The Dance of God

The Reason for God - Dance of God

Teach Your Baby To Read: Share It!

“Has Science Buried God?” A Debate between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

In 2006, Oxford biologist Richard Dawkins published his best-seller The God Delusion, a scathing attack on religion in general and the Christian faith in particular. With generous doses of ridicule and scorn, he sought to convince people why there almost certainly is no God. For Dawkins, religion is what happens when people persistently choose to believe in a delusion despite contrary evidence. But has science really disproved the existence of a personal Creator? Well, just the opposite may be true. According to John Lennox, professor of mathematics and philosophy of science at Oxford, the evidence actually points us to belief in a purposeful Creator of the universe.

His monograph “God’s Undertaker: Has Science Buried God?” represents a sustained response to Dawkins’ challenges from a Christian perspective. Since then, both eminent scientists had conducted their debate live before sold-out crowds. The most recent encounter was held at the Oxford Museum of Natural History where the famed evolution debate between Thomas Huxley and Samuel Wilberforce took place in 1860. More than 150 years after the publication of Charles Darwin’s Origin of the Species, the question of God in relation to science is as fascinating and fierce a topic to engage the human mind as ever.  The format of this debate also entitled “Has Science Buried God?” was unusual in that both proponents engaged in extended conversations without much intervention from a moderator. Although it allowed for more spontaneous exchanges, the lack of a clear structure also meant that various issues cropped up that deviated somewhat from the main topics.

The Intelligible Universe

In his opening gambit, Dawkins made a surprising concession that “a reasonably respectable case” can be made for a deistic God, who merely set up the laws of nature, sat back and watched the show. It seemed like an about-turn from his de facto atheist position. In The God Delusion, Dawkins rated belief in God as highly improbable comparable to belief in fairies beneath a garden[1]. But he immediately went on the offensive by chastening Lennox for his specifically theistic beliefs, such as Jesus’ miracle of turning water into wine. Dawkins found it unbelievable that the Creator of the universe, this Paragon of mathematical laws and physical science, should intervene to rid the world of sin by being personally tortured and executed. In start contrast, what he saw as “profoundly unscientific” and “petty” would inspire the Psalmist’s awesome wonder when he marveled in song, “When I consider Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place, “What is man that you are mindful of him, the son of man that you care for him?”[2]

In response, Lennox found it equally hard to believe the atheist’s claim that there is no rationality behind the universe’s existence. How could an intelligent mind such as Dawkins’ be produced by “freak accident”? As scientists, both men operate on the assumption that the world and its laws could be studied and understood rationally. But how do we account for the intelligibility of the universe? The entire scientific enterprise is undermined if the reliability of our cognitive faculties is in doubt. For Dawkins, the truth-discovering faculty of a brain is obviously useful for our survival in the real world. It would not help the propagation of genes if animals often made misguided jumps off a cliff. Lennox quipped that some human beings do very well by telling lies. The problem is also known as “Darwin’s doubt”: How can we really trust a mind that has been determined by unguided, mindless evolution interested only in reproductive success rather than the truth? For a Christian scientist, the world is ultimately intelligible because there is Logos (or a rational Mind) behind it. The present impasse may be transcended with further exploration into whether truth-discovery is necessarily helpful to survival or paranoid false beliefs could function as a survival strategy too.  

The Origin of Everything

Fred Hoyle once said that the probability of life appearing on Earth is like the chance that a hurricane, sweeping through a junkyard, would assemble a Boeing 747. Dawkins admitted that scientists do not yet have an answer to explain how the extremely precise balance of physical laws and gravitational constants necessary for organic life came about. However, such gaps in our current knowledge should not be a license to bring in God as an explanation. The “parable” of Darwin’s theory showed that even seemingly designed living organisms could emerge from blind processes of natural selection. Perhaps we should wait patiently for a cosmologist “Darwin” to arrive on the scene. But even if science could never fill these gaps, he added, the God hypothesis would still be far more complex to explain than the “simpler” problem of the universe’s origin. Dawkins also had little patience for the idea that God may guide the evolutionary process in order to create life because it would be an unnecessary add-on explanation for something that could be exhaustively explained with natural causes. If we can explain a falling object by gravitational force, we wouldn’t dream of saying “Oh! There must be a God pushing it down”?    

Lennox took issue with the false dichotomy that just because a scientific mechanism has been discovered (evolution or gravity), the role of God as an Agent is ruled out of court. He believed that science could open up a few “good gaps” that we would expect if God indeed created the universe. Perhaps it would be helpful if he could distinguish between “bad gaps” caused by ignorance and “good gaps” revealed by more accurate scientific knowledge. For example, recent discovery of complex DNA language coded in the book of life is a clue inferring to the existence of a rational Mind behind it. For Lennox, the atheist’s assumption that there must be an exhaustive, reductionistic and natural explanation for all things is itself a faith position that cannot be verified by scientific experiments. Philosophically, he argued that the question “Who created God?” is meaningless because by definition, God is eternal and not caused by anything else.

As an analogy, we may imagine the sight of a tree being struck down by lightning while driving north from Simpang Pulai on a rainy monsoon day. The tree fell from a hill, washed down by pouring water and triggered an avalanche of rocks. At the end of these observable natural processes, a long string of rocks formed the words “Welcome to Ipoh!” Would we be inclined to think that it was no freak accident and that the natural processes themselves were directed by intelligence? It is not a superfluous but reasonable inference to the best explanation. If that simple rock-based information leads us to such a conclusion, how much more compelling is the complex, ancient DNA language written in each and every cell within our bodies? To borrow a quote from Lennox, “You don’t argue away the existence of an agent by explaining the natural mechanism.”

Ultimate Meaning and Purpose in Life

What can science tell us about morality and the purpose of life? Is there any ultimate justice in a world of suffering and injustice? The practical implications from both worldviews came into stark relief when such fundamental issues were addressed. When pressed for his own position, Dawkins bit the bullet with admirable clarity, “OK, suppose there is no hope. Suppose there is no justice. Suppose there’s nothing but misery and darkness and bleakness. Suppose there’s nothing that we would wish for… Too bad!” He proposed that it is a nobler alternative to face up to our inevitable death in a silent and cold universe than pinning our hopes on childhood illusions and imaginary friends. It is completely irrelevant whether a belief is comforting because the psychological benefits don’t make it true. We need to have solid evidence to ground our beliefs. Within an atheistic framework, Dawkins believed that each one of us could make up a meaning for our own lives. However, not all constructed meanings are equally valid. From his own subjective standards, Dawkins believed that it would be a “tragedy” that people waste their lives devoted to religion.

