Sinner!” shouted Ah Kow, “You just want to watch semi-naked girls.” “Do not,” Ah Lek shouted back, “I want to watch the movie The Passion of the Christ.” “Liar!” screamed Ah Kow pushing Ah Lek. Ah Lek responded with a well executed ‘drunken tiger falling down the hill’ roundhouse kick.

Abba Ah Beng was sitting crossed legged eating durian[3] in the main hall when his two disciples were brought before him. He looked up at Ah Kow and Ah Lek with a gleam in his eyes, which set the two disciples’ knees quaking[4]. “Fighting again, I see,” sighed Abba Ah Beng, “Ah Kow, open this durian with this screwdriver.” Ah Kow reached out to grab the durian and tried to open the fruit. All he managed to get were lots of painful scratches. “Here, let me,” said Ah Lek as he reached out and grab the screwdriver. With a skilful poke and twist, he opened the fruit into two pieces revealing the seeds with its golden fleshy outer layer.

A rich aroma filled the hall. Both Abba Ah Beng and Ah Lek inhaled with a satisfied “Hmm.” Ah Kow gagged. “Such a wonderful smell” sighs Ah Lek. “So horrible-lah. Like rotten eggs!” Ah Kow complained. “Here,” Abba Ah Beng said, “eat, eat.” Ah Lek took a seed and ate its luscious flesh with a look of ecstasy on his face. “Very good-lah” he commented. Abba Ah Beng beamed. “Sure good-lah. Special tree, B94” he explained. Meanwhile, Ah Kow shut his eyes as he put the fleshy seed in his mouth. “Urgh!” he croaked, “the inner seed is so hard.” Then he choked and turned blue as he had accidentally swallowed the seed.

“The Bible is like a durian,” explained Abba Ah Beng, as he performed the Heimlich manoeuvre on Ah Kow. “To apply it, you have to know how to open it. Otherwise all you get are some painful wounds. With the correct technique, which is the Holy Spirit, you can open the Bible and taste of its teachings. The succulent fleshy part of the seed is the interpretations and traditions of the church. These are the negotiable part of the Bible; like going to the movies, wearing jeans to church, or playing drums during worship. Some people love it, others hate it. The hard seed is the inner core of Biblical teaching. It is non-negotiable and consists of truths such as God is three and one (the Trinity), Jesus is the Son of God, and Jesus is fully human and fully God. This seed when planted in the right soil will grow into a tree and bear good fruits.”

Both disciples blinked in awe at Abba Ah Bang’s insight, the durian forgotten. Abba Ah Beng calmly finished his durian, burped and said, “I’m going to town, my movie starts in an hour.”


Endnotes:
[1] 1 John 2:15a
[2] Romans 12:2b
[3] A durian is a round fruit with thorns on the outside. It is the King of fruits. Either you love it or hate it. Want to know more, google ‘durian’ and hope your computer do not smell.
[4] Disciple Ah Kow later set up the Christian group called Quakers.


read more here

.

Ecclesiates: The Meaning Of Life

After more than a year of labor, Dr Leong Tien Fock finally reached the conclusion of his commentary/blog on Ecclesiastes:

“"The conclusion, says Qoheleth, in light of all that has been heard, is indeed what has been anticipated all along: fear God and keep His commandments... In other words, this is what being human is all about. It is the very essence or purpose of human existence. No wonder when a human being violates God’s commandments and commits something unconscionable we would say, “He is not a human being!”

This explains why “God so works that man should fear Him” (3:14). And why life does not really make sense until and unless we live according to this purpose. In our exposition we have already discussed how the fear of God contributes in different ways to the meaning of life. What needs to be added here is that the fear of God provides a transcendent purpose for living under the sun. A transcendent purpose is certainly more worthwhile and meaningful than one which is not. And human beings do express the need for such a purpose. As sociologist Peter Berger puts it, “The religious impulse, the quest for meaning that transcends the restricted space of empirical existence in this world, has been a perennial feature of humanity. (This is not a theological statement but an anthropological one—an agnostic or even an atheist philosopher may well agree with it.) It would require something close to a mutation of the species to extinguish this impulse for good” (1999:13).

Theologian McGrath confirms that even prominent atheists like Sigmund Freud and Karl Marx do not deny the fact that human beings do seek for transcendent meaning; they simply sought to explain away this human desire as “nothing more than a coping mechanism thrown up by the human mind to shield us from the unbearable pain of knowing [from their atheist point of view] that life is pointless” (2002:11-12). Even if it is indeed purely a “coping mechanism,” being able to cope with reality is still better than bearing the “unbearable pain” of meaninglessness. And what if Qoheleth is correct, that this “coping mechanism” is not just an invention of the human mind but also an intention of the divine will?