Lennox would agree that beliefs should be evaluated based on evidence rather than the emotional comfort it offered. He pointed out that atheism could be guilty of Freudian wish-fulfillment as well – “a flight away from the reality of God”. Lennox stressed the historical evidence of Jesus’ resurrection from the empty tomb and eyewitnesses. If Jesus rose from the death, it is a worldview-shattering event that expands our “horizon of hope” beyond the bounds of death. At least, in view of mainstream scholarship, Dawkins was forced to take back his claim that Jesus’ existence was disputable. Through God’s self-revelation in Christ, Lennox testified that it was a personal relationship with Him that offered fullness of life (science included!).

Under the looming shadows of a T-Rex skeleton, both participants did a good job comparing the worldviews they represented. Dawkins held the rhetorical edge with his engaging analogies, but Lennox held his own with careful philosophical arguments. It is a worthwhile experience to listen in order to understand the views of someone you do not agree with. The full debate may be viewed from YouTube or Fixed-Point.org.

---

[1] The God Delusion, pages 51-53

[2] Psalm 8:3-4 

Book Review: The Other Six Days

Review: The Other Six Days (Paul Stevens)


For most of church history, the people of God have been divided into two categories – those who “do ministry” (the clergy) and the objects of ministry (the laity). This clergy-laity division perpetuates a caste system of “spiritual” work with missionaries and pastors at the top of value chain, followed by people-helping professionals (like doctors, teachers, nurses) and “barely-religious, secular” jobs (such as lawyers, politicians and jazz musicians) close to the bottom! In The Other Six Days, Stevens challenged that dualism with provocative biblical, theological and practical reasons.

In Part I of the book, the author sounded a clarion call for reframing a theology “of the whole people of God” (where every member of the church is gifted, chosen and called by God for service in the world), “for the whole people of God” (which intentionally empowers the ordinary believer for practical, applied living) and “by the people of whole people of God” (where academic theologians work together with ordinary believers in the furnace of marketplace realities). By doing so, we recover an ecclesiology where each member is “ordained” to do the Lord’s work from Mondays to Saturdays and equipped to apply biblically Kingdom values to his daily concerns.

He argued that even in the Old Testament, the entire nation of Israel was called to belong to God and serve His purposes (Exodus 19:6). But within that people, were not some given a special call to be priests, prophets and kings? According to Stevens, the new covenant envisaged by the Old Testament promised a day in which all people will have God’s law written in their hearts (Jeremiah 31:34). The once-for-all sacrifice of Jesus the great High Priest has fulfilled the function of the Old Testament priesthood so that now the entire church is a royal priesthood. But he cautioned against ‘anti-clericalism’, stressing the need for gifted leadership of dedicated pastors as God’s will for the church (page 53). Drawing from the doctrine of Trinity, he outlined how the church needs to mirror that perichoretic life of God by rejecting individualism and embracing every member to contribute to the unity/ministry of the whole community of faith.

In Part II of the book, Stevens explores the thorny subject of calling and vocation in a culture where we no longer find meaning at work in relation to God. It is common to hear believers in ‘full time’ ministry speak of a special call from God but it seems not to apply to other believers. Stevens proposed that we do not separate God’s calling for humanity into two, disconnected mandates – The Creation Mandate (Genesis 1:27 – 30) and The Great Commission (Matthew 28:19-20). It has tragic consequences to emphasize one and downplay the other. Rather, we ought to see our human calling in terms of a “covenant encompassing creation, redemption and final consummation. Salvation is both a rescue operation (recovering our lost vocation in Eden) and a completion project (preparing for the final renewal of creation at the second coming of Jesus)” . In that sense, all believers are called to communion with God, community-building (relationships, family and holy sexuality) and stewards in caring for the creation. “Every legitimate human occupation (paid or unpaid) is some dimension of God’s own work: making, designing, doing chores, beautifying, organizing, helping, bringing dignity and leading.”

In Part III of the book, Stevens explores how the biblical ministries of prophet, priest and king relate to the whole people of God in the wider world. As priests, the church intercedes for others in God’s presence and offers up everyday life as ‘spiritual worship’ (Romans 12:1). As regents, they bring in Kingdom values to bear on all of life. They embody the rule of God on earth as it is in heaven. As prophets, they bear witness to the gospel and challenge dehumanizing powers and idolatrous systems. People can be encouraged to see the marketplace as a natural place for evangelism by “using workplace terminology to share our faith; by connecting Sunday and Monday through interviewing people about their work, and praying for them; by extending pastoral care to the workplace, especially when there is injustice or unemployment; and dealing with workplace sins and temptations as part of church discipline” .  I am encouraged to put into practice some of these recommendations on a weekly basis during worship service to facilitate this paradigm shift.

The Other Six Days is a most worthy and inspiring read for Christians who seek deeper connections of faith to their work in the office, factory, school, field or at home as well as pastors who seek to send out the congregation to minister in the world. When we recover a biblical theology of work, ministry will be transformed as pastors are liberated from the crushing burden to minister to every need in the church. Rather, they exercise leadership gifts to empower and equip the people to spiritual maturity and service with God’s word. Similarly, mission is transformed when a church of one hundred members serve throughout the week in all the contexts in which God has placed them. They do not need to go into the world because they are already there.

Book Review: How Long, O Lord?

Review: How Long O Lord? (DA Carson)


Despite advances in science, pain and death remain an inevitable part of life. Where is God when suffering abounds and tragedy strikes in the form of cancer, tsunami, wars and abuse? For some, it is an intellectual question to reconcile the existence of a loving and all-powerful God in the face of seemingly purposeless evil. For others, it is an existential cry from the heart. D. A. Carson wrote this book to help Christians not only to find assurance that their beliefs are consistent but to apply and draw comfort from them in the dark seasons of suffering.

In Part I, Carson cautioned us against false security that we could be insulated from suffering and radical evil through our own resources. Sometimes, we expect immediate relief from pain through our prayers and forget that God works for the good of those who love Him precisely in the midst of misery. It is not a promise to remove suffering altogether in this side of heaven. We may also draw false comfort from biblically indefensible notions of God as a sympathetic but less-than-omnipotent god or as a deistic Watchmaker who stay uninvolved with the world after setting natural laws in motion. Such attempts at justifying God’s ways with humanity (or theodicy) are sub-biblical, Carson argues, because Scripture reveals God as personally involved with the world and His omnipotence is not constrained with human freedom.

In Part II, Carson explores selective biblical themes relevant to the problem of evil and suffering to locate it within a Christian framework. From a survey of redemptive history, we find that an originally good creation is corrupted by human sin. Sickness and death entered the world as a result. While it does not mean that every bit of suffering is necessarily the immediate consequence of a particular sin, there is a profound sense that we are sinners who take part in and deserve the sufferings of a fallen world. We have forfeited any “right” to a life of ceaseless comfort. It is by God’s mercies that we are not destroyed. While discussing social evils, Carson pointed out that Jesus was not surprised by the prevalence of wars, famines and earthquakes (Matthew 24). Instead, the Lord treats natural disasters and injustices as incentives to repentance: “Unless you repent, you too will all perish”. It thus runs counter to our default expectation that we deserve prosperity and health while suffering and death are grossly ‘unfair’.

There are also sufferings peculiar to the people of God as a form of discipline for their ultimate good and intended to help them to fight sin. It is not necessarily a consequence for the lack of faith or prayer. Sometimes, mature Christian leaders may experience suffering closely connected to opposition to their courageous witness so that through their weakness, the life of Christ may be revealed and nourish the church (2 Corinthians 4:8-12). The chapter on Job is also a provocative challenge to the mistaken notion that the righteous will not suffer or those who suffer must have directly deserved it: The real question is whether we are more interested in seeking God for His own sake or for personal gain? Will we still worship Him when all worldly comforts are stripped away?  

Another helpful biblical theme is God’s promise to right all wrongs and wipe away all tears at the End. It assures us that wickedness will not prosper ultimately. Death will not have the last word. From that eschatological perspective, we cultivate homesickness for heaven in God’s presence and avoid putting our hopes on all things finite. Ultimately, however, only the cross of Calvary reveals to us the kind of suffering God that we can trust despite not having all the answers. It is not “a kind of immanentist identification of God with all human suffering” (page 189). The cross is the supreme display of God’s justice and love. Christ suffered once-for-all to reconcile His people to the Father. He knows first hand what suffering is and therefore, He is able to sympathize with our weakness. Whatever hidden reasons God has for allowing tragedies and disasters, the reason could not be that He does not care. Only the God who carries the scars of wounds on Himself could really speak to and heal our own brokenness.

In Part III, Carson discusses the mystery of providence in how the Bible affirms God’s all-encompassing sovereignty in a way that is compatible with meaningful human responsibility. It consists more of biblical expositions than philosophical speculations. God’s loving providence teaches us to trust and obey in spite of not having all the answers. “God is less interested in answering our questions than in other things: securing our allegiance, establishing our faith, nurturing a desire for holiness” (page 245).

Finally, the book concludes with some pastoral reflections that often in the midst of suffering, the most comforting “answers” are simple presence, practical help and silent tears with those who mourn. Overall, I found it to be most helpful to anchor our faith in solid biblical insights so that we will stand firm when the storm of inevitable of pain and death comes. It challenges our false demands for how life ought to be and our idolatrous dependence in our own resources to insulate life from pain. It offers much wisdom and sensitivity in dealing with the problem of suffering in a gospel-centered perspective.

The Reason for God: The Reality of Resurrection

What can history tell us about the historical Jesus? You can study the life of Jesus just like we study any other ancient person in many universities around the world (using the criterion of dissimilarity, multiple attestations, embarrassment, plausibility, coherence and so on). The most hotly debated question among these historians is: The resurrection of Jesus. It is the holy grail of the quest for Jesus.

Even today, popular culture is obsessed with Jesus – look at Da Vinci Code and the news surrounding discovery of Gnostic fragments, Mary Magdalene, and James’ tomb. Many historians (who made the assumption that a miracle simply cannot happen or should be ruled out of court in a responsible historical research) claim that it didn’t really happen.

But how do you explain how the Christian movement started in Jerusalem? How do you explain the empty tomb and eyewitnesses? It is a serious historical question.

That is not what happened to all the other would-be Messiahs who were crucified by Rome. They either find a replacement or abandon that leader.

The resurrection of Jesus is also a personal question. If Jesus rose from the dead (not merely resuscitated), it changes everything. It means that death will not have the last word. It is a bedrock of hope when you are faced with a Roman sword or cancer.

If he was resurrected, it authenticates the claims He made about Himself and His teachings. If not, our faith is in vain.

What are the alternative explanations?

Perhaps ancient people do not have scientific knowledge of the world and believe in superstitions. So they easily accept reports of a risen Jesus. The heartbroken disciples began to sense he was still with them, perhaps see visions or dreams. These feelings developed into stories that he had risen from the grave to support these beliefs.

But the Gospels were written too early to the actual events (AD50 – 90) for myths to develop. We can see resurrection account in ‘handed down’ statement of faith formula already in 1 Corinthians 15:3-6 (third day, physical body, eyewitnesses). Women were the first eyewitnesses and this is likely authentic since their words are not accepted as evidence in court. Why would you invent a fact that would be embarassing to your case? Their Jewish opponents did not challenge the claim of empty tomb, but implicitly accepted it by providing an alternative explanation (stolen corpse).

Taken together, the empty tomb and eyewitnesses form a case for the resurrection. It is not bombproof evidence. But there is a dent we would expect in the historical evidence that Jesus rose from the dead, transforming disillusioned followers into committed evangelists. It is not wishful thinking.
Hallucination theories and stolen body theories assume that Jesus’ resurrection was an open option can is expected to others. But the people of that time would have considered it impossible for different reasons. Why would they create a lie and die for it? “Here’s the plan: We steal the body, come back and tell everybody He is risen and get killed for it. Who’s in this with me?”

 “Chronological snobbery”: Ancient people know that dead people do not come back to life. We should give them more credit. In fact, an individual bodily resurrection was almost inconceivable. Spirit is good, but the body is evil in Greek thought. Even those who believe in reincarnation understand a return to embodied life as a prison for the soul. For Jews, they expect a final day resurrection of all righteous in the renewal of the world. But the idea of an individual being resurrected, in the middle of history, while the rest of creation goes on with sin and death, is inconceivable.   

Wright: Jewish revolutionaries whose leader had been executed had two options: give up the revolution or find another leader. Claiming that he was alive again was simply not an option. Unless, of course, he was.
That historical event caused the Christians to shift their worldview: Jesus is not only human, he is the transcendent, personal God revealed in the Hebrew Scriptures.

What does it matter? Many skeptics care for the environment and the poor, yet the material world and all of life came by accident and everything will end up in ashes one day. They wonder why so few people care for justice yet their own worldview undermines any motivation to care and make sacrifices for a better world. In the end there is no difference.

If Jesus is not risen, then Karl Marx is probably right to accuse Christianity of ignoring problems in the material world., and Freud to say it is wish-fulfillment or Nietzsche to say it was for wimps.