If Qoheleth is correct, “God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether good or evil.” This judgment is here given as the basis (“For”) to heed his exhortation to fear God and keep His commandments. Since this judgment is comprehensive, especially since even “every hidden thing” will not escape scrutiny, it has to be a judgment after death. Furthermore, only a belief in such an inescapable judgment would be adequate to move one’s conscience to take Qoheleth's exhortation and God's commandments seriously. If Qoheleth did not have in mind a judgment after death, his exhortation to fear God rings hollow.

Also, the human heart cries out for a final accounting of all that is done under the sun. For unless good deeds are ultimately vindicated and bad deeds incriminated, our sense of justice is violated, and like a movie that ends with the villain vanquishing the hero, life does not make sense. Only with an assurance of a final and just accounting do we have an idea of how the story of life under the sun ends, and ends meaningfully. Only then do we know something of the significance, or meaning, of what we do in this world. With the disclosure of this transcendent ingredient to the meaning of life, Qoheleth ends his speech."

Recently, I did an assignment on existential meaninglessness from the angle of the after life with interaction with some of Freud and Marx's themes as well.

Check out The Case for Afterlife, Is Heaven a pie in the sky? and How on Hell Is It Fair?

Seven Reasons Why I Like the Apostle Paul

Here are seven reasons why I like Paul of Tarsus.


1. He is a fanatic. Fanaticism has a bad reputation. It brings to mind suicide bombers strapping explosives to their bodies, and going to crowded places to blow up innocent men, women and children. However, the meaning of a fanatic is a person who is totally devoted to a cause. Paul is a fanatic. He is totally committed to the God of his religion. He was so incensed when he heard about The Way which taught that the Messiah has come (and he was not consulted), that he packed his bags and sailed from Tarsus to Jerusalem to persecute the followers of The Way. In Jerusalem, he became the model for the later day Inquisitors by going from house to house and arresting the followers of Jesus.

Paul is so effective that he received a personal audience from the ascended Christ Himself! Paul still remained fanatic. However he is now a 180-degrees fanatic. He just turns the other direction and remain as fanatic as before. He now champions The Way and persecutes rabbinic Judaism! The scripture did not say it but I suspect the Jerusalem Christians gave a sigh of relief when they shipped Paul back to Tarsus.

I like Paul’s fanaticism. At least you know where he stands and his commitment. Instead of wallowing in self-pity and doubt when he discovered that he was actually persecuting the followers of the Messiah, he continued in His service. For Paul, there is no either/or/maybe. It is yes or no. I remembered what my mentor once told me. He was accused by an exasperated non-Christian that he is a fanatic. “Yes, I am a fanatic,” he answered, “now, what about you?” Resounding echoes of Paul in his rebuttal.

2. He is a systems thinker. A systems thinker is one who sees the whole picture without being bogged downed by details. That is what I like about Paul. He sees God’s plan of redemption of mankind and recreation. Paul is able to fit the jigsaw pieces of the Hebrew Bible and the gospel narratives of Jesus’ life and sees the big picture. And what was more amazing is that he is able to communicate it to others in ways that they understand. Many systems thinkers are lousy teachers. Paul’s earlier writings, in form of letters to the churches of Galatia, Thessalonica and Corinth were to address specific problems faced by these churches. Yet we see glimmers of his thinking in them. It is in the book of Romans that he blossoms and reveals God’s mighty plan for mankind and all of creation.

3. He is missional. Missional is a new word, coined by the emerging churches. When we use the word ‘mission’, we normally think of missionary going to do their work ‘over there.’ The emerging churches use the word missional to describe each of us becoming a missionary ‘over here’ or where we are now. This is another reason why I like Paul. He is not too worried about terms and set about doing what he is supposed to do and we stumble after him inventing words to describe what he did. He is missional before the word is invented. Another way to describe missional is: seeing where God is going and going with Him. That is exactly what Paul did. He sees that God’s plans involve all of mankind, not just the Jews. By default, he became the apostle to the Gentiles and I am eternally grateful to him.

4. He is courageous. How many people do you meet that can actually admit that they are wrong. “Oops. Sorry for persecuting you and leaving you in prison!” Paul was able to see his mistake and became a follower of Christ. Then he went and confront his old religion, rabbinic Judaism. Next he went and confronted the pillar of the church, Peter in Antioch. And he quarrelled with Barnabas because of John Mark. I love that guy. He is always confronting someone. Sometimes I wonder if his sufferings will be less if he is not so confrontational! Confrontation takes courage and Paul has courage. How many of us have the courage to confront the wrongs that we see? It is so much safer and easier to keep quiet and ignore it.