But the Christian hope of eternal life is not like that. It is not about running away from reality. Our ultimate future is a new heaven and a new earth. This world we live in will be renewed, transformed and restored. It won’t be abandoned or left to rot.

So we look forward to a resurrection just like Jesus’ where we will be raised to life in an incorruptible and glorified body. What God has done in Christ on Easter morning, He would do on a cosmic scale for the entire creation, including us. There will be no more sorrow, sickness, decay or violence for God will wipe away every tear and restore all that is good. C.S. Lewis described the future redeemed world to be more substantial, more tangible and more solid than the world as we know it. New Creation: Coming soon to a planet near you…

If that is what Easter resurrection means, shall we not take up some new things that

model (in small ways) the future kingdom of justice, love and hope?

Now, how would that look like?

Surely the surprising reality of Easter Sunday ought to empower us to be witnesses of Christ’s death and resurrection the way it did for the early disciples.

Good to know stuffs about the historical quest for Jesus:

EP Sanders: Any interpretation of Jesus should be able to account for these “almost indisputable facts”:

1.      Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist.

2.      Jesus was a Galilean who preached and healed.

3.      Jesus called disciples and spoke of there being twelve.

4.      Jesus confined his activity to Israel.

5.      Jesus engaged in a controversy about the temple.

6.      Jesus was crucified outside Jerusalem by the Roman authorities.

7.      After his death Jesus' followers continued as an identifiable movement.

8.      At least some Jews persecuted at least parts of the new movement (Gal. I.13,22; Phil. 3.6), and it appears that this persecution endured at least to a time near the end of Paul's career (II Cor. II.24; Gal. 5.11; 6.12; cf. Matt. 23.34; 10.17).

Passing On The Legacy of a Gospel Centered Life

Sermon audio can be downloaded here 

Saying goodbye can be very hard, sometimes. Some of us who are parents will probably remember that heart-wrenching first day when our children went to school. I remember Yoong Zhen in his kindergarten uniform, trying to put up a brave front but cried desperately when he saw us leaving. It feels horrible. Bidding farewell to a loved one at the airport can be painful too. 

Usually, when we say goodbye to our loved ones, there is an implicit promise that we will return home. That we will meet again later in the evening... or in a few days… a couple of months… maybe even years… I’ll be back. But what would you say to them if you do not expect a return?

Imagine if you could record a video for them on the smart phone or digital camera, what message would you leave behind? 

To grow up is to learn about the reality of death, about its power to take away the people we love, about its finality, about the sorrow it brings, and about the fact that it is the one sure thing about being human. But it is also one thing that we are most uncomfortable about, and we prefer not to face it. We prefer the illusion that life goes on forever.

In the passage we read just now, the apostle Paul gave an emotional farewell message to the leaders of the Ephesian church. They have traveled all the way to meet Paul in Miletus probably because he was still on the wanted-list, still hiding after the riot in Ephesus. He believed that they would never see each other again this side of heaven. It was an opportunity to say what’s closest to his heart… to leave them with a reminder of what is most important in life and ministry… and that’s exactly what Paul did, he gave them an inside look into his own soul…    

One of the 7 Habits of Highly Effective People by Stephen Covey is: Begin with the end in Mind. Think about where you want to go before you travel. If life was a painting and you were the artist, what would you paint? What colors would you choose? Would you draw breath-taking landscapes of far away lands? Or would it be a portrait of yourself or family? When others look at it, what will they remember? Random sketches here… some scribbling there? Or will they see a masterpiece?

What do you live and die for? What are the priorities in your own soul?

Paul says: “I don’t know what will happen to me. I will follow the Holy Spirit wherever He may lead. Everywhere I go, prison and hardships await me. But I consider my life worth nothing to me; my only aim is to finish the race and complete the task the Lord Jesus has given me”.

At the end of his life, a couple of years down the road, Paul writes something similar to another church leader he mentored named Timothy, saying,

"I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race [that same phrase!], I have kept the faith. There is laid up for me the crown of righteousness which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that Day, and not only to me but to all who loved his appearing." (2 Timothy 4:7–8)

As we reflect on this passage in Acts 20, I hope the Lord will help redirect our priorities and refocus our goal in life so that we too may fight the good fight, finish our race, keep the faith… and approach Him with confidence on that glorious Day.

So I would like to organize this message with three points

-         What is the message of a gospel-centered life?

-         What is the pattern of a gospel-centered life?

-         What is the legacy of a gospel-centered life?

1) What Is The Message Of The Gospel-Centered Life?

The apostle Paul told the elders of the church: “You know that I have not hesitated to preach anything that would be helpful to you… I have not hesitated to proclaim to you the whole will, the full purposes of God.” That means: He did not hold back just because he was afraid of offending someone. He did not shrink from telling them the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Nor did he back away from difficult and politically incorrect topics to gain a crowd. He wanted to please God more than pleasing men.

So he was committed to teach them the whole counsel of God whether in public and in private (from house to house). Be it in the synagogue or one-to-one, he declared the inclusive good news of God’s grace to both Jews and Greeks, regardless of ethnic or cultural background. It cuts across racial barriers.

And what was his message? He tells us in verse 21: That they must turn to God in repentance and have faith in our Lord Jesus… Turning away from sin (repentance) and turning to God (faith) are two sides of the same coin. It is the same turning. You cannot have one without the other. To turn to God is to turn away from sin.

Nowadays it is getting popular to promote a watered-down version of Christianity: “God wants us to prosper financially, to have plenty of money, to fulfill the destiny He has laid out for us. You will often receive preferential treatment simply because your Father is the King of kings, and His glory and honor spill over onto you. If you just believe and pray the right way, you will be happy, wealthy and healthy…”

Hello? What about being holy? What happened to the bits about carrying your own cross? And counting the cost? These things are not so much denied as simply downplayed, bypassed and ignored.

And although this kind of popular teaching fits nicely with our kiasu culture (afraid to lose/materialistic culture), it is not ultimately helpful to people when they are faced with pain, suffering or cancer. Indeed, they can be destructive to our souls by baptizing greed and worldliness in Christian lingo.

Even today, as it was in the first century, real commitment to Christ is often costly.   Bonhoeffer, a modern day Christian who paid the ultimate price for his faith in Nazi Germany wrote that: “Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without repentance, baptism without church discipline, communion without confession. Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ.”

That is not what Paul has in mind when he describes his own calling as the task of “testifying to the good news of God’s grace.” That’s not Paul’s idea of grace.

Rather, this good news has two important, inter-related themes. The first one is that guilty sinners are now declared as righteous by God’s grace alone (not through our moral performance) received through the empty hands of faith alone (not through our merits or achievements) in Christ alone (not in any other person or philosophy). It does not depend on our status or culture. And this is the most humbling, fundamental basis for Christian unity.

This grace does not come cheap. It is free but it’s expensive because it costs the Son of God his life on the cross. We are bought with His own blood (according to Paul).   
If I am accepted by God because of my good karma or my “sacrifices” for the church then there would be a limit to what God could ask of me. I would be like a taxpayer with ‘rights’. We can negotiate. I have paid my offerings, put in a sermon once a month and the job is done - now I deserve from God a certain quality of life. It’s like a contract. I’ve done my part of the deal so there’s a limit to what God can ask. Or I can expect something from Him in return.
But if I am a sinner saved by sheer grace alone – then there’s nothing he cannot ask of me. There’s no room to bargain. Everything that I have now belongs to Him. Nothing is really mine, anymore. I am not my own, I was bought with a price, I was purchased with the previous blood of Jesus Christ. Now we belong to the One who gave up everything for us.  

It’s a paradox… the irony of this love so amazing, so divine, demands my soul, my life, my all… To give up control of our lives into the hands of Someone else is scary, isn’t it? But it’s also comforting to know this Someone infinitely loves us and gladly laid down his life for us … The fact is: we are never in control anyway. We are enslaved by whatever we are living for – be it career, pleasures, family or reputation. Grace is only a threat to the illusion tat we are free, in control and living life as we choose. When we let go of control, then we are truly free. Those who lose their lives shall find it.

Last week, we had the privilege to listen to Grace Boey at our weekly Faith and Work interview. She was sharing about her plans to join Teach For Malaysia. It is an NGO committed to the vision that one day, all children around the world will have the opportunity to an excellent education. One thing that struck me was that she was going to get a pay cut even before starting on her 2-year program. Wow, that is major shock to your value system if salary is the main criteria for choosing a job, isn’t it? It’s unthinkable.

It doesn’t make any sense unless… unless she found something that is more valuable than a big paycheck. You can’t explain it any other way. She must have done some cost/benefit analysis that says obedience to God’s calling and investing in the future of underperforming children is worth more than all that.

God’s kingdom, to her, is the pearl of great price … the wise businesswoman will sell all her goods to purchase it. This kingdom is the treasure hidden in the field, for its sake someone will gladly go and sell all that he or she has.

It’s a powerful challenge to our consumeristic culture, isn’t it? It gets you to wonder: She must have found something worth more than what everybody is chasing after. Have you found that treasure… that pearl of great price? It is costly grace.

After reminding the elders of what he has told them, Paul goes on: “Therefore, I declare to you today that I am innocent of the blood of any of you. For I have not hesitated to proclaim to you the whole counsel/purpose of God…”

What is he talking about here?

The phrase “innocent of your blood” alludes to the prophet Ezekiel’s words in Ezekiel chapter 33. In that passage, there’s a solemn warning that when God brings a sword of judgment upon the land, the appointed watchman who stands guard on the city walls must blow the trumpet and warn the people to save their lives. Those who heard the trumpet sound but did not take the warning seriously will be responsible for their own destruction. Those who heard the warning and repented will be saved. But if the watchman sees the coming sword of judgment and does not blow the trumpet and the people are not warned, they will be destroyed in their sin. But their blood will be required at the watchman’s hand. He is guilty of their death… He is responsible for not warning them.

So Paul is saying to them: “I have preached to you the whole will of God, everything that you should know. So I have discharged my duty as a watchman and have given you the warning to repent and be saved.”

What about us? Are we faithful as watchmen on the city walls? Have we taken seriously our calling to sound the alarm so that those who are spiritually asleep may be warned? So they too will see the danger and repent? If they perish in their sin without being warned, then we are held responsible for not warning them.

There is a poem that brings home this message of our responsibility to be bearers of the Light in our circle of friends, colleagues and family members. It is called The Letter from Hell. This letter was part of a story in which someone eternally separated from God in hell wrote a letter to her Christian friend. Here is how it goes:

My Friend,
I stand in Judgment now,
And feel that you’re to blame somehow.
Never did you point the way.
You knew the Lord in truth and glory,
But never did you tell the story.
My knowledge then was very dim;
You could have led me safe to Him.
Though we lived together on earth,
You never told me of the second birth,
And now I stand this day condemned,
Because you failed to mention Him.
You taught me many things, that’s true.
I called you “friend” and trusted you,
But I learn now that it’s too late,
You could have kept me from this fate.
We walked by day and talked by night,
And yet you showed me not the Light.
You let me live, and love, and die,
You knew I’d never live on high.
Yes, I called you “friend” in life,
And trusted you through joy and strife.
And yet on coming to the end,
I cannot, now, call you “My Friend.”

Church, we are called to be bearers of the light in this Puchong community and to share this burden of bearing the Light together. None of us can do it alone. For example, every Saturday morning, there are always parents who bring their young children to the Children’s Library. Many of them have yet to know Christ. There are always opportunities to talk with them, get to know them and prayerfully invite them to join our worship on Sunday mornings. We definitely need more volunteers so that this ministry can be more effective in blessing the community. Would you consider prayerfully how you may work alongside this outreach work? We need volunteers to tell stories to the children and befriend our guests.

Michael Card, one of my favorite Christian composer and singer wrote this song:

The Light we must bear 
Is the Light we must share 
Is the Light that illumines the darkness 
The promises kept 
Give us strength to accept 
This burden of bearing the Light 

Let us share the burden of bearing the Light as a family together. At the end of the day, the message of a gospel-centered life is the good news God’s free but costly grace.

2) What Is The Pattern of the Gospel-Centered Life?

Godliness is not only taught, it is caught. You learn it by hearing the message preached and perhaps more so, by seeing and getting involved in how it is being modeled in real life.  

That’s why Paul reminded the Ephesian elders to look at the pattern of his own lifestyle:  “You know how I lived the whole time I was with you, from the first day I came into this area. I served the Lord with humility and with tears and in the midst of severe testing by the plots of my Jewish opponents…  I have not coveted anyone’s silver or gold or clothing. You yourselves know that these hands of mine have supplied my own needs and the needs of my companions.  In everything I did, I showed you that by this kind of hard work we must help the weak, remembering the words the Lord Jesus himself said: ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’”

The emotional intensity of our prayers… How we respond to opposition and difficulties? How we handle money? How we treat the weak and needy? Every day, consciously or unconsciously these are opportunities to model a pattern of gospel centered life.