5. He is focussed. He knew what he has to do and he did it. He observes that a marathon runner has to lose excessive weight if he is to finish well. So Paul left all he had behind and set forth to fulfil his destiny and to suffer. He could have stayed at home in Tarsus. He would become the rabbi of a mega-synagogue, married a nice Jewish girl and have lots of little Pauls and Paulines running around. No, he detached himself from worldly attachments. In the end, he was executed by beheading at the side of a road outside a gate of Rome and buried in an unmarked grave. Regrets? He may have some but to echo Jim Elliot, “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.”

6. He invests in people. Paul may be the foremost theologian of the Christ faith but what endear him to me are his relationships with people. His letters are full of greetings to people he had met, written to or referred to. In modern day terms, he is a foremost networker. But unlike the most networker who networks for the contacts she can use in her business, Paul’s networking is because he sees Christ in each of them. Paul is not into organisation or structures but into human resources. Paul believes that one person can make a difference. I wonder how many of us agree with Paul and believe that what each of us do here and now can make a difference. I believe if we see people as Paul sees them, we will spend more time with, and invest our resources in people.

7. He leaves an enduring legacy of hope. Paul is a reformed Pharisee, Hebrew scholar, inquisitor, theologian, missionary, pastor, teacher, church planter, mentor, and networker. He left behind a large body of writings that was never rivalled. However, the legacy he left with me is his humanity. He is honest about his struggles, his pride and his suffering. Paul suffered physical, mental, emotional and spiritual attacks. Yet, what shone though was his humanity; a man in the process of becoming a ‘new man in Christ.’ And that gives me hope. Paul’s legacy is his blessed hope; that one day, all pain and sufferings will end and we shall be with Jesus forever.

Paul is a fanatic/ systems thinker/ missional/courageous/ focussed/people orientated/eschatological hope-giving follower of the Way. Hey, he is a neat guy and I like him. I wonder if he plays golf.


more of my comments about Paul here

Mengapa Sejarah Penting?

Terjemahan dari KeropokLekor dan Hedonese

Dalam surat yang singkat, Yudas (Jude) mengajar kita sedikit sebanyak tentang pentingnya menimba ikhtibar daripada sejarah. Ini bukan isi utama surat tersebut. Akan tetapi, beberapa pemerhatian yang seterusnya agak luar biasa:

Dalam surat kedua terakhir dalam Al-Kitab, Yudas menulis untuk mendorong para pengikut Kristus untuk “mempertahankan dengan bersemangat, iman yang telah diwahyukan Tuhan kepada mereka” (ayat 3). Surat ini adalah amaran supaya berwaspada akan orang tertentu yang telah masuk menyelusup… orang-orang yang fasik, yang menyalahgunakan kasih karunia Allah kita untuk melampiaskan hawa nafsu mereka, dan yang menyangkal satu-satunya Penguasa dan Tuhan kita, Yesus Kristus.” (ayat 4). Yudas menyifatkan orang-orang tersebut dengan jelas. Mereka “mengutuk segala yang mereka tidak fahami” (ayat 10). Mereka “mengadu tentang nasib mereka, mencari salah orang lain, hidup menuruti hawa nafsu mereka, membodek orang untuk menangguk di air keruh” (ayat 16). Mereka “menyebabkan pecah-belah dan berfikiran duniawi, dan hidup tanpa Roh Kudus” (ayat 19).

Penilaian yang dahsyat ini bukanlah ditujukan kepada orang-orang di luar gereja, tetapi kepada orang telah menyelusup tanpa disedari. Yudas mahu umat mengecam mereka supaya gereja tidak ditipu dan dihancurkan oleh ajaran sesat dan perbuatan tidak bermoral mereka.

Salah satu strategi Yudas adalah dengan membandingkan mereka dengan watak dan peristiwa lain dalam sejarah. Contohnya, dia berkata bahawa “Sodom dan Gomorrah… yang dengan cara yang sama melakukan percabulan dan mengejar kepuasan-kepuasan yang tak wajar, telah menanggung siksaan api kekal sebagai peringatan kepada semua orang.” (ayat 7).

Jadi Yudas membandingkan pengajar-pengajar sesat tersebut dengan Sodom and Gomora. Tujuan beliau menjadikan Sodom dan Gomora sebagai “peringatan” kepada apa yang bakal menimpa mereka. Dalam minda Yudas, mengetahui sejarah Sodom dan Gomora itu penting bagi mengecam ajaran sesat dan melindungi umat daripadanya.