And Paul’s life is consistent with his message. He lived out what he preached. He walked the talk. He says what he does and does what he says. You know how I lived… You know I did not hold anything back… You know my own hands have supplied my own needs… (Sometimes, he worked as a tent maker to earn his own living so that he may serve the church even when no one supported him financially.)

“You can see my example with your own eyes”. That’s a bold claim to make.

Someone once said: “The single greatest cause of atheism (people not believing in God) in the world today is Christians, who acknowledge Jesus with their lips, then walk out the door, and deny Him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable”. With their mouths they claim that Jesus is Lord, but with their actions they demonstrate loyalty to money, sex and self-fulfillment.

How is my life different because of faith in Christ? What are you doing now that you would not do had you not been a follower of Jesus? Does our faith make a difference in how we address challenges at work or at home?

For Paul, the good news has two important, inter-related themes. The first one was justification by faith as we saw just now. The second major theme is the redefinition of the people of God, no longer according to race, circumcision or culture, but according to faith in Jesus, so that all believers are equally the true family of God. All of us stand on level ground at the foot of the cross. There is no difference now between Jews and Gentiles in the fact of their sin, in Christ’s offer of salvation or in their status as God’s people.

That’s why he is willing (compelled by the Spirit) to go to Jerusalem even though everyone is telling him, “It’s crazy! If you go there, it’s madness. Your enemies are waiting for you there”. Why did Paul insist on going to Jerusalem? Is he trying to be a hero? Nope, we get a clue of his real purpose in Acts 24:17 - when he was arrested, sent to prison and stood before the judge, Paul explains it like this: “After an absence of several years, I came to Jerusalem to bring my people gifts for the poor and to present offerings”. This is no ordinary collection to maintain the everyday functioning of the church.

  

Do you remember that Paul did the same thing in Acts 11? When a famine hit the church in Judea, the multiracial church in Antioch took up a collection and sent their gift to the mother church in Judea through Paul. Here in Acts 20, Paul is willing to die to bring this collection to Jerusalem, because in it, he sees the greatest symbol of the grace and power of Christ to tear down barriers and walls of separation. Like Jesus His Master, the apostle Paul was actually prepared to lay down his life for the church. We see this collection mentioned again and again in his letters… In Romans 15 he refers to the churches’ contribution to the poor in Jerusalem in this way, “If the Gentiles have shared in the Jews’ spiritual blessings, they owe it to the Jews to share with them their material blessings.” In this mutual sharing, Paul sees a great symbol of unity and solidarity of the Jewish and Gentile people of God.

A Christian from South Africa told a painful story 30 years ago when he was fighting against apartheid, an oppressive system of racial segregation. One night, he met an underground Communist cell of young people who opposed apartheid with violence. "Tell us about the gospel of Jesus Christ," they asked. So he explains how personal faith in Christ wonderfully transforms persons and creates one new body of believers where there is neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female, rich nor poor, black nor white. Then a teenager said, "That is wonderful! Show me where I can see that happening." The Christian’s face fell as he sadly responded that he could not think of anywhere South African Christians were truly living out the message of the gospel. "Then the whole thing is a piece of sh—," (doot!) the youth angrily replied. Later he joined the war and lost his life.

Unless people can see gospel transformation happening in us, it’s not credible or attractive. Show me where I can see that happening in Malaysia. There is a pattern of life that is consistent with the gospel.

You may recall a few years ago that racial and religious tension was high with cow’s head and pig’s head being thrown around. Acts of provocation that seek to divide and incite hatred amongst Malaysians. In the midst of that, something strange happened. Farish Noor wrote a great article in English calling Malaysians of all walks of life and belief to reclaim our nation from the hate-mongers. In Hikayat Padawa Lima, there is a ferocious demon/monster called Chandrabirawa. Many warriors tried to fight it but they failed. If you cut off his arm, a more powerful arm grows out in its place. It thrives on hate and violence. Until Yudistira, a young pacifist prince faced this monster. The demon tried to provoke him but he remained calm. Prophecy has it that it can only be defeated by a man of pure heart who does not harm anyone. The demon’s anger grew until it is consumed by it flame of its own hate. Farish wrote: “Hate will not be defeated by more hate, and racism will not be defeated by more racism. Love - for peace, for others - is a mighty force that can defeat the demons among us.” Then he says on Facebook that he wished someone can translate it into Bahasa. I thought “Yah! It would be more relevant and reach more people” so I did the translation in Bahasa and he put it up on his website. 

There’s a small, even funny symbolism in this because here is a Muslim author of Malay-Indian descent writing in English and a Christian-Chinese translator writing in Bahasa, both quoting from the Mahabratta epic to call for peace for all Malaysians.

By God’s grace, step by step, through small acts of reconciliation and small symbols of peacemaking, we can create a social space for gospel demonstration. It’s the ultimate defense of the gospel.  

What is the Legacy of the Gospel-Centered Life?

At the Beijing Olympics, the United States men’s and women’s 4x100-meter relay teams had high hopes of winning the gold medal. They were talented and fast individuals. They had trained hard for many years. They came with blazing feet but the problem is not with their feet. The problem is with their hands. Both teams failed to win any medal because they dropped their batons and were disqualified.

And Paul saw his life and ministry as running a race… As we learn from David Jackman last week, it is also a Relay Race – there’s no use being the fastest individual runner if we fail to pass the baton safely to the next runner. So we need to consider: What kind of legacy are we leaving behind after finishing our race? Are we passing on the Light to the next generation?

Paul knows that the future of the church in Ephesus depends on these elders gathered before him. That’s why he poured his life into them. He wanted them to run the race and passed the baton well, “Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood. I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. So be on your guard!”

The church leader’s role (be it pastor/elder) is to take care of the sheep and drive away the wolves. It has a positive and negative dimension. The minister’s life is on public display for the whole world to see. This is why the qualifications for a minister of the gospel given in 1Timothy 3:1-7 carries emphasis on the life and testimony of the pastor/elder. He must not only be “able to teach”, “he must have a good testimony among those who are outside.”

Without these shepherds, the flock of God’s people will be scattered by the wolves or false teachers. Without the church, there will be no community to display and pass on the gospel. There will no legacy left.

Someone once said: “without the church, we cannot be Christians”. Or “you cannot have God as your Father without having the Church as your Mother”. Do you agree with that?

Honestly, my first instinct was to disagree with the statement. We don’t need the church in order to be Christian. Our decision to follow Christ is personal and independent of the church. But if you it sink deeper, the statement contains truth.

Without the church, the body and community of Christ, how do we know Christ in a living and lived way? You can hear about Christ from one person and decide to become a follower, but you wouldn’t necessarily know what it means to be living as a Christian, beyond your beliefs until you encountered and experienced other Christians, for better or for worse! 

Being in a community of Christians allows us to reflect, mirror and model to one another what God’s cost grace really means. In offering comfort to those who mourn. In caring for those in need. Rejoicing in the success of others. Offering biblical wisdom and correction to each other. We are reminded of our identity as bearers of the light when we mirrored the light through corporate worship, serving and doing life together, we sing, narrate and enact to each other God’s grace in Christ as a family here in CDPC. That is how we pass on a legacy of faith.

The song “BEARERS OF THE LIGHT” that I quoted just now describe three kinds of relationships we may have with other believers so that we can share the burden of bearing the light. Who is a Barnabas/Timothy/Paul in your life?

The first one is about spiritual friendship:

He will walk beside us 
A strong friend, Barnabas 
He will be that sure shoulder to lean on 
The promise we share 
Is our burdens to bear 
And our Light tells the darkness to be gone 

The second one is about guiding younger believers:

He will come after me 
A young Timothy 
Looking for someone to guide him 
I will kindle his Light 
Make him strong for the fight 
I will promise to be there beside him 

The last one is about finding a spiritual mentor

The great need of us all 
A true mentor, a Paul 
Who has traveled the road that's before us 
He has made good the pledge 
To take the Light on ahead 
We can follow his footsteps before us 

I wonder: What do we look like if we intentionally seek out relationship such as this in CDPC? When we walk with one another, help each other as spiritual friends, caring and guiding a youth/child among us and seek out to learn and follow the footsteps from more experienced mentors even as they follow Christ.

I think when we do that, we learn to carry and pass on the light to the next generation. So let us commit each other to God and to the word of his grace, which can build us up and give us an inheritance, a legacy among all those who are sanctified. 

This is your life… It’s God’s gift. There may be dark blots and grey patches on the canvass. But against that background, the brilliant, manifold colors of God’s grace can shine through.  May our lives be a gospel-centered work of art. Paint a master piece. Sign your name on it. 

Klang Valley Bible Conference 2012

KVBC2012 Brochure

The Reason for God: The (True) Story of the Cross

Here is the positive case for belief in the Christian faith so far:
- There are clues to believe in a personal Creator God / Moral Law giver
- Not only that, we already presuppose God by living as if moral laws really exist
- That’s bad news: We break our own ethical standards by self centered living
- The solution is not moral improvement, but radical grace from God

But why must Jesus die on the cross for us in order for God to forgive our sins? Isn’t that His job anyway? Some calls it 'cosmic child abuse' (a fierce Father needs to punish the innocent Son before He could forgive the guilty).

Keller argues that real forgiveness is costly suffering. If someone damaged your car, you can either ask him to pay all/share the costs or you absorb the full cost of his misdeed yourself. Someone has to bear the payment.

If someone wronged you, you may try to take revenge and make him suffer. But it takes a toll on you – make you hard, cold, cynical, prejudiced and vengeful. The cycle of retaliation can spread and intensify (The Prestige). The other option is to forgive (refuse to make them pay for what they did). It is a form of suffering. But it leads to new freedom, life and peace. It breaks the cycle of violence.

 Shouldn’t we confront the wrongdoers to restrain them, ask them to repent or protect others? Yes, but out of love/first seek forgiveness. Otherwise what we seek is not justice but revenge, not their change but their pain. Example: Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Since forgiveness means absorbing the debt of sin yourself instead of making the guilty pay for it, should it surprise us that when God forgives us that He went to the Cross and die there? It is important to realize that Jesus is not just a third-party bystander. For Christians, Jesus is God Incarnate. He is the Judge Himself receiving the punishment. He is eternally one with the Father. The cross is biblically portrayed as a Trinitarian conspiracy of love where the Father ‘so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son’ (John 3:16) and the Son voluntarily accepts the cross as the supreme expression of His own love: “Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. You are my friends.” (John 15:13) It is not primitive deity that demands blood for their wrath to be appeased but God became human to offer his own blood so that he can destroy all evil without destroying us.

Some people argue that the cross is primarily a display of how great God’s love is for us. (Romans 5:8). His sacrificial death melts away our hate, awakens moral change and moves us to imitate Christ (moral influence). The sole obstacle to salvation lies in the subjective resistance of sinners. But unless the cross objectively rescues us, it would be an empty show of sentimentality just like a silly lovesick boy who declares, "Darling, I will prove my love for you by jumping off Niagara Falls". It is only a meaningful act of love if the beloved is in real danger so that diving into the waters would be an attempt to rescue her.

We can’t have a God of love without the cross. It is impossible to love people with a problem or need without in some sense sharing or even changing place with them. Consider parenting. If you don’t allow your children to hinder your freedom in work and play at all, they will grow up emotionally needy, troubled and over-dependent. The choice: You sacrifice your freedom or theirs. All love toward people with serious needs is substitutionary sacrifice.

Stott: The essence of sin is we human beings substitute ourselves for God while the essence of salvation is God substituting himself for us.

Ironies of the Cross: Properly understood, the Cross cannot encourage the oppressed to simply accept violence because Jesus died to honor justice. He identified with the oppressed.
He went to the cross to save the world by losing His life, to triumph through defeat, kingdom through weakness and service, glory by giving up everything. N.T. Wright: “The real enemy, after all, is not Rome but the powers of evil that stood behind human arrogance and violence… On the cross, the kingdom of God triumphed over the kingdoms of this world by refusing to join in their spiral of violence. On the cross, Jesus would love his enemies, turn the other cheek, go the second mile”.

This upside-down kingdom creates an alternate reality and reversal of values of the world with regard to power, status and wealth. It is a new counter culture in which we no longer need justify ourselves through pride of race, class, career and money, but transcend them in ways that are life-giving and community-building.

The stories that always seem to move us most deeply are those in which someone faces loss or death in order to bring life to someone else. (The Matrix? Lord of the Rings?)

A Tale of Two Cities: Charles and Sydney look very much alike and both love the same woman, Lucie. During French revolution, Charles was arrested and sentenced to die. But Sydney exchanged places with him so that he and his family could escape.

But the gospel is not just a moving fictional story about someone else. It is a true story about us. Jesus has come to us in our prison and despite our unwillingness to be saved has taken our place. When you realize that you are actually inside Jesus’ story (and He is in your story) it changes you inside out.

The fact that Jesus has to die for me humbled me out of my pride.
The fact that Jesus was glad to die for me assured me out of my fear. 