Seperti ayat 11, Yudas memberikan 3 rujukan lain kepada peristiwa lampau sebagai perbandingan dengan apa yang sedang berlaku di kalangan orang Kristian. Beliau berkata “Celakalah mereka, kerana mereka mengikuti jejak Kain dan kerana mereka, oleh sebab upah, menceburkan diri ke dalam kesesatan Balaam, dan mereka binasa kerana kederhakaan seperti Korah.”

Menarik sekali. Kenapa Yudas melihat kembali tiga insiden sejarah yang berlaku beribu-ribu tahun dahulu – Kejadian 19 (Sodom), Kejadian 3 (Kain), Bilangan 22-24 (Balaam), Bilangan 16 (Korah)? Apakah tujuan Yudas?

Berikut adalah tiga sebabnya:
1) Yudas menganggap bahawa pembaca sudah mengetahui kisah-kisah sejarah tersebut! Adakah ini tidak menakjubkan? Zaman Yudas adalah abad pertama! Tiada buku-buku cetakan. Tiada Al-Kitab. Tiada kaset atau video. Hanya hafalan dan cerita yang diwarisi. Dan Yudas menganggap mereka akan jelas tentang “jejak Kain”, “kesesatan Balaam” dan “kederhakaan Korah”? Tahukah anda tentang kisah tersebut? Bukankah ini menarik? Ini menyebabkan saya merasakan bahawa tahap pengetahuan Al-Kitab dalam gereja kita hari ini adalah terlalu rendah.

2) Yudas menganggap bahawa dengan mengetahui sejarah, masalah situasi semasa dapat dimudahkan. Orang Kristian akan lebih bersedia menghadapi ajaran sesat pada hari ini jika mereka mengetahui situasi yang sama semalam. Dengan kata lain, sejarah adalah penting untuk kehidupan Kristian. Untuk mengetahui bahawa Kain iri hati dan membenci abangnya dan merosakkan hubungannya dengan Tuhan akan memberi amaran kepada kita agar berjaga-jaga sekiranya perkara yang sama berlaku hari ini. Kesedaran bahawa Balaam menyalahgunakan Firman Tuhan untuk kepentingan diri membolehkan anda kenalpasti perbuatan yang sama hari ini. Mengetahui bahawa Korah memberontak terhadap kepimpinan sah Nabi Musa akan memperlengkapi anda agar berwaspada dengan orang-orang tidak suka dipimpin.

3) Tidakkah ianya jelas bahawa Tuhan menentukan arus sejarah dan pastikan ianya direkodkan supaya kita memperoleh ikhtibar dan lebih bijaksana dan berpengetahuan dalam menangani situasi semasa demi Kristus dan gereja-Nya? Janganlah berhenti belajar sejarah. Tambahlah ilmu pengetahuan setiap hari. Dan berilah anak-anak kita salah satu perlindungan bagi cabaran masa depan, iaitu, pengajaran kisah-kisah lampau.

Belajar dengan anda, demi Kristus dan kerajaan-Nya
John Piper

There And Back Again: Malaysian Exiles

Antony Loke wrote this biblical exposition to "show how an Old Testament exilic text, in this particular case, Isaiah 40-55, can be read in the light of and allowed to speak to a contemporary situation: the post-1987 Operation Lalang Malaysian Church."

Excerpt: "How did the Malaysian church respond to this national crisis (DC:Operasi Lalang)? Unfortunately, it was not too well. The morning edition of the Star national newspaper showed a blackened photo, to protest against the Government’s use of the ISA.

While the rest of the nation raised a hue and cry against the injustice, the Malaysian church was unduly silent. In the days and weeks that followed, the Malaysian church did not respond in its Christian magazines and publications or local church newsletters with the single exception of the Catholic Asian News (CAN) which openly called all Roman Catholics to pray and hold masses for those detained, regardless of whether the detainees were Roman Catholics or not.

The self-imposed muzzled silence of the rest of the Malaysian church was perplexing and baffling.

Why did it respond in this manner? Was it purely out of fear? Fear of further repercussions from the Government, which was already emboldened to use the ISA and which, it was felt, would not hesitate to use it again? Was the self-muzzling an act of restraint lest the more vocal prophetic voices within the church lashed out against the Government’s actions and caused more harm in that volatile situation? From hindsight, we are better able now to judge the response of the Malaysian church. But at that time, what would have been our response in the midst of the confusion, despair and despondency that had crept into the church?"

Read the entire article here