Kairos Forum on Political Activism

Kairos Public Forum

New Political Activism and Realignment: Implications for Malaysia’s GE13

Venue: Saint Paul’s Church
             Lorong Utara Kecil
             46200 Petaling Jaya
             Petaling Jaya

Date: Monday 17 September 2012.

Time: 8.00pm to 10.30pm
 
Speakers: Dr. Bridget Welsh, Mr. Lim Heng Seng and Mr. Andrew Khoo

Program
Brief introduction: Christian Political Concerns by Dr. Ng Kam Weng
Talk 1 - New Political Realignments & Realities  by Dr. Bridget Welsh.
Talk 2 - Sabahan and Sarawakian Restive Natives and Political Activism to Regain Constitutional Rights by Mr. Lim Heng Seng
Talk 3 - Civil Society & Recent developments in Law and Courts: Ramifications for Democracy by Mr. Andrew Khoo.
Open discussion - Chaired by Mr. Philip Koh

Speakers Biodata

Dr Bridget Welsh is Associate Professor of Political Science at Singapore Management University where she teaches courses on comparative politics, parties, political participation, gender and international relations. She has edited Reflections: The Mahathir Years (2004), Legacy of Engagement in Southeast Asia (2008), Impressions of the Goh Chok Tong Years in Singapore (2009), Transformations: The Abdullah Badawi’s Years in Malaysia (2013).

Mr. Lim Heng Seng is a partner with a legal firm in Kuala Lumpur. He served in the Malaysian Judicial and Legal Service from 1976 until 2001. He has also served as chairman of both the Industrial Court of Malaysia (1994-2003) and the Social Security (Socso) Appellate Board (1997-2003). Heng Seng is a member of the Editorial Advisory Board for the Industrial Law Reports published by the Malaysian Current Law Journal. He is the advisory editor on Malaysian Court Forms published by the Malayan Law Journal.

Mr. Andrew Khoo currently serves as Chairperson of the Bar Council Human Rights Committee. He has been Chancellor (legal advisor) to the Anglican Bishop of West Malaysia since September 2001.  He also serves on the Home Council of OMF Malaysia and on the board of directors of CMS Asia. He is a member of the Steering Committee of BERSIH 2.0.

Mr. Philip Koh (Chairman) is a member of Kairos Board of Directors ; Advocate & Solicitor

* No registration required for attendance


Download the article: Social Impact of Christian salvation

The Gospel: Neither Religion Nor Immorality

The Reason for God: Religion and the Gospel 

Our main problem is sin (building our identity on anything but God). But why must the solution be Christianity? All religions teach us to do good and if I live a better life, isn’t that good enough?

 The Christian faith is much more radical than that. The problem is not that we don’t know stealing, lust, hatred, attachment to worldly things, selfishness, cruelty is wrong or sinful. The problem is we already know it but we still do it. We want to do good but at the same time, we also find another desire to do exactly the opposite. So just getting religious advice and teachings, laws and regulations, do’s and don’ts is not the solution. The diagnosis has to be much deeper than that. All other religions have founders who show the way to salvation, but only Jesus claims to actually be the way of salvation himself.

 The story of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde? When Dr Jekyll realizes that he is this living contradiction of good and evil, he decided to do all he can to get rid of selfishness and pride from his heart. He devoted himself to charity and good works, to drown his selfish nature with acts of kindness and sacrifice and pay for the wrongs he had done before. And it worked! He became the most moral and kind person, and stopped taking the potion at night to become Mr Hyde. Then one fine day Dr Jekyll thinks of all the good that he has achieved, and how much better a person he was compared to others. He says, “I can say with total honesty that my decision to do good has produced great results. You know how much hard work I spent to help suffering people… But as I smiled, comparing myself with others, comparing my acts of goodness with their lazy, cruel neglect to do good… at that very moment, a horrible feeling came over me and I looked down… I was once again Mr Hyde”.

At that moment, just when he has achieved his standard of being good and righteous, Jekyll transformed into Hyde again, this time without drinking any potion at all. Unable to control his transformations any longer, Jekyll killed himself. The moral of the story is this: Covering up our selfishness and pride with lots of good works and kind deeds won’t make us less self centered. Instead they only feed into our pride and self righteousness. Jekyll becomes Hyde, not because he is bad, but precisely because he is good.

If you define the purpose of your existence in terms of performance, you do good deeds motivated by self-interest (in order to get to heaven, escape from hell or to feel good about yourself, to meet expectation of others). In the end, the ultimate motive is still ‘yourself”. If you achieve it, you end up with self righteousness and pride. If you fail to achieve it, you will end up with despair and fear. Either way you still end up becoming Mr or Miss Hyde. There are two ways to run away from God and be your own Savior: Be bad and break all the rules and be good and keep all the rules. Religion says: “Do good, obey the rules – then I will be accepted by God”. The Good News: “I am accepted by God because of what Jesus has done – therefore I obey”.

What is the Difference?

 Motive: Religion operates out of fear, of consequences if we break the rules. The gospel operates out of a desire to please and resemble the One who gave his life for us. Identity: In a religious framework, you become self righteous when you perform up to the standards or despair when you do not measure up. The gospel is that I am so sinful that Jesus had to die for me yet I am so loved that Jesus was glad to die for me. It leads to humility and confidence at the same time. How we treat the other: In ‘religion’, group identity is formed through exclusion of those who are different. A Christian’s worth and identity is through the Lord who was excluded for me. Since I am not saved by my moral practices, then I would expect to find those who are different are superior to me in many ways. Suffering: Moralistic religion leads people to believe they deserve a happy life and rage when things go wrong. The gospel frees us from the spiral of bitterness when life goes wrong because Jesus the Righteous One also experienced suffering and rejection. It’s simply not true that if we live a good life, things will go well for you.

The Threat of Grace

 The gospel sounds too easy: “All I have to do is get a personal relationship with God and then do anything I want!” But you can only say that if you have not experienced it. “If I was saved by my good works then there would be a limit to what God could ask of me or put me through. I would be like a taxpayer with ‘rights’ – I would have done my duty and now I would deserve a certain quality of life. But if I am a sinner saved by sheer grace – then there’s nothing he cannot ask of me”. If Jesus had really bought us with His sacrifice, then we are not our own. We now belong to the One who gave up everything for us. There is no coercion or unwilling obligation; yet your behavior has been radically changed by the mind and heart of the Person you live. Analogy of Les Miserables: The paradox is that unconditional grace demands that the recipient give up control of his or her life. Actually we are not in control but enslaved by what ever we are living for. Grace is only a threat to the illusion tat we are free, autonomous and living life as we choose. The Christian faith is not religion or irreligion. It is something else altogether. PS: Why is it important to make this distinction clear